DCS: Me 262 Discussion (Development on hold currently)

[NineLine]

Hi, can you point me to the source please.

 

You can start here I would think: http://www.deutsches-museum.de/archiv/

 

Contact me on Skype if you would like insight into my past experiences with them ;)

 

I have already contacted sources on this side of the pond.

[Hummingbird]

There's also this, although its for the early B-1 engine:

http://documents.mx/documents/manual-jumo-004-b-1.html

 

Also some info on the automatic throttle regulator used on the B4 which entered mass production in October 1944:

 

 

 

This new system eliminated the danger of flame outs by automatically regulating the amount of fuel delivered to the engine, but it didn't change the fact that the engines were slow to respond to quick throttle changes, a quirk of all early jet engines.

[5tuka]

A very detailed analysis, should give you a good read if you like diving into technical things:

[ame]http://www.enginehistory.org/German/Me-262/Me262_Engine_2.pdf[/ame]

 

Also this (don't know original source):

[Friedrich-4B]

Here is the maintenance manual for the General Electric CJ610 turbojet, cleverly disguised as a Jumo 004 B-1 Handbuch.

[Friedrich-4B]

And, to keep the ball rolling from 5tuka's post, attached is the complementary article on the Me 262's airframe, plus an article on Anselm Franz, designer of the Jumo 004

[Hadwell]

Why this choice? Especially since a pair of Jumo 004's have been restored and tested in 2015, wouldn't it be just as easy to use a pair of them?

 

because a working pair of 70 year old engines with, when they were brand new, a few hours life expectancy... is kinda amazing in itself....

[Echo38]

sometimes Yo-Yo likes to poke you guys where it hurts

 

Just got clarification, of course it will model the Jumo engines.

 

OMG! So evil! I fell for it. : D

[Groove]

That was an interesting read :)

[mwd2]

A lot of Manuals (in German) for Messerschmitt aircrafts (also for Me 262):

 

Me 262 - Ersatzteil-Liste Me 262 A-1, Band 1, 561 Seiten

95 MB

Me 262 - Bedienvorschrift Me 262 A-1, August 1944, 24 Seiten

12 MB

Me 262 - Flugzeughandbuch Me 262 A-1, Teil 6 Triebwerksanlage, Teil 7 Treibwerkbedien. , Januar 1945, 54 Seiten

24 MB

Me 262 - Allgemeine Geräteliste Me 262 A-1; September 1944, 58 Seiten

30 MB

Me 262 - Projektbaubeschreibung Me 262 / 1942

8 MB

Me 262 - Merkblatt Me 262 mit Starthilfe-Raketen R1-502, 1944, 4 Seiten

0,5 MB

Me 262 - Beiträge zur Beseitigung der Fahrwerkschäden der Me 262, 28.Oktober 1944, 16 Seiten

10 MB

Me 262 - Einflieger Bericht der Me 262 in Brandenburg von Hans Schumacher , Mai 1997, 28 Seiten

10 MB

Me 262 Lorin Antrieb - Messerschmitt Me 262 mit Lorion Antrieb, projektierter Schnelljäger, Tabellen von 1944, 17 Seiten

50 MB

 

http://www.deutscheluftwaffe.de/archiv/Dokumente/ABC/m/Messerschmitt/Messerscmitt%20AG.htm

[some1]

Starting the Me-262 should be fun. Here is a short excerpt from a diary of a pilot who flew Yak-17 trainer in the early '50s. This plane had the RD-10 engine (a soviet copy of Jumo 004)

 

Starting the RD10 engine is quite complicated:

 

1. Remove left and right ignition coil, clean them and install back.

2. Pour out kerosene from ignition chambers and the nozzle. Wipe the exhaust nozzle.

3. Connect the battery and heat the ignition coils until they reach 220 degrees (in 10 minutes)

4. At -5 degrees Celsius heat with lamps until the indicators show +150. Then remove the covers and wipe the exhaust nozzle.

5. Shout "Clean exhaust!", put the battery switch in the down position. Put the engine switch in the down position.

6. Shout "Flooding!", and for 3-4 seconds press engine flooding switch.

7. Shout "Clean exhaust!" and press the engine starter starter button, at the same time put the ignition switch in the forward position.

8. If the turbine RPM reaches 600-800, turn on ignition.

9. If the turbine RPM reaches 1800-2000 move the cut-off valve and throttle forward, and monitor closely exhaust gas temperature, it shouldn't be higher than 680 degrees Celsius.

10. Shut down the starter engine. If the EGT exceeds 680 degrees in 2-3 seconds shut down the main engine.

11. At 2800-3000 RPM shut down ignition. Fuel pressure not lower than 0.3 at 30 degrees temperature.

 

Shutting down the engine:

1. Put the throttle to idle and press the ignition button. At the same time move the throttle and fuel cut-off fully back.

