Author Topic: Spitfire Mk. LF. IX vs Spitfire Mk IX  (Read 3342 times)

Offline artik

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1909
      • Blog
Spitfire Mk. LF. IX vs Spitfire Mk IX
« on: June 18, 2004, 11:10:10 PM »
What is the difference?
Artik, 101 "Red" Squadron, Israel

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23048
Spitfire Mk. LF. IX vs Spitfire Mk IX
« Reply #1 on: June 18, 2004, 11:28:57 PM »
Merlin 61 in the Spitfire F.Mk IX we have vs Merlin 66 in the Spitfire LF.MK IX.  

The Spitfire LF.Mk IX would be faster at low altitude (336mph at S.L. vs. 321mph at S.L.), climb better (~4,500fpm), have a lower critical altitude and, if the wings were clipped as they are likely to be should it be added, rolls much faster while giving up some turn performance.

BTW, there is no generic "Spitfire Mk IX", there is the Spitfire F.Mk IX powered by a Merlin 61 or Merlin 63, Spitfire LF.Mk IX powered by a Merlin 66 and the Spitfire HF.Mk IX powered by a Merlin 70.
« Last Edit: June 18, 2004, 11:31:15 PM by Karnak »
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline Crumpp

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3671
Spitfire Mk. LF. IX vs Spitfire Mk IX
« Reply #2 on: June 19, 2004, 12:18:11 AM »
IF the wings are clipped won't it give up some climb performance too.  

Crumpp

Offline Guppy35

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 20386
Spitfire Mk. LF. IX vs Spitfire Mk IX
« Reply #3 on: June 19, 2004, 01:04:10 AM »
The Spit LFIX was the favorite of the RAF pilots as it had it's best performance in the same alt range as the 190s.  It was the one they felt most confident in going up against the LW.

And as the ground attack, low alt war intensified it was the one that ended up with clipped wings, and bomb racks to let it be used in that role.

The LFXVI was essentially the LFIX with the American built Packard Merlin 266

And the LFVIII was also engined with the Merlin 66.

These were the best of the Merlin Spits.

Dan/Slack
Dan/CorkyJr
8th FS "Headhunters

Offline Kweassa

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6425
Spitfire Mk. LF. IX vs Spitfire Mk IX
« Reply #4 on: June 19, 2004, 01:46:57 AM »
I request that both Spit9s should be in exsistence. We don't have to give up on any of them.

 I'm a LW enthusiast, but it doesn't mean I'm unfair! :) We have 3 different Gustav models alone, from the early G to the last G(except the most important '44 Gustav, the G-14.. which I'm dying to see in AH). There's no reason why AH Spit9 should be solely limited to the earliest possible Spit9 with a Merlin61 and hybrid armament.

 Bring on the Spit9 with Merlin 63 or Merlin66(or even both!!)

 Since the problem of ridiculous hitting ranges have been more or less solved with the new gunnery, I've been seeing a lot less Spitfires as a whole in AH2. No doubt that in AH1 the Spits were just doing too good, better than it should be(due to hitting ranges). But now, when that issue is solved, it reverts back to the old problem where the only MA-competitive Spitfire RAF fans can really get their hands on is now a 60 point perked Spit14. I don't mean to say the dedicated Spit pilots of AH1 are now suddenly incompetent or something, I'm just pointing out that as a whole the Spit9 is now a bit more thoroughly outclassed by the 1944~45 monster planes(as they should be).

 So, I'd love to see a more competitive Makr9 - like I said, us LW fans have two A model 190s, and three 109 Gustavs. All along the war the RAF have fought these planes and existed side-by-side in the arms race to produce better and powerful planes.

 If the different Spitfires are all too simular to be modelled(which I don't think is a problem, since the G-2 and the G-6 are very simular in general performance also, with only a notch of maneuvering/armament differences).. then bring different versions ie) HF and LF to the Spit9 mix.

 Like..

1) Change our "hybrid" '42 Spit9 to the actual one - much more limited ordnance and only with the C-wing, 4x 30cals and 2x Hispanos.

2) Gives us a second Spit9, a LF engine, in the standards of late '43~ early '44,  bubble topped, wings clipped, with an E-wing with 2x 50cals and 2x Hispanos.


 That would give us a generic, standard '42 early Spit9, and a '43~'44 Spit9  with enough different characterisitcs to see it as a new sub-variant in the family... bubble topped, better low-alt performance, little suffering high-alt performance.. and clipped wings with better roll.

