DD_Fenrir
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Downloads
Gallery
Events
Articles
Posts posted by DD_Fenrir
-
-
370th FG
Awards and Promotions:
None.
Personnel:
A new pilot has been posted to the 402nd Fighter Squadron - we await confirmation of his identity.
A new pilot has been posted to the 485th Fighter Squadron - we await confirmation of his identity.
Rosters:
410th BG
Awards and Promotions:
None.
Personnel:
No changes.
Roster:
-
1
-
-
Mission Date 25/11/44
402nd FS - Attack Transportation Targets, Emmerich
485th FS - Fighter Sweep, Emmerich-Mönchengladbach sector
410th BG - Attack Rail Targets, Krefeld
Debrief:
370th FG
402nd:
Again in the face of spirited AAA resistance the 402nd remained un-phased and wrought terrible destruction upon the enemy ground forces in the target area. Finding themselves with ammo and ordnance to spare they pushed SE along the front and discovered further opportunities to beat-up on the Krauts in the vicinity of Weeze, breaking off through a combination of low ammo and the instance of Lt. Finknottle receiving damage to his airframe; he elected to make an emergency landing at Ophoven, making it safely but not without incident - his right engine quit on him as he approached the threshold! Nonetheless he seems re markedly unperturbed, though we suspect a few shots of whiskey may have had their medicinal effect!
By the time they broke for home the 402nd claimed 37 ground targets destroyed. Another excellent performance chaps, well done! Particular mention goes to 2nd Lt. Patrick Last who claimed 14 targets alone - a most impressive haul we're sure you'll agree. Great work that man!
470th:
Major Payne-less' debrief covers the salient points - unfortunate showing gents; looks like we've been too effective hammering the Luftwaffe of late. Regards the flak, there's not much you can do against that 88 stuff; it often seems to creep up as the gunners gradually correct their fire and the only possible recourse is to regularly adjust course and alt if you're in a known 88 area, but they move the guns around so much it's almost impossible to be sure of where you'll encounter it. The major towns and airfields will certainly have some but we're regularly seeing stuff near the front also. Guess we've just got to keep a wary eye out for the bursts.
410th BG
The 410th flattened their assigned target, primarily due to the excellent low level bombing skills of 2nd Lt. Dave Haggis who single-handedly took out an entire train consisting of a locomotive and 9 wagons! Great job that man!
-
1
-
-
Dayum...!
-
1
-
-
51 minutes ago, AOB said:
Thanks Fenris, I would have instantly failed because of the way my plane is set up in practice. I am going to fiddle with my settings to make them compatible with your instructions. Also I am slightly confused with the start time. The forum calendar shows that the game will be from 0530 to 0730 my time which is GMT plus 10.5. Your start time is 2 hours later than that, not that I am complaining or anything. 🙂
From the various online calculators (which coincide with your GMT+10.5) it appears the start time for you would be 0730. I trust these over the forums calculations - not sure why the forum is so keen to get you up at the crack o'dawn?!
If you could be on from 0700/0715 that'd be great.
-
1
-
-
Hey AOB.
Glad you're interested in joining the campaign, our next mission is on Sunday 7th February at 2100GMT which I understand is your Monday morning? If you could join half an hour/15 minutes before hand I will happily include you if you can still make it.
One thing that consistently catches out the first timers is getting the engine start procedure running without a hitch; we start engines off at the ramp then taxi to the relevant runway. Due to the specific procedure to engine starts in the Lightning we have often found that it can catch out those unfamiliar with how to do it, people mostly being used to air starts, or on the runway with engines already going, so I would suggest you take some time to get comfortable with getting the motors running, and how to rescue the engine start procedure should you accidentally fluff it!
Here's the procedure in case you haven't tried it before:
1. Ensure both engines selected (they are both selected by default when you spawn in).
2. Mixture 100% - Levers fully forward
3. RPM 100% - Levers fully forward
4. Press Engine start key (default 'E')
5. Left Engine will start first, then Right Engine.
6. When both motors running reduce Mixture to 70%
7. When ready to taxi release Parking Brake by pressing your brake input/key once.
8. Should either motor fail to start ensure you switch off that engine by selecting it and pressing 'E' to switch it off prior to trying again.
