Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Sublime

The Tempest Shrine (tempest discussion)

Recommended Posts

I think 2000+ HP at 4000rpm will sound er....Powerful !

 

Cheers, Dakpilot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well the Saber has twice the number of cylinders as a Merlin, so when it is ticking over at 1500 revs, it will sound more like a Merlin at 3000 revs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

 

Same engine, Napier Sabre, same sound, especially as the Tempoon :) 

Edited by Pict
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

, especially as the Tempoon :) 

 

Could also be a Typhest 😁

Share this post


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

 

Same engine, Napier Sabre, same sound, especially as the Tempoon :) 

It's a poor recording from quite far away (the engine note has a frequency too high for some old microphones), these are better:

 

 

 

The Sabre was said to be something like 4 times as loud as a Merlin (probably an exaggeration, but apparently late night run-ups of the engine would disturb people and livestock over a mile away), with a very high pitch "scream" sound which was extremely fatiguing to pilots. Since it's also a sleeve-valve engine it should also have that characteristic "whoosh" that the Centaurus and Hercules have (you can hear it in both videos).

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

It's a poor recording from quite far away (the engine note has a frequency too high for some old microphones), these are better:

 

Yeah, yeah...you can always turn the volume up like I did. And at least the poor offering I put up was free from AAA fire, or commentators.

 

But I will give you a plus for the unmistakable sound of a Trumpfest launching it's rockets in apparent anger, almost like a tweet barrage :) 

 

1 hour ago, sevenless said:

 

Could also be a Typhest 😁

 

Could even be a Tea-chest, that would keep the Brits busy :) 

Edited by Pict

Share this post


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

 

Yeah, yeah...you can always turn the volume up like I did. And at least the poor offering I put up was free from AAA fire, or commentators.

 

Sorry if I came off a bit prickish oof, I've just never been a fan of that recording it just underwhelms me for some reason.

 

I hope the team has come up with something you'll just want to fire the volume up for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/29/2019 at 8:14 PM, Sublime said:

Did the US ever operate any Tempests like they did some Spitfires or not by that point?

 

In combat - no. The P-47 and the Tempest were slightly comparable. However, I remember to have read back in the IL-2 FB AEP days some USAAF fighter pilots did conduct test flights and mock dogfights in the Tempest Vs. My guess is if there were major advantages over the P-47 some missions would warrant a switch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the first aerial victories of the Tempest  was claimed by George "Lefty" Whitman, an US pilot flying with 3 squadron at the time. He shot down a Bf 109G on 8 june 1944. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, JG7_X-Man said:

My guess is if there were major advantages over the P-47 some missions would warrant a switch.

No. Besides another case of „not invented here“, it would simply have been too late. Converting a shop to produce another AC type was planned to take about half a year. It is exactly the amount of time North American was given for the development of the P-51. They were supposed to (license)produce the P-40 and for this, they got half a year to get ready. Not wanting to pay anything to Curtiss, they asked to produce something better (it was still nothing more than a promise). They got the ok for that provided they deliver according to the schedule for license builds.

 

Thus, if they thought the Tempest was awesome (and not the P-80), you could expect Tempests to be delivered by the end of the war, when they had Bearcats as well.

 

Buying from Britain was no option as well. Their production was a mess hampered by strikes.

Share this post


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

One of the first aerial victories of the Tempest  was claimed by George "Lefty" Whitman, an US pilot flying with 3 squadron at the time. He shot down a Bf 109G on 8 june 1944. 

 

There was 3 claims on June 8.  W/C  RP Beamont, 150W, R*P, JN751, F/L AR Moore, 3 Sqd, JO*P, JN753, as well as Whitman, JN743, each claiming a 109 N of Rouen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

24 cylinders should give it a higer-pitched sound than the current V12 aircraft - like a V6 vs. a V-12 car.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, EAF19_Marsh said:

24 cylinders should give it a higer-pitched sound than the current V12 aircraft - like a V6 vs. a V-12 car.

No. You get twice the noise. But noise volume doesn't scale linearly, hence what you'll hear is only marginally loder. It runs at higher revs, this changes the sound as you describe it in a (a specific) car. The sound differences amogst cars/motor bikes are mainly functions of their exhaust mufflers. A V12 Mercedes sounds very much unlike a V12 Ferrari.

