New Lancaster B1 DLC: TFS6 2025

[Blitzen]

There ius a realkli nice free Lancaster trip in VR for anyone with a headset

https://store.steampowered.com/app/5..._Berlin_Blitz/

With VR you can even crawl out on the wing over Berlin!

[Blitzen]

Did someone say "target for tonight?" This new Lanc will be mine with one of the new late model Bf-110's or the existing Ju-88 C's!

[IIJG27Rich]

I remember a Canadian sim called something like that but it never quite got off the ground. The late model Ju-88s were quite something.

[Blitzen]

Another reason the British did not focus on maximum ceiling for their 4 engined bombers was related to the Mk XIV bombsight. (same bombsight as in later Wellington)

This bombsight had a maximum recommended bombing height of approx. 22,000-25,000 ft... it was not possible to bomb accurately over that altitude.

Whereas the American Norden bombsight was designed to allow bombing from 30,000 + ft.... although in practice most B-17/B-24 raids bombed at between 25,000-30,000 ft.

However, the Mk XIV was much easier to use than the Norden, the computer had automatic systems and it didn't require the bomber to be straight and level. The aircraft could be maneuvering when dropping. The Norden required the aircraft to be straight and level during the bomb run... which made it more vulnerable to Anti Aircraft guns.

The Americans used the Norden in their 4 engined bombers, but found it cumbersome for the twin engined types and replaced it with a license built copy of the Mk XIV, called the Sperry T-1. The Medium and Light bombers bombed from 20,000 ft or under and they didn't need the complexity of the Norden or the added danger of flying straight and level.

Would this make much difference if you were committed to night area/carpet bombing?

[RAF74_Buzzsaw]

Would this make much difference if you were committed to night area/carpet bombing?

Every nation in WWII used bombsight types where the results in terms of accuracy were similar. The Americans often said their Norden bombsight was so accurate it could "...drop a bomb in a pickel barrel..." but in practice when bombing from over 15,000 ft, if bombs dropped within 100 yards of the target, it was considered an extremely accurate strike. The British and German bombsights were similarly accurate.

There was no 'pinpoint' accuracy, except in low level bombing... (under 5000 ft) which was too costly in terms of plane losses, with rare exceptions where the attacks surprised the defenses... as in the various low level Mosquito raids.

The Luftwaffe were the first to use general/area bombing methods, as well as bombing civilian targets indescriminately for terror reasons, as in Guernica, Warsaw, Rotterdam, Coventry, etc. They were the first to use incendiaries in a deliberate attempt to cause urban firestorms... and succeeded with their attempts in Warsaw, Rotterdam and Coventry. The Germans primarily failed in their bombing campaign of Britain a) because their aircraft were not capable of carrying large enough bombloads, b) because they started to experienced losses from Nightfighters which were not sustainable.

At the start of the war RAF first restricted themselves completely from bombing ANY urban targets, only bombing naval ships at sea or in or dockyards, or dropping leaflets over cities, but after they experienced Luftwaffe area bombings, decided to respond by bombing German Industry in cities.

Initially 1940-41 they tried to bomb industrial targets from low level at night for accuracy, but found this method was a) not successful, b) resulted in heavy losses.

They then began to bomb from higher altitudes, but found the results were poor.

After 'Bomber' Harris took over, he decided the key was bombing with massive numbers of bombers... swamping the defenses. After the RAF continued to have poor accuracy even with massive forces, he began to promote the idea of 'de-housing' German industrial workers... i.e. destroying the homes of the workers who ran the German war industries. According to the Geneva Convention, those persons employed in working in War Industries are legitimate targets, although the convention probably meant workers who were actually present in the factories. Harris saw the tenement blocks around the factories which typically housed the workers as easier targets than factories... because they occupied a larger area, therefore were easier to hit. He wanted to denote his targets as factories + worker tenements... and in fact wanted to ignore the factories completely. The Luftwaffe had already come to the same conclusion, and during the London Blitz and bombings of other British cities, their targets were based on the same logic... the working class sections of London and other British cities were the areas which suffered the most.

The RAF overall commander, Air Marshal Portal wanted to keep Harris focused on industrial targets, but Harris, who was in charge of day to day target assignment tried to bypass him. The result was the RAF bombed a mix of pure Industrial targets, and a mix of Industrial/Tenements.

