Jump to content

Tempest Mark V research


ShamrockOneFive
 Share

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, 56RAF_Talisman said:

Note that the author states that 150 grade Octane fuel and 416 mph ASI at sea level gave Tempest pilots the edge and confident advantage in the hard-fighting winter of 1944.

 

He might be quoting testing figures. It's no operational confirmation. It would still be nice to have in game, though 11lb are more important imho.

 

(430 mph for the Bf109G-6 is off.)

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, JtD said:

 

He might be quoting testing figures. It's no operational confirmation. It would still be nice to have in game, though 11lb are more important imho.

 

(430 mph for the Bf109G-6 is off.)

I might have agreed with you if he had not clearly stated that this performance edge and resulting confidence was part of the hard fighting of winter 1944.  Also, I would not expect the Axis aircraft figures to be exact as we are possibly talking captured aircraft and second hand information on Axis aircraft and he does not indicate that he actually flew the Axis aircraft.  However, his credentials for giving us details on the Tempest V are impeccable.  He is not just any pilot.  The link below gives an idea of his credentials.  I would not expect this book to provide definitive details regarding Axis aircraft and would expect such details to be open to correction, but I would expect to be on very solid ground regarding details in this book regarding the Tempest V.  It is the Tempest V that the author is an expert and an authority on, not Axis aircraft. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roland_Beamont

Edited by 56RAF_Talisman
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

=362nd_FS=RoflSeal

Re-thinking about it, if the author is talking about winter conditions, 416 mph at Sea level with high boost doesn't sound that off..

 

Edited by =362nd_FS=RoflSeal
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, =362nd_FS=RoflSeal said:

Re-thinking about it, if the author is talking about winter conditions, 416 mph at Sea level with high boost doesn't sound that off..

 

 

True but bear in mind LW aircraft also obey the laws of thermodynamics and would get a similar boost.  I tested various aircraft in sim and get 10 - 40 kph extra than during autumn/spring.

 

K4 with DC engine did 653kph (406 mph) at SL on winter map.

A8 did 606kph on winter map

D9 did 614kph (not as big an increase).

Edited by ICDP
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, =362nd_FS=RoflSeal said:

Re-thinking about it, if the author is talking about winter conditions, 416 mph at Sea level with high boost doesn't sound that off..

 

Beamont got 415mph IAS  while chasing V1s, so a summer map.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As said elsewhere, it's IAS. At 400 the Tempest manual gives a 22mph position error correction. Trend: Increasing as speed goes up. So 416 IAS is 394 TAS at most, and that's perfectly plausible.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 1/5/2018 at 12:34 PM, ShamrockOneFive said:

 

That was actually a mix-up of miscommunications by the third party artist who created the Tempest (it was a fan project for him) and Maddox Games implementation. It had mostly to do with the height at which the pilot sat in the cockpit. This is from before the days of the 6DOF cockpits.

 

I suspect that 1CGS won't make the mistake and we're already able to adjust our viewpoint in this sim without trouble anyways.

@ShamrockOneFiveI would be interested in your thoughts about the rear view from IL2 Bodenplatte's Tempest V,  now that the patch is out.....I am pretty surprised at the lack of vision out the back and am wondering if its something wrong with my setup given your comment about adjusting our viewpoint. 

Is the game view fairly accurate to what the Tempest was like?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dallas88B said:

@ShamrockOneFiveI would be interested in your thoughts about the rear view from IL2 Bodenplatte's Tempest V,  now that the patch is out.....I am pretty surprised at the lack of vision out the back and am wondering if its something wrong with my setup given your comment about adjusting our viewpoint. 

Is the game view fairly accurate to what the Tempest was like?