 

It is clear that the Sabre has some more gearing and you'll hera that. Just compare the two:

Spoiler

merlingearsmodded.jpg

Spoiler

2036c2659db7c5e7142681a70a96538f.jpg

 

The Sabre will mainly be louder due to higher compression settings than the Merlin. The tune is mudulated by twice the firings per rev and another 25% increase of the revs, giving it 125% of the ignitions during the same time. Also the Sabre is always run at high revs. The Merlin for most of your flight is brought back to ~1'800 to 2'000 rpm, making a Tempest in cruise mode sound even more different that a Spitfire.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as the Sabre what are its qualities 0ecularities for an engine?

Better than a merlin? Just different? A beast?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry if it has already been asked, but does the Tempest was supposed to be faster than Dora and K4 (at low/medium alt)?

  • Haha 1

Share this post


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

0ecularities for an engine?

I saw a Sabre last year at an airshow--there is a project to restore a Typhoon to flight (which is very cool), and they had bought their 'bits' along to show. The star attraction was the Sabre and the main impression I got from it was its size. I mean it's HUGE. I'd put it somewhere between a massive Harley and a Mini Cooper. If size = noise then it should be a real screamer. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, F/JG300_Faucon said:

Sorry if it has already been asked, but does the Tempest was supposed to be faster than Dora and K4 (at low/medium alt)?

It is reliably faster than the fastest Doras and a bit faster than the 109K4. many combat records show that. However, initial accelleration of both German planes are good, especially the 109K4. The Tempest is required to keep its momentum, but then it outclasses both, unless bounced from high. That said, I wouldn't think it likely that you can outrun both German planes if have messed up your fight.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, ZachariasX said:

No. You get twice the noise. But noise volume doesn't scale linearly, hence what you'll hear is only marginally loder. It runs at higher revs, this changes the sound as you describe it

 

Er, yes. That’s what I said: higher pitch. I never mentioned the vague concept of ‘noise’ or ‘volume’. A V12 and a V12 indeed sound the same, but if you read carefully I compared a V6 and. V12: the latter is higher-pitched. As you noted, a Sabre always runs at high RPM (which should be a strength), this in general will produce a higher-pitched sound under almost all flight conditions, whereas a Merlin only sounds like that when at very high power settings.

 

Since you basically agreed with what I said, I am unsure as to why you prefaced your reply with ‘no’.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, EAF19_Marsh said:

Since you basically agreed with what I said, I am unsure as to why you prefaced your reply with ‘no’.

I wasn‘t sure how you originally meant it, but seems I didn‘t get you right. It surely is as you say, my confusion.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Two things:

There are a couple of great articles with many pix on the Typhoon ( slightly OT I know) in the most recent issues of Wing Leader Magazine ( Wing Leader.co.uk ) its a beautifully produced magazine available digitally and you’ll enjoy the narratives of the men that flew Tiffies.

 I read The Big Show  by Pierre Clostermann years ago & thought it to be one of the best combat aviation books ever written. I remember several photos of him flying a Tempest ( with wing tanks!)towards the end of the war, but don’t remember much of what he did with them late in the war.Recently I have read here & other places that most of the Tempests were used in TAC units or chasing down V-1’s and not so much in fighter vs.fighter role. If memory serves Clostermann flew Spitfires for most of the war before transitioning to Tempests- I wonder if that meant his job changed when postings?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Blitzen said:

If memory serves Clostermann flew Spitfires for most of the war before transitioning to Tempests- I wonder if that meant his job changed when postings?

He started his career with No. 341, the Free French  that flew Spit Mk.IX stationed at Biggin Hill. After their leader Muchotte was lost over the North Sea while Clostermann was his wingman, his situation became intolerable as they balmed him for the loss. He subsequently transitioned to No.602, City of Glasgow, flying Spit Mk.V C and Mk.VD (clipped wings). He chose No. 602 as a friend of his from flight school, Jaques Remlinger was stationed there. After some office work and liaison duties aboaurd the Richelieu covering the Murmansk convoys, in the beginning of 1945 he could transfer back to flying duties , against the wish of deGaulle. He chose the a Tempest unit, as it was obvious that the Tempest was the highest performing British aircraft (and Spitfire XIV units probably had less vacancies). With No. 274, 56 and 3 Tempests, he flew all kind of CAP behind enemy lines. Everything German was game. They shot up a lot of vehicles and trains as well as a good number of aircraft. They lost a lot of tempests and flying personell due to Flak, their main opponent.

 

The difference to the missions with No.602 are more academic. In 1944, the Spitfires were often used as ground attack aircraft loaded with a bomb. After the bomb run, they added a free hunt. On the Tempest, they neither carried rockets nor bombs. They just carried three times the ammo load in 20 mm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Big Show was a great book if I remember properly.

