150 octane fuel

[pburnage]

Why don't we have the possibility to use 150 octane fuel performance? It was widely used from mid 1944 onwards.

[DD_Fenrir]

Here we go....

[pburnage]

Yes, a beaten up topic. But I haven't read a satisfying answer yet.

[grafspee]

Yeah, topic was widely commented by many, but i can't remember if ED said anything about that. And i am pretty certain that ED never said that 150 grade will get in to DCS. I may be wrong, this topic is old as P-51 module.

Edited October 20, 2022 by grafspee

[DD_Fenrir]

2nd TAF Spitfire IX Squadrons D-Day:

1. 56
2. 132
3. 222
4. 302
5. 308
6. 310
7. 312
8. 313
9. 317
10. 329
11. 331
12. 332
13. 340
14. 341
15. 349
16. 401
17. 403
18. 411
19. 412
20. 416
21. 421
22. 441
23. 442
24. 443
25. 453
26. 485
27. 602

ADGB Spitfire IX Squadrons D-Day (those in 10, 11 and 12 Groups):

1. 1 
2. 33
3. 74
4. 80
5. 126
6. 127
7. 229
8. 274
9. 501
10. 504

 

2nd TAF eschewed the use of 150 Octane for logistics reasons until early 1945; ergo, straight away that removes 73% of the total Spitfire IX force that could usefully undertake offensive operations during the summer of 1944 from utilising 150 grade.

Add to that, that at the time of D-Day only 3 of the ADGB Spitfire IX squadrons were testing 150 Grade operationally and that % of use is tiny. Admittedly as the V-1 attacks commence there's a rush to get 150 octane supplied to all ADGB Spitfire, Tempest and Mosquito nightfighter units and we see it become the norm for ADGB use until the autumn, but given ADGBs focus of defensive operations, as a Luftwaffe Jadgwaffe pilot, you're still very unlikely to encounter a Spitfire operating with 150 octane as they are too busy chasing V-1s; you'll much more likely face-off against Spitfires of 2nd TAF running at the usual +18lb boost.

Then, in September of 1944 with the V-1 threat almost gone, even ADGB reverts to 130 Octane to make the exchange of units with 2nd TAF simpler.

It's not until February of 1945 that we see 150 appear, this time in 2nd TAF with its Spitfires based in Holland and Belgium. 

So, if you wanna create early 1945 scenarios, which would require 1. a west wall map, and 2. the correct Spitfire (should be a IXe). Then yes 150 octane should be represented.

But we don't have these. We have a representation of the spring/summer of 1944.

As its stands we have in DCS a Spitfire IX that best represents that most likely to be encountered by the Jagdwaffe in the ETO in the spring & summer of 1944.

Edited October 20, 2022 by DD_Fenrir

[pburnage]

Dear Fenrir,

I understand you advocate an accurate representation of spring/summer 1944.This sounds perfectly reasonnable. Then, all 109Ks and 190D9s should be banned from all Normandy and Channel scenarii, as only  190A8s and 109 Gs were flying then on the front. Or else, how accurate is that? 

Furthermore, it should not be so difficult to update the spit for 150 octane. I never developped anything for DCS, but I have developped quite a bit for CFS2 in its days. Changing the power was just changing a few points in a table, and a couple of parametres to update. I am convinced models in DCS are way more complex and take a lot more physics into consideration, but I doubt it is that different. 

FInally, why isn't there an official answer from ED, since this has been discussed for so long already?

[grafspee]

@pburnageIf it was a case, if it was so easy to just change couple numbers in table, i think we would have 150 grade already. I think that in DCS case, it require a lot more work, like revisiting whole thing, FM and system modeling like engine modeling, cooling etc. maybe this new cooling model is bringing us closer to 150 grade fuel.

Oh i think i can remember that stuff from ED were saying that gains from 150 fuel are near zero so no point in developing that. It was quite time ago, my memory could twist that, but this is what i remember when it was discussed couple years ago. 