 

The in-game model is as accurate as you are ever going to find, so I'd check your camera settings. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In case anyone is reading this... I am using Opentrack and the Delan Clip for head tracking. I made some setting changes to Relative Translation and Neck displacement. Now can 'look over my shoulder" around the edge of the shield (located behind the pilots head) and down past the tail on both starboard and port. Thanks to @BlackHellHound1 for the excellent thread A complete guide to set up Head-tracking (Opentrack) here 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ShamrockOneFive
6 hours ago, Dallas88B said:

@ShamrockOneFiveI would be interested in your thoughts about the rear view from IL2 Bodenplatte's Tempest V,  now that the patch is out.....I am pretty surprised at the lack of vision out the back and am wondering if its something wrong with my setup given your comment about adjusting our viewpoint. 

Is the game view fairly accurate to what the Tempest was like?

 

I've been too busy blasting things on infront and sailing past at 350mph to look behind me 😄

 

Jokes aside, my impression is positive. The headrest was bigger than the one on the Mustang and so the view is a little less. You may need to adjust the default view a bit more forward (F10 key) and you should get a better view out the back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, 77.CountZero said:

Its mutch better then it was in old il2, you can see oposite side of rudder, so you can seee all you need to check 6.

Yeah, old Il-2 the visibility was terrible, the bubble canopy was useless with the big headrest in the way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
On 8/22/2018 at 7:24 AM, No.41_Glen said:

Conclusion:  In January 1945, production 3rd batch with Sabre IIB Tempest were in the service, but the quantity is small. In February, Sabre IIB Tempests account for 50% victories. From September to December 1944, Sabre IIA engine Tempest were the absolute mainstream, however, their conversion to IIB status  is unknown. We don't know how much of them were upgraded to 11 lbs setup in late 1944.

 

So the Devs have decided on two models: +9 and +11lbs.

 

I have been trying to find out when the change occurred in 2nd TAF on the continent, but like a lot of WW2 subjects, the answer is blurry.

 

This post by Glen seems to match what I have gleaned from other sources, i.e. the +9 lbs version was the most common version until the end of 1944.

The +11 lbs version started appearing in substantial numbers in early 1945 and was the most prevalent version towards the end of the war.

 

Is that the consensus or is there other evidence floating around?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
On 12/8/2019 at 7:49 AM, Sgt_Joch said:

 

So the Devs have decided on two models: +9 and +11lbs.

 

I have been trying to find out when the change occurred in 2nd TAF on the continent, but like a lot of WW2 subjects, the answer is blurry.

 

This post by Glen seems to match what I have gleaned from other sources, i.e. the +9 lbs version was the most common version until the end of 1944.

The +11 lbs version started appearing in substantial numbers in early 1945 and was the most prevalent version towards the end of the war.

 

Is that the consensus or is there other evidence floating around?

Usaully  it took several months for RAF to supply new type to battle field, IIB engines were available in late 1944, but not sure about the quantity, bTW IIA engine can also be modified. 

Edited by No.41_Glen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

I've taken advantage of the free downloads offered by the British National Archives to have a look at the reports filed by the Tempest squadrons. Of very helpful note is a list of reports from 3 Squadron from the fall of 1944 showing the total amount of ammo loaded for each mission. Every entry I've seen shows a max of 600 rounds per plane - the game's current ammo loading. 

 

(If anyone's interested in checking for themselves, the document is AIR/27/34/24).

 

EDIT: also, the one available 1945 ammo report from 3 Squadron for January shows the same thing: 600 rounds per plane.

Edited by LukeFF
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, CountZero said:

Any reports about tempests losing wings , or pilots needed to take care of pull on stick to not lose wings ?

 

No

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • LukeFF pinned this topic

56 Squadron, August 1944:

 

56SqnAugustAmmoExpenditure.thumb.JPG.7f2b752e071334ebb694bb5d570dc05e.JPG

 

 

September 1944:

 

56SqnSeptemberAmmoExpenditure.thumb.JPG.5195828a1d6a5082f578c94b60578224.JPGCapture.thumb.JPG.db55e965a774e10d779ce0ea68723083.JPG

 

October 1944:

 

Capture2.thumb.JPG.1f13a769b6624daea9fba7c41201c9ac.JPG

Edited by LukeFF
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

LF_Gallahad

I think it would be great to have a "Extra ammo" modification then 😀

 

Nice finding, Luke!