-
Well for this F-14 crew, it just got a LOT harder...
https://www.f-14association.com/tales/crash-landing-a-crippled-tomcat.html
Geez...!
-
3
-
-
Just now, Crash said:
I might not be there tonight as I have to take Belle my old retriever to the vets. Looks rather bad
Oh no, Crash. Hoping for a positive outcome mate, really am. Good luck.
-
Found this gem on the ED forums:
QuoteThis seems to be a hot topic lately, so I've put in some research to learn as much as possible about this, and what we can do to mitigate the problem with wrecking our bearings.
Background on the problem:
This is a problem that is unique to radial engines, and is not much of a factor in inline or V engines, in that reciprocating loads can damage bearings. Under normal conditions, combustion happens, pushes the piston and connecting rod down in the cylinder, which turns the crankshaft. Crankshaft turns the reduction gears, gears turn the propeller, propeller creates thrust. This is true for both radial and inline/V engines.
Lets briefly explore V engines, like the famous Merlin 61 V-12, used in warbirds such as the Spitfire and Mustang. The crankpins on the crankshaft were only attached to two connecting rods, and being a four stroke engine, only take the force of a power stroke only once per revolution. This is the key concept here, but bears repeating, the crankpins only take the force of a power stroke only once per revolution in a V engine. Here's a picture illustrating this. Note that two pistons share a crankpin.
Radial engines are a whole different animal compared to their V shaped cousins. The crankshaft layout is a lot simpler, with one row of cylinders sharing one crankpin. The cylinders are then spaced evenly around that point, and nearly always feature an odd number of cylinders in that row. Having an odd number of cylinders simplifies the ignition timing, as every other cylinder fires in turn. (a nine cylinder would have the firing order of 1-3-5-7-9-2-4-6-8) Since all of the cylinders have to share one crankpin, the crankshaft is built much larger and stronger to handle the forces involved. The connecting rods also have a unique arrangement, with one serving as the master rod which connects to the crankshaft, and the other cylinders rods are articulating rods that bolt to the master rod. Looks something like this:
On to our R-2800 engines now. The cylinders in one row, nine of them spaced 40° apart, share one crankpin, and every other cylinder fires as the engine runs. The crankshaft thus takes the force of a power stroke every 80° of rotation, or 4.5 times every revolution. Contrast that with the V engine where a crankpin only takes one power stroke every revolution. That's a lot of force on the crankshaft, but fortunately Pratt and Whitney thought this through and added a hole for pressurized oil to flow in between the crankshaft and master rod assembly at the correct place where a power stroke would be pushing down on the crank (the thrust side). You certainly don't want any metal on metal contact, especially in the one spot on the crankshaft where power strokes are pounding down on it. A lot of radial engine crankshafts featured this oil hole, not just ones built by P&W.
Here's what the R-2800 crankshaft looks like. There are several bearings pointed out here, the mains and the crank journals. The mains are supported by the crankcase, and are not the ones that we damage by running the engine improperly. Those would be the crank journals that take the damage. There are only two, one for the front row, and one for the rear. In the photo, if you look at the rear crank journal (right hand side) you can see the oil hole for that bearing facing downward.
This (and a lot of others) radial engine were very well designed, and provided many hours of reliable service (combat damage and ham fisted pilots not withstanding). So how do the bearings get damaged? By reversing the reciprocating load on them, or in other words, windmilling the prop.
The engine is designed to provide power to the prop and is built to do exactly that. When power is reduced and sufficient wind speed exerts more force on the prop than what the engine is providing, the loads in the engine are reversed by 180º. The prop is now driving the crankshaft, which is now moving the pistons around. The crank journal is taking the load on the side opposite of the oil hole, where there is very little oil. This leads to metal on metal contact, an overheated bearing, and metal in the oil, loss of power, and given enough time, total engine failure. This is likely amplified somewhat in that since the engine is still turning it has oil pressure, and that is likely exerting some hydraulic force on the thrust side of the crank, pulling the opposite side in a bit closer. Oil pressure eventually falls and the oil temperature rises due the engine wear and friction (not sure if DCS models this behavior). While this is happening the piston rings are also fluttering in their grooves, leading to damaged ring lands and broken rings (not sure if DCS models this either). How quickly damage accumulates is a function of severity and time. A high RPM steep dive would damage the engine more rapidly than a moderate RPM shallow dive.
