Tempest Mark V research

[unreasonable]

I love this forum.   

 

You can see why the RAF decided to get rid of the sky band - given that the Germans were using a variety of units specific bands on fighters by 1945, it makes sense just to say shoot at anything with a tail band.  Not sure why the change of spinner colour though.

[Talisman]

This is a great forum thread folks :))

Very enjoyable, with lots of good educational research and historical information on an aircraft sometimes overlooked. 

I think the Tempest V was the pinnacle for the Hawker Aircraft Company during the War.

Keep up the good work.

 

Happy landings,

 

Talisman

[ZachariasX]

1 hour ago, Talon_ said:

https://www.classicwarbirds.co.uk/articles/the-history-of-invasion-stripes.php

 



 

I know that, but he took that image in the new edition of his book, even identified himself with an arrow:

Spoiler

This is weird. He got his first "Grand Charles" on his 24th birthday, so that was Feb. 28th when he also was handed command of No.3 and given that aircraft. He referring to is as "one of the new engines with 2'950 hp and Rotol propeller". Clould it be that this JF-M did not get his invasion stripes washed off by that time? JF-E certainly didn't have those stripes.

 

During the patrols on the invasion beach, they surely had those, here, JF-Z, supposedly parked in Newchurch, Kent:

Spoiler

 

 

The spinner was not "white", the paint color was officially called "duck egg", it has a slight greenish and blueish tint to it. It comes in many variations though.

Spoiler

 

Personal repaints (like a red spinner) were illegal, but it was obviously not the first thing that got policed in the field.

 

There are more funny references:

Here, a "Tempest VB" of 486 Sqn., JN805:

C1 roundels, no stripes and no band around the tail.

 

Now, what could make this an Tempest Vb, same as Clostermann is talking about his late tempest supposedly was. Sabre IIc?

 

Looking at another photo Clostermann provided, we see two Tempests of 486 before take off.

Spoiler

No invasion stripes, no skyband around the tail. I'd say Rotol props. The spinner is a good give away.

 

Tempest production. Or "not production":

Spoiler

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Talon_]

8 minutes ago, ZachariasX said:

I know that, but he took that image in the new edition of his book, even identified himself with an arrow:

  Hide contents

This is weird. He got his first "Grand Charles" on his 24th birthday, so that was Feb. 28th when he also was handed command of No.3 and given that aircraft. He referring to is as "one of the new engines with 2'950 hp and Rotol propeller". Clould it be that this JF-M did not get his invasion stripes washed off by that time? JF-E certainly didn't have those stripes.

 

Impossible. Clostermann was flying Spitfires for the entire duration invasion stripes were present on the continent in any form - and they were only on the top surface of the aircraft for a few weeks. He transferred to Tempests as the new orders were being applied.

 

The colour of the band and spinner is called "RAF Sky, Type-S".

These accounts are verified by the Imperial War Museum:

 

https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/205127013

 

https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/205210846

 

 

 

[ZachariasX]

19 minutes ago, Talon_ said:

and they were only on the top surface of the aircraft for a few weeks.

Yes, they could be washed off. As it impacted the surface finish of the aircraft, I'm sure crews must have been happy to get them washed off.

 

19 minutes ago, Talon_ said:

The colour of the band and spinner is called "RAF Sky, Type-S".

Good old orphan colors.

Spoiler

 

They are all different now. It would have been nice if they kept the mixing recipies.

Edited August 25, 2018 by ZachariasX

[unreasonable]

Getting rid of the sky spinner was probably just some Oxford graduate miffed that the RAF is flying around in Cambridge blue.

[Quinte]

6 hours ago, ZachariasX said:

It doesn't look like the Rotol propeller, or is it? 

It looks like a DH unit indeed. Keep in mind that Clostermann may have taken that photo post-war, and this may be the "Grand Charles" that he nosed over a few days before the midair during a victory flyover. AFAIK it's unclear whether he actually flew NV724 during the war.

 

3 hours ago, ZachariasX said:

This is weird. He got his first "Grand Charles" on his 24th birthday, so that was Feb. 28th when he also was handed command of No.3 and given that aircraft. He referring to is as "one of the new engines with 2'950 hp and Rotol propeller".

That's what the book says. But Clostermann actually joined 274 squadron on the 4th of march, flew for the first time on the 5th and got his first tempest victory on that day. IIRC he only was posted to 3 squadron on April 8th.

