Developer Diary 283 - Discussion

[Heliopause]

Some French ports remained in German hands till May '45.

I believe they used napalm against (atleast) on of them (some type of fort).

[SCG_motoadve]

Drop tanks, is fuel management coming?

[Avimimus]

7 hours ago, AndytotheD said:

American fighters flew with paper drop tanks; iirc they could only be used once because the fuel would rot them. There wouldn’t be much point to bring these ones back. 

 

Interesting! Thanks. Drop tanks are one subject I haven't read up on.

[migmadmarine]

1 hour ago, Avimimus said:

 

Interesting! Thanks. Drop tanks are one subject I haven't read up on.

Note that we didn't start out with paper ones, we started out with metal and transitioned to paper, in part as the Germans had a bounty for recovered ones to recycle the metal. The long cigar shaped ones are paper, the teardrop shaped ones are metal.

[AndytotheD]

7 minutes ago, migmadmarine said:

Note that we didn't start out with paper ones, we started out with metal and transitioned to paper, in part as the Germans had a bounty for recovered ones to recycle the metal. The long cigar shaped ones are paper, the teardrop shaped ones are metal.

After doing some further reading I’ve found that the USAAF used both metal and paper 108 gallon tanks. Generally speaking the paper ones were of British construction and the metallic ones came from the US. The paper ones did have to be dropped prior to landing, but the metallic ones could be brought home. 

[Heliopause]

[smink1701]

Nice surprise!

[Blitzen]

7 hours ago, LukeFF said:

 

Yes, the Luftwaffe planned to issue drop tanks to the units around Stalingrad, but by the time they arrived the battle was almost over, so they didn't really see any usage there. It's talked about in Volume 4 of Black Cross / Red Star.

One has to wonder if 109E's had drop tanks for the Battle of Britain in the Summer of 1940, if  it would have made a difference, esp the further west they had to fly escorting the bombers??

[fergal69]

Get your motors ready......

 

 

[AndytotheD]

49 minutes ago, Blitzen said:

One has to wonder if 109E's had drop tanks for the Battle of Britain in the Summer of 1940, if  it would have made a difference, esp the further west they had to fly escorting the bombers??

I imagine that they wouldn't necessarily had that much of an effect given they were still shackled to the bombers and by the end of the battle the bombers were hitting cities and civilians and not airfields and aircraft production.  If this hadn't been the case, and they were still allowed to perform frei jagd, they probably would have been a very unpleasant surprise to the RAF, especially the "Big Wings" and likely would have, for better or worse, prematurely ended Leigh-Mallory's career.

[SYN_Vander]

11 minutes ago, fergal69 said:

Get your motors ready......

 

 

Awesome. What an infernal device! Something a villain from some fantasy sci-fi movie would come up with.

[fergal69]

33 minutes ago, SYN_Vander said:

Awesome. What an infernal device! Something a villain from some fantasy sci-fi movie would come up with.

If it goes wrong, what use is that little fire extinguisher going to be?

[BMA_FlyingShark]

2 minutes ago, fergal69 said:

If it goes wrong, what use is that little fire extinguisher going to be?

It's probably not for the device that combusts but for the guy next to it who catches fire.

 

Have a nice day.

 

[Bremspropeller]

2 hours ago, Blitzen said:

One has to wonder if 109E's had drop tanks for the Battle of Britain in the Summer of 1940, if  it would have made a difference, esp the further west they had to fly escorting the bombers??

 

Probably not:

The Wehrmacht had no idea how to invade Britain and it all was a costly bluff to blackmail the Brits into agreeing on peace.

The Brits said "eff you" and we do know the rest of the story.

 

Hitler wanted Lebensraum and wheat in the Ukraine, not some mint sauce and warm beer in a british pub. What else can you expect from an abstinent vegetarian...

[Gambit21]

3 hours ago, Blitzen said:

One has to wonder if 109E's had drop tanks for the Battle of Britain in the Summer of 1940, if  it would have made a difference, esp the further west they had to fly escorting the bombers??

 

It would have resulted in far more  109 sized holes in the turf further inland - but that’s about it I think.

[RedKestrel]

8 minutes ago, Gambit21 said:

 

It would have resulted in far more  109 sized holes in the turf further inland - but that’s about it I think.

