DCS: Spitfire Mk LF IXc Discussion

[NeilWillis]

So, when does the debate about what exactly constitutes mid-year start?

 

It probably means I'll have time to get the M-2000C, L-39ZA, P-40 and the Gazelle, maybe even a F-5E pinned down before the Spitfire arrives.

[NineLine]

So, when does the debate about what exactly constitutes mid-year start?

 

It probably means I'll have time to get the M-2000C, L-39ZA, P-40 and the Gazelle, maybe even a F-5E pinned down before the Spitfire arrives.

 

How about lets not stress it and know we will get it as soon as its ready to be gotten ;)

[BlackLion213]

From the ED Facebook page.

 

 

The texture/surface details of that fuselage looks amazing! Incredibly realistic. It seems that every new module (from ED at least) really pushes the visuals a step further.

 

The Spitfire IX is one of my very favorite WWII fighters and I'm elated with what I've seen so far.

 

The last cockpit renders were gorgeous as well!

 

-Nick

[Talisman_VR]

And it seems we are getting the elliptical wing.:smartass:

 

Shame, I was looking forward to getting the clipped wing :(

 

Perhaps we will get both :)

 

Clip wing gets my vote as it is very much in keeping with the historical time line of Spitfire development and I believe the clip wing was the more common version of wing for 44/45. After all, remember it is a Low Fighter (LF) version.

 

Happy landings,

 

Talisman

Edited January 30, 2016 by 56RAF_Talisman

[westr]

Shame, I was looking forward to getting the clipped wing :(

 

Perhaps we will get both :)

 

Clip wing gets my vote as it is very much in keeping with the historical time line of Spitfire development and I believe the clip wing was the more common version of wing for 44/45. After all, remember it is a Low Fighter (LF) version.

 

Happy landings,

 

Talisman

I have a feeling we probably will. They have already modelled the clipped wing version.

[airdoc]

I have a feeling we probably will. They have already modelled the clipped wing version.

 

Yep, they may have considered a way to implement both versions under a single module. Many people had already asked for it.

 

This would affect other 3rd parties working on similar projects. Overall it would be a great feature.

[westr]

perhaps we can ask for both a bubble canopy and razorback P-47 now then, lol.:megalol:

[otto]

perhaps we can ask for both a bubble canopy and razorback P-47 now then, lol.:megalol:

 

That's actually a great idea.

 

Would also be great if they found a way to implement the same way the 109 gunpods.

[Cripple]

Well, you are all waaaaaaaaaaaay ahead of me. I read the email at work, and am ashamed to say it took me far to long to notice the full wings. Thanks ED for the update, and a particular "Thank you" from me for listening to our whinging about it. :P

 

Now, about buying that early alpha release....? Heh heh. ;-)

[BFBunny]

I'm not sure what i'm more excited about flying it or trying to shoot it down in the 109.

[Azref]

I hate to be this guy but I'd like to point out some errors on the MK IX model.

 

Firstly the Elevator is from the earlier MK I to Mk V version of the Spitfire. I've atached an image comparing the different elevators.

 

(1) Is the current elevator modelled on the DCS Spitfire IX however it should look like (2)

 

The Spitfire Mk IX also had no headrest, they were removed on an earlier version and shouldn't be present.

 

And finally the wire shouldn't be there and the mast is an earlier model. Below is an image of MH 434 showing the correct style HF mast, which is what I believe ED are working from for the in game model.

 

Please don't shoot the messenger. :thumbup:

[NineLine]

All valid, but we need to figure out what they are modelling right now, its possible the MH 434 is the wrong scheme for the aircraft (it was when it had clipped wings for example), I initially thought it was a conversion job from a Spit V, but unsure now, the wings keep changing on me :)

 

I hate to be this guy but I'd like to point out some errors on the MK IX model.

 

Firstly the Elevator is from the earlier MK I to Mk V version of the Spitfire. I've atached an image comparing the different elevators.

 

(1) Is the current elevator modelled on the DCS Spitfire IX however it should look like (2)

 

The Spitfire Mk IX also had no headrest, they were removed on an earlier version and shouldn't be present.

