NZFF

Ian Warren wrote:

QUOTE (Ian Warren @ Jul 1 2010, 10:12 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Sticks , I have a date this month to meet Les Munro , surviving New Zealander who was on the raid , at a forum , to simply chat and listen .

il keep you posted on this one .

Thanks Ian
I would have a 1000 questions to ask. Pity he was not part of the Moehne & Eder Attacks. He is the last surviving Pilot from the raids

"The second wave of Lancasters had taken off before Gibson and had flown the northerly route across the North sea to the Sorpe. To confuse the enemy defences and to keep them guessing as to the real intentions of the bombers, they made their land fall some 125 miles to the North, but over the Dutch Island of Texel the second wave sufferred its first casualty. Light flak was responsible for damage inflicted on F/L Munro's Lancaster AJ-W (ED 921), which lost its VHF radio and intercom as a result, forcing him to abort his sorte and return to Scampton, where he landed at 0030 hours, the Upkeep still clasped beneath the beely of W for William. Orders had forbidden 617's aircraft captains to return with a live mine on board."

After the aborted raid he continued with 617 Squadron and achieved great success with Tallboys and the like. Makes interesting reading about the exploits of 617 Squadron after the initial raid that cost them so dearly and is still considered to be the most highly regarded raid Bomber Command ever flew.

What I would love to know is what happened to the original Dambuster aircraft. Did they just sit out the war parked at Scampton and never to fly again as some have said? This info is very confused in all writings, it is also said AJ-W was damaged 17 08 44 and was SOC'd 26 09 47. So was it the original Dambuster Lancaster OR was it a replacement with the same "AJ-W". Did Mr Munro fly a AJ-W or KC-W after the raid? There is no greater mixed up bag of research than the 617 Dambuster Squadron.

Cheers

Be the question ill ask for you , Its amazing how one raid has so much interest 67 years later .

Ian Warren wrote:

QUOTE (Ian Warren @ Jul 2 2010, 11:25 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Be the question ill ask for you , Its amazing how one raid has so much interest 67 years later .

Thanks, that will be interesting.

Yes that raid has always generated interest, its probably the greatest show of flying skills from WW2 at least. We also know a modern group of jet flyers failed the test in a giant simulator 5 or so years ago.

In the flight sim context its been popular as well. Over 3000 downloads in CFS1, in excess of 5000 in FS2002 and 18817 in FS2004. There are 11797 simmers (since November last) with the up dated Plane-Design Lancaster that maybe Ed might be sorry he gave permission for me to use.

There has been quite a lot of feed back, mainly that simmers find it all too hard and taxing and simply revert to flying the Lancaster at altitude and really thats not a Tribute to their skills. In the period up to the raid they never flew above +1500 feet.

I was also suprised to find so many do not use flight plans which in the case of the Operation Ready version is necessary to set the aircraft up properly and to fly the approximate route and then find the dams. At tree top level you cannot navigate very well.

There are no other Lancasters in the sim world that you can fly the Dambuster wall attacks because they all lack the necessary Dambuster tools to fly at "+60 feet". They just look like the aircraft - big difference and for obvious reasons mine are not anything like the reality of 1943. In a sim they cannot be.

FINALLY: I am amazed really that the so called experts, after 65-67 years, have decided the right hand turn at the Moehne dam was not used. Instead the straight in approach that I first used in CFS1 is said to be it (that seemed obvious from a study of maps). Hell of a lot of museums etc have got it wrong now, including our National in Canberra.

It shows how little is known about some aspects of the raid. Amazing, was it not documented? How good was the debrief (10 questions)? In Gibson's debrief he says he could see the target from 3-4 miles out. No question asked "where did it hit the wall? The straight in run is supported by the fact that no Lancaster repeated an attack at the Moehne. Very different to the difficult EDER and Sorpe.

If the "straight in" attack route was used how come one "bomb" landed by the left tower. How could you be 110 yards out on a straight run in? For heavens sake, these were the best bomber crews in Bomber Command. Not even in a sim is that possible. But the right turn could throw a bomb well off line if released whilst still on the turn. Common outcome in the sim, particularly FSX with at least 130 yards of water missing. l doubt if Mr Munro would have/remember the answers.

If you view the slow motion clip of a bomb drop in my film, one could ask "how did bombs go over or hit the parapet. - too fast, too high, too late.

I think its quite interesting that those that did make it to the Sorpe dam (3 Lancasters) made a total of 30 (thirty) runs to drop 3 weapons. Can you imagine what the crew members were thinking after 9 tries?

Oh yes it is an interesting subject to ponder if your interested in sim flying and really want to understand the aircraft your flying.

Cheers

Ross ..

I have studied the raid myself , one reason getting the AH Lanc FS9 / 2004 was to test it out in the NZ dam and lake regions , with the photoreal scenery i was working on using the Auckland Lake res.v as the Target , it appeared to be so similar , and nearly the same size off length in lake towards the Dam ..

FSX - With the ore detailed RealNZ Auckland region , i was able to get in , i had this in the back off my mind to see , this time with the FCS Lancaster and in at night . Hell off a exciting ride even on the sim . I did wonder if Mr Munro would like to stop here and have a go at it , that will be the second question ill put to him , exclude the Go flight autopilot im sure he would feel right at home and if not leave an open invitation .

Ian Warren wrote:

QUOTE (Ian Warren @ Jul 2 2010, 07:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Ross ..

I have studied the raid myself , one reason getting the AH Lanc FS9 / 2004 was to test it out in the NZ dam and lake regions , with the photoreal scenery i was working on using the Auckland Lake res.v as the Target , it appeared to be so similar , and nearly the same size off length in lake towards the Dam ..

FSX - With the ore detailed RealNZ Auckland region , i was able to get in , i had this in the back off my mind to see , this time with the FCS Lancaster and in at night . Hell off a exciting ride even on the sim . I did wonder if Mr Munro would like to stop here and have a go at it , that will be the second question ill put to him , exclude the Go flight autopilot im sure he would feel right at home and if not leave an open invitation .

Thanks for that Ian - Goodluck in getting some answers.

I vowed I would not do anymore Lancasters but could you give a link to the any your flying, might get interested in one more! Someone has got to get a DB Lanc right eventually.

Cheers