Edited October 21, 2022 by grafspee

[Skewgear]

2 hours ago, pburnage said:

Dear Fenrir,

I understand you advocate an accurate representation of spring/summer 1944.This sounds perfectly reasonnable. Then, all 109Ks and 190D9s should be banned from all Normandy and Channel scenarii, as only  190A8s and 109 Gs were flying then on the front. Or else, how accurate is that?

We tried that earlier in the year. Turns out there's a number of people out there who either only own the Fw190D or won't fly in multiplayer unless they've got a perceived advantage over the other side. We compromised by removing it from the earliest two missions.

Part of the flip side of the problem is that all of our plane set is Q4 44/Q1 45. It would be quicker if a terrain maker built northern France / Belgium Netherlands / Germany than asking for aircraft updates to bring our fleet back to Q2 44 standard.

As for 25lbs boost / 150 octane, in dev terms that's a change to the boost gauge graphic and the engine parameters. Relatively easy, I'd have thought.

[71st_AH Rob]

9 hours ago, grafspee said:

@pburnageIf it was a case, if it was so easy to just change couple numbers in table, i think we would have 150 grade already

Yes but we can't even get one line of code changed years after it was identified to get correct belt composition for the Mustang.  And that isn't even a whole line but two digits in that line.

[DD_Fenrir]

10 hours ago, pburnage said:

Dear Fenrir,

I understand you advocate an accurate representation of spring/summer 1944.This sounds perfectly reasonnable. Then, all 109Ks and 190D9s should be banned from all Normandy and Channel scenarii, as only  190A8s and 109 Gs were flying then on the front. Or else, how accurate is that? 

Furthermore, it should not be so difficult to update the spit for 150 octane. I never developped anything for DCS, but I have developped quite a bit for CFS2 in its days. Changing the power was just changing a few points in a table, and a couple of parametres to update. I am convinced models in DCS are way more complex and take a lot more physics into consideration, but I doubt it is that different. 

FInally, why isn't there an official answer from ED, since this has been discussed for so long already?

I quite agree.

The Bf 109K-4 and Fw 190D-9 predate EDs takeover over the WW2 aircraft, maps and assets from RRG and their kick starter; from day one it was pointed out that the plane set and map were mis-matched but no-one was listening.

The ideal map would have been Belgium Holland Luxembourg and the west frontier of Germany; all the planes we currently have would have suited this map perfectly. Availability of +25lb as an option for Spitfire IXs would have been a rational argument to reflect early 1945 scenarios.

But we don't have this.

Bf 109G-6/14 would have been a far more suitable choice for our current map sets, but by the same argument, so too a P-51B and a razorback P-47 as these were present in greater numbers than their bubbletop variants. 

So the question to ask ED (and yourselves as customers) is do you compound the errors by introducing yet another inaccuracy as a band-aid; or do you focus your efforts to providing content that helps mitigate the historical inaccuracies.

Personally I prefer the latter.

So, as I see it, EDs ETO development should focus on:

1) providing a flyable Bf 109G-6/14

2) a West Front 44-45 map

That way a lot of these arguments disappear. Whether ED would provide a +25lb Spitfire version thereafter would depend on how vocal the community is about it, though in that case I would certainly join the call for it.

As it stands, I would rather see a Bf 109G variant than a +25lb Spit.

[Mr_sukebe]

Regarding accuracy, we could also argue:

 - At the start of June 44, there were very few Luftwaffe aircraft in France

 - Post invasion, a large number of squadrons were sent, but were promptly ripped to pieces, even to the point of some being shot whilst coming in to land at their new airbase

 - The quality of the pilots was by then already waning, due to poor quality training

 - MW50 "might" have been first introduced in the middle of 44', however, doesn't mean that it was widely available.  After all, getting any fuel to squadrons wasn't that easy once Ploesti started to get hit

 - By the invasion, the ratio of allied to axis fighters was MASSIVELY in favour of the allies

Put the above together, and maybe MW50 should be heavily limited (e.g. randomly available) and servers should only allow circumstances where there's more allied than axis aircraft in the air.