It may have reduced the overall bomber losses and increased RAF losses some as well, but I don't think change the outcome of the battle. 

[Gambit21]

3 minutes ago, RedKestrel said:

It may have reduced the overall bomber losses and increased RAF losses some as well, but I don't think change the outcome of the battle. 

 

Agreed

[Blitzen]

4 hours ago, Bremspropeller said:

 

Probably not:

The Wehrmacht had no idea how to invade Britain and it all was a costly bluff to blackmail the Brits into agreeing on peace.

The Brits said "eff you" and we do know the rest of the story.

 

Hitler wanted Lebensraum and wheat in the Ukraine, not some mint sauce and warm beer in a british pub. What else can you expect from an abstinent vegetarian...

One of those "What might have beens..."

  "Perhaps there might have been a few less "Fighter Boys " around to annoy them...Still the Fleet up at Scapa Flow could have come roaring down the Channel, to deal with the ragtag German Invasion Fleet...I believe Len Deighton pointed this out some time ago ,but then with less RAF interference the Stukas ( See Crete air sea campaign,)could have had a field day and without air superiority , the Luftwaffe could have used its relatively fresh airborne units too in some way ( again not forgetting Crete in '41 as an object lesson...)

 My point is that the 109 boys had to keep an eye on their petrol level when swanning about around over England. Galland once said they had about 10 minutes time *over London before they had to head back. I read recently that one RAF fighter pilot said that most of the time he encountered 109's heading back to France .Little wonder they had little margin for error. The German long range fighter, the Bf-110 , that they pinned so many hopes on , wasn't a complete failure , but no where near the success the Luftwaffe hoped it would be. I'm just saying..

)*It would be interesting for someone with the time to test this in CloD assuming the FM is close to being correct for the 109 especially regarding fuel management. I've found that in both GB & CloD its very hard to run out of gas in any of the planes ( but I bet the 262 sucks down a lot of kerosene?))

Spoiler

Edited June 10, 2021 by SYN_Haashashin

[AndyJWest]

1 hour ago, fergal69 said:

If it goes wrong, what use is that little fire extinguisher going to be?

 

I'd like to think that if they were only expecting to run it for a couple of minutes, they didn't have a lot of fuel in the tank. And unlike a turbojet, or a piston engine for that matter, a pulse jet doesn't have a lot of rapidly-spinning parts to go flying off if it breaks. Most 'things going wrong' scenarios would probably just result in the thing shutting down. Though I'm not sure that standing in front of it is particularly wise, since amongst the few moving parts it does have (if it is a genuine V1 pulsejet) are the valve shutters at the front, and if that part disintegrates, bits could conceivably go forwards. 

[Irishratticus72]

12 minutes ago, Blitzen said:

One of those "What might have beens..."

  "Perhaps there might have been a few less "Fighter Boys " around to annoy them...Still the Fleet up at Scapa Flow could have come roaring down the Channel, to deal with the ragtag German Invasion Fleet...I believe Len Deighton pointed this out some time ago ,but then with less RAF interference the Stukas ( See Crete air sea campaign,)could have had a field day and without air superiority , the Luftwaffe could have used its relatively fresh airborne units too in some way ( again not forgetting Crete in '41 as an object lesson...)

 My point is that the 109 boys had to keep an eye on their petrol level when swanning about around over England. Galland once said they had about 10 minutes time *over London before they had to head back. I read recently that one RAF fighter pilot said that most of the time he encountered 109's heading back to France .Little wonder they had little margin for error. The German long range fighter, the Bf-110 , that they pinned so many hopes on , wasn't a complete failure , but no where near the success the Luftwaffe hoped it would be. I'm just saying..

)*It would be interesting for someone with the time to test this in CloD assuming the FM is close to being correct for the 109 especially regarding fuel management. I've found that in both GB & CloD its very hard to run out of gas in any of the planes ( but I bet the 262 sucks down a lot of kerosene?))

Maybe Adolf would have had more cruising time over Blighty if he'd had the cigar lighter removed. 

[-=PHX=-SuperEtendard]

13 hours ago, SIERRA-TWO-NINE said:

Also I cannot wait for the Mustang Mk3 (P51B/C) to chase down V1s, For some reason it was always my favourite Mustang, Loving the new Typhoon as well! unbelievable work by the Devs!!