Edited by LF_Gallahad
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ack, false alarm, guys! I wasn't reading these charts correctly. Those columns are divided up into "Effective Sorties" and "Not Effective Sorties". When one adds up the numbers of aircraft in each of those columns, the number of rounds per aircraft is 600.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

NZTyphoon

Really interesting info Luke, thanks for that. Also notable is that long range tanks aren't listed in any of the 'LOADS CARRIED/EXPENDED' columns...does this mean that they weren't used, or were they overlooked for some reason?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, NZTyphoon said:

Really interesting info Luke, thanks for that. Also notable is that long range tanks aren't listed in any of the 'LOADS CARRIED/EXPENDED' columns...does this mean that they weren't used, or were they overlooked for some reason?

 

I think drop tanks are listed under the category of "Bombs, RPs, L R Tanks, etc (By Types)." For instance, for 56 Squadron's January 1945 report, the third row highlighted shows 8 total planes that flew an Armed Recce, has "16" under the category of "Loads Carried" and "12" under the category of "Loads Expended." That tells me all 8 planes that day carried 2 drop tanks, and all but 4 were jettisoned.

 

Furthermore, many of the entries elsewhere in the ORB list these missions as "Long Range Armed Recce." So, I take that to mean these were missions flown with drop tanks.

Edited by LukeFF
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

NZTyphoon
9 hours ago, LukeFF said:

 

I think drop tanks are listed under the category of "Bombs, RPs, L R Tanks, etc (By Types)." For instance, for 56 Squadron's January 1945 report, the third row highlighted shows 8 total planes that flew an Armed Recce, has "16" under the category of "Loads Carried" and "12" under the category of "Loads Expended." That tells me all 8 planes that day carried 2 drop tanks, and all but 4 were jettisoned.

 

Furthermore, many of the entries elsewhere in the ORB list these missions as "Long Range Armed Recce." So, I take that to mean these were missions flown with drop tanks.

Doh! (facepalm here) You're right - I missed reading the 45 Gal LRT in the first columns of the LOADS CARRIED/LOADS EXPENDED...

January45.JPG.f93744b1655cca19790fdebbad6779c9.thumb.JPG.1c6675d54e174527cb5bf51f10785b7f.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...
LLv34_Flanker

S! 

 

The ammo is numbered rather than names. Does game indicate which ammo is used in Tempest? Could post appropriate pages of the manual. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...
On 8/24/2018 at 8:36 PM, No.41_Glen said:

 

Second production batch of 300 aircraft built by Hawker Aircraft Ltd, Langley, Buckinghamshire. EJ504, EJ518-EJ560, EJ577-EJ611, EJ626-EJ672, EJ685-EJ723, EJ739-EJ788, EJ800-EJ846, EJ859-EJ896. Series 2 aircraft, Sabre IIA engines with modifications, short-barrel cannon, spring tab ailerons. Deliveries commenced 5-44, completed 9-44; average rate of production approximately 18 aircraft per week.

 

Second production batch of 300 Tempest Vs built by Hawker at Langley: EJ504; EJ518-EJ560; EJ577-EJ611; EJ616-EJ-672; EJ685-EJ723; EJ739-EJ788; EJ-800-EJ846; EJ859-EJ896 Sabre IIA or IIB, Hispano V cannon, spring-tab ailerons Deliveries commenced 5-44; completed 9-44 18 aircraft per week. (From Francis K Mason Hawker Aircraft Since 1960, 1991 page 567

 

http://www.hawkertempest.se/index.php/piloter/victories

29 Sept

Fw190

1

56

S/L D.V.C. Cotes-Preedy

US-C (EJ721)

Emmerich area

 