 

And finally the wire shouldn't be there and the mast is an earlier model. Below is an image of MH 434 showing the correct style HF mast, which is what I believe ED are working from for the in game model.

 

Please don't shoot the messenger. :thumbup:

Edited February 2, 2016 by NineLine

[NightRush]

Yeah I agree Sith, it depends if its a full replication of MH434 or just to replicate a early/mid Mk IX.

 

I guess its hard with creating a model like this, do you make it to represent the widest range of Spits, or do you have it represent a single airframe

[Bounder]

I think there has been a question of whether we will see a Spitfire with a mk V airframe typical of the early '42 prototypes but with a mid/late war configuration and engine (merlin 66). One issue being that modifications to the mid/late war mk IX including the elevator (as described by Azerf above) made to correct issues associated with the mk V as well as to adjust for the new engine etc may be absent and thus we end up with a rather unusual and not so very typical mk IX. Or at least that's what I've picked up trying to following these threads.

[Alicatt]

I hate to be this guy but I'd like to point out some errors on the MK IX model.

 

Firstly the Elevator is from the earlier MK I to Mk V version of the Spitfire. I've atached an image comparing the different elevators.

 

 

And finally the wire shouldn't be there and the mast is an earlier model. Below is an image of MH 434 showing the correct style HF mast, which is what I believe ED are working from for the in game model.

 

 

Please don't shoot the messenger. :thumbup:

 

As HF radio comms is only really used for long distance flights, ie. trans Atlantic, and even that being supplanted with satellite radio, and most short to medium distance communication is done on the VHF, the aircraft would not need the HF wire antenna in todays world.

 

Even by 1940 HF was starting to get phased out and replaced by VHF radios, also on the picture of MH 434 I do not see any IFF antennas going to the tailplane. The mounting point of the antenna on the rudder is also a little suspect in that it is past the pivot point which would cause the cable to slacken and tighten every time the rudder was used which would lead to fatigue of the parts in the antenna, also it would cause flutter fading of the radio signal, while not so noticeable at HF frequencies it is still there.

 

I was a MF, HF, and VHF, maritime radio installer and am still a licenced ham radio operator hence my curiosity.

 

Edit: after doing some search on 't internet found this article: http://spitfiresite.com/2010/04/spitfire-masts-and-aerials.html/2

 

By the end of 1940 most front-line Spitfires would have been fitted with VHF and IFF. As per usual changes could take a few months to filter through from the factory and photos of factory fresh Spitfire IIs still show the mast fitted with the triangular prong well into 1941. By the end of 1941 the plain tapered mast was universally fitted. The attachments points for the prong were still visible on the back of the mast.

Edited February 3, 2016 by Alicatt
found more information

[Talisman_VR]

"The Spitfire Mk IX also had no headrest, they were removed on an earlier version and shouldn't be present."

 

That is very interesting Azref, I had not realised this. Thanks for posting. Do we know why the headrest was removed?

 

Happy landings,

 

Talisman

[Cripple]

"The Spitfire Mk IX also had no headrest, they were removed on an earlier version and shouldn't be present."

 

That is very interesting Azref, I had not realised this. Thanks for posting. Do we know why the headrest was removed?

 

Happy landings,

 

Talisman

 

I was about to ask the same thing. From the Mk.V manual it's mod no.662, but I can't find anything else about this mod so far. :(

 

(I knew about this but made the decision to put one I my 'pit anyway as I like the feel of headrest, and it looks nice and "Spitfire-y")

[MiloMorai]

Photos of MH434 from 1980 and 1984,

http://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-spitfire-mk-ixb-mh434-was-built-in-1943-at-vickers-castle-bromwich-80413649.html

[Azref]

After some digging in what notes I have available it appears that the headrest was deleted, on all Marks, towards the end of July 1942, though airframes still on the production line might still have had them.

[Decibel dB]

As HF radio comms is only really used for long distance flights, ie. trans Atlantic, and even that being supplanted with satellite radio, and most short to medium distance communication is done on the VHF, the aircraft would not need the HF wire antenna in todays world.