Yeah it should be quite fast. It should also get good variability in engine configurations, either V-1650-3 and V-1650-7 engines, regular fuel, 150 octane. And then the British used their equivalent of +25 boost for them (81") as they did in the Spitfires. The 81" Mustang Mk III with -7 engine would be the fastest prop at the deck.

Edited June 10, 2021 by -=PHX=-SuperEtendard

[Rjel]

14 hours ago, Juri_JS said:

A question for experts - is it true that USAAF pilots sometimes dropped their fuel tanks on targets like trains or is this a myth?

Not an expert but I have seen a couple of clips of drop tanks flashing into view as a following fighter tried to ignite them. The tanks appear to rupture as they tumbled into the ground. But, of course I can't find the clip right now. In the book Escort to Berlin on page 167, it is mentioned that on 2-11-45, Lt. Henry Kaul of the 4thFG was killed while trying to drop his tanks on a truck. I presume so his wingman could fire into the spreading gasoline. I believe Kit Carson mentions trying the same in his book Pursue and Destroy. I'll have to thumb through it to find the quote.

 

Here it is. Look at about the two minute mark. There are a couple of different clips.

 

https://archive.org/details/gov.archives.arc.23458

Edited June 10, 2021 by Rjel

[sevenless]

Droptanks and Mustang IIIs...perfect as a summer gift...

 

[[-=BP=-]Slegawsky_VR]

At the present moment your

P-51D aircraft gets shoot

and develops a leakage in L/R or wing 

The hard coded tank auto switch 

stops your journey over Belgium.

 

Plus a lot of times these tanks failed to disconnected resulting in forcing severe trim adjustments etc.

 

We should feel sympathetically to the guy guy responsible for coding these.

[DFLion]

Thanks Jason and the Team for getting onto developing the drop tanks. They have been working well in COD and will add so much more realism to Great Battles, especially on the Rhineland map -well done - keep it coming.

DFLion ?

[HBPencil]

16 hours ago, Juri_JS said:

A question for experts - is it true that USAAF pilots sometimes dropped their fuel tanks on targets like trains or is this a myth?

I'm no expert but I have read of this being done in the PTO, so it wouldn't surprise me if it was done in other theaters.

[JG7_X-Man]

On 6/9/2021 at 6:15 PM, [-=BP=-]Slegawsky_VR said:

There had been an issue with the Spitfire range hence its inception but since Malta slipper tanks started started to appear.

In simple terms there was a bit of competition between 3 Americans squadrons and the brits and the Yanks won obviously.

After P-47 with added 80gallon there was no need for RAF to fly long range except reconnaissance hence Mk,XIX.

P-51B\C changed air war and destroed LW ovever germany in the end.

It was not the Spiitty,

Once forward landing ground were established the role of a Spity pilot was diminished to ground support.

Til then switching tanks was vital to a pilot somewhere over the channel.

 

I have come to the conclusion that sometimes people just post non factual or flat out inaccurate information just to get a rise out of people.

This post is the perfect example! @[-=BP=-]Slegawsky_VR I hope you were drunk when you posted this - so I could at least have an understanding and more respect for your lack of knowledge on this subject.

[SidtheGit]

14 hours ago, fergal69 said:

If it goes wrong, what use is that little fire extinguisher going to be?

The extinguisher is probably there for extinguishing the jet flame inside the combustion chamber...if the combustion process begins to 'run away' or becomes an issue then discharging the extinguisher into the intake, the gas or powder will cut off the oxygen and smother the flame, hopefully problem solved. 

Edited June 11, 2021 by SidtheGit

[Bremspropeller]

I'm rooting for this option:

 

Returning Luftwaffe 300l tanks in style...

 

[Jaegermeister]

On 6/10/2021 at 4:11 AM, Bremspropeller said:

 

I'm quite sure it was at least used with the 9th AF, dropped from Jugs.

 

Napalm was also dropped on villages in the Hurtgen Forest by the Lightnings of the 370th. The Germans were in the basements of the houses, and the napalm successfully extricated them from their small stone fortresses. Not many got out. I have not seen any photographs of early napalm, but I believe it was very similar to a drop tank. 