29 Sept

Fw190

1

56

F/L A.R. Moore

US-M (EJ741)

Emmerich area

 

19 Nov

Me262

1/2
1/2

486

P/O O.D. Eagleson
F/L Taylor-Cannon

SA- (JN858)
SA- (EJ828)

Rheine

The last A/C with EJ896 series number, is 55 after EJ828 which had a victory on 19 Nov 1944, that's only three weeks gap(18 aircraft per week), so the last A/C of 2nd Batch(EJ896) joined the war no later than 10 December. This is the hard evidence that SabreIIB engine involved in 1944's battle.

 

 

 

Sorry to dredge up such an old reply, but I wanted to chime in here, since I have all the Tempest squadron ORBs. Anyways, it is plain from the records that 56 Squadron was using EJ Series Tempests from July 1944. Their first missions with Tempests were flown on July 2, and we can see the following EJ planes were utilized on that day:

 

EJ 559

EJ 536

 

EJ Series planes were not the most common type in the squadron, but they definitely show up throughout the month. I see these planes on hand flying missions with 56 Squadron during July 1944 (probably others as well, this was just a quick scan).

 

EJ 559

EJ 536

EJ 547

EJ 533

EJ 534

EJ 559

 

In August 1944, you start seeing a lot more EJ-series planes.

 

Meanwhile, 3 Squadron received their first EJ Series Tempest in early June 1944. At that time they had on hand (from the EJ production block)

 

EJ 504  - first flown operationally June 2; strangely, it then doesn't show up again for the rest of the month

EJ 525 -  first flown on 17 June by Wing Commander Beamont

 

So, in other words, Tempests with Sabre IIB engines were flying with 56 Squadron since July 1944, and 3 Squadron since June 1944. It doesn't look like 486 Squadron got EJ planes until some time later.

 

In conclusion, it's plainly obvious that Tempests had engines with IIB engines even since before the V-1 threat began, and they of course would have continued using them at +11 lbs on the Continent in the fall of 1944.

 

Attached is 56 Squadron's reports for July 1944.

 

AIR-27-531-34.zip

Edited by LukeFF
  • Thanks 2
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

ACG_Talisman

Also using +11 lbs boost Tempest V over the Continent in the summer of 1944.  Below is an operations record book account of anti-diver (V-1 flying bomb) operations and armed recce over the continent in the same month of August 44.  You will see 25th Aug starting with anti-diver patrols and then an armed recce into France at Cassel, Nr St Omer.  Anti diver patrols are then resumed on 26th Aug.  Then on 27th Aug another armed recce near St Omer.  Then on 28th Aug an attack on a radar station in France at Cassel, near St Omer.  Seems they made a hell of a mess of it!

 

So +11 lbs boost Tempest V anti-diver squadrons were also on operations over Europe in between anti-diver operations during August 1944 (as well as September, see second operations book extract below).

 

Source for operational record book extracts here: Newchurch Village :: 56 Sqn Operations Record Books

25to31aug1944-sm.jpg

Some more 56 squadron (+11 lbs boost anti-diver rostered unit) Tempest V operations over the European continent detailed below.  I see they destroyed a staff car and FW 190's.

Last 2 missions from base on the continent at Grimbergen.  Note that activity recorded on this sheet covers to the end of September 1944, starting in England and then moving to Europe.

 

18to30Sept1944.jpg

Edited by ACG_Talisman
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another snippet on Tempest ammo loadouts, this time from 274 Squadron on 18 September 1944: one mission to attack flak positions in support of Market Garden, and another to target cover to Halifax bombers. In both cases, the ammo load is given as "8 x 600 x 20mm". In other words, 8 Tempests each carrying 600 rounds, so 150 rounds per gun.

 

Note as well the usage of drop tanks, since they were still based in the UK at this time.

 

897856485_274Squadron.thumb.JPG.a3ef182c6f10bdc245d940d169955d4f.JPG

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...