 

Even by 1940 HF was starting to get phased out and replaced by VHF radios, also on the picture of MH 434 I do not see any IFF antennas going to the tailplane. The mounting point of the antenna on the rudder is also a little suspect in that it is past the pivot point which would cause the cable to slacken and tighten every time the rudder was used which would lead to fatigue of the parts in the antenna, also it would cause flutter fading of the radio signal, while not so noticeable at HF frequencies it is still there.

 

I was a MF, HF, and VHF, maritime radio installer and am still a licenced ham radio operator hence my curiosity.

 

Edit: after doing some search on 't internet found this article: http://spitfiresite.com/2010/04/spitfire-masts-and-aerials.html/2

 

Not true sorry we still use HF radio in today airline unfortunately, either HF voice in some place or HF data for use of ADS/CPDLC. Airbus or Boeing still today come out of the factory equipped with HF radio and antenna, however they are not the cloth line style that they use to be

[Alicatt]

Not true sorry we still use HF radio in today airline unfortunately, either HF voice in some place or HF data for use of ADS/CPDLC. Airbus or Boeing still today come out of the factory equipped with HF radio and antenna, however they are not the cloth line style that they use to be

 

As I said, it is still used for long distance communications. MF and HF is also used for LORAN (closed in the 1990s) and LORAN-C which is still in use today.

 

In 1940 they were phasing out the use of HF in the Spitfire and replacing it with VHF radios and they still used HF for the IFF but the antenna was in a different location.

 

I worked for Decca Radar Ltd. installing/servicing/repairing radars, radios, navigators, echo sounders etc.

 

The first of the Decca Navigators was used to help with the navigation and surveying of the beaches for the D-Day invasion. :)

 

Edit: A night passage to Normandy, a personal account of the opening phase of the D-Day landings.

[url]http://www.sperrymarine.com/sites/default/files/downloads/2099763146/Night%20Passage%20To%20Normandy%20(2).pdf[/url]

Edited February 3, 2016 by Alicatt

[BerryMORE]

Hi guys! Does anybody have this publication AP 1565 J&L Vol1?

[Cripple]

Hi guys! Does anybody have this publication AP 1565 J&L Vol1?

 

Yup. It's fairly easy to acquire. The ebay bundles of Spitfire manuals on a CD usually contain it.

[Friedrich-4B]

In 1940 they were phasing out the use of HF in the Spitfire and replacing it with VHF radios and they still used HF for the IFF but the antenna was in a different location.

 

+1

 

In 1940, the HF T.R.9.D was being replaced by the VHF T.R.1133: attached are pages from A.P. 1565A, Spitfire I Merlin II & III Engine (June 1940). Note that the aerial mast was the aerial for the T.R. 1133

 

The problem with the T.R.9D in 1940 was that it was limited to one or two frequencies, plus its reception was often so bad that pilots couldn't hear air to air or ground to air transmissions properly (modern HF radios don't suffer from the limitations of the T.R.9 series) - the T.R 1133's, which were replaced by 1943 by the improved T.R.1143, operated over a wider range of frequencies and the reception was much clearer.

 

This 1942 photo of an early production Spitfire F. Mk. IX of 611 Sqn is representative.

 

 

In addition, a typical 1944 vintage L.F. Mk IX had a rod IFF antenna under the outer starboard wing - also note, in both photos there's no longer a headrest, as mentioned by Azref. AFAIK it was removed because it hindered the pilot's ability to look to the rear.

 

Edited February 3, 2016 by Friedrich-4/B

[Cripple]

Cheers for that info, F-4B. I have the "newer" control box for the 1133, but was never sure why it had replaced the 9D.

 

From a purely personal perspective, and having tried it out in my 'pit, I have to question that rationale for deletion of the headrest. One's view is obscured by the dirty-great slab of armour plate and frame 12 -> aftwards; but unless one has eyes in a funny place, a ~6" pad at the rear of one's skull has no negative effects upon either head-movement or peripheral vision.