NV994 was delivered to 3 squadron on the 15th, april 1945, as JF-E. It was the first "Grand Charles". The one photo I have seems to suggest it had a DH prop, too. I believe NV994 was the one he had to belly land only a few days later when he got shot by american AAA. Supposedly he goit shot down at some point (the "piece of cake" story), but I can't find any traces of that.

By the end of the war, he was flying SN222.

Edited August 25, 2018 by Quinte

[MiloMorai]

The 'Invasion Stripes'  paint was of what type of paint?

[ZachariasX]

8 minutes ago, MiloMorai said:

The 'Invasion Stripes'  paint was of what type of paint?

It was different from the paint applied at the factory. I will check back what they used exactly. It was not like you see them on restored museum pieces that use „nice“ paint.

 

 

[Quinte]

Distemper was apparently used when the stripes were applied in the field. Factory smooth-paint stripes were later applied. You can usually see the difference on photographs.

[ZachariasX]

1 hour ago, Quinte said:

It looks like a DH unit indeed. Keep in mind that Clostermann may have taken that photo post-war, and this may be the "Grand Charles" that went down in a mid-air during an airshow. AFAIK it's unclear whether he actually flew NV724 during the war.

 

He didn‘t waste his „Grand Charles“ at Bremerhaven, that one had an oil leak. He even took that as a bad omen. He took a replacement aircraft and his wingman clipped off his tail with his prop during the parade, taking the other two in the formation with them. Clostermann being the only survivor, his chute opening right above ground. He had it as close as Eric Brown, minus the duck pond.

 

The picture was taken on the day he left the RAF, one hour before a B25 would take him to Paris. So yes, it is a post-war photograph.

 

1 hour ago, Quinte said:

But Clostermann actually joined 274 squadron on the 4th of march, flew for the first time on the 5th and got his first tempest victory on that day. IIRC he only was posted to 3 squadron on April 8th.

 

This is correct. Throughout his diary, he combines events of several days to sort of one chapter. He wrote them when he had the time for it, as his individual entries are unusually long for a diary. His book is not much edited (minus all the typos the idiotic publishers left), it is pretty much what he wrote originally adressing his parents.

 

This means he could well be no more than approximate with a lot of stuff now important to us, but in quality, he had no reason to lie about things. It makes it most challenging getting exact sense from it, as he was very mch in the fog of war at the time.

 

 

10 minutes ago, Quinte said:

Distemper was apparently used when the stripes were applied in the field. Factory smooth-paint stripes were later applied. You can usually see the difference on photographs.

Yes, exactly. It produces a much more uneven finish. Cheap and no need for primer.

Edited August 25, 2018 by ZachariasX

[MiloMorai]

And a much more ragged/uneven edge.

[ZachariasX]

1 minute ago, MiloMorai said:

And a much more ragged/uneven edge.

Would have been something, using tape and varnish first. „Hey, Picasso, there‘s a war on!“

[Quinte]

You somehow managed to quote something I had edited an hour before that. He nosed over after a too long landing a few days before that parade.

8 minutes ago, ZachariasX said:

His book is not much edited (minus all the typos the idiotic publishers left)

The last french edition "Le Grand Cirque 2000" is almost entirely rewritten. Sadly I've lost my original edition, years ago, probably in some box somewhere at my parents'. Maybe someday I'll find it back, it has quite a few differences. For example, the original has dates all over. The new one, not so much.

[ZachariasX]

24 minutes ago, Quinte said:

For example, the original has dates all over. The new one, not so much.

The original French one I guess. I have a German first edition. That one also has sometimes dates leading chapters, but for our topic they are of little use. During the time he was put behind a desk in London up to his first missions with 122, there are hardly any reliable dates stated.

 

It‘s probably best to match this info with photographs and make some sense from that.

2 hours ago, Quinte said:

Supposedly he goit shot down at some point (the "piece of cake" story), but I can't find any traces of that.

He later denied having said that in this way, but indeed he got shot down by a 190D (possibly from JG301) that he chased. The German then took the fight. In process, after losing sight of him, Clostermann received shots in the engine at tree top altitude and had to belly land right away near the shore of lake Dümmer. The landing went smooth, but he got mugged by American soldiers while he was waiting next to the aircraft. He landed just a couple of yards on the German side. He got mugged and liberated at the same time.

 

With this episode, he managed to be the butt of a joke in the official sqadron report as the idiot who let himself getting shot down just days before the ar was over.

