Spitfire Mk. LF. IX vs Spitfire Mk IX

[Crumpp]

The clipped spit was not the answer to the 190A.  Otherwise it too would have carried a recommendation to "mix it up".  

Crumpp

[Guppy35]

Originally posted by Crumpp
The clipped spit was not the answer to the 190A.  Otherwise it too would have carried a recommendation to "mix it up".  

Crumpp

The clipped Spit was definately a response to the 190 and it's roll rate however and one of the ways they tried to extend the service life of the Spit V with the clipped, cropped and clapped Spit.

As for mixing it up.  Having gotten to know numerous Spit pilots over the years while researching the XII, and from everything I've read, the Spit drivers felt very confident mixing it up with the 190s once the Spit IX appeared and in particular with the IXB as they referred to it, which was in fact the LFIX.

It, at least in their eyes, leveled the playing field again so that they didn't feel like they were going into the fight in an inferior aircraft as they did when they fought the 190 in the Spit V.

The wing clipping of the Spit was all about roll rate. And that was a result of the 190's roll rate.

Dan/Slack

[Guppy35]

As for, at least in my eyes, the best Spit scenario in AH.

Spit I  (Already here)
Spit V(already here.  Not going to suggest clipped wings or different wing armament.  Not worth it

Spit LFVIII-Normal span wings, Universal wing with the 4 303 and 2 20mm, broad chord rudder, and the single hardpoint for carrying a drop tank or bomb on the centerline.  In terms of scenarios that covers the Pacific and CBI with the RAF and RAAF as well as the Med with the RAF and USAAF which operated the VIII, and it lets the VIII stand in for the LFIX in the 43-44 period

Spit LFIXE-Normal high back fuselage. Broad chord rudder. Clipped E Wing with 2 20mm and 2 .5MG as well as the wing hardpoints to go with the centerline hardpoint that allows for the 250 pound bombs under each wing or the rockets as well as the 500 pounder or drop tank on the centerline.  This covers the 1944-45 period in terms of scenarios when the LFIXe was used much more as a ground attack aircraft and it could fill in for the LFXVIe that did the same or in a pinch for us Spit XII fanatics, fill in for the XII in the 43-44 time frame as the performance was similar.

Spit XIVe (already have)

You end up leaving out the II, VI, VII, XII and 21 which all saw combat to varying degrees during the war.  But you give a wide enough variety to keep the Spit fanatics interested and the skin makers busy.

Dan/Slack

[Crumpp]

Your absolutely right on the 190A and the Spit IX being on par with one another.  The clipped wing did help reduce the 190's advantages but at the expense of reducing the turn and climb.  Everything is a tradeoff and while I don't have the data before me I would be very surprised if the clipped spit would actually have been superior.  I think a pilot would have been better off a normal wing IX.  

The turn radius was dominating in the Spit IX.  If a 190 turned with a spit he died.  Consequently Spit IX drivers did not fight in the verticle with 190's.  The 190 zoom climb, accelleration, dive, speed advantage and roll rate (manuverability) gave them the advantage in the close in verticle "knife" fight.
Crumpp

[Urchin]

Have you ever read the book "Fighter Combat" by Robert Shaw?  

It is a good read, it might dispell some of the illusions you have about a "knife fight" between a 190 and a Spitfire IX being any kind of close affair.  

One thing you have to keep in mind is that in the real WW2, pilots were even more timid than people are in here.  There was a good reason for this- when they screwed up, they actually did die.

So what a Spitfire pilot might describe as a 190 aggressively boring in, I would probably describe as "The 190 came in with a 5,000 foot altitude advantage, made some bore n zoom passes (being careful to roll out and "extend" in the opposite direction of the Spitfires break turn), and then left when he started to lose his energy advantage.

A 190a5 or 190a8 does not have a significant advantage in the vertical if both planes (the Spit IX and the 190), are going close to the same speed.  A 190 going 400mph will outzoom a Spitfire going 300 mph, and if a real-life pilot was smart enough to keep his energy up, he could probably make 4 or 5 "Boom and Zoom" passes before he had to split.  

Another thing you must keep in mind is that a WW2 "furball" on the Western Front commonly consisted of perhaps a squadron on either side constantly seeking a height advantage to bore n zoom from.  Sure, the two sides were in sight of each other, and if they were of a mind they could have engaged, but as a general rule even the most aggressive pilots would not engage unless they had altitude, numbers, or preferably both.  A group of 190s could undoubtedly engage a group of Spitfires and emerge the victor, even if a handful of 190 pilots got a little too agressive  and engaged without having a clear energy advantage- because those 190s had other 190s to bail them out of trouble.  Unlike in Aces High, living was the highest priority for the vast majority of pilots, not just "getting a kill".  After all, there is no reupping in real life.  

In real life, as in Aces High, top speed is a very important attribute.  A plane with a higher top speed can typically cruise faster than a plane with a lower top speed, thus picking and choosing their fights.  In Aces High, unlike in real life, the MOST important attributes a plane can have are (in order, in my opinion) a small turning radius, a fast turn rate, and good acceleration.  The Spit IX has all three.  The 190A has 1 of the three.  

I have no doubt that the Spitfire and 190 are modelled correctly vis a vis each other in Aces High.  Yes, the 190a5 may be lacking 5 mph of top speed on the deck.  It honestly doesn't matter.  As it is modelled, a 190a5 (or a8) holds the advantage over a Spit 9 as long as the 190 pilot is exceedingly cautious, good at maintaining an energy advantage over a lower and slower opponent, and knows when to run.  

I think you just have an unrealistic portrait of what a "fight" was like on the Western Front during WW2.

[Crumpp]

Really Urchin?

Well I have the RAF, Luftwaffe, and USAAF test's which anyone can examine.  Frankly you need to examine the data.  The actual performance charts bear out the story.  