 ...


ps) Guppy, how much difference in turning ability would there be, with a clipped wing Spit? Would the reduction in wing area do anything to its maneuverability? Maybe a difference like as in a A6M2 Zero and a A6M5?

Offline Replicant

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3567
Spitfire Mk. LF. IX vs Spitfire Mk IX
« Reply #5 on: June 19, 2004, 03:03:35 AM »
I hardly ever fly the Spit9 but I agree that the LF.IX was a very widely and important variant that should be included in the game.  Since HTC have mentioned that they may do variants of existing aircraft this surely be in the list of new additions!
NEXX

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23048
Spitfire Mk. LF. IX vs Spitfire Mk IX
« Reply #6 on: June 19, 2004, 03:31:07 AM »
Kweassa,

The bubble canopy Spits didn't show up until 1945.  I don't think it would be good to have our 1944 Spit as a perk plane and a rare 1945 plane as the end of the line Spit, still leaving the Merlin 61 Spit IX to carry on through 1943, 44 and into 45 on it's own.

What I would like to see would be a Spitfire LF.Mk VIII.  It is close enough in performance to the LF.Mk IX to sub for it and it would give a true Pacific Theater Spitfire.  It would also bring a unique mark number rather than HTC suddenly adding a F in front of our current Mk IX and another Mk IX showing up in the list with an LF in its name.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline Kweassa

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6425
Spitfire Mk. LF. IX vs Spitfire Mk IX
« Reply #7 on: June 19, 2004, 05:08:02 AM »
Quote
What I would like to see would be a Spitfire LF.Mk VIII. It is close enough in performance to the LF.Mk IX to sub for it and it would give a true Pacific Theater Spitfire. It would also bring a unique mark number rather than HTC suddenly adding a F in front of our current Mk IX and another Mk IX showing up in the list with an LF in its name.


 Ahhh...! I get what you mean now. It'd be indeed a good choice then.


ps) but I still think the '42 Spit9 should be removed of 50 cals and hybrid ordnance.

Offline Flyboy

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1582
Spitfire Mk. LF. IX vs Spitfire Mk IX
« Reply #8 on: June 19, 2004, 05:11:01 AM »
the spit9 was, and still is the best 1vrs1 plane in AH

Offline thrila

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3190
      • The Few Squadron
Spitfire Mk. LF. IX vs Spitfire Mk IX
« Reply #9 on: June 19, 2004, 05:36:48 AM »
Kweassa that seem fair enough.  The '42 spit would be a spit F mk. IXc with the 4 .303's.  The '43/44 spit could be either a Spit  LF IXe with the .50cals or a mk. VIII (tropical camo does look nice) :)  

It would be nice to see a late '44  spit IX with 150 octane fuel (Tho perked in MA obviously).

While still on  topic about spits- i would love to see a spit mk. XII, unfortunately not many were produced.
"Willy's gone and made another,
Something like it's elder brother-
Wing tips rounded, spinner's bigger.
Unbraced tailplane ends it's figure.
One-O-nine F is it's name-
F is for futile, not for fame."

Offline mw

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 160
Spitfire Mk. LF. IX vs Spitfire Mk IX
« Reply #10 on: June 19, 2004, 07:28:06 AM »
Here are the official reports on performance of the various Spit IXs.  Here are charts showing the difference in performance.  The short answer to the question "What is the difference?" is the engine.

Offline Urchin

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5517
Spitfire Mk. LF. IX vs Spitfire Mk IX
« Reply #11 on: June 19, 2004, 08:50:02 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Flyboy
the spit9 was, and still is the best 1vrs1 plane in AH


I'd agree that the Spit 9 is probably the best "dueling" plane out of any in the planeset.  

However, that means jack **** in the MA.  I can count on one hand the number of one-vs-one fights I've had in the past month.  And have several fingers left over.  

Although the Spit 9 is a superb fighter, it isn't exactly competitive by MA standards.  The only time that a spit pilot is going to get a kill is if A.  An la-7 or P-51 or some other "fast" plane runs down a loner and the spit pilot happens to beat out the other 15 guys trying to kill the singleton, or B.  if someone in a less manueverable plane decides to fight the spit's way.  

