Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Sublime

The Tempest Shrine (tempest discussion)

Recommended Posts

20 minutes ago, 9./JG27DefaultFace said:

From wikipedia "During 1944, several veteran USAAF pilots flew the Tempest in mock combat exercises held over the south of England; the consensus from these operations was that it was roughly akin to the American Republic P-47 Thunderbolt."

Pilot assessments are interesting and insightful, yet can also be frustrating in how they can vary so much from each other as well! ūüėĄ

As an example of that, your quote from Wikipedia prompted me to dig out a book which is a history of a Tempest squadron (486 (NZ) Squadron) and read the section dealing with an unfortunate incident when a flight of Tempests was bounced by a bunch of 406th FG Thunderbolts. Interestingly the 486sqn pilots felt they had a clear edge over the P-47s, to quote an example: "Ralph Evans sat on the tail of another which went into a tight turn. He had to throttle back to stay with the American and was close enough that he could clearly see the pilot looking back at him, obviously in some anguish." It's worth noting that the altitude that the fight took place at wasn't stated but it started when the Tempests were just about to attack two Fw190s flying at approx 10,000ft.

In regards to the Tempest's turning performance, here's two abridged examples of what could happen when it came up against against high end LW aircraft flown by experienced pilots. I don't mean for these to show anything like the whole story regarding turn performance etc. but rather as interesting events in themselves. In both cases the Tempest pilot was Jack Stafford (2 victories, 3 shared and 8 V-1s):

- "Staff saw a 109 heading north at low level... anticipating others would be around he took the whole flight down. Staff overshot in his initial attack and the enemy pilot, thought to be Leutnant Gerhard Schindler of 13./JG27, a 15 victory ace and certainly no newcomer, wasted no time in positioning his 109K-4 behind the New Zealand Flight Commander. A turning match ensued with Schindler having little option but to dive away. Stafford fired following in the dive, and also as the 109 pulled out. Schindler was wounded and pieces fell away from his aircraft... The 109 rolled over on to its back and, before it dived into the ground, the pilot managed to parachute from it."

- "... as I turned [Crump] fastened on to my tail and was shooting. I pulled into a steep turn... but [Crump] kept his position... but he couldn't gain any deflection on me. He kept pulling a little tighter and I could see his aircraft shuddering with the recoil and almost stalling. Suddenly my windshield was covered with glycol. I thought I had been hit, but it was my engine overheating from the long period of turning at stalling speed... A short time later [Crump] broke off and disappeared below [Crump had see the glycol streaming from Stafford's aircraft and believed had hit Stafford's Tempest]."
"Crump" was Leutnant Peter Crump of 10./JG54 (equipped with the Fw190D-9) who had 28 victories at that time.

Bonus content, here's a piece of Stafford's poetry from that time, in the tune of My Darling Clementine:

On an airfield up in Holland
where the Brown Jobs look for mines
Sat a Wingco and his Peelots
Drinking beer and shooting lines
Name was Kenway, always Kenway
Never pressed the tit on time
Used to linger - with its finger
Fully in and fully fine
109s at twenty thousand
262s at forty nine
No correction, for deflection
Fully in and fully fine.

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, HBPencil said:

Bonus content, here's a piece of Stafford's poetry from that time, in the tune of My Darling Clementine:

 

Quoted in Sheddon, IIRC.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Pict said:

 

Are you drinking it yourself or just pouring it on your keyboard? ;)

 

See here for my spreadsheet mapping the usage of 150 octane amongst the Spitfire IX/XVI squadrons of No. 83 and No. 84 Group 2TAF during our timeframe.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But more importantly, the 150 octane discussion is totally irrelevant to the Tempest!

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, HBPencil said:

Pilot assessments are interesting and insightful, yet can also be frustrating in how they can vary so much from each other as well! ūüėĄ

Absolutely agree. Those stories are definitely quite interesting as well.