2. If after shutting down there is a flame in the exhaust nozzle, turn on the starter engine and blow it out. If that doesn't help, turn on the main engine. Let it idle with ignition turned on.

3. Covers can be put on if the EGT doesn't exceed 100 degrees.

 

That's the instruction. It needs to be mentioned, that those emergency situations during engine startup happen very often. It gets dangerous when the petrol doesn't ignite and pours from the nozzle. Or when it does ignite, but the RPM doesn't rise, only the temperature. In such situation you beat the records in getting out of the cockpit. Before the subsequent startup, it's mandatory to clear the exhaust nozzle from the fuel. A group of strong mechanics raises the plane's nose into the air and pours the unburnt fuel from the exhaust. When it evaporates and the concrete under the plane is dry, you can take your place in the cockpit and try again. If the petrol ignites correctly and the RPM starts to rise and EGT does not exceed 680 C, at 2000 RPM you open the kerosene valve, and if that ignites, you close the petrol valve and you can consider the engine started. The engines are primitive, the startup itself complicated. First the petrol, then kerosene, like a motorcycle.

 

The mechanics say that the engines are from Germany, war trophies or something, and there has to be something to it, because I saw on one of them a placard that says "RD-10 Juno-Brema". But maybe just made in Germany on USSR order. Yak-17 is a bit easier to fly than a prop Yak-9. Doesn't pull sideways on take-off and the stronger engine makes aerobatics easier. The cockpit is quite spacious, visibility wonderful, like a car, engine noise is lower. You also don't have to manipulate the prop pitch or monitor oil and water coolers, there's only one exhaust gas temperature gauge.

However, the difficulty is the constant need to monitor the fuel pressure gauge. Below 2.0 atm., which can happen at sudden throttle back, the engine can flame out. A restart in the air remains only theoretical option so far. The main disadvantage however is the small fuel amount, which allows for 20 minutes of steady flight. In practice we do two landing patterns, 12 minutes, or a short practice zone that lasts no more than 15-17 minutes.

 

 

Source (in Polish):

http://www.pilot.skarb.telsat.wroc.pl/l3.htm

Edited January 5, 2016 by some1

[Groove]

We have the whole Me-262 manual compendium.

 

Any chance to obtain technical drawings of the A1 cockpit?

[NineLine]

That was an interesting read :)

 

I need to learn German, I blame DCS/Yo-Yo for making the German aircraft so wonderful to fly :)

[Hummingbird]

We have the whole Me-262 manual compendium.

 

Any chance to obtain technical drawings of the A1 cockpit?

 

Yes, here you go:

http://www.luftfahrt-archiv-hafner.de/

 

You're looking for the Ersatz liste which is down near the bottom of the Messerschmitt page, there you'll find info on the cockpit layout and wiring etc (example below).

 

Also of interest is the JUMO 004 B, Luftstrahl-Turbinentriebwerk technical compendium, which contains a lot of original source material on the Jumo 004 engine.

Edited January 5, 2016 by Hummingbird

[NineLine]

I think he is looking for measurements and such as well for 3D modelling.

[El Hadji]

Just finished the book "A Higher Call" by Adam Makos (recommended read if you haven't already...) where a large portion is about Franz Stigler who was attached to JV44. He was one of the few pilots in "Cirkus Galland" who actually had some real training on the 262. In the book he mentions all the problems with the plane and how using the throttle at altitude was a no-no because of fan blades being made from inferior quality metal which made them sensitive to changes in temperature etc.

 

I wonder how this will be taken into consideration in DCS? I mean realism is key in DCS and if the 262 will be as reliable as say the 109K-4 it won't be very realistic. But on the other hand, if players suffer from random flame outs all the time I doubt it will be very fun from a gaming perspective. Any thoughts?

Edited January 5, 2016 by El Hadji

[NineLine]

Just finished the book "A Higher Call" by Adam Makos (recommended read if you haven't already...) where a large portion is about Franz Stigler who was attached to JV44. He was one of the few pilots in "Cirkus Galland" who actually had some real training on the 262. In the book he mentions all the problems with the plane and how using the throttle at altitude was a no-no because of fan blades being made from inferior quality metal which made them sensitive to changes in temperature etc.

 

I wonder how this will be taken into consideration in DCS? I mean realism is key in DCS and if the 262 will be as reliable as say the 109K-4 it won't be very realistic. But on the other hand, if players suffer from random flame outs all the time I doubt it will be very fun from a gaming perspective. Any thoughts?

 

My thought would be to make sure all the things that can go wrong, would be an option to go wrong in the ME, only issue is that I am not sure these random failures work in MP currently, but I dont remember.