Now that we know the how and the why the bearings get damaged, how do we prevent it, and why does this happen more during landings? And with that, how do we know when the engine is being windmilled?
The point where the engine starts to be windmilled is different between aircraft (weight, speed, props, RPM, and MP settings). Aircraft that had a BMEP gauge or torquemeter had a decent idea of when this happened as those instruments were a good direct measurement of power output. Other aircraft just had to make do with the RPM and MP settings. One of the old "rules of thumb" was to keep at least one inch of MP for every 100 RPM. If you're doing steep dives link the prop lever with the throttle and pull them both back during the dive. Don't close the throttle entirely during the dive, keep some power on.
For landing techniques, there are two schools of thought. The military method and the airline method. I'll elaborate on both, but keep in mind the time frame of this (1930's to 1960's), the heyday of radial engine aircraft.
The military technique mostly utilized the overhead break landing pattern, with a high RPM setting during the approach. The Mustang usually had 2,700 RPM set, the Jug set 2,550 RPM. The Air Corps/Air Force preferred to have its pilots ready for a go around, hence the high RPM setting. During the war, if the engine could be used for the next mission, great. If not, a new one was installed. This mentality carried on into the Cold War when the military had a fairly generous budget. Keep in mind that jets were up and coming as well. Accident rates with them were higher, mostly due to pilots transitioning from piston engines to jets. Piston engine can deliver power pretty quick when you push that throttle up, early jets not so much. Jet engine spool up times took a lot longer than pistons, especially if one was on short final. It took a while for the Air Force to adopt the stabilized approach (high drag, high thrust) with jets. The high RPM approach with pistons, stayed with them. Better to risk engine damage and a go around in order to use the plane (and pilot) again. Maintenance costs were not of much concern.
If you are going to use the military high RPM approach, follow the 1" MP per 100 RPM rule of thumb. With RPM set at 2,550 RPM, don't let the MP fall below 26", until you are on final and near the flare. By then your airspeed should be between 90-110 MPH, and your RPM should naturally fallen some. The prop should be sitting on the low pitch stops and there won't be sufficient wind speed to drive the prop.
The airline technique was much different. They had to stay profitable and keep happy customers, and work within much tighter budgets than the military. Pilots wrecking engines would eat up maintenance budgets with replacement engines, not to mention taking a bird out of service and cancelling flights. Aircraft only make money when they are flying. Their technique with descents and landings was to start down sooner (shallower descent) while keeping the engines at cruise RPM settings (around 1,900 RPM). and also not allowing the MP to fall below the 1" per 100 RPM. This would be maintained during landing, with the the RPM brought up at the flare when the throttles are closed when there was no risk of the prop driving the engine. This led to quieter operations and higher engine longevity.
This method gives some more flexibility with power settings as you are not constrained to a fixed RPM during the descent and approach.
The key points in summary:
- Radial engines are pretty tough, but can be easily damaged if its pilot is not careful with the engine settings.
- Pull the RPM back before entering a steep dive and keep a little bit of power on.
- During descent and approach, keep at least 1" of MP for every 100 RPM to ensure the engine is providing power and not being driven by the prop.
-
2
-
-
-
-
2 minutes ago, Jabo said:
There's a slight discrepancy in the data there Tom, the first set of data has me down as completing 19 sorties but the scoreboard says 18. I'm guessing PWCG is counting my take-off prang as a sortie?
Yup, got it in one Nick.
-
-
370th FG
Awards and Promotions:
None.
Personnel:
A new pilot has been posted to the 485th Fighter Squadron - we await confirmation of his identity.
Rosters:
410th BG
Awards and Promotions:
None.
Personnel:
No changes.
Roster:
-
2
-
-
Mission Date 23/11/44
402nd FS - Attack Transportation Targets, Rotterdam
485th FS - Attack Rail Targets, Den Haag
410th BG - Attack Transportation Targets, Gouda
Debrief:
370th FG
402nd:
Despite fierce AAA resistance the 402nd pressed home a determined attack and whilst only a handful of enemy vehicles were found (and destroyed) they wrought terrible carnage upon the enemy's flak arm, escaping with only moderate damage to one airframe and minor damage to a second, and all 8 aircraft returned successfully to base.