Compare the La-7.  The La-7 is fast enough to run down every plane in the set, and then it turns well enough to out-turn what it out-runs.   You have to drop about 50-60 mph in "deck" speed to find another plane that turns as well as the La-7.  So the La-7 runs people down, then depending on whether the pilot is a ***** or not, kills them or pins them for the horde.  

The P-51 has the same ability, as do the 109-G10 and 190-D9.  

The Spit 9 is so slow that even third and fourth tier planes like the 190-A5 and -A8 can just leave if they don't want to fight.  

Both RAF fans that play this game could use a more representative model of an unperked Spitfire.  If the Spit 14 is going to stay perked, then I think a Spit 9 LF would be a good compromise.

Offline Crumpp

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3671
Spitfire Mk. LF. IX vs Spitfire Mk IX
« Reply #12 on: June 19, 2004, 09:30:05 AM »
Interesting,

The charts the RAF used for their test are using Military power for the FW-190A3 or FW-190A5 for level speed and not the rated boost settings.

Of course the RAF test concentrates on the performance vs 109G.  Anyway the RLM charts for the 190A5 hold it at 655kph to 670kph (406 to 416 mph) at  19,685 feet  at 2700U/min on 1.42ata C3 boost.  The chart speed is adjusted for air density(temp).


The Spitfire with +25lbs of boost is listed as having a max level speed of 389mph at 13,800 feet.


I think the RAF had valid reasons for not recommending it's Merlin powered Spit IX pilots "mix it up" with FW-190A's.  That recommendation was reserved for the the Gryphon powered spits which did dominate the 190A.

Just a quick gander at the charts it seems to me that the RAF original test with Faber's 190A3 didn't change much with the addition of +25 lbs boost and 1.42/2700 clearence for the 801D-2.

Seems the overall effect was to steepin the Spits climb rate increasing it's climbing superiority but the 190 widenend it's level speed range and accelleration gap.  The performances are pretty close though with the spit gaining slightly more in the climb department than the 190 does in level speed.


You can check it out at:

http://www.terra.es/personal2/matias.s/fw190.html

There should be a graph for the 190A3 coming up soon on that site so will be able to get a comparision on the 1.42ata settings.  I sent it off to Mandoble.  Pyro is going to be redoing the 190 flight model.  I for one would appreciate the unbiased opinion of some knowledgeable spitfire folks.  Facts are the 190A vs Spit IX should be one of the more even matches in the game with the outcome decided by pilot skill.  

Crumpp

Offline Crumpp

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3671
Spitfire Mk. LF. IX vs Spitfire Mk IX
« Reply #13 on: June 19, 2004, 10:16:17 AM »
Quote
The Spit 9 is so slow that even third and fourth tier planes like the 190-A5 and -A8 can just leave if they don't want to fight.


190A5 and the A8 are the Spit 9's contemparary advesaries and not "third and fourth" tier planes. The 190A  is "third and fourth" tier in only in AH.  

Unfortunately, for the LW pilots in AH, the Gyphon powered spits represent quite a leap in performance and although the 190D9 is considered to be it's main rival, It has the short end of the performace stick in many areas.  1 vs 1 co-energy fight Spit IVX vs 190D9 I would put my money on the Spit with equal pilot skills.  1 vs 1 Spit IX vs any 190A with 1.42 ata boost and it should be a coin toss given equal pilot skill.

Crumpp

Offline Guppy35

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 20386
Spitfire Mk. LF. IX vs Spitfire Mk IX
« Reply #14 on: June 19, 2004, 12:34:03 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Kweassa

ps) Guppy, how much difference in turning ability would there be, with a clipped wing Spit? Would the reduction in wing area do anything to its maneuverability? Maybe a difference like as in a A6M2 Zero and a A6M5?



The RAF tested the Spit V with both clipped and regular wings.  They found no measurable difference in speed & climb until it got above 20K where the standard wing showed some improvement.

The clipped spit had a vastly improved rate of roll, and dive.

The turning circle was slightly increased for the clipped spit at 20k amounting to about 55 feet.

They noted no difference in the take off roll either when the two aircraft took off side by side and suggested that the strengthening of the wing by clipping it, would allow a higher maximum IAS.

So basically 20K and below you are better off with a clipped wing Spit, and since the war moved down to those levels and below in 43 on for the RAF fighters, it makes sense.

Certainly I've never heard a Spit XII driver complain about the clipped wing.  They preferred it.

Dan/Slack
Dan/CorkyJr
8th FS "Headhunters