A different story emerges than the one you are telling.  One that backs the RAF assessment conducted by them during WWII when they were trying to figure out the best way to beat the Luftwaffe.  
Glad you mentioned Shaw's book because that is what got me to thinking and examining the data on the FW-190.

History didn't occur that way in fact to quote Cpt Brown:
==============================================
 "A somewhat odd form of Dogfighting developed with the FW-190 pilots endevoured to keep in the verticle plane by using zooms and dives while their spit mounted antagonist tried everything in the book to draw them on to the horizontal. If the German pilot lost his head and failed to resist the temptation to try a horizontal pursuit curve on a spitfire, as likely as not, before he could recover his speed lost in steep turn he would find ANOTHER spitfire turning inside him. On the other hand, the German pilot who continued to zoom up and down was usually the recipiant of difficult deflection shots of more than 30 degrees. The FW-190 had tremendous initial accelleration in a dive but was extremely vunerable during a pullout. recovery, having to be quite progressive with care not to kill the speed by "sinking".

==============================================

Crumpp

[Urchin]

If you do have that book, I'd like to recommend you read the sections about flat scissors, rolling scissors, and the section on combat between dissimilar planes (High T/W vs low wingloading).  I'd be happy to continue the conversation about tactics used by the 190s/Spitfires against eachother.  

In fact, you can tell me why I am wrong based on the factory data while I tell you that you are wrong based on Shaw's book and my own personal experience (granted, its only in AH).  

Should be fun, I'll try to keep it relatively cordial, although I can come off somwhat brusque on the Internet.  It doesnt really allow for the humour in my sarcasm to come through.

In fact, we seem to interpret that qoute differently.  I see that qoute as saying the 190s started with an energy advantage and maintained it by Boom n Zoom (or Bore n zoom as I call it), you seem to think it indicates the two would start co-E and the 190 could build an energy advantage over the Spit IX by diving and zooming.

[Crumpp]

That is correct, I am talking a co-energy merger.  190 vs Spit IX should be a very even fight IF both pilots do not give in to temptation and cater the others strengths.  Many a Spit pilot in the skies over France met his doom attempting to follow directly a 190 in the verticle.

      Read the 190A5 deck speed thread.  It explains it.  Seems the climb speed of the 190's is off.

      Depending on the Altitude the fight occurred at the 190 could build an E advantage on the Spit IX.  There are some altitude zones the Spit IX will be superior in even in the verticle, however it's advantage is slight as to be almost the same.  Most importantly the 190 easily outdived the Spit especially in initial accelleration.  Later spit models came close to matching the speed of the dive but not the accelleration.  Diving away was always an option for the 190 driver.  On the Deck the 190 held the cards in level speed/accelleration.  The 190 was also rated as "more manuverable than the spitfire" by the RAF except in turning circle.  Something you definately do not see in AH.  


     Try turning with a 190 and following him if he rolls out of the turn circle.  A common 190 manuver was to flick out of the circle, enter a shallow dive and zoom climb above the spitdriver.  Even the Gryphon powered spits had difficulty with a test pilot giving them radio warning in following a 190 in this manuver.  It was impossible for the Merlin powered varients.  

    Cpt Eric Brown in an interview for "Flight Journal" Magazine relates a story about flying a MkIX spit varient in late 1943 over France. He  ran into an FW-190 and fought him for 40 minutes to a standstill.  The entire time the 190 driver kept doing the same manuver described above.  Brown just extended his turns and slowly brought the fight out over the channel until both fighters broke it off.  
 

This holds true throughout the life cycle of the 190A vs Merlin Powered Spit.  If you study when the different A/C were cleared for various engine upgrades/settings you will see it.  You will also see the overlaps in which for short periods of time One of the them is superior to the other.  Usually it is the spitfire, the RLM was great about getting a model into service but just seemed to drag their feet in Engine upgrades.

I am very familiar with scissors.  It's one of the manuvers in AH a 190 is good at.  However that is not the most common manuver 190's employed in reality.  I am also familiar with Energy Combat.  Turning is for sissy's who can't think of anything better to do.

Crumpp

[Guppy35]

Originally posted by Crumpp


I am very familiar with scissors.  It's one of the manuvers in AH a 190 is good at.  However that is not the most common manuver 190's employed in reality.  I am also familiar with Energy Combat.  Turning is for sissy's who can't think of anything better to do.

Crumpp

Actually the turning for Spit drivers was purely defensive.  It was not seen as a way of gaining the advantage, it was what you did when had nothing better to do.  You pulled the stick in tight and held the turn hoping to spit the other guy out the other side so you could disengage.

Needless to say they didn't want to dogfight anymore then any other fighter pilot.  Sneak up on a guy and blast em was preferred, just like everyone else.  Nothing sporting about it.

Dan/Slack

[Urchin]

Originally posted by Crumpp
That is correct, I am talking a co-energy merger.  190 vs Spit IX should be a very even fight IF both pilots do not give in to temptation and cater the others strengths.  Many a Spit pilot in the skies over France met his doom attempting to follow directly a 190 in the verticle.

      Read the 190A5 deck speed thread.  It explains it.  Seems the climb speed of the 190's is off.

I'll read the other thread, I read some of it but not all of it.

      Depending on the Altitude the fight occurred at the 190 could build an E advantage on the Spit IX.  There are some altitude zones the Spit IX will be superior in even in the verticle, however it's advantage is slight as to be almost the same.  Most importantly the 190 easily outdived the Spit especially in initial accelleration.  Later spit models came close to matching the speed of the dive but not the accelleration.  Diving away was always an option for the 190 driver.  On the Deck the 190 held the cards in level speed/accelleration.  The 190 was also rated as "more manuverable than the spitfire" by the RAF except