Oleg Maddox's Room #1

[Lazarus]

Oleg,
I thought you might find it interesting what we do with your simulator even after all these years!

Come and see the fun we have because of you!
Let me know you stopped by!

www.uslglobal.com

[Bobb4]

Originally Posted by brando

This is not correct. Ten or twenty minutes is way more than it took for a pilot to fire up his engine before a scramble for one simple reason - a pre-flight start-up and run-up had already been carried out by the ground crew. This was a customary procedure for all fighter planes that were placed on stand-by for immediate action, certainly in the RAF. In other words, the planes were already warmed up and required much less of a procedure than for a cold-start. Sometimes the pilot was involved in this morning preparation, but more likely it was carried out entirely by the fitter and the rigger. Often the pilot wasn't involved at all in the start-up.



B

I was refering to the bombers such as the H111.
Realistic start up procedures from start to finish will only be fun for a while, used once or twice then disabled.
Your version that the ground crew will do it all for you kind-of defeats your argument to have it enabled in the first place...

[brando]

Originally Posted by Bobb4

I was refering to the bombers such as the H111.
Realistic start up procedures from start to finish will only be fun for a while, used once or twice then disabled.
Your version that the ground crew will do it all for you kind-of defeats your argument to have it enabled in the first place...

I don't think I was arguing anything of the sort. I was just quoting a real pilot's experiences and suggesting that ten or twenty minutes is not needed to launch a fighter that has been prepared by its ground crew as was customary for both the RAF and the Luftwaffe.
I don't actually think the bomber crews spent that amount of time preparing either. Once again, the donkey work had been done by ground crew, so I think 5 minutes would be plenty, followed by taxiing onto the field and awaiting the starting flare.
It's more interesting to know whether bomber crews will want to spend the time forming up over France (often 10 or 20 minutes or longer) so that they can adopt the customary formations and cross the Channel at 15,000 feet. Therein lies the interesting question as far as bombers are concerned. Off-line reality-seekers may do this, possibly using a time-acceleration key to stave off the boredom ..... but I wonder what the IL2 dogfight arena types will make of it? Will they just jump in their Spits and 109s, tear diagonally across the field at full-bore and go looking for a T'n'B at 0 feet over the middle of the Channel, bitching because they haven't got an La7 or a FW A8 or a P51?

Personally I hope that there will be a short period of preparation before any plane is ready to take off, either off-line or on. As the quotes from Geoffrey Wellum suggest, it's not very long and is done very quickly. Taxiing from the dispersed position to the runway should be made mandatory in my opinion, and there should always be a chocks removal operation before that commences. Not the "rev to full power, release 'chocks', sprint away" fudge for carrier take-offs, IL2 style, but the removal of the wedges used to hold the plane still on engine start up that was used for all aircraft. Then the taxi-out, and then a smooth take-off that doesn't involve pushing the throttle through the gate followed by manually pumping up the undercarriage (Spitfires). These are certainly the steps I would like to enable in any co-op that I host, and I wouldn't fly in a D/F arena that didn't impose these kind of checks.

B

[JG52Uther]

What would really help in D/F servers is if individual scores were turned OFF,maybe a server setting.In my squad we would love to spend time forming up in bombers,and flying in formation to target,and get engaged over the target,but in il2 you are more likely to get engaged by some clown just after take off by someone who doesn't care if they get shot down.
SoW needs to be more realistic in this aspect,and I think its one of the reasons that a lot of the more serious flyers rarely use D/F servers.

[Igo kyu]

Originally Posted by proton45

You could be right...but wasn't wind direction (drift) one of the settings on the "Norden bombsight"? I think that the "Jet Stream" was a big issue when they tried to drop bombs over Japan...

That sounds probable. I don't know about the Norden bomb sight, but the aircraft flies in the air, so the windspeed affects the speed or track of the aircraft over the ground, you'd need to allow for that. The only time wind would affect the flight of a bomb other than in that way would be if there was significant wind shear, so the wind at altitude was in a different direction or strength than nearer the ground. It's the latter that I think is probably negligible most of the time.

I don't remember (my memory is terrible) about the jetstream being a problem over Japan. Incendiaries, which were used against Japan, would be much more affected by wind than big iron cased explosive bombs.

[Skarphol]

Hi!

I think the jetstream caused most problemes for navigating long distances over water. The existance of jetstreams was not known to the crews until quite late in the war. The pilots had never had problems with jetstreams until the B-29's started to fly very high for long periodes of time. I don't think jetstreams affected bomb aiming in any serious way once the bombers had reached their targets.

Skarphol

[proton45]

Originally Posted by Skarphol

Hi!

I think the jetstream caused most problemes for navigating long distances over water. The existance of jetstreams was not known to the crews until quite late in the war. The pilots had never had problems with jetstreams until the B-29's started to fly very high for long periodes of time. I don't think jetstreams affected bomb aiming in any serious way once the bombers had reached their targets.

Skarphol

Although I can't find any specific charts on the effect of "drift" on ordinance once dropped from the aeroplane...I don't think that they would have included an analog computer (to compute the wind "drift") in the Norden bombsite if it wasn't an important calculation. (even a miscalculation of 10 mph could mean a 170 foot bombing error at 20,000) I suppose that "wind drift" is the kind of detail that some people could find important in a "air combat sim" (and some others would like "clickable cockpits"_lol).

[Igo kyu]

Originally Posted by proton45

Although I can't find any specific charts on the effect of "drift" on ordinance once dropped from the aeroplane...I don't think that they would have included an analog computer (to compute the wind "drift") in the Norden bombsite if it wasn't an important calculation. (even a miscalculation of 10 mph could mean a 170 foot bombing error at 20,000) I suppose that "wind drift" is the kind of detail that some people could find important in a "air combat sim" (and some others would like "clickable cockpits"_lol).

Notice that the line of the drifting bombs is straight. This is because it is relative to a straight nose on view of the aircraft. If there is a cross wind, the aeroplane has to fly with it's nose toward the wind a bit, so the line it is flying along is actually the line over the bombs, but it's nose is pointed into the wind a bit, so it looks as if its not going in quite the same direction. The drift is the difference between the line the aircraft is flying along, and the direction it's nose is pointing in.

[robtek]

one thing that could be used to stop the
"jump in their Spits and 109s, tear diagonally across the field at full-bore and go looking for a T'n'B at 0 feet over the middle of the Channel, bitching because they haven't got an La7 or a FW A8 or a P51?" - players would be if the engine would react as it was then, with a seize or at least with much reduced power.

[brando]

Originally Posted by robtek

one thing that could be used to stop the
"jump in their Spits and 109s, tear diagonally across the field at full-bore and go looking for a T'n'B at 0 feet over the middle of the Channel, bitching because they haven't got an La7 or a FW A8 or a P51?" - players would be if the engine would react as it was then, with a seize or at least with much reduced power.

I couldn't agree more! While I accept that there needs to be an element of relaxed realism for the gamey d/f arenas if only to make sales, let's hope the other end of the scale is a more true rendition of the mechanical side of flight.

B