DCS: Spitfire Mk LF IXc Discussion

[JtD]

The clipped wings were used across the board and were neither limited to the LF models, nor did all LF models have clipped wings.

[Kurfürst]

By the way, about +25 lb MP... I've found that R-R produced the engines suitable for +25 lb MP only by special order converting plain 66 for +25 lb (Mod 785). Maybe somebody knows what was converted - only MP regulator or some parts were replaced for higher load?

 

Will there be several variants of engine modelled in DCS? Will it be selectable, dependant on date, or there will be several models, like an 1945 version of Mark IX with +25?

 

Standard boost was +18 through 1944 for Mark IX (only two Squadrons used + 25 for operational trials, not sure if they seen any combat during the trials).

 

+25 lbs boost large(?) scale introduction into combat service was around February - March 1945 of 2nd TAF Spitfire units (ca 25 Squadrons were supposed to convert), though there were again some engine/150 grade fuel related fatal accidents at takeoff and the units concerned were soon switched back to 100 octane fuel to the relief of the pilots, which allowed the usual +18 lbs boost.

[bongodriver]

Oh god.....now it begins.

[leafer]

They're here... :D

 

Which is a good thing by the way. The more the better for ED and us.

[MiloMorai]

Oh god.....now it begins.

 

Sounds like a double standard being applied > what is 'good' for 1.98ata is not 'good' for +25lb.

[NineLine]

Will there be several variants of engine modelled in DCS? Will it be selectable, dependant on date, or there will be several models, like an 1945 version of Mark IX with +25?

 

Standard boost was +18 through 1944 for Mark IX (only two Squadrons used + 25 for operational trials, not sure if they seen any combat during the trials).

 

+25 lbs boost large(?) scale introduction into combat service was around February - March 1945 of 2nd TAF Spitfire units (ca 25 Squadrons were supposed to convert), though there were again some engine/150 grade fuel related fatal accidents at takeoff and the units concerned were soon switched back to 100 octane fuel to the relief of the pilots, which allowed the usual +18 lbs boost.

 

 

Personally I would love to see all these different options at the very least in the ME, you could restrict an Octane type, or other different resources, etc. It would be a nice way to add in some different challenges into a mission. Within the boundaries of DCS, I am not sure if it will be possible... but it would be very cool to choose fuel type, etc...

[Kurfürst]

Personally I would love to see all these different options at the very least in the ME, you could restrict an Octane type, or other different resources, etc. It would be a nice way to add in some different challenges into a mission. Within the boundaries of DCS, I am not sure if it will be possible... but it would be very cool to choose fuel type, etc...

 

I agree. The WW2 DCS seems to cover the last year of the war (Normandy to VE day), during which some improvements were made to fighter aircraft performance, so you essentially have low boost and high boost versions for every one of them.

 

I definietely hope so that both low/high versions would be modelled, but it thats too modelling time intensive, it would probably make more sense to make the low boost version, which is kinda represents the late 1944 period. After all, most of these planes were introduced from the 2nd half of 1944.

[NineLine]

I agree. The WW2 DCS seems to cover the last year of the war (Normandy to VE day), during which some improvements were made to fighter aircraft performance, so you essentially have low boost and high boost versions for every one of them.

 

I definietely hope so that both low/high versions would be modelled, but it thats too modelling time intensive, it would probably make more sense to make the low boost version, which is kinda represents the late 1944 period. After all, most of these planes were introduced from the 2nd half of 1944.

 

 

That will be the key, as what it would take to add these in and how they would be added. For example, fuel octane types, could it be added as an option to choose in the ME, which type of fuel the aircraft used, and the aircraft would perform accordingly, or would it have to be a separate aircraft for each option. Obviously it would be nice to have different types of fuel resources, so maybe you limit the amount of higher octane fuel so that as the mission progresses you could run out of that fuel type. Right now I dont think there is anything like this in DCS World, so I am not sure if it could be added within the time frame.

[bongodriver]

Sounds like a double standard being applied > what is 'good' for 1.98ata is not 'good' for +25lb.

 

What? you think suggesting the highest possible boost for the 109 vs the lowest possible boost for the Spitfire is somehow a biased?.......unthinkable.

[JtD]

I think so far Kurfürsts statements were that 1.98 existed and 18lb was more common in 1944. Which I guess is right on both occasions, isn't it? No need to jump the gun with the bias discussion. And frankly, the bigger concern is that we get a Normandy map and a K-4, which doesn't add up in the first place. Whichever engine it uses, whatever boost, it will be out of place. So we're better getting on Luthiers nerves for him to release map editor tools so that we as the community can throw in an Ardennes map a.s.a.p. :)

[Kurfürst]

That will be the key, as what it would take to add these in and how they would be added. For example, fuel octane types, could it be added as an option to choose in the ME, which type of fuel the aircraft used, and the aircraft would perform accordingly, or would it have to be a separate aircraft for each option.

 

I wonder, if given the very complex nature of DCS engine models, it may be doable by simply setting higher manifold pressure to the engine model, and accurate power curves, heat models are then calculated automatically....?