As the war progressed, the RAF developed more technical aides to improve bombing accuracy, and it became more practical to expect factories to be hit. Still Harris interfered and tried to focus on his 'de-housing' project. He thought he could win the war by generally devastating German cities. But Portal and later Eisenhower/Montgomery insisted he focus on industrial targets, especially oil refineries, which were critical to German war effort, and he was over-ruled. The RAF bombers were actually more effective than the USAAF bombers when targeting German factories because they dropped larger bombs, 2000 lb and 4000 lb, compared to the typical USAAF 500 lb. The heavy machinery in the German factories or refineries was barely affected by smaller bombs, the walls might be knocked down, but the machinery remained. Albert Speer, the German armaments minister commented after the war that the RAF bombing was far more damaging.

Meanwhile the USAAF was conducting its 'pinpoint' daylight bombing campaign... except that it wasn't really pinpoint either. Because of factors like cloud, the higher altitude the USAAF bombed from as well as bombardier error, the USAAF only got marginally better results... and they often ended up bombing the worker tenement areas around the factories as well... because of the inaccuracy.

Was the RAF/USAAF strategic bombing campaign effective? Yes it was... but sometimes for other reasons than the actual targets hit.

1) Harris's 'de-housing' campaign didn't work... after the initial shock, German workers just found other accomodation, and continued to work in the factories

2) The bombing of heavy industry and the aircraft industry didn't really work... the Germans reacted by moving away from concentrated production in one location, instead spreading out their factories to smaller sites, and putting some aircraft assembly plants underground.

3) The bombing of German Oil Refineries, and Synthetic Refining plants, (refining petroleum from coal) was very successful, and combined with the loss of the Rumanian Oilfields to Soviet advance, reduced German Petrol production to almost zero... which crippled their war machine. In this campaign, the RAF bombers were more effective than the USAAF because of their heavier bomb types.

4) The Germans were forced to deploy huge numbers of aircraft, troops and armaments to defend their industries and cities... the Luftwaffe fighter force became almost invisible on the front lines, as all these aircraft/pilots were on home defense. In addition, enormous numbers of Anti-Aircraft guns were deployed in home defense... in the case of the famous 88 mm gun, this was a huge loss for the Wehrmacht front line defenses... the guns deployed in home defense could have played a big part in defending against Allied and Soviet tank advances. Finally, some 2 million German soldiers were deployed to man these Anti Aircraft weapons, or in home defense as firefighters/rubble clearance, repair etc. These soldiers again would have improved the German chances of defending the frontlines. Albert Speer confirmed this in his memoirs and testimony to Allied questioners after the war.

5) The Luftwaffe dayfighter force, (and a large part of the nightfighter force when it was committed to daylight interception) was essentially destroyed by the USAAF Fighter escorts... this had ramifications to the overall progress of the war... with complete air superiority, the Allied forces were able to invade in Italy/Normandy/Southern France, and attack and advance to the liberation of occupied Europe as well as the conquest of Germany.

The RAF and USAAF suffered very high losses in their bombing campaigns... although they could afford it. But the losses were of some of the 'best and brightest'... the cream of the young men of both countries were recruited to fly these big bombers, it required a high level of intelligence to be a pilot, navigator, bombardier, and undoubtedly it meant postwar the potential contributions of these young men was lost.

The Germans lost between 300,000 and 600,000 civilians to the bombing campaign. (depending on what sources you look at) Compared to the civilian casualties in the various Allied/Soviet countries occupied by German armed forces, this was a small amount. (Soviets lost approximately 16-17 million civilians, Poland lost close to 6 million, Yugoslavia lost approx. 1.5 million, French lost 400,000, Czechs lost 300,000, etc.)

With hindsight, the RAF night bombing campaign would have been better undertaken with a force of fast light bombers... as for example the Mosquito. These aircraft were too fast to be intercepted, and could bomb more accurately. If Harris and the RAF commanders had been a little more forward thinking, they could have switched more of their aircraft production efforts towards building a large fleet of Mosquitoes carrying 4000 lb bombs. Losses would have been much reduced and accuracy improved.

[major_setback]

Fighter Squadron: Screamin' Demons over Europe did a very basic one.

Screamin' Demons Over Europe:

Screenshot_20240112-124526_Gallery.jpg

[Kendy for the State]

Hi Kendy.
Avro Lancaster Owners Workshop Manual by Haynes is a good one for interior pics of Lancs. I think most are from the Battle of Britain Memorial Flight. Available from Amazon mate.