 

Like I said we will have to wait and see how it turns out in game. Numbers wise it should theoretically have a somewhat higher wing loading and a little less HP/weight than a mustang, and with a similar NACA 6 wing it probably wont quite turn as well but will be slightly faster. The other thing that might make a difference is that the 2 might turn very similarly without flaps, but the Mustangs flaps should theoretically be more suited for use in a dogfight. Once again that all depends on how the flaps end up implemented in game though, which doesnt seem to always be as intuitive as one might think.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Talon_ said:

 

See here for my spreadsheet mapping the usage of 150 octane amongst the Spitfire IX/XVI squadrons of No. 83 and No. 84 Group 2TAF during our timeframe.

 

Ah, both by the look of the effort you've put into that :) 

 

Well worth the bookmark I just gave it, thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
17 minutes ago, 9./JG27DefaultFace said:

littleÔĽŅ lessÔĽŅ HP/weight than a mustaÔĽŅng

 

Which boost figures are you looking at because the Tempest we should get at +11lbs makes 700hp more than a Mustang. The Wikipedia wing loading figure for the Tempest includes the weight of two 1000lb bombs.

 

Regardless we know the stall speeds of both which is a good baseline for turning performance - 85mph for the Tempest and 95mph for the Mustang.

Edited by Talon_

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Suddenly my windshield was covered with glycol. I thought I had been hit, but it was my engine overheatiÔĽŅng from the long period of turning at stalling speed...

 

I would prefer that rather than the sudden death of the engine after the timer period... just sayin' 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Talon_ said:

 

Which boost figures are you looking at because the Tempest we should get at +11lbs makes 700hp more than a Mustang. The Wikipedia wing loading figure for the Tempest includes the weight of two 1000lb bombs.

 

Regardless we know the stall speeds of both which is a good baseline for turning performance - 85mph for the Tempest and 95mph for the Mustang.

Ok I went back and crunched some numbers myself and if you compare a "mean weight" Tempest at 10700lbs and a Pony at what I would consider a Normal combat weight for the Mustang in the context of a flight sim ~40% fuel and the Tempest does come out with a not insignificant edge.

 

As I said it will all depend on how some of this stuff is implemented in game though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, 9./JG27DefaultFace said:

Ok I went back and crunched some numbers myself and if you compare a "mean weight" Tempest at 10700lbs and a Pony at what I would consider a Normal combat weight for the Mustang in the context of a flight sim ~40% fuel and the Tempest does come out with a not insignificant edge.

 

As I said it will all depend on how some of this stuff is implemented in game though.

 

Also the elevator control for the Tempest was described as borderline unstable so you can expect Spitfire-like instantaneous turn at the cost of energy.

 

 

Screenshot_20190703-144710.png

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Talon_ said:

We've been playing Pandora's BoX since the Macchi arrived with prototype gunpods.

 

Those gunpods were added because of the way the campaign mode and its attendant unlocks were coded, nothing more, nothing less. 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The tempest was a complex beast:

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, ShamrockOneFive said:

 

I'd love to see the Spitfire Vb get the fuller treatment at some point. I am prepared to accept the Tempest performing Typhoon duties. I'm also still holding out hope for a Typhoon :)

 

To me that sounds like someone at the bar saying they would like an 18 year old single highland malt whisky, but that they are quite happy to have a cheap white rum cocktail until someone opens the whisky bottle.

 

It gives me little confidence that the whisky will be opened and we are going to be stuck on the cheap rum cocktails :drink2:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Pict said:

 

To me that sounds like someone at the bar saying they would like an 18 year old single highland malt whisky, but that they are quite happy to have a cheap white rum cocktail until someone opens the whisky bottle.

 

It gives me little confidence that the whisky will be opened and we are going to be stuck on the cheap rum cocktails :drink2:

It's actually the other way around. You get the whisky after ordering the beer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
23 minutes ago, ZachariasX said:

It's actually the other way around. You get the whisky after ordering the beer.

