DCS: Spitfire Mk LF IXc Discussion

[MiloMorai]

Good work Friedrich.

[Friedrich-4B]

E wing installation:

Edited March 8, 2014 by Friedrich-4/B

[MiloMorai]

I guess it can be put to rest this nonsense that the Spitfire with a gyro gun sight was not the predominate gun sight installed in the Spitfire.

[NineLine]

I guess it can be put to rest this nonsense that the Spitfire with a gyro gun sight was not the predominate gun sight installed in the Spitfire.

 

Is that what all this was about? ;)

[Friedrich-4B]

It seems to me that the DB throttle system is much simpler than on other engines, as it does not need to do much to limit the air pressure delivered by the supercharger. All it does is maintaining the required manifold pressures and prevent too high pressures.

 

Whereas on simpler supercharger designs like the Merlin the supercharger always develops a fixed maximum pressure (ie. a LOT more than desired) via RPM through a fixed engine-to-supercharger gear ratio, which then needs to be regulated and then throttled to the desired engine setting.

 

To claim that the DB60X duel throttle system is somehow less complex than that of the likes of the Merlin, and to pretend that the supercharger on the latter always develops "a fixed maximum pressure...which needs to be regulated and then throttled...", whereas the DB supercharger somehow doesn't is nonsensical. Both systems needed to control the supercharger's boost, and went about the process in different ways to achieve the end result; ie: the pilot controlled the aircraft's speed via a throttle control.

 

As it is, the two-stage, two speed supercharger on the Merlin 60, 70 series etc used an automatic boost control system which enabled the supercharger to develop pressures of anything between -4 lb/sq in to +18 and +25 lb/sq in; all the pilot had to do was use the throttle lever and (sometimes) set the propeller:

 

 

[MiloMorai]

So, ten Spitfire Squadrons it is, most of whom have never even seen a single German fighter, let alone shot at them.

 

When there was only penny packets numbers of your heroes, it is understandable that they would not be seen or even shot at.

[DD_Fenrir]

Funny, Dick Audet found enough to shoot down 5 on a single mission - his first air-to-air engagement too - with his gyro gunsight, on 28th December 1944.

 

Oh and he found a further 5 into January plus an ME 262.

 

He flew with, oh my, funny that, 411 sqn.

 

According to my sources plenty of other pilots made ace over the autumn winter and spring of 1945. Guess there must have been German aircraft to shoot at then?

 

Funny, I didn't realise this was a discussion about the apparent paucity of Luftwaffe activity over the Western front during the last months of the war. I thought we were establishing the commonality of usage of the Gyro gunsight in RAF/RCAF Mk.IX Spitfires? Can't see what relevance this particular line of discussion has on the original argument that fitment was few - disproved quite resoundingly I'd say - apart from to try and deflect attention from the inaccuracy of the original claimants argument.

 

Oh but then this Kurfy we're talking bout isn't it? Modus Operandi there then. Be nice to see him just once acknowledge his faulty claims rather than try and weasel out of the discussion but guess that'd be too noble.

Edited April 14, 2014 by DD_Fenrir

[Friedrich-4B]

Starting the Merlin 66 from cold:

 

 

Magnetos, ground running and checks to stopping the engine:

 

[sobek]

Focus on facts, gentlemen, not the other persons throat. If you find yourself unable, then walk away.

[MiloMorai]

Will the Spitfire IX get 150PN fuel and 25 lb boost?

[Sharpe]

I'm curious about something else; a lot imagery of the time shows Spitfires being started up with the use of little battery carts. Will something similar be available here?

[NineLine]

I'm curious about something else; a lot imagery of the time shows Spitfires being started up with the use of little battery carts. Will something similar be available here?

 

Only if we have to start the 190 like this :P

 

[Sharpe]

Only if we have to start the 190 like this :P

 

 

You know you could probably do the same with the K4, right?

[Friedrich-4B]

from Spitfire IX/XVI Pilot's Notes, 3rd ed September 1946 (NB comments on rear fuselage fuel tanks and some handling qualities apply to late Spitfire LF. XVIs with cut down rear fuselages and clear-view canopies):

 

 

Edited June 30, 2014 by Friedrich-4/B
NACA report deleted; reached pdf download limit

[Grim_Smiles]

Only if we have to start the 190 like this :P

 

Did they really have to start the inline 190s like this (as I've seen the radial ones start up without any crew assistance) or could she just be missing some parts that required them to do this? If this is really how it was I can't imagine a more frustrating thing when you have enemy aircraft on the way, and ground crew keeps having to hop on your wings to do this routine.