 

For reference, take a scan at this book, which includes details about the Luftwaffe involvement before and after D-Day:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/D-Day-Through-German-Eyes-Wehrmacht/dp/1398103233/ref=sr_1_8?crid=2R43VAGL68HM0&keywords=the+invasion+from+the+german&qid=1666369324&qu=eyJxc2MiOiIwLjg4IiwicXNhIjoiMC4wMCIsInFzcCI6IjAuMDAifQ%3D%3D&sprefix=the+invasion+from+the+german%2Caps%2C81&sr=8-8

Edited October 21, 2022 by Mr_sukebe

[DB 605]

16 minutes ago, Mr_sukebe said:

Regarding accuracy, we could also argue:

 - At the start of June 44, there were very few Luftwaffe aircraft in France

 - Post invasion, a large number of squadrons were sent, but were promptly ripped to pieces, even to the point of some being shot whilst coming in to land at their new airbase

 - The quality of the pilots was by then already waning, due to poor quality training

 - MW50 "might" have been first introduced in the middle of 44', however, doesn't mean that it was widely available.  After all, getting any fuel to squadrons wasn't that easy once Ploesti started to get hit

 - By the invasion, the ratio of allied to axis fighters was MASSIVELY in favour of the allies

Put the above together, and maybe MW50 should be heavily limited (e.g. randomly available) and servers should only allow circumstances where there's more allied than axis aircraft in the air.

 

For reference, take a scan at this book, which includes details about the Luftwaffe involvement before and after D-Day:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/D-Day-Through-German-Eyes-Wehrmacht/dp/1398103233/ref=sr_1_8?crid=2R43VAGL68HM0&keywords=the+invasion+from+the+german&qid=1666369324&qu=eyJxc2MiOiIwLjg4IiwicXNhIjoiMC4wMCIsInFzcCI6IjAuMDAifQ%3D%3D&sprefix=the+invasion+from+the+german%2Caps%2C81&sr=8-8

 

DCS (or any other simulator) cannot really model allied massively superior numbers, or quality of pilots/planes, or even fuel shortage properly. These thing will probably never be like they were in real life. However it could accurately model correct maps and correct planesets for them. That's why 109 G6 is shortest way to make thigs as correct as possible for now...and hopefully late-war map "later". It's actually hard to believe there is no more ww2 maps available after all these years.

Btw, most of the server i've flown, already limits MW50 use heavily.

[grafspee]

2 hours ago, 71st_AH Rob said:

Yes but we can't even get one line of code changed years after it was identified to get correct belt composition for the Mustang.  And that isn't even a whole line but two digits in that line.

I won't argue with that argument heh

[Skewgear]

2 hours ago, DB 605 said:

Btw, most of the server i've flown, already limits MW50 use heavily.

We limit it to around 1/3 of Me109Ks per mission. It was generally available from May 1944 but we try to balance that with the fact that the Me109K didn't enter squadron service until Q4 1944, which is well after the period available on the Normandy map.

Obviously we don't limit it on the 4YA WW2 PVE server and I can't speak for other public multiplayer server providers. It is really difficult to build a historically faithful environment circa June/July/August 1944 using late war aircraft.

[Kurfürst]

On 10/20/2022 at 9:51 AM, pburnage said:

Why don't we have the possibility to use 150 octane fuel performance? It was widely used from mid 1944 onwards.

I agree, it would be a nice addition to the K-4 module, if that’s what you meant.  

[king1hw]

Fen has a point it would be good to see a 109 G Series.  However with the increase of the Urga Map I would not mind a Battle of Britain in DCS.  Hurricane rotol MK1 100oct and 87.  Same for a Spitfire MKIa 100 oct and 87 no boost.  A 109 E4 Series and a few bombers completed JU87 and 88 a HE111.  I was flying over London this morning and I get amazing FPS on my 4080 and took the same hop on Cliffs of Dover and Urgas map is great.