 

Not clear what aircraft he flew, but it seems he often had aircraft other than his personal one. I doubt that this was his JF-E, but I have to check to be sure.

 

One can definitely say, he as very, very lucky. He belly landed Tempests frequently. Most others ended very badly doing this stunt once. He even went to see his old friend Jaques and his old Spit squadron to show off with the Tempest. He did some aerobatics only to find out he couldn‘t lower his gear anymore and he belly landed right in front of the same crowd that watched his flying. He was rather popular among the crowd then.

[MiloMorai]

I can't find any loss of a Tempest flown by Clostermann. Maybe it was salvaged?

[NZTyphoon]

From Chris Thomas & Christopher Shores' 2nd Tactical Air Force, Volume Four:

Continuing with...Chris Thomas & Christopher Shores' 2nd Tactical Air Force, Volume Four:

[NZTyphoon]

Just to finish, some info on RAF colours and markings,  plus a note on the RAF's 'Night', that was used for serial numbers, the under surfaces of many aircraft types, Typhoon and Tempest i.d stripes, and "D-Day stripes"(from Paul Lucas: RAF Fighters 1945 - 1950: UK Based and The Battle For Britain - RAF May to December 1940):

 

Edited August 26, 2018 by NZTyphoon

[ZachariasX]

7 hours ago, MiloMorai said:

I can't find any loss of a Tempest flown by Clostermann. Maybe it was salvaged?

Most likely. He made a landing soft ennough that he still hurt himself a bit by jumping out of the aircraft without detaching the oxygen tube. He said the German would have taken a pass at him but didn‘t fire. He must have been rather shaken up, regardless of what may have happened.

 

Thanks guys for the info on colors. Makes it easier to identify photographs!

Edited August 26, 2018 by ZachariasX

[Talon_]

@NZTyphoon phenomenal post, we are very much obliged. I'd do anything to get my hands on those four volumes! ?

[Talon_]

 

Takeoff procedures

 

 

[MiloMorai]

 

Of note for the developers is the retraction of the under carriage.

 

[Talon_]

First claim from an NV series Tempest* 14th Jan, 2x Fw190 damaged by F/S M. J. Rose

 

*3rd production batch, +11lbs boost from factory

 

 

 

First time Tempests appear in the 2TAF claims log, only 1 out of the 10 serials is not a batch 2 aircraft - JN875. The first production run ended on JN877 and we know the late aircraft were basically identical to the EJ series anyway.

 

 

Edited September 17, 2018 by Talon_

[MiloMorai]

Just some claims trivia.

 

Bf109 - 79 destroyed, 6 damaged

Fw190 - 115 destroyed, 3 damaged

 

From looking at the claims list, claims of Fw190s increased in 1945 and of the Bf109 decreased.

[=RvE=SirScorpion]

I think after reading this thread the argument should be if we should get the 13lb tempest which i fully support. the 11lb seems like a done deal and 9lb seems to be more out of time frame or "game play" than the 13lb is all things considered.

 

I also noticed some people are regular in attempting to logical fallacy soo hard to pre nerf none 109s. its like so consistent among so many threads its pathetically obvious. and needs to stop.   

[Quinte]

6 hours ago, =RvE=SirScorpion said:

I think after reading this thread the argument should be if we should get the 13lb tempest which i fully support. the 11lb seems like a done deal and 9lb seems to be more out of time frame or "game play" than the 13lb is all things considered.

I'm quite sure we can say with 99.99% confidence that we won't get a +13lbs Tempest. Reasons are as follow:

- There is very little to no solid intel regarding which aircrafts were cleared for such boost. The Sabre IIb was never cleared for that by Napier, which indicates a IIc. We don't know when this was introduced, and in what numbers?

- If we base this, as is often assumed, on the presence of a Rotol prop, very few wartime tempest Vs were fitted with such a prop unit, and they appear right at the end of our campaign's timeframe, during march 45.

- There is little to no info available as to the performance of such an aircraft.In fact, even finding actual performance numbers for a +11lbs, 3850 rpm Tempest V is quite difficult.

- Not to mention it would be quite the uber plane anyway.

[ZachariasX]

11 minutes ago, Quinte said:

- There is very little to no solid intel regarding which aircrafts were cleared for such boost. The Sabre IIb was never cleared for that by Napier, which indicates a IIc. We don't know when this was introduced, and in what numbers?