 

People who intend to drink good whisky after indulging in cheap grog wouldn't know the difference. Suffice to say, at that point the genie is already out of the bottle :)

 

Anyhow I don't think we will see the Spitfire VB upgraded with bombs or clipped wings on the Kuban map any more than I think we should add any weapons other than the 4x20mm cannon to the Tempest we get for the BOBP time frame, and that was my long lost point here.

 

I prefer not to mix my drinks, seeing the Tempest as a 25 year old Glenfarclas that should be enjoyed on it's own for what it really is.

 

All that said, I have the feeling that we will have a repeat of the original IL2 where the Tempest is a Tempoon and the Typhoon never makes an appearance. So anyone wanting a Tempoon to plug their ground pounding hole is just about sure to get it :cool:

Edited by Pict

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Pict said:

All that said, I have the feeling that we will have a repeat of the original IL2 where the Tempest is a Tempoon and the Typhoon never makes an appearance. So anyone wanting a Tempoon to plug their ground pounding hole is just about sure to get it :cool:

 

The Tempest attacked ground targets throughout it's entire service life - just not with bombs until the last month of the war.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Talon_ said:

just not with bombs until the last month of the war.

 

 Sure, but last few days would be more accurate and only twice at that. Plus never ever with rockets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, Pict said:

 

 Sure, but last few days would be more accurate and only twice at that. Plus never ever with rockets.

 

Right but we are getting at least the bombs in game as they were used historically. I still don't see what the problem is as the Tempest platform was approved to use both bombs and rockets and went on to do so in Korea as the Sea Fury with the same wing design. If the Tempest V had seen service in the Pacific theatre as the Tempest II was intended there is also no doubt that it would have used bombs and rockets there.

 

Can you answer specifically why you don't think the Tempest should have access to bombs as it did during the war? If it's purely due to timeframe issues then why take away the option from mission creators to host maps that take place outside the BoBp Campaign timeline? As an admin of Combat Box we can use the new planeset to host missions from late 1943 all the way up to the end of the war.

Edited by Talon_

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Talon_ said:

Can you answer specifically why

 

I thought I'd already done a reasonable job of that, but someone who sees the Tempest V as a Typhoon, a Tempest II and a Sea fury would possibly struggle with my logic :)

 

The Tempest V's contribution to the bombing of the enemy was insignificant. The Spitfire Mk.XIV was also approved to carry bombs and did so, even on a raid significant enough to be mentioned in the RAF's official history. I'd sooner be asking for a Spitfire Mk.XIV complete with bombs than look for a Typhoon substitute. Or a Mosquito or Mustang III,. anything that would expand the 2TAF line up rather than cut it short with duplicity.

 

I am not taking anything away from anyone, anymore than I am providing anything for anyone, I am not the developer, any and all of what I have said is my personal feelings about the matter. I just think it would be better to petition the developer for a Typhoon before bending over and accepting anything as a substitute. You might just get it.

 

The logic behind what is and what is not included from a historical stand point baffles me with it inconsistency. We have a Spitfire Mk VB that is restricted to it's historical representation in the given theater and time frame, great! Then they supply it with paint schemes from all theaters and timelines so that you fly it online with an a-historical kaleidoscope of people, but always with the historically correct weapons etc. There are many examples, that's just one that applies to all the planes.

 

I would set up a server myself, if I could switch off a few things like the techno chat, but until then I'll give it a miss.

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still don't get it. 1C has not said the Typhoon is not coming because we have the Tempest, and if you don't want to fly the Tempest with bombs - you don't have to! Just take off without them!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/2/2019 at 11:42 PM, Talon_ said:

 

Better than 190, worse than 109

 

Vs 190

 

Turning Circles 
41. There is very little difference in turning circles between the two aircraft. If anything a very slight advantage lies with the Tempest. 

Rate of Roll 
42. The Tempest V cannot compare with the FW 190. 

 

 

Vs 109

 

Turning Circle 
47. The Tempest is slightly better, the Me.109G being embarrassed by its slots opening near the stall. 

Rate of Roll 
48. At normal speeds there is nothing in it, but at speeds over 350 mph the Tempest could get away from the Me.109G by making a quick change of bank and direction. 

