Should the Spitfire Mk.XIV be clipped?

[RTHolmes]

Ive noticed that although the XIV prototypes and production/converted Mk.XIIIs had standard wing tips, most of the pics I can find of high-back XIVs in service show clipped wings.

The RAF, however. decided that [skin buckling on the wing] had to be avoided and issued instructions that all Mk XIVs were to be retrospectively fitted with clipped wings

given the improvement in capability the XVI's clipped wing gives compared to the (very similar) unclipped VIII, clipping the XIV might finally make it perk-worthy.

anyone have more evidence either way?

[dirtdart]

Perked, bubble canopy, I would pay 20-25 perks for that. 

[RTHolmes]

low-back XIVs were rather rare - less than 10% iirc, most looked like this:

[SmokinLoon]

The Spit 14 need not be perked at all, but of the powers to be think it *really* needs a perks it certainly doesn't deserve the price it has now.  The Spit 16 is more of a threat than the Spit 14 ever will be (turns better, rolls better, more stable, carries 1k ordnance).  The only place the Spit 14 really shines better is above 24k altitude.

[branch37]

Ever come up against one above 24K?  If you have, then you probably know why it's perked.

[SmokinLoon]

Ever come up against one above 24K?  If you have, then you probably know why it's perked.

Indeed, I've surprised many at the high alts. 

[Guppy35]

Find me a wartime shot of a clipped XIV and I'd support it.  If there were any, it was very few and I've yet to see a photo that's not postwar.  Seems like once they moved to a more tactical role postwar with the increase in RAF jet units, the XIVs got thier wings clipped.  But at the end of WW2 they were being used as interceptors with full span wings and the IXs and XVIs were the clipped Spits flying the ground attack.

[Butcher]

Ever come up against one above 24K?  If you have, then you probably know why it's perked.

From tour to tour I love getting a spit 14 up to 25k and wait for buff raids to tangle with the escorts, most generally forget the spit14 in this role,
Its climb rate is outstanding as well as handling above 20k.

[Krusty]

The Spit 14 need not be perked at all, but of the powers to be think it *really* needs a perks it certainly doesn't deserve the price it has now.  The Spit 16 is more of a threat than the Spit 14 ever will be (turns better, rolls better, more stable, carries 1k ordnance).  The only place the Spit 14 really shines better is above 24k altitude.

This is not a condemnation of the Spit14 perk, but rather a need for the spit16 to HAVE a perk!

 


P.S. Clipping wings usually corresponds to low alt work and low alt engine gearing. We have a high alt Spit14 so we couldn't clip the wings (even if there were any in the war -- apparently not) without also changing the engine, the performance, the entire plane itself. That would be an entirely new plane.

[Karnak]

Ever come up against one above 24K?  If you have, then you probably know why it's perked.

Sorry, but that excuse doesn't fly.  The Ta152, P-47M and P-47N share that dominance and yet are not perked.

P.S. Clipping wings usually corresponds to low alt work and low alt engine gearing. We have a high alt Spit14 so we couldn't clip the wings (even if there were any in the war -- apparently not) without also changing the engine, the performance, the entire plane itself. That would be an entirely new plane.

All Spitfire Mk XIV's, even the clipped wing ones, had the same high blown Griffon 61 or 65.  It isn't like the Merlin 61/63/66/70/266 you find on the Spitfires VIII, IX and XVI.

That said, the wings should not be clipped.

[Krusty]

Ah, thanks. Now that you mention it I have the feeling it's been said before (deja vu and all that).

I agree they should not be clipped on this model.

[Noir]

give us the XII!

[Krusty]

give us the XII!

Why? Fly the Spit16, and it outperforms the XII.

The thing is, the XII, outside of those who absolutely love the detailed history of the plane, isn't useful. Nor is it better than anything we already have in-game.

What makes it interesting is that it was around in early 1942. At THAT TIME it was very fast. Much like the Mossie was fast against early 1943 models but in the MAs it's pretty much an easy target, you'd get the same issues here.

To quote an article on the XII that lists speeds:
"The resulting aircraft was very fast at low levels, reaching a speed of 372 mph at 5,700 feet and 397 mph at 18,000 ft. It was faster than the Mk IX up to about 20,000 feet, but above that height it was slower."

Well, let's look at our Spit9 and clipped wing Spit16:



So, our Spit16 is as fast at 5000ft, even faster at 20,000ft, and stays fast up to almost 25k.

I know, I know... The die hard fans want it, and I can't blame them 1 iota. However, if you wanted to you could just fly a Spit16 and pretend, and get comparable results.

[Noir]

RAF fans would kill for 2 cylinders more....I would expect the XII to have a lot of character and a fun aircraft to fly!

[Karnak]

RAF fans would kill for 2 cylinders more....I would expect the XII to have a lot of character and a fun aircraft to fly!

They are both 12 cylinder engines.  The Merlin is a 27 liter engine and the Griffon was, if I recall correctly, a 36 liter engine.