Never cleared by Napier? Here, look again, this is by the Napier Heritage Trust:

 

 

We are musting at the possible power outputs of an engine that is absolutely known to produce 3'055 by the end of the year in question here. Also it is stated that the IIb ran officially at +11 boost, but if you see a whopping 600 hp headroom, then a 13' boost becomes at least plausible. Plus there *are" people thyt you can quote saying "I used +13' boost".

 

The Sabre is a most remarkable piston engine. I think it is even the most remarkable of the war. It by far outclasses ANY other piston engine in power to weight, power to displacement and power to frontal area. The Griffon was a good engine, but that's about it. Just a good, big fat V12.

 

Naturally, most hated thos engine, most notably RollsRoyce, a company that was rather infamous in handling things when they felt someone was stepping on their turf.

 

20 minutes ago, Quinte said:

- If we base this, as is often assumed, on the presence of a Rotol prop, very few wartime tempest Vs were fitted with such a prop unit, and they appear right at the end of our campaign's timeframe, during march 45.

True. But those very few are more like 50 operational aircraft, rather than 5.

 

 

 

In total, you are probably right. we will get what the devs have most info on, and this is +11 boost. RollsRoyce almost killed the plane back then, but now they could kill the memory of it by making Napier fold, erasing documentation of smaller, iterative steps to increase the power of the engine.

 

[Quinte]

4 minutes ago, ZachariasX said:

Never cleared by Napier? Here, look again, this is by the Napier Heritage Trust: 

I don't see a IIb cleared for +13? I think you missed my point?

 

In addition, the info on that document, regarding the IIc, doesn't match British Piston Aero engines and their aircrafts, which is weird since that book used Napier archives at the time. And brings more precise info. There is no doubt the Sabre IIc was going up to +17,25 lbs boost (so yes, btw, those 3055hp were not produced at +13, they were at +17,25, aka WEP).

 

How long was such WEP permitted? No info.

For how long could you get +13, then? No info.

When was the IIc introduced? My book says it was fitted to at least one Tiffie, so probably before war's end, since Typhoons were scrapped immediately. No more info.

How many produced and fitted? No info.

Was having a rotol prop a definitive sign that you have a IIc? No info.

 

And so on.

 

 

 

[MiloMorai]

A 11lb Sabre would be just fine. A 13lb Sabre would be too much for some.?

[ZachariasX]

57 minutes ago, Quinte said:

I don't see a IIb cleared for +13? I think you missed my point?

No, it is exactly as you said. However, you also have 15 boost in the same timeframe, making actual use (as stated in pilot accounts) very plausible.

[=RvE=SirScorpion]

2 hours ago, ZachariasX said:

No, it is exactly as you said. However, you also have 15 boost in the same timeframe, making actual use (as stated in pilot accounts) very plausibl

 

considering how many accounts there are about the actual combat use of 13lb, and allowance test of +15lb i also say it was very plausible in the time frame.

 

the though part is getting actual data, since the tempest is one of those aircrafts where information even on the basic models is tough to find.  

[ZachariasX]

1 hour ago, =RvE=SirScorpion said:

it was very plausible in the time frame.

Around Christmas/New Year, I shouldn't think ratings above +11 boost were issued. But From February to Summer, I'd expect a gradual increase of permitted boost ratings.

[Talon_]

Does anybody know if the Sabre IIB used a manifold pressure regulator? If this is not the case perhaps the engine can be overboosted (the A-20B we have in game is rated for WEP on 43" MAP however you can actually pull well over 50" using supercharger gear 2 or even just flying at 100% power at sea level). This would also explain Clostermann's weird claims of 50 million horsepower or whatever.

[=362nd_FS=RoflSeal]

5 hours ago, Talon_ said:

Does anybody know if the Sabre IIB used a manifold pressure regulator? If this is not the case perhaps the engine can be overboosted (the A-20B we have in game is rated for WEP on 43" MAP however you can actually pull well over 50" using supercharger gear 2 or even just flying at 100% power at sea level). This would also explain Clostermann's weird claims of 50 million horsepower or whatever.

Lack of a manifold pressure regulator seemed to have been an American thing only, and then until about early 1943 at the latest

Edited September 21, 2018 by RoflSeal

[blockheadgreen_]

An important detail that most get wrong is the control column. The Tempest V series one had pneumatically fired Hispano II cannon, whilst the series two model (the one we’re getting) possessed electric Hispano Vs.

 

You all know that, but 3D modellers build their Tempest V S2s with the classic Hurricane/Typhoon (Dunlop AH2040) control column, which has a pneumatic pushbutton.

 

But, an accurate Series II should feature a later electric Dunlop AH8400 grip (which has a three position gunbutton, which would allow for the seperate inner and outer pair firing that has been described)

 

[ZachariasX]

Interesting. There‘s another inconsistent Clostermann account then, whe he supposedly shot at a Me262 and he had leakage in the pneumatic system and the guns in one wing would jam. He then correcting the aim after itial hits and then all guns would jam. If that was true he still must have been mounting a late series II Tempest.

 

Besides, how are you supposed to hold that spate grip? Right hand on the spate to also operate the bicycle brake I guess. Then the gun trigger must be the large button on top to fire with the right hand thumb, while the switches on the side (guns/fire) are toggles for selecting the respective guns?

[unreasonable]

55 minutes ago, ZachariasX said:

Interesting. There‘s another inconsistent Clostermann account then, whe he supposedly shot at a Me262 and he had leakage in the pneumatic system and the guns in one wing would jam. He then correcting the aim after itial hits and then all guns would jam. If that was true he still must have been mounting a late series II Tempest.

 

Besides, how are you supposed to hold that spate grip? Right hand on the spate to also operate the bicycle brake I guess. Then the gun trigger must be the large button on top to fire with the right hand thumb, while the switches on the side (guns/fire) are toggles for selecting the respective guns?

 

The brake handle would only be relevant in certain situations; I do not think you would want you right hand right on the top of the grip while flying - my view of that grip would be that the gun button would normally be used by the left hand thumb, which is also in position to open the safety cover and adjust the selector switch. You are not going to be doing anything else with the left hand while firing.  It does look a bit ergonomically challenged though. The pneumatic version looks more comfortable.

[ZachariasX]

2 minutes ago, unreasonable said:

It does look a bit ergonomically challenged though.

Well, looking at the force required to move the control column it makes sense gripping it with the right hand like a spate from almost above.

 

There was a pilot in Clostermanns squadron, Vassillardes was his name. He cut off his left hand in a crash landing. The plexi shards were really sharp... He got an artificial limb as left hand and he could fly with that. He was a bit of a special case, as he wore thick glasses. But as a former Shell Company exec, he made Churchill push him into a Tempest Squadron, as he was a certified pilot even before the war. But he must have used the right hand to fly as well as to shoot.

[unreasonable]

I disagree - If you need to move something from side to side against considerable resistance you put you hands on the sides of the object not on the top. Pulling and pushing it does not make any difference, but if you want the two hands to exert force symmetrically you would have to have them at the sides of the grip.  

 

As for your one handed pilot: if he could manipulate the throttle and so on with his prosthetic arm he could have pushed down on a button with it too, and even if he used his right hand that is hardly evidence for what was normal practice.

 

But who knows: it is an odd looking grip.

 

 

[ZachariasX]

3 hours ago, unreasonable said:

he could have pushed down on a button with it too,

That guy still flew very successfull mission. Clostermann really admitted that, although he didn't like him at all. He though that way of getting to fly Tempests was impropper, although surely impressive.

 

Besides, having a left hand trigger would be about the daftest thing in the history of fighter aircraft. It would literally be the only aircraft in the world with that arrangement for a function of utmost importance. I suspect you hold the stick in a place where your right thumb can still conveniently reach the toggle on top to fire guns. The switches on the left side are too deep in to be able to conveniently toggle them in the heat of the battle wearing thick gloves. Any trigger has to be a very prominent switch.

 

Also one has to keep in mind that the pivot for the aileron twist on the control column is rather high up, so it might be convenient holding the stick such that one no only pushes or pulls it sideways, but also exerts a twisting force like the turning of a wheel. Having such a short element that twists sideways (maybe only 15 inches or so), you do not have the long lever like you have in the Mustang or the 109 and your hand doesn't just move sideways, it also rotates around that pivot point. It makes sense holding the grip differently. Same as in the Spitfire. Also there, you hold the stick at a (maybe) 2 o'clock position on the round part. Like this, you can reach the fire button with the thumb but you can also twist the stick besides mocing it sideways. The left hand there would hold the straight left part in a 8 o'clock position if both hands are required. It is very wheel like.