 

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/tempest/tempestafdu.html

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, easyhomewin said:

 

Vs 190

 

Turning Circles 
41. There is very little difference in turning circles between the two aircraft. If anything a very slight advantage lies with the Tempest. 

Rate of Roll 
42. The Tempest V cannot compare with the FW 190. 

 

 

Vs 109

 

Turning Circle 
47. The Tempest is slightly better, the Me.109G being embarrassed by its slots opening near the stall. 

Rate of Roll 
48. At normal speeds there is nothing in it, but at speeds over 350 mph the Tempest could get away from the Me.109G by making a quick change of bank and direction. 

 

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/tempest/tempestafdu.html

 

 

 

 

Do you not find it fishy that in these tests a 109 is being out-turned by a 190?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Pict said:

 

To me that sounds like someone at the bar saying they would like an 18 year old single highland malt whisky, but that they are quite happy to have a cheap white rum cocktail until someone opens the whisky bottle.

 

It gives me little confidence that the whisky will be opened and we are going to be stuck on the cheap rum cocktails :drink2:

 

I got straight to the scotch BTW. :cool:

15 minutes ago, Talon_ said:

 

Do you not find it fishy that in these tests a 109 is being out-turned by a 190?

 

There's a lot that's been written about how the 109 was interpreted in these tests. It seems like the test pilots were backing off of the turn because of the slat deployment. But that's pretty normal when you put the 109 into a turn so there's been discussions on if the 109 they were testing had broken slats and they were deploying asymmetrically or if there was something else at work.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ShamrockOneFive said:

I got straight to the scotch BTW. :cool:

 

Someone with some sense...if you haven't tried it already I suggest Glenfarclas https://glenfarclas.com/ as a decent tipple, my own benchmark whisky, partly as it's the real deal and partly as it's still family owned, one of the few as most are currently under the control of United Distilleries (UD). Anyhow a 10 year old bottle is just fine and will cost you about 40 pounds sterling in Scotland, a 12 year old is about 40 Euros in France, way cheaper. No need to fork out 1000's for a bottle, but you can if you wish as they have a massive range available, 1954 to date I think :) 

 

I'll crack open a new one to celebrate your 1st rocket attack in the Tempoon when it's released, while I'm tearing the lufwaffles a new one in the air with my Tempest V :P 

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, Pict said:

 

People who intend to drink good whisky after indulging in cheap grog wouldn't know the difference. Suffice to say, at that point the genie is already out of the bottle :)

 

Anyhow I don't think we will see the Spitfire VB upgraded with bombs or clipped wings on the Kuban map any more than I think we should add any weapons other than the 4x20mm cannon to the Tempest we get for the BOBP time frame, and that was my long lost point here.

 

I prefer not to mix my drinks, seeing the Tempest as a 25 year old Glenfarclas that should be enjoyed on it's own for what it really is.

 

All that said, I have the feeling that we will have a repeat of the original IL2 where the Tempest is a Tempoon and the Typhoon never makes an appearance. So anyone wanting a Tempoon to plug their ground pounding hole is just about sure to get it :cool:

Pretentious drink metaphors aside, I believe that giving the Tempest V bombs is unlikely to affect the possibility of the Typhoon appearing in the future. Mostly because the decision to make a playable Typhoon is far more dependant on things like potential sales, access to documents/resources and whether or not it fits a future theatre. Plus, At the end of the day this is still a game and if the devs feel there game would be more fun or profitable with bomb hauling Tempests (or flyable Typhoons) then that is what they will do. Also consider that they already restrict armaments in campaign to historical service dates, so you may not even be able to use bombs for most of the campaign or they may even make them an optional thing.

Edited by ShadowStalker887
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I expect to see bombs and rockets as modification for Tempest

 

probably modifications:

2x500lbs
2x1000lbs
8xRP3

normal gunsight

radio option 

 

but for selfish reasons i would like they dont give bombs and rockets, as Tempest numbers will be limited online, i dont wont ground attack guys taking it ūüėĄ¬†they should stick with poor P-47s or P-38s

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact that you feel the need to tell other people how to drink their whisky is actually not that bad of a metaphor for how silly this is.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Talon_ said:

Do you not find it fishy that inÔĽŅ these tests a 109 is being out-turned by a 190?