All told the 402nd claimed 38 ground targets destroyed, a superlative performance in the face of stiff enemy fire - well done boys, impressive stuff!
485th:
The 485th also faced off against a savage barrage of anti-aircraft fire whilst decimating the rail facilities at The Hague; alas they were not so lucky in avoiding the worst of the enemy's fire. Lt Rox, despite receiving heavy damage pressed home his attacks and claimed 10 ground targets prior to force landing. So too 2nd Lt. Starling, who claimed some ground units before taking hits and being obliged to break off, though he thankfully he managed to recover at Florennes. 2nd Lts. Artois and Tonar were unable to claim targets before they too had to break off and find places to ditch thanks to taking heavy punishment from the guns. Alas, 2nd Lt. Iden Kare's aircraft was seen to strike the ground during an attack run and it presumed he was killed in the subsequent conflagration. It is unclear whether he was struck by flak or misjudged his run and recovered too late. Nonetheless, this recent member to the squadron was already starting to make his mark and his loss will be felt by all.
All told the 485th claimed a solid 27 ground targets, but at a cost - though one that could have been greater, especially considering the brutal defensive fire. Well done to those of you who had the presence of mind to get your aircraft back to friendly territory - whilst the losses in machines are troublesome in the short term, the fact we have managed to keep you the pilots is a far more important resource to retain.
410th BG
The 410th had a rare unsuccessful mission today, the stiff and varying winds at altitude playing havoc with their bomb runs; whilst making what seemed like solid drops from the bomb-sight their runs were frustratingly off target and inconclusive.
-
2
-
-
-
Thanks FT you're a bloomin gem!
-
1
-
-
Thanks FT
2 Q's:
1. Do you need a Livery folder to still exist (albeit empty) in the DCS
2. Where does the .cmd file need to go?
-
Just found out that it is possible to move your "Saved Games" folder to another disk and Windows will retain the connection to DCS core files, so if like me you were running out of disk space on you OS drive, but have plenty of space elsewhere, then rejoice!
-
1
-
-
-
3 hours ago, FoolTrottel said:
The wonders of modern medicine... *hic*
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, rox said:
What I mean is that you can't select a Mi-8 under the country Syria in DCS World in the first place, it's just not listed. So if you want to have a "Syrian" Mi-8, you need to actually put it into the editor as a Russian Mi-8 (or any other country of the same coalition) and load the skin from the same country under which the Mi-8 is placed (in the case of the skin I downloaded, Russia was allocated as the skin country in the lua). Basically a Russian heli in the editor with a Syrian skin.
That then would be a worthy candidate for a Bug Report on the ED forums!
-
32 minutes ago, rox said:
.....so the Syrian skins I downloaded for the Mi-8 are actually found under the Russian Mi-8, as the helicopter is entirely absent as a choice when Syria is selected as a country.
Syria was only recently added as a country option; it could be that the skin was created before the Syria as a country option was made available. You can edit the Description.lua in notepad though Rox; you could add the Syria code to the allowed country portion, but you'll have to find out exactly what that code is...
-
Announcement:
For reasons best known to itself, PWCG has awarded us NONE of the aircraft that the 402nd strafed on the airfield East of Cologne this past mission. The AAA guns, yes, the static planes, no, despite these being logged as valid targets in previous missions.
I was credited with 5 in the in game score table - as witnessed by Painless - and I know BluBear got 2, Fruitbat 2 and Wingflyr 1. We have a .trk file to prove this, currently in the hands of BluBear should anyone wish to see it.
Whilst they will not appear within the PWCG Squadron Logs I will be accounting for them in the tally board.
I'm announcing this to all for fair play reasoning and transparency but I'll be damned if I'm letting PWCG get away with this one cos it was a bloody good strafe and we deserve the credit for it, especially as considering past missions of a similar vein, all static a/c were logged as valid targets and we were not to know that our efforts were going unrecorded by PWCG.
I will be chasing Pat Wilson on why this happened, but there is already ongoing work on a Beta version of PWCG that specifically covers the logging of certain ground target types that currently are not logged and this might fix this issue.
-
1
-
1
-
PWCG P-38 Lightning Strikes Co-op Campaign
in IL-2 Sturmovik: Great Battles Series
Posted
Scoreboards: