Normandy Map - Spit IX Range

[philstyle]

Last night we (54 Sqn) ran a "normandy" period training mission. We attempted to get 9 spitfires from Sokhumi to Gori, engage some ground targets and then land at Kutaisi.

 

 

The straight line distance from Sokhumi to Gori is about 270km.

The distance back to Kuatisi, another 109km.

Total distance = 380km (240 miles)

We ran +4LB Boost and 2650-2700 rpm the whole way. We had rich mixture though, and were operating at around 5,000ft.

 

At the target area, we had about 5 minutes of combat at +12LB boost. Every single Spitfire in the formation ran out of fuel during the combat.

 

So, without drop tanks, how much use is the South-English coastline going to be with respect to the Spitfire?

 

 

Tangmere to Le Havre or the invasion beaches is about 163km (326km return trip). This means that, basically, and missions which require Spifires to take-off from England and patrol or do anything over the Normandy area will be impossible unless we have drop-tanks.

 

Incidentally, does anyone know what the "Fast Cruise" engine settings in Kufurst's post here are: https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3064067&postcount=7 ??

I've like to use those settings to try and test the Spitfire Range in DCS. Although I suspect I will need "lean" mixture and operate at higher altitude in order to get better fuel economy...

[Krupi]

The fuel consumption is still too high, we haven't had a patch released since this was first noted.

 

I would hope that the fuel tanks would be released before Normandy.

 

The first fight with a 90 gallon tank is going to be interesting! :D

Edited March 20, 2017 by Krupi

[Pman]

Last night we (54 Sqn) ran a "normandy" period training mission. We attempted to get 9 spitfires from Sokhumi to Gori, engage some ground targets and then land at Kutaisi.

 

 

The straight line distance from Sokhumi to Gori is about 270km.

The distance back to Kuatisi, another 109km.

Total distance = 380km (240 miles)

We ran +4LB Boost and 2650-2700 rpm the whole way. We had rich mixture though, and were operating at around 5,000ft.

 

At the target area, we had about 5 minutes of combat at +12LB boost. Every single Spitfire in the formation ran out of fuel during the combat.

 

So, without drop tanks, how much use is the South-English coastline going to be with respect to the Spitfire?

 

 

Tangmere to Le Havre or the invasion beaches is about 163km (326km return trip). This means that, basically, and missions which require Spifires to take-off from England and patrol or do anything over the Normandy area will be impossible unless we have drop-tanks.

 

Incidentally, does anyone know what the "Fast Cruise" engine settings in Kufurst's post here are: https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3064067&postcount=7 ??

I've like to use those settings to try and test the Spitfire Range in DCS. Although I suspect I will need "lean" mixture and operate at higher altitude in order to get better fuel economy...

 

I haven't tested this in the IX, but the data in the chart is for a later IX with the rear tanks (an additional 75 gallons ~).

 

For the IX we have the range is considerable shorter when running with those settings. I believe we only have the forward tanks in the IX, which gives a capacity of between 75-85 gallons.

 

For cruising and range you should be running more like +4lbs and whatever RPM you need to obtain 170-180mph to a minimum of 1800RPM. If you need less than 1800 RPM reduce manifold until you hold that speed at 1850-1900 RPM. This should also be run on lean mixture and not rich.

 

This should give you about an hour and half of flying, Maybe if you are pretty good with trimming etc you may get up to 2 hours (giving you somewhere in the region of 300miles range, circa 500km.)

 

Like I said I haven't tried it in sim, but this is how the RL maths stacks.

 

Pman

[ViFF]

For cruising and range you should be running more like +4lbs and whatever RPM you need to obtain 170-180mph to a minimum of 1800RPM. If you need less than 1800 RPM reduce manifold until you hold that speed at 1850-1900 RPM. This should also be run on lean mixture and not rich.

 

This should give you about an hour and half of flying, Maybe if you are pretty good with trimming etc you may get up to 2 hours (giving you somewhere in the region of 300miles range, circa 500km.)

 

 

just a small note: trimming has nothing to do with endurance, but I agree with you that a well trimmed spitfire will be able to fly farther than a poorly trimmed one... :book:

 

Another item to note is the best altitude for cruise, which if I remember correctly should be around 24,000 feet for the spitfire, where you can make use of the supercharger stage and lean out the mixture to benefit from less fuel burn in the high alt cruise.

 

S!

Edited March 20, 2017 by ViFF

[Goblin]

just a small note: trimming has nothing to do with endurance

 

Sure it does.

Aft loading a conventional design like the Spit, where the pitching moment of the wing is counteracted by the tail, means less trim drag. Less drag means less power which again means less fuel consumption and better endurance.

 

So if trimming means that trim drag is reduced (trimmed condition has less drag than untrimmed), it does have an impact on endurance.

 

Range will also increase, for the same reasons plus higher speed in trimmed condition.

[ViFF]

Sure it does.

Aft loading a conventional design like the Spit, where the pitching moment of the wing is counteracted by the tail, means less trim drag. Less drag means less power which again means less fuel consumption and better endurance.

 

So if trimming means that trim drag is reduced (trimmed condition has less drag than untrimmed), it does have an impact on endurance.

 

Range will also increase, for the same reasons plus higher speed in trimmed condition.

 

ofcourse trimming is important, but why are you confusing range with endurance?

 

You could keep your spitfire aloft at an even lower power setting than the one that pman mentions. You will have greater endurance, but less range.

 

S!

[Talisman_VR]

Last night we (54 Sqn) ran a "normandy" period training mission. We attempted to get 9 spitfires from Sokhumi to Gori, engage some ground targets and then land at Kutaisi.

 

 

The straight line distance from Sokhumi to Gori is about 270km.

The distance back to Kuatisi, another 109km.

Total distance = 380km (240 miles)

We ran +4LB Boost and 2650-2700 rpm the whole way. We had rich mixture though, and were operating at around 5,000ft.

 

At the target area, we had about 5 minutes of combat at +12LB boost. Every single Spitfire in the formation ran out of fuel during the combat.

 

So, without drop tanks, how much use is the South-English coastline going to be with respect to the Spitfire?

 

 

Tangmere to Le Havre or the invasion beaches is about 163km (326km return trip). This means that, basically, and missions which require Spifires to take-off from England and patrol or do anything over the Normandy area will be impossible unless we have drop-tanks.

 

Incidentally, does anyone know what the "Fast Cruise" engine settings in Kufurst's post here are: https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3064067&postcount=7 ??

I've like to use those settings to try and test the Spitfire Range in DCS. Although I suspect I will need "lean" mixture and operate at higher altitude in order to get better fuel economy...

 

Hi Phil,

 

There is a very handy reference table in the real life pilot notes with best economy settings and gallons per hour fuel consumption rates. For example, on your mission last night I was sometimes flying at zero boost and 1800 rpm (in theory (but not in DCS at the moment as it is still WIP) this should have given me 39 gallons per hour). Probably why I was the longest flying Spitfire, but even I did not make it back to base, LOL. The DCS Spit IX devs have acknowledged that they have set the fuel consumption too high at the moment, so we very much hope they fix that very soon, before the Normandy map is released. Also, eventually we should get drop tanks on the Spit IX I think.

 

P.S. As Pman says above, 170-180 is a good speed for economy with the lowest boost and rpm settings to maintain that speed range.

 

Happy landings,

 

56RAF_Talisman

Edited March 20, 2017 by 56RAF_Talisman
Add P.S.

[Goblin]

but why are you confusing range with endurance?

 

I don't.

 

Anything causing drag wil increase minimum power required.

At any given speed, the power required will be higher, if drag is increased.

 

Simply put, less drag means less fuel used.

[ViFF]

I don't.

 

Anything causing drag wil increase minimum power required.

At any given speed, the power required will be higher, if drag is increased.

 

Simply put, less drag means less fuel used.

 

 

Sorry but you are wrong.

 

In the special case between max endurance speed vs max range speed, the drag at max endurance speed is a little bit higher.

 

http://www.eaa1000.av.org/technicl/perfspds/perfspds.htm

 

 

 

max endurance power setting < max range power setting

 

drag at max endurance speed > drag at max range speed

 

The power required (HP) for max endurance speed will always be lower even though the drag is a little bit higher.

 

The main reason the drag is a little bit higher is due to higher induced drag due to higher wing incidence for maintaining 1 G flight at the lower speed.

 

hope this helps you understand better

 

edit: the graph is not for the spitfire. it just as an example from the link.

 

S!

Edited March 20, 2017 by ViFF

[Goblin]

I'm not debating the fact that endurance and range is different entities :)

 

I was just addressing your statment that trimming had nothing to do with endurance.

 

Un-trimmed means more drag which means required power increases.

Required power is, after all, drag multiplied by speed.

[ViFF]

and I'm addressing your statement:

 

Anything causing drag wil increase minimum power required.

At any given speed, the power required will be higher, if drag is increased.

 

Simply put, less drag means less fuel used.

 

Look above, I just gave you an example of higher drag gives you greater endurance :)

 

I also said that trimming is important, but to be honest, unless your are in a grossly out of trim state, causing tons of parasitic drag... otherwise the effect on the amount of "extra power" you need to draw to overcome the small parasitic drag of being out of trim is negligible.

 

I'm not discrediting what your wrote but you are most probably referring to parasitic drag, but that becomes a factor only in the higher air speeds.

 

S!

Edited March 20, 2017 by ViFF

[Goblin]

Look above, I just gave you an example of higher drag gives you greater endurance :)

 

Yes, because max endurance speed is found at the speed for minimum power required, and that's not the same as the speed for mimimum drag.

 

But I'm saying that if you increase drag, the total drag curve will move upwards in that graph, and so will power required.

 

But hey, believe what you want. :)

[P3CFE]

interesting subject.

 

Hope you both agree..

With an aircraft not trimmed out on an axis... (Lets say pitch), Your aircraft wants to change pitch when flying hands Free.

So you have to counteract with handforce to counter this tendency.

 

When counteracting and flying level Again, the only extra drag is produced by a un neccesary deflected trimtab.

This drag is unnaccesary and adding drag..it Will add fuel usage per airmile.

IT Will be small..but it Will.

 

When not trimmed in multiple axis, like rudder and roll, you Will have continues slipping

conditions witch Will increase fuel usage seriousely

 

Greetings..

 

John

[ViFF]

I absolutely agree! Sorry for perhaps nit picking on this but the principle of the matter to me was that for the given engine setting that pman wrote in his post (+4 boost / 1,800 RPM) you are flying and you have the same endurance whether you are trimmed out nicely or not.

[Goblin]

Same power setting, same endurance. That's correct! We agree! :)

[Kurfürst]

Last night we (54 Sqn) ran a "normandy" period training mission. We attempted to get 9 spitfires from Sokhumi to Gori, engage some ground targets and then land at Kutaisi.

 

 

The straight line distance from Sokhumi to Gori is about 270km.

The distance back to Kuatisi, another 109km.

Total distance = 380km (240 miles)

We ran +4LB Boost and 2650-2700 rpm the whole way. We had rich mixture though, and were operating at around 5,000ft.

 

At the target area, we had about 5 minutes of combat at +12LB boost. Every single Spitfire in the formation ran out of fuel during the combat.

 

So, without drop tanks, how much use is the South-English coastline going to be with respect to the Spitfire?

 

 

Tangmere to Le Havre or the invasion beaches is about 163km (326km return trip). This means that, basically, and missions which require Spifires to take-off from England and patrol or do anything over the Normandy area will be impossible unless we have drop-tanks.

 

Incidentally, does anyone know what the "Fast Cruise" engine settings in Kufurst's post here are: https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3064067&postcount=7 ??

I've like to use those settings to try and test the Spitfire Range in DCS. Although I suspect I will need "lean" mixture and operate at higher altitude in order to get better fuel economy...

 

Its somewhat of a mystery waht the 'fast cruise' refers to in that table and I fear all the people who could tell are no longer with us. Going by the figures given for the 109 though my guess would be that it's some sort of intermediate cruise setting between max. continuous and max. economy settings.

 

BTW, I found this and this could help. Mk VIII and Merlin 66 figures by Australian tests, should be pretty close to our IX. It shows consumption and mileage for various cruising RPM and Boost combinations.

 

I have but made brief calculations, but from a glance of it, for the 2600/+4 cruise settings you mentioned running out of fuel in the midst of combat doesn't seem that off after a 240 mile cruise, even in a purely theoretical case of cruise this would mean that only about 30 gallons (and in practice, with formation flying, warm-up, taxi, climbing etc. - even less). At combat, you can go through that rather quickly..

 

Best cruise for range is apparently 1800 / -2, albeit this is a very slow cruise at around 210 mph TAS that make you rather vulnerable tactically, in fact historical tactical memorandums I have seen advised against it..

[TWC_SLAG]

The fuel consumption is still too high, we haven't had a patch released since this was first noted.

 

I would hope that the fuel tanks would be released before Normandy.

 

The first fight with a 90 gallon tank is going to be interesting! :D

 

In CLoD, a flight from Tangmere (or from anywhere else on the south coast) to Le Harve is no problem. Altitude and engine mgmt are important.

 

When the DCS Spit gets fixed, it shouldn't have a problem, either.

[TWC_SLAG]

Another thought occurred to me: why ever fly from England, when you would have more time-on-target by flying from a field in France? Even if you do fly from England, you can R&R in Normandy before flying home.

 

This range thing seems to be a non problem.

[Krupi]

I don't think it is a problem, we just need the drop tanks and it will be fine.

 

I can't recall if we are going to get the rear fuel tank, I think not?

[NineLine]

Spit is still early access, certainly not complete, all this will be looked at.

[crowebar]

Another thought occurred to me: why ever fly from England, when you would have more time-on-target by flying from a field in France? .

 

The bacon & eggs! :thumbup:

[philstyle]

Another thought occurred to me: why ever fly from England, when you would have more time-on-target by flying from a field in France? Even if you do fly from England, you can R&R in Normandy before flying home.

This range thing seems to be a non problem.

 

 

 

 

1. One wonders if there was not much point in ED bothering to even map the english coast in that case . . .

 

 

2. What if poeple want to fly "pre-D-DAY" missions. However, it's a real shame that the Allied temporary/advanced airfields appear to be hard-coded into the map. This means that pre-d-day scenarios will have to be played on a non-historical base map.

[REDEYE_CVW-66]

The inclusion of England is superb for historical and gameplay reasons. The droptanks will sort out the range. Most Spit squads did not move to France until a couple of weeks+ after the landing. Before that, they did land in France to refill before going home as mentioned above. Flying scenarios before d-day with the fields in place might be a slight annoyance, but hardly enough to ruin immersive gameplay. In addition to being useful for D-day and later scenarios, England can be the start point for defensive missions as well, stopping bombers, coastal and convoy patrols, intercepting recce's etc etc.

 

Also, Racoon made a comment somewhere about wanting the airfields to be optional also. The COULD mean, that they can be toggled trough a map option- but either way- I'm just happy to move out of the Caucasus with my warbirds- for good!

[dannyq8]

 

 

2. What if poeple want to fly "pre-D-DAY" missions. However, it's a real shame that the Allied temporary/advanced airfields appear to be hard-coded into the map. This means that pre-d-day scenarios will have to be played on a non-historical base map.

 

 

I was under the impression, and I thought it was mentioned a while back, that we could place airfields, therefore also remove them?

 

Are we stuck with hard coded airfields on the Normandy Map?

[philstyle]

I was under the impression, and I thought it was mentioned a while back, that we could place airfields, therefore also remove them?Are we stuck with hard coded airfields on the Normandy Map?

 

 

 

I've not heard anything officially.

If we can remove them.. then.. fantastic. That would allow us to play more than just a few months of WW2, without having to conveniently overlook the landscape!

 

 

Kinda seems odd for them to build all those defensive emplacements on the map, if they've all been overrun by the allies already...