 

Not really, as there are several Luftwaffe tests that would make a similar statement.

The interpretation lies with you, but I'd hazard the guess we're not talking turning performance at 200mph here, but rather we're discussing 300-350mph, where the 109 is locking up significantly.

 

The slats opening asymmetrically is a funcion of sideslip and sloppy flying (or the lack thereof).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
56 minutes ago, 9./JG27DefaultFace said:

The fact that you feel the need to tell other people how to drink their whisky is actually not that bad of a metaphor for how silly this is.

 

You show me just where I was telling anyone how to drink their whisky and I'll agree with you, until then you might want to read what I said again and if your struggling with it have someone translate for you.

 

1 hour ago, ShadowStalker887 said:

Pretentious

 

Your 1st post and you make it to call me pretentious, not sure how to take that one, I hope it's a compliment...good on you. I gave you your 1st "like" to go with the post anyhow.

 

Hello and welcome to the group of people who post stuff around here, for better or worse :) 

 

 

Edited by Pict
Spelling, tweaking etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/1/2019 at 7:08 AM, Diggun said:

Bet you 20p they don't.

 

I think we'll get gunsight mods and optional drop tanks with the Tempests, and nothing else.

 

 

gentlemens bet for bragging rights. Im 100% we.ll get rockets and bombs

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I REALLLY wish theyd add fuel octane and options for it in game to affect engines. i doubt we'll see it though.

imagine? Also reading german memoirs often dora formatios would have 1 or 2 with Mw50 the rest not-  thatd be interesting no?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sublime said:

I REALLLY wish theyd add fuel octane and options for it in game to affect engines.

 

They said something about refuel & rearm in the latest dev post, it would make for some interesting scenarios is different gas options were in the mix. Like 150 octane only available at certain bases and certain aprons of course depending on the supply situation, which may well be a target :)

 

They also mentioned something about pilot fatigue which is also cool, but I would really like to see air-frame fatigue too. Tempest pilots spoke of how Spit 14 jockeys wrinkled their wings beyond repair in hi speed dives in futile efforts to compete with the 7 ton Hawker.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I fear pilot fatigue will be like a careeer mode only tbing where if you fly multiple sorties per day.

Itd be cool as a variable.option for online like make lufties fatigued in early 45 scenarios to sinulate wear and tear/hunger or evem as ad hoc way to sinulate raw recruits...

Who knows

Id love new fuel because MAYBE itd help US planes. This is part of why Im so chuffed abt the tempest besifes my natural love for her - I like p51s but as I age I realize theyre great war winning planes but not for the sexy reasons I thought as aa child.  I love the p38 but I fear the US hobble in this game. My hope goes to the tempest..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hope they get the Sabre noise correct: should be pretty different to the current engine sounds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ISTR recordings of it are rare too ūüėē

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
20 hours ago, EAF19_Marsh said:

Hope they get the Sabre noise correct: should be pretty different to the current engine sounds.

Any idea what a 24 cylinder engine sounds like? I have no idea 

Edited by Bilbo_Baggins

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bilbo_Baggins said:

AnyÔĽŅ ÔĽŅidea what a 24 cylinder ÔĽŅengine sounds like? I ÔĽŅhaveÔĽŅÔĽŅ no ÔĽŅidea

 

I would imagine loud.... Very very loud. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

No idea what the sound is like

 

(working on computer ATMO..no sound! )

 

Cheers, Dakpilot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, -LUCKY-ThanksSkeletor said:

I would imagine loud.... Very very loud. 

Probably still less than the DB60X, it has lower compression. 7.5 : 1 vs up to 8.5 : 1 in the DB. Merlin has 6 : 1 and purrs like a cat compared to the DB.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
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
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...