Cheers

HAWK.

I purchased this book, and can confirm that it was an utter waste of money for building cockpit controls. There's plenty of nice general information, and lots of pretty pictures of planes, but absolutely nothing regarding dimensions of any controls. I can get better pictures off the internet. I purchased the book for the B-17 as well, hoping to get some controls built for that bomber also, and there is even less info on that aircraft. Absolutely worthless.

Where does TF get their info for building cockpits?

VCAF_Kendy

[RAF74_Buzzsaw]

I purchased this book, and can confirm that it was an utter waste of money for building cockpit controls. There's plenty of nice general information, and lots of pretty pictures of planes, but absolutely nothing regarding dimensions of any controls. I can get better pictures off the internet. I purchased the book for the B-17 as well, hoping to get some controls built for that bomber also, and there is even less info on that aircraft. Absolutely worthless.

Where does TF get their info for building cockpits?

VCAF_Kendy

From the original manuals and drawings.

Plus pictures from the surviving Warbird cockpits.

[ATAG_Lenny]

Contact the Canadian Warplane Heritage in Hamilton, just outside of Toronto, Ontario. VR-A flies most days in the summer. One of only two airworthy Lancaster's, the other being the BBMF in the UK. If you can arrange with them either Snapper or I can go visit and take pictures or access data and documentation they have on site. We are both supporting members.

In fact I'm looking at going there tomorrow as the RAF Red Arrows are stopping by to say hello at noon.

Lenny

[Dazza]

I popped by.

55c313df-8993-425c-95f7-e75ce6e2a81e.jpg

[ATAG_Lenny]

Holy cow! I was there too! But you were somewhere that the visitors couldn't access?
Lenny

IMG_2216.jpg

[Dazza]

Holy cow! I was there too! But you were somewhere that the visitors couldn't access?
Lenny

IMG_2216.jpg

I was outside the fence along the road. I've just moved to Hamilton so popped by for a few mins while out running errands.

Daz

[Kendy for the State]

Contact the Canadian Warplane Heritage in Hamilton, just outside of Toronto, Ontario. VR-A flies most days in the summer. One of only two airworthy Lancaster's, the other being the BBMF in the UK. If you can arrange with them either Snapper or I can go visit and take pictures or access data and documentation they have on site. We are both supporting members.

In fact I'm looking at going there tomorrow as the RAF Red Arrows are stopping by to say hello at noon.

Lenny

Sorry I didn't see this in time to reply... If someone knows the diameter of say, the boost gauges, or rpm indicators, I could extrapolate the rest of the controls from the photos and drawings. Obviously they don't have to be exact for the purpose of a flight sim, but it would be nice to get sort of close.

Interestingly, all my JU88 stuff got banned from Etsy, because apparently it represents "Hate speech", as it was used by the Nazis. Once I update things I will probably put them back up on my Shopify site.


Regards,
VCAF_Kendy

[Marco]

Sorry I didn't see this in time to reply... If someone knows the diameter of say, the boost gauges, or rpm indicators, I could extrapolate the rest of the controls from the photos and drawings. Obviously they don't have to be exact for the purpose of a flight sim, but it would be nice to get sort of close.

A fair while back I photographed and measured a number of British flight instruments for you from my collection. Here's the boost gauge, common to most British aircraft of the time:

1 Boost Gauge.jpg

Hope it helps.

~S~

[RAF74_Buzzsaw]

Sorry I didn't see this in time to reply... If someone knows the diameter of say, the boost gauges, or rpm indicators, I could extrapolate the rest of the controls from the photos and drawings. Obviously they don't have to be exact for the purpose of a flight sim, but it would be nice to get sort of close.

Interestingly, all my JU88 stuff got banned from Etsy, because apparently it represents "Hate speech", as it was used by the Nazis. Once I update things I will probably put them back up on my Shopify site.


Regards,
VCAF_Kendy

If you look at the aircraft instruments in game, they are modeled on the original types, to the best of our knowledge and research.

Instrument types like boost gauges, vary depending on the model, and the engine type... as the war progressed, allowable boost was increased and instrument dial maximum figures were adjusted to match.

[Kendy for the State]

A fair while back I photographed and measured a number of British flight instruments for you from my collection. Here's the boost gauge, common to most British aircraft of the time:

1 Boost Gauge.jpg

Hope it helps.

~S~

Nice, thanks! That may be a good starting point.