[Hummingbird]

Just finished the book "A Higher Call" by Adam Makos (recommended read if you haven't already...) where a large portion is about Franz Stigler who was attached to JV44. He was one of the few pilots in "Cirkus Galland" who actually had some real training on the 262. In the book he mentions all the problems with the plane and how using the throttle at altitude was a no-no because of fan blades being made from inferior quality metal which made them sensitive to changes in temperature etc.

 

I wonder how this will be taken into consideration in DCS? I mean realism is key in DCS and if the 262 will be as reliable as say the 109K-4 it won't be very realistic. But on the other hand, if players suffer from random flame outs all the time I doubt it will be very fun from a gaming perspective. Any thoughts?

 

A lot of these issues were partially solved with the B4 engine though which was a lot more reliable than the B1, both due to a new fan blade design as well as the automatic throttle regulator which also monitored engine temperature.

 

But of course failures still happened as the engines were pushed passed the 50 hour overhaul mark due to a lack of spare parts and oil etc..

 

But if we keep in mind that ingame we will be given a new Me262 everytime we take off, well then even the 10 hour TBO of the B1 won't be felt. The real planes had to last a lot longer than the single sorties we fly ;)

[Hummingbird]

My thought would be to make sure all the things that can go wrong, would be an option to go wrong in the ME, only issue is that I am not sure these random failures work in MP currently, but I dont remember.

 

I think an option like that would be optimal, esp. if someone wants to simulate an Me262 that has already seen a fair share of operational use.

[ShadowFrost]

Something like a misc option in the settings? (Server Controlled) but like the Mig-21 where there is a slider to choose cockpit shake. What if we had one for engine reliability. Where a 100% is normal and 0% the slightest overheat, over-rpm, etc. (as picky as the DCS engine can go) will upset the jumo and cause problems. I guess there could also be a 200% option where the engine ignores minimal overheats and over-rpms but all of this would be controlled by the select server.

Edited January 6, 2016 by ShadowFrost

[MiloMorai]

Why just the 262 as the K-4 and D-9 had issues as well.

[NineLine]

Why just the 262 as the K-4 and D-9 had issues as well.

 

You can set failures for all aircraft.

[El Hadji]

All planes have failures but according to a lot of sources (Franz Stigler, Hermann Buchner etc) the 262 was more prone to fail than other planes they flew in combat. New technology not tested enough in combination with poor materials because of the war made the Schwalbe pretty dangerous.

 

My thought is that if the 262 behaves like a flawless, almost modern, jet fighter, realism will suffer. Don't get me wrong, I love this plane (hence all the books I've read about it and the pilots who flew 262's) but I think it must be a pretty hard thing to get right from a gameplay perspective.

[Kurfürst]

Engine flaming was not a random reliability problem, it was an operating problem - the Jumo 004 blades did not tolerate too fast throttle movement (heat shock?), so you had to be careful with the throttle. The old Il-2 series modelled this quite nicely BTW.

 

IIRC the later Me 262 series cured that with an automatic throttle regulator, but this only cut in above 6000 (or 8000) rpm, so at startup you had to be careful and had to avoid complete throttle backs, but in general high regime flight it was okay (automatic).

[otto]

All planes have failures but according to a lot of sources (Franz Stigler, Hermann Buchner etc) the 262 was more prone to fail than other planes they flew in combat. New technology not tested enough in combination with poor materials because of the war made the Schwalbe pretty dangerous.

 

My thought is that if the 262 behaves like a flawless, almost modern, jet fighter, realism will suffer. Don't get me wrong, I love this plane (hence all the books I've read about it and the pilots who flew 262's) but I think it must be a pretty hard thing to get right from a gameplay perspective.

 

It's very fine line you need to walk on with failures. Because for example if someone has little time to fly because of work , family etc and ( i'm taking here from my own experience). If this person tries one mission and get's a random failure.Than after one week of work tries another mission and gets another failure it's going to get really frustrating. And the other team in MP isn't going to be thrilled either to not be able to get kills because all 262 pilots have failures and need to bail out.

Now of course it's also not realistic for this planes to not have failures.

 

 

Finnaly for example:

Franz Schall Hauptmann JG7 Killed in flying accident 10 April 1945. Someone who reads that might say "Might be a me262 failure" but it's actually a bomb crater that destroyed the plane after landing.Also the plane was reliable enough to let this guy shoot down 14 planes while flying the 262 that's more than the average piston engine pilot of the war .

Edited January 6, 2016 by otto

[El Hadji]

Exactly what I mean Otto. On one hand a fully functional, flawless jet fighter will ruin the WW2 experience (especially in mulplayer if the number of 262's becomes great. Did JV44 have more than 10-12 planes operational at once?). On the other hand it will ruin the entertainment value if the 262 crashes all the time. Not an easy thing to get right...

 

Another famous 262 crash was that of Johannes Steinhoff JV44. That wasn't a engine failure either but a blown tire during takeoff. Amazingly enough Steinhoff survived the inferno. Badly burnt but alive and could continue his military career after the war.