Author Topic: Spitfire 14 is porked (Read 3871 times)

Furball · « **on:** December 14, 2003, 11:56:50 AM »

im fed up of all the p38 threads, f4u, p51 etc etc etc threads so im starting my own. Fix the Spitfire 14, Spitfire IX and Mosquito!

Quote

TACTICAL COMPARISON WITH SPITFIRE IX
13. The tactical differences are caused chiefly by the fact that the Spitfire XIV has an engine of greater capacity and is the heavier aircraft (weighing 8,400 lbs. against 7,480 lbs. of Spitfire IX).

Range & Endurance
14. The Spitfire XIV, without a long-range tank, carries 110 gallons of fuel and 9 gallons of oil. When handled similarily, the Spitfire XIV uses fuel at about 1 1/4 times the rate of the Spitfire IX. Its endurance is therefore slightly less. Owing to its higher speed for corresponding engine settings, its range is about equal. For the same reasons, extra fuel carried in a long-range tank keeps its range about equal to that of the Spitfire IX, its endurance being slightly less.

Speeds
15. At all heights the Spitfire XIV is 30-35 mph faster in level flight. The best performance heights are similar, being just below 15,000 and between 25,000 and 32,000 ft.

Climb
16. The Spitfire XIV has a slightly better maximum climb than the Spitfire IX, having the best maximum rate of climb yet seen at this Unit. The In the zoom climb the Spitfire XIV gains slightly all the way, especially if full throttle is used in the climb.

Dive
17. The Spitfire XIV will pull away from the Spitfire IX in a dive.

Turning Circle
18. The turning circles of both aircraft are identical. The Spitfire XIV appears to turn slightly better to port than it does to starbord. The warning of an approaching high speed stall is less pronounced in the case of the Spitfire Mk XIV.

Rate of Roll
19. Rate of roll is very much the same.

Search View and Rear View
20. The search view from the pilot's cockpit is good; the longer nose of the aircraft interferes with the all-round visibility, which remains the same as that of the Spitfire IX. Rear View is similar.

Sighting View and Fire Power
21. The sighting view is slightly better being 4 deg (140 m.p.h.) as against 3 1/3 deg. The two bulges at the side cause little restriction. The firepower is identical with the Spitfire IX.

Armour
22. As for the Spitfire IX

Conclusions
23. The all-round performance of the Spitfire XIV is better than the Spitfire IX at all heights. In level flight it is 25-35 m.p.h. faster and has a correspondingly greater rate of climb. Its manoeuvrability is as good as a Spitfire IX. It is easy to fly but should be handled with care when taxying and taking off.

fats · « **Reply #1 on:** December 14, 2003, 12:29:15 PM »

So you're saying Spitfire MkIX should be made turn worse so it has an identical turning circle with MkXIV?

// fats

mold · « **Reply #2 on:** December 14, 2003, 12:55:37 PM »

LOL fats

GScholz · « **Reply #3 on:** December 14, 2003, 02:44:02 PM »

Quote

Climb
16. The Spitfire XIV has a slightly better maximum climb than the Spitfire IX, having the best maximum rate of climb yet seen at this Unit. The In the zoom climb the Spitfire XIV gains slightly all the way, especially if full throttle is used in the climb.

Yes there is something very wrong with the Spit14.

mold · « **Reply #4 on:** December 14, 2003, 03:02:05 PM »

Good call GScholz. Damn, the XIV is really porked, thanks for bringing this to our attention Furball!

HTC, we need to have the FM's drastically altered in the SpitIX and SpitXIV. The SpitIX turning radius should be greatly increased, and the SpitXIV should have a greatly reduced climb rate and much less lenient stall characteristics. I suggest the IX change should be made immediately since it is flown so often.

Furball · « **Reply #5 on:** December 14, 2003, 06:22:19 PM »

Notice with radiator flaps open..

GScholz · « **Reply #6 on:** December 14, 2003, 06:39:05 PM »

That the Spit14?