 

At least on Merlin engines, it seems the difference was rather straightforward - higher manifold pressure was allowed and full throttle, and more fuel was supplied. On other engines, like the dual version of 605DB/DC its not so straightforward, there was very likely much more serious changes in engine - timing, for example.

[Kurfürst]

I think so far Kurfürsts statements were that 1.98 existed and 18lb was more common in 1944. Which I guess is right on both occasions, isn't it?

 

Correct. But some people just flame for sport. ;)

 

 

No need to jump the gun with the bias discussion. And frankly, the bigger concern is that we get a Normandy map and a K-4, which doesn't add up in the first place. Whichever engine it uses, whatever boost, it will be out of place. So we're better getting on Luthiers nerves for him to release map editor tools so that we as the community can throw in an Ardennes map a.s.a.p. :)

 

I agree, in fact the whole planeset looks quite typical for late 1944 NW Europe, i.e. an "Ardennes map". Even if the initial planeset is very much out of the timeframe (really the only planes that seem right for Normandy is the Mark IX!) but lets not forget the other variant addons to be added later.

 

Its also a question of modelling material. If a plane was very different from earlier, it was usually more tested, more manuals were made of it so its easier to model.

[bongodriver]

I think so far Kurfürsts statements were that 1.98 existed and 18lb was more common in 1944

 

What he actually said was

 

Jagdflieger cleared the 1.98ata and ordered its use by (at least) four Me 109 Gruppen of JG 27 and 53, operating on the Western Front.

 

March 1945 of 2nd TAF Spitfire units (ca 25 Squadrons were supposed to convert), though there were again some engine/150 grade fuel related fatal accidents at takeoff and the units concerned were soon switched back to 100 octane fuel to the relief of the pilots, which allowed the usual +18 lbs boost.

[NineLine]

As far as the map goes, I would rather see an expansion of the RRG map to include these areas, instead of a whole new map, but we dont know what we are getting from RRG and what capabilities the Map tools will have, especially in the area of map expansion.... I really would like to see RRG release a huge un-detailed map, with their small area done, and the ability to add to it... But I am drifting off topic :)

 

Correct. But some people just flame for sport. ;)

 

 

 

 

I agree, in fact the whole planeset looks quite typical for late 1944 NW Europe, i.e. an "Ardennes map". Even if the initial planeset is very much out of the timeframe (really the only planes that seem right for Normandy is the Mark IX!) but lets not forget the other variant addons to be added later.

 

Its also a question of modelling material. If a plane was very different from earlier, it was usually more tested, more manuals were made of it so its easier to model.

[Endy]

Will there be several variants of engine modelled in DCS? Will it be selectable, dependant on date, or there will be several models, like an 1945 version of Mark IX with +25?

 

Standard boost was +18 through 1944 for Mark IX (only two Squadrons used + 25 for operational trials, not sure if they seen any combat during the trials).

 

+25 lbs boost large(?) scale introduction into combat service was around February - March 1945 of 2nd TAF Spitfire units (ca 25 Squadrons were supposed to convert), though there were again some engine/150 grade fuel related fatal accidents at takeoff and the units concerned were soon switched back to 100 octane fuel to the relief of the pilots, which allowed the usual +18 lbs boost.

 

Well Kurfurst, according to this: http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/150grade/150-grade-fuel.html

 

"By 12 August 1944, 16 Squadrons in A.D.G.B. had been modified to to operate with 150 grade fuel."

 

and

 

"By mid August the V-1 threat was largly eliminated with the advance of the allied armies beyond the launching areas. The ADGB squadrons that had converted to 150 grade fuel now found more time to operate over the continent. The Spitfire IX Squadrons were permanently pulled off anti-diver duty on 10 August and went over completely to escort work, sweeps and armed recces."

 

It also seems that (according to the information I found) ADGB had 11 squadrons of Spitfire Mk IX in June 1944, all (or most) later converted and supplied with 150 grade fuel and at least some were operational over France (afer being relieved of V-1 interception duties) though based in England.

2nd TAF group (which you probably had in mind) usage of 150 grade fuel is November/December but that's a different story.

 

So it seems Mk IX using 25 lbs boost by aircraft belonging to one of ADGB squadrons is perfectly within the time frame of the game, since around August 1944, depeding on group and squadron. That's rather more than just 2 squadrons and much earlier than you mentioned because from the middle of 1944.

 

I agree with Sithspawn though, it could be an option in the editor, same as for 109 ata and Mustang 75" boost.

Edited November 6, 2013 by Endy

[JtD]

The 16 squadrons mentioned are listed in reference 41 of the article and contain only 2 Spitfire IX squadrons. 4 Tempest, 4 Mustang, 3 Spitfire XIV, 2 Mosquito XIX and 1 Mosquito XIII making up the rest.

 

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/150grade/backfire-2.jpg

[Endy]

The 16 squadrons mentioned are listed in reference 41 of the article and contain only 2 Spitfire IX squadrons. 4 Tempest, 4 Mustang, 3 Spitfire XIV, 2 Mosquito XIX and 1 Mosquito XIII making up the rest.