[NineLine]

I dont think this is a normal start up, but it would be cool to have an animated crew come do this :)

[Grim_Smiles]

I dont think this is a normal start up, but it would be cool to have an animated crew come do this :)

 

It would be cool to have the animation in game of seeing the ground crew hopping on the wings and doing this. But probably wouldn't have been cool in WWII if this had been a normal startup lol. I can imagine a 190 pilot sitting in his cockpit watching the black dots of enemy aircraft get larger, and screaming "MACH SCHNELL!! MACH SCHNELL!!!" at higher and higher pitch while the ground crew keeps trying to start the plane like this.

[NineLine]

It would be cool to have the animation in game of seeing the ground crew hopping on the wings and doing this. But probably wouldn't have been cool in WWII if this had been a normal startup lol. I can imagine a 190 pilot sitting in his cockpit watching the black dots of enemy aircraft get larger, and screaming "MACH SCHNELL!! MACH SCHNELL!!!" at higher and higher pitch while the ground crew keeps trying to start the plane like this.

 

 

Nope, I agree... its a hurry up and wait approach to scrambling fighters :)

[Friedrich-4B]

How about this for an animation?

 

http://www.tangmere-museum.org.uk/artefact-month/the-waaf-who-flew-a-circuit-on-a-spitfire

[Krupi]

How about this for an animation?

 

http://www.tangmere-museum.org.uk/artefact-month/the-waaf-who-flew-a-circuit-on-a-spitfire

 

Is that the new take on the spit girl :megalol:

[Sharpe]

Is that the new take on the spit girl :megalol:

 

it beats 'the one that sits on your lap'.

[Alicatt]

How about this for an animation?

 

http://www.tangmere-museum.org.uk/artefact-month/the-waaf-who-flew-a-circuit-on-a-spitfire

 

Where my father served during WWII but it was Mossies and Meteors by then not Crikeys and Spits

[Kurfürst]

Funny, I didn't realise this was a discussion about the apparent paucity of Luftwaffe activity over the Western front during the last months of the war.

 

Well in my experience is that discussions with certain contributors the noise / signal ratio of threads is usually very poor.

 

I thought we were establishing the commonality of usage of the Gyro gunsight in RAF/RCAF Mk.IX Spitfires? Can't see what relevance this particular line of discussion has on the original argument that fitment was few - disproved quite resoundingly I'd say - apart from to try and deflect attention from the inaccuracy of the original claimants argument.

 

No, the original arguement was that:

 

Not forgetting that by mid-1944 a high proportion of 2 TAF Spitfires were fitted with the Mk II Gyro gunsight

 

I would say that this notion was shattered pretty conclusively again, you just have to push to right buttons on certain people and pavlovian conditioning will kick in soon and spare you the trouble of disproving their silly ideas. ;) Sure, there is much noise and nonsense, even personal comments in the meantime, but in the end we have learned that this "high proportion of 2 TAF Spitfires" were actually about 10 (ten) Squadrons, give or take a couple, most whom had very little or no actual contact at all with enemy fighters, and whom would be rightfully described by some as insignificant, penny packet numbers.

 

We also learned that the Spitfire had some sort of cold starting device and that some people take special pride in reading books.

[Krupi]

I really don't think you have an argument here Kurfurst, regardless of how many aircraft had a Mk II installed the fact the Dora will come with the apparently even rarer EZ gyro means that it will be highly likely the spit will come with the Mk II.

[Kurfürst]

I don't have an arguement against it at all. I have said already.

 

"Otherwise its very interesting and IMHO it would be very interesting to see such a sight in a Spitfire, to boost its fighting potential. Its operation seems to be very similar the German Einheitszielvorrichtung EZ 42 sight that is already modeled."

 

It just NZTyphoon/Friedrich/etc. who has issues with modelling German equipment all the time. He simply wants the best of everything, even rare items for the RAF, and the worst of everything for the LW fliers.

 

You see he has issues with the EZ 42 being modelled, he repeatadly said that., making up all sort of nonsense about its use an operation which has been throughly debunked; I on the other hand do not have any issues on seeing the GGS being modelled, quite the contrary, I think it would be great and fun to try it. AFAIK Il2-46 even had a Spit model with it. However I have issues with blanket, nonsensical statements about historical facts. Frankly I couldn't care about the EZ 42 either, but since DCS seems to model a Papageistaffel D-9, which all had them, I'd love to try it anyway. Because its fun.

 

BTW any confirmation on the Spit model? I cannot recall seeing any yet.

Edited May 6, 2014 by Kurfürst