The persona histories ,about Typhoon Ops down low ,brief as they are in the Wing Leader magazine , are sobering losses were quite high and apparently no one made many friends as they were pretty sure not to be coming back in the near future.German flak must have been pretty damn good.One wonders how the developers will design it in BoB?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Their losses were about 80:20 flak vs. fighters. Mostly Tempests seem to have flown in groups of 8 as a flight as this was RAF practice from mid-‘44 from a 24 aircraft unit.

 

Though take what he says with a little discernment, when they ran into fighters it tended to be larger German formations. However, he also acknowledges be bounced by very capable schwarms as well.

 

Sheddan also confirms that German fighter were rare but that the flak was lethal and accounted for leaders as much as the inexperienced. 

7 hours ago, ZachariasX said:

I wasn‘t sure how you originally meant it, but seems I didn‘t get you right. It surely is as you say, my confusion.

 

Misunderstanding 😎

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 7/1/2019 at 9:03 AM, -LUCKY-ThanksSkeletor said:

 

It was cleared for all the standard bombs and rockets the RAF was using at the time. Why wouldn't you want the option to be added? Less features = more value?? How does that work. 

Well we have a little wager going on it. Im certainntheyll add bombs and rockets. Why wouldnt they?

Plus we have all sorts of stuff that wasnt there IRL. Not fantasy totally just not there.  Tempests COULD use the weapons but didnt.

Like the Germans HAD FW190A3s during the Battle of Stalingrad but NOT THERE. Yet we have them in career mode.. Because.. Why not?

Id add as much as Id love a 2 for 1 and them making a Typhoon ans Tempest go together as am option.. Since I dount that highly rockets and bombs would allow some typhoon esque ops..

Edited by Sublime

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

"Alex says, "The Tempest is a bit of a mystery plane in history. Not a lot of books and no flying examples like you get with say the Spitfire. There are several different versions of performance numbers in the data we collected and trying to weed through all of them and find the truth was a challenge. In cases like this, our aero model and our systems start to tell the story instead of the data telling us, which happens on more well documented planes. It's a bit like a detective story. We search for the truth with our advanced aero modeling and see what starts to line up. As I measured its shape and entered more and more data points into our aerodynamic and power models, its real flight envelope began to emerge and it began to line up with one or more of the data sources. The end result is a really great war-winning airplane that Allied pilots are going to like and we think is the most accurate Tempest ever made for a PC flight-sim."

 

With the info we gathered, the Mk.V sub-variant we decided to build is the Series II with the Sabre IIa engine. The initial results of FM tests are very promising for fans of British airplanes and Alex has done another outstanding job. The Tempest is indeed a deadly plane and British pilots were lucky to have her."

 

so what to expect? smels like basic 7lbs 1h combat and 5min 9lbs, bearly as fast as normal k4 at deck and ugly as heck, did it even use that old engine from sep44 to april 45?

Share this post


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

We should all speculate more, complain more and judge a product that hasn't even been released yet :crazy: 

 

Definitely! Else, why do we exist?

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, 77.CountZero said:

did it even use that old engine from sep44 to april 45?

 

Not on that boost rating. Early IIAs were upgraded though should really be named IIB.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the matter of ratings for Sabre IIA, a decision has been made in September 1944 to revert them Sabre IIAs to +9 lbs, as higher ratings were only cleared in the desparation to combat V-1s in the summer.

319311ED-A76C-46EF-94EF-DE0B60CE392F.jpeg

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, VO101Kurfurst said:

On the matter of ratings for Sabre IIA, a decision has been made in September 1944 to revert them Sabre IIAs to +9 lbs, as higher ratings were only cleared in the desparation to combat V-1s in the summer.

319311ED-A76C-46EF-94EF-DE0B60CE392F.jpeg

 

I've seen the full version of this in the national archives in Kew - the document goes on to make it clear that this was just a recommendation to maintain operations at +11lbs boost and that earlier "intentions" to reduce to +9lbs are not necessary thanks to the extensive trials mentioned in the other paragraphs.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, VO101Kurfurst said:

On the matter of ratings for Sabre IIA, a decision has been made in September 1944 to revert them Sabre IIAs to +9 lbs, as higher ratings were only cleared in the desparation to combat V-1s in the summer.