 

Edit... Napalm was filled in the AN-M76 500 lb bomb in place of gasoline.

 

 

 

Edited June 11, 2021 by Jaegermeister

[Bremspropeller]

Didn't they also use WP?

 

What about frag bombs? Normandy really is calling for those.

[JG7_X-Man]

On 6/10/2021 at 12:01 PM, Blitzen said:

One has to wonder if 109E's had drop tanks for the Battle of Britain in the Summer of 1940, if  it would have made a difference, esp the further west they had to fly escorting the bombers??

 

I for one think that this is a very good question.

 

It's my contention that the fighters could have spent more time defending the bombers and shooting down RAF aircrafts (vs running home). However, this also means more 109s would have been shot down, which would be offset combat loss number as fewer being lost to running out of fuel during the trip back across the channel.

 

I think it would have made a difference with lowering bomber losses which would have kept Goering from that giving "close escort" order which would have led to more RAF aircraft destroyed on the ground too. This would have also lowered the number of Luftwaffe fighter pilots killed/captured as a direct/indirect result of low fuel consequences.

 

In the big picture, IMHO, 109E-1s/E-3s/E-4s equipped with drop tanks during BoB would have meant more Luftwaffe pilots would have been available to die in '43 - '44.

 

Wow! I had to edit this - the one time we are all in agreement on this topic!

Edited June 11, 2021 by JG7_X-Man

[LachenKrieg]

FLAK yeah I like it! Thanks for the update.

[[-=BP=-]Slegawsky_VR]

18 hours ago, JG7_X-Man said:

 

I have come to the conclusion that sometimes people just post non factual or flat out inaccurate information just to get a rise out of people.

This post is the perfect example! @[-=BP=-]Slegawsky_VR I hope you were drunk when you posted this - so I could at least have an understanding and more respect for your lack of knowledge on this subject.

Ad hominem right of the bat, you feel better now?

[LukeFF]

11 hours ago, Jaegermeister said:

 

Napalm was also dropped on villages in the Hurtgen Forest by the Lightnings of the 370th. The Germans were in the basements of the houses, and the napalm successfully extricated them from their small stone fortresses. Not many got out. I have not seen any photographs of early napalm, but I believe it was very similar to a drop tank. 

 

Edit... Napalm was filled in the AN-M76 500 lb bomb in place of gasoline.

 

There was also a single use of napalm by RAF Typhoons on April 12, 1945 (From Hawker Typhoon And Tempest: A Formidable Pair):

 

[Lusekofte]

On 6/10/2021 at 4:35 AM, LukeFF said:

 

Spits were not relegated to ground support after Normandy, and they were flying long-range missions all the way to the war's end. Source: the entire archive of RAF Operations Records Books and countless secondary sources. 

Norwegian Pilots did do groundattack missions, to the end of the war flying Spitfires, most Norwegian pilots KIA died in these operations. I think they where under RAF organisation, The airforce after the war was based on those Spitfires, 

[migmadmarine]

There is a difference between "not relegated to ground support" and "did do ground attack missions" 

[Tonester]

Love your work guys…just a question, are any of the maps in our great sim big enough to ever really need drop tanks? I wouldnt have thought so but cant imagine them going to all this trouble for just a visual thing so is there a plan for much much bigger maps? Once again, love your work…you lot give astounding value for money…DCS should take notice of this business model me thinks

[Diggun]

Just now, Tonester said:

just a question, are any of the maps in our great sim big enough to ever really need drop tanks?

Meaningful strike missions on any of the current maps in most full real servers online would benefit from drop tanks. Teh upcoming Normandy map certainly will require them for cross channel missions. Just as in reality. 

[AndytotheD]

1 hour ago, Tonester said:

Love your work guys…just a question, are any of the maps in our great sim big enough to ever really need drop tanks? I wouldnt have thought so but cant imagine them going to all this trouble for just a visual thing so is there a plan for much much bigger maps? Once again, love your work…you lot give astounding value for money…DCS should take notice of this business model me thinks

Luftwaffe fighters in the latter stages of the BoBp campaign could use them. I love the Bf 109 but it’s got short legs for some of those sorties, especially given the rate at which it seems to suck down fuel when you firewall it. In MP it would be useful because I spend so much of my time lost.