Fulqrum Publishing Home   |   Register   |   Today Posts   |   Members   |   UserCP   |   Calendar   |   Search   |   FAQ

Go Back   Official Fulqrum Publishing forum > Fulqrum Publishing > IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover > Technical threads > FM/DM threads

FM/DM threads Everything about FM/DM in CoD

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1281  
Old 04-25-2012, 05:20 AM
Flanker35M Flanker35M is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Finland
Posts: 1,806
Default

S!

Just to say about update intervals on technical literature. We do get some that are dated some time ago and have gone thru the whole process or whatever before being published. But also get urgent ones that are released very quickly and have to be done or added to the literature so safety is not compromised. So I would guess that especially during wartime if something critical came up then info would be passed to the troops fast in a way or another to prevent losses because of lack in information. I do not think RAF or any other air force waited a year before publishing stuff, even during war

An example would be also the Curtiss representative that went to study the Helldiver planes having strange losses due control failures. Reason was a pulley/linkage in the wing and in the end he ended up machining these things of better materials on a CV! All this during war time and in the field. So info came out fairly fast don't you think. So would it feasible to think that the pilot/technical literature was updated fairly quickly and urgent information was passed to troops in form of a bulletin or other means before the amendment could be added to the official literature? Just a thought.
  #1282  
Old 04-25-2012, 06:55 AM
41Sqn_Banks 41Sqn_Banks is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 644
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crumpp View Post
Those amendments are to be logged in the space provided at the front of the Operating Notes:



To complete the update, the operator is instructed to paste in and replace the old text with the changes noted in the Amendment.

Here you can see that an amendment was properly added to the Operating Notes by the Operator:


Actually it's good example. You describe how it should be in theory. And this is how it was in reality for this particular manual:

The incorporated amendments were not logged by the operator in the A.L. overview in the front of the manual.
Some amended paragraphs were cut out of the amendment list and placed (not always taped or pasted, some only slipped in) above or below the old paragraphs. Some amendments were written into old paragraphs by a pencil.
About 4-5 pages of the amendment list were slipped in the front of the book and the old paragraphs didn't even contain a note that there are amendments in the front for it.

Also you will find some instances where a subject was amended in one section of the manual but the same subject is not amended in another section.

You are simply putting to much weight into the single sentences of the manual, you must look at the context.
Do you think the ground crew always read a manual before the fueled up the aircraft? They simply painted a small "100" next to the fuel tank cap and everyone knew what to do.
  #1283  
Old 04-25-2012, 07:01 AM
41Sqn_Banks 41Sqn_Banks is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 644
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flanker35M View Post
S!

Just to say about update intervals on technical literature. We do get some that are dated some time ago and have gone thru the whole process or whatever before being published. But also get urgent ones that are released very quickly and have to be done or added to the literature so safety is not compromised. So I would guess that especially during wartime if something critical came up then info would be passed to the troops fast in a way or another to prevent losses because of lack in information. I do not think RAF or any other air force waited a year before publishing stuff, even during war
The clearance of 100 octane fuel for Spitfire I, which definitely is something urgent and important, was added by A.L. 2 to the May 1940 section of the manual.
The additional restriction of 100 octane fuel to operational units is definitely nothing urgent. And this restriction was simply ruled out by Pilot's Notes General that allowed the use of lower octane fuel if really necessary (of course lower operational limits applied in this case).
  #1284  
Old 04-25-2012, 07:20 AM
Osprey's Avatar
Osprey Osprey is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Gloucestershire, England
Posts: 1,264
Default

Biff just keeps on digging that hole for the stupid doesn't he? lol
  #1285  
Old 04-25-2012, 08:15 AM
Flanker35M Flanker35M is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Finland
Posts: 1,806
Default

S!

Banks, good points. I know from experience too that things are done outside books as they are a routine. But this can cause a danger too as you can miss things an addition or change can bring so I am sure ground crews were informed on important changes and schooled for a professional and safe working procedure.

I've done heaps of changes to literature when they come. It is realy interesting and rewarding to compare these changes to the older version and see the reasons behind it. At the same time you learn more from the plane you work on. I think this applies to every AF today, now and in the past. Thanks for great discussion
  #1286  
Old 04-25-2012, 09:38 AM
winny winny is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Manchester UK
Posts: 1,508
Default

Tsk.. Those damn RAF pilot's, never filling in their bloody paperwork, dunno why. Maybe all that getting killed nonsense had something to do with it.
I dunno, any excuse.

From what I've read, the last thing they wanted to do having just seen their mates explode 20 feet off the port wing was effin paperwork.

To apply modern standards to a life or death situation in 1940 is ridiculous.

By modern standards none of them would be able to fly because most of them were still drunk from the night before. What's the FAA got to say about that? Or 4 hours sleep, clinically exhausted are you son.. Tough, get up there and fight for your life.
  #1287  
Old 04-25-2012, 10:08 AM
NZtyphoon NZtyphoon is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: NZ
Posts: 543
Default

An interesting doco here:
Oops - it says the RAF used 100 octane fuel - although the Fw 190 didn't appear during the battle.
  #1288  
Old 04-25-2012, 10:10 AM
NZtyphoon NZtyphoon is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: NZ
Posts: 543
Default

And an interesting one here


About testing the Spitfire at Castle Bromwich
  #1289  
Old 04-25-2012, 10:11 AM
winny winny is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Manchester UK
Posts: 1,508
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crumpp View Post

That being said, I can also tell you for a fact ALL Spitfire Mk II's were using 100 Octane in June of 1940.
Oh good, now we're getting somewhere.

So, if I sit down with my copy of Spitfire the history, I'll be able to work out where all the mkII's went from the factory, therefore I'll be able to tell which stations had 100 octane. Cool. I'll get back to you.
  #1290  
Old 04-25-2012, 10:13 AM
Flanker35M Flanker35M is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Finland
Posts: 1,806
Default

S!

Winny..war or not the technical staff did work by the a certain order and did use literature. Claiming these guys just did it without any supervision or literature is just thick. The base how an unit work is doing things, how professional it is performing it's tasks..all those are trained and done before the war. RAF or any other AF did not switch mode because of war..sure they had to improvise in the field but it was based on something. And belive me even in war superiors ask for paperwork because it is essential for the big picture if you get the drift.
Closed Thread


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 04:28 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.