 

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/150grade/backfire-2.jpg

 

Ah sorry then, my bad. I based it on info from June when they had 11 x Spit IX, thanks for pointing it out :)

 

Anyway, I'm still for an editor option though for Spit, 109 and the Pony :)

Edited November 6, 2013 by Endy

[JtD]

Certainly - the more options, the better.

[Endy]

Indeed, especially if Normandy is only a "starter" map with the planeset being essentially from different periods and not all of them really fitting there. So it seems Spit IX squadrons from ADGB and since January also these converted in 2nd TAF (additional 25 Spit IX squadrons?) should have that option.

 

There's also some interesting info here: http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/150grade/1-supply-23nov44s.jpg

 

It seems US VIIIth Air Force was using 20,000 tons of 150 grade fuel in November as opposed to 2,000 used by RAF.

 

It also seems, according to the article there, that VIIIth AF switched its fighters to 150 grade fuel pretty much since July 1944 until the end of the war, with February-April '45 being a temporary switch to “Pep” fuel (100/150 plus 1.5 T’s ethylene dibromide), and due to some maintenance problems reverting back to normal 150 grade in April.

 

That would mean that using 150 grade fuel should definately be an editor option for the Mustang and P47D as well, or even the default state actually, as it seems all VIIIth airforce fighter units were using it since the middle of 1944.

[outlawal2]

Considering we have had the P-51 as long as we have, I am happy it is receiving some love and getting stablemates and a proper environment...

 

(All the abovementioned statements are great points, but I for one am happy with the current plans so if any of the ideas above are implemented all the better!)

[Merlin-27]

That would mean that using 150 grade fuel should definately be an editor option for the Mustang and P47D as well, or even the default state actually, as it seems all VIIIth airforce fighter units were using it since the middle of 1944.

 

 

ohhh boy...another octane discussion. :D

[Endy]

ohhh boy...another octane discussion. :D

 

 

Not a discussion really but facts, with plenty of historical documents to back it, take a look yourself, that's interesting stuff :) 8th AF fighters were converted to 150 octane fuel in July '44 and remained this way until the end of the war, that's a fact :)

Which means both P51 and P47 should be using it in DCS:WWII or do you not agree? Of course, it all depends on the devs but it seems that's a reasonable thing to do is it not?

 

Anyway, here's a little fragment:

 

It was decided that Grade 150 fuel was to be the only fuel available for AAF fighter airplanes in the United Kingdom. 24

Successful service tests led in May 1944 to the Eighth Air Force Fighter Command requesting that it "be supplied immediately with grade 150 aviation fuel for use in P-47, P-51 and P-38 planes". 25 Deliveries of Grade 100/150 aviation fuel to AAF Stations commenced within a week of the landings in France. 2627 The change over to 150 grade fuel necessitated the resetting of all aneroid switches on the P-51s. 28

By early July 1944 the 8th AF fighter aircraft were operating at the following power settings:

150 grade fuel continued to be used by 8th AF units through 1944. The WER engine limitation for the P-51 continued to be 72" Hg.

 

There's a lot more but I'll not be quoting everything here, you can read it yourself if you're interested, along with stuff quoted earlier like fuel supplies, orders, engineer notes etc. :) http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/150grade/150-grade-fuel.html

Edited November 6, 2013 by Endy

[Yo-Yo]

I wonder, if given the very complex nature of DCS engine models, it may be doable by simply setting higher manifold pressure to the engine model, and accurate power curves, heat models are then calculated automatically....?

 

 

There is no problem for the model to work with different MP and give accurate output. The only problem s how organise ME management of the planes. The best way is to have +18 and + 25 as separate planes because of MP regluator different setitng. But there is some limtatons to unique plane IDs number.

[Tiger27]

It must be some mixing up. I mean 3/4 inch (ca. 20mm) of stick travel is literally nada!!!! Maybe Yo-yo meant 3/4 of the stick travel (75%)? Also it should be defined what speed we are talking about.

 

DCS P51 is the first sim what made me desperate to have FFB. It is very difficult to fly on the edge without it in this sim. And that is how it supposed to be.

 

Will the limited stick movement of a 109 also be modelled in FFB, so that when flying a 109 you are more limited in pitch and roll than in a Spit, owing to it's split stick?

 

Not really sure that FFB as it is today is necessarily the way it is supposed to be, many of the feelings fed back through ffb may not have been felt in a real plane, as many were felt more through the seat of the pants, and the forces you face with FFB are nothing to what you would be dealing with in real life.

 

Hopefully the sounds will help those without FFB to sense the onset of stall etc.

[Mogster]

The stick may not be the most realistic place to "feel" what the aircraft is doing but at least with FFB you can feel those forces. Without FFB there's just nothing, you can make aero sounds louder but then that's not exactly realistic either.

 

I do like FFB and find it quite immersive I think it's seriously undervalued and underdeveloped in sims.