319311ED-A76C-46EF-94EF-DE0B60CE392F.jpeg

 

 

"It is their intention to reduce" =/= "decision was made"

 

Your interpretation skills are rather selective. Especially since the snippet you posted essentially contradicts your reasoning:

While initially cleared for combat against V-1s, no negative side-effects have transpired while operating on the increased boost-pressure at 130oct grade fuel.

 

It's pretty obvious that +11 has proven itself as an easy option to reach for in case of neccessity.

Edited by Bremspropeller
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


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

 

Not on that boost rating. Early IIAs were upgraded though should really be named IIB.

 

So they make Tempest V with engine that cant be use in SP campaign, and even make bombs for it that they didnt use untill may45 so not for campaign timeline ?!? but not engine that fits lol

 

why then even bather making Tempest , its better to make Typhoon and you can use it in SP campaign historicly, and you can use it with bombs, and RP-3 rockets and it has same engine

 

why insted Typhoon go make top performing fighter for allied side,  and then give him worst posible engine out of all available options you have, makes no sence or logic especialy when you had Typhoon and Spitfire XIV as top performer, something is not computing here , did they realy tought they are making Typhoon and make mistake caling it Tempest on anouncment, as i remenber they had picture of Typhoon when they anounced bobp...lol

Bodenplatte_Artwork_Tempest_EN.jpg

 

must be batle of normandy is next when they make tempest for that and not for bobp, atleast cockpit is great as expected, and 20mm are deadly as expected (untill they also get nerfed) so old engine will have to do... did it even had worst option then this for its engine from 43 ? maybe hurricanes engine from 1942 ? or gloster gladiators from 39 ... 

Edited by 77.CountZero

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only thing that makes sense to me is the following:

 

- For BoBP have a "Series II" (+11 lbs) 2'400 hp engine. What we are getting essentially.

 

- For futher collector aircraft make a "Series III" (+13/+15 lbs, 4000 rpm) with 3'055 hp and Rotol propeller. This would be Closternanns "Grand Charles". It had what became the Sabre VA engine installed with boost past +11 activated when pushing the throttle through a safety wire. It was an emergency rating and not included in the normal travel range of the throttle, that one AFAIK was also only until +11 lbs. The additional wing root cooler (from Tempest Mk.II) was not that badly needed in during the cold temperatures (winter 1945 was very cold), but it was added in summer and named accordingly once Napier had some order in ther rather organic engine development.

 

The "Series III" would be even easyer money as the Spit XIV.

 

And yes, this sim features unicorns already. And this is not necessarily a bad thing.

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why not attach the "crazy Sabres" to a Typhoon collector's plane that is slightly pricier than a "normal" collector's plane?

It would sell like hotcakes!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

unicorn budget is spend on 1.98k4 and 262 with unbrakable engines, allieds get at best engines from 43 or early 44 to fight campaign in 45 

 

so for bobp tempest 11lbs should be default option for boost, and 13lbs modification and iib engine, not 7 and 9lbs iia engine only and hope they make modification for 11lbs

Edited by 77.CountZero

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe it's just me, but so far we have no idea what we're really getting. Maybe there will be an engine modification, but we will probably only know that when the patch comes.
Until then I would hold back from dismantling the plane before it is even there. If it comes without the boost modification, there's still more than enough time to complain about it. Or better to provide well-founded criticism and suggestions.
Altogether I am glad to see the Tempest with bombs and maybe with a lot of luck it will also receive the rockets (I may dream!).
It would also be really nice to have the camouflage paint from the Hendon museum in the game (Would be a nice tribute to the boys).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Big_Al_the_Allo said:

Maybe it's just me, but so far we have no idea what we're really getting. Maybe there will be an engine modification, but we will probably only know that when the patch comes.

 

It's just you, Jason specified Sabre IIA in the notes which is a +9lbs engine.

1 hour ago, 77.CountZero said:

they had picture of Typhoon when they anounced bobp...lol

Bodenplatte_Artwork_Tempest_EN.jpg

 

 

Ironically this Tempest was manufactured in the third batch with a Sabre IIB engine.

Share this post


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

 

It's just you, Jason specified Sabre IIA in the notes which is a +9lbs engine.

 

Roughly what power is that, 2,235 hp?

Share this post


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

 

Roughly what power is that, 2,235 hp?

 

On the high end, 2160hp on the low end. It varied quite a bit in the very early days when the IIA was current.

 

On +11lbs it should be 2420hp.

 

At +9lbs it's slower than a Dora, +11lbs changes that.

Edited by Talon_

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...