GScholz · « **Reply #7 on:** December 14, 2003, 07:02:54 PM »

Never mind, it must be with a T/O weight of 8400 lbs. That chart shows that the AH Spit14 is grossly over modelled in climb.

The AH Spit14 holds it's climb rate way better as altitude increases compared to your chart.

GScholz · « **Reply #8 on:** December 14, 2003, 07:15:09 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Furball
Notice with radiator flaps open..

That's why you have radiator flaps. During climbing you need maximum cooling because the airspeed (i.e. cooling effect) is low. During cruise you can close the flaps to reduce drag and keep the engine at best operating temp.

All WWII fighters climb with open radiators.

Nashwan · « **Reply #9 on:** December 14, 2003, 07:53:17 PM »

The chart Furball posted is for the prototype Spit XIV. It had a lower gearing for the first supercharger gear, thus a lower critical alt in low gear.

Whereas the prototype had a critical alt at climbing speed of just under 2000ft, the production version had a critical alt of just under 10,000ft. See the CENTRAL FIGHTER ESTABLISHMENT
REPORT No. 78 at
http://www.fourthfightergroup.com/eagles/spit14pt.html

AH seems to have gone somewhere in the middle, with a climb rate and critical alt between the production and prototype versions.

Quote

Quote
Climb
16. The Spitfire XIV has a slightly better maximum climb than the Spitfire IX, having the best maximum rate of climb yet seen at this Unit. The In the zoom climb the Spitfire XIV gains slightly all the way, especially if full throttle is used in the climb.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yes there is something very wrong with the Spit14.

Bear in mind the A&AEE were comparing the Spitfire XIV with the Spitfire LF IX, with Merlin 66, that had a climb rate of 4,700ft/min. ie, the major production variant of the Spit IX (4000+ produced).

Not comparing it against the AH Spit IX, which is an early F IX, with Merlin 61, climb rate 3,900 ft/min (350 produced)

GScholz · « **Reply #10 on:** December 14, 2003, 08:52:07 PM »

Still not right.

Quote

Max. rate of climb in MS supercharger gear 5,040 ft/min. at 2,100 ft.

The AH Spit14 holds 5000 fpm up to 8-9k.

Karnak · « **Reply #11 on:** December 15, 2003, 06:13:42 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by GScholz
Yes there is something very wrong with the Spit14.

That's because we have a Spitfire F.Mk IX with a Merlin 61, not a Spitfire LF.Mk IX with a Merlin 66 in AH. They were testing it against the LF.IX.

Or are you under the impression that a Spitfire Mk IX is a Spitfire Mk IX is a Spitfire Mk IX?

GScholz · « **Reply #12 on:** December 15, 2003, 06:17:23 PM »

You did notice the

didn't you?

Still ... I haven't seen any data that justifies the 5000 fpm climb rate up to 8-9k for the Spit14.

Furball · « **Reply #13 on:** December 15, 2003, 09:24:13 PM »

Quote

1. Introduction.

...........Climb and level speed performance and position error measurements have been made on Spitfire F Mk.VIII (Conversion) JF.319, the prototype Mk.XIV. This aircraft was fitted with a Griffon RG5SM engine and a 5-bladed Rotol propeller. It is understood that the final version of the Mk.XIV will have a Griffon 65 engine which differs from the engine now installed in having a higher MS supercharger gear ratio. The external features of this aircraft were similar to the production version of the Mk.XIV, except that the shape of the fin and rudder will probably be different.

Maybe thats it?

Angus · « **Reply #14 on:** December 16, 2003, 10:48:15 AM »

A fully loaded Spit XIV of production line will climb to 20K in 5 minutes smooth. In AH it takes close to 6 minutes, so the XIV is porked in that way.
It also turns worse than the Spit IX, and stalls worse as well.
And for GSchlozie: A Spit 9 is about a Spit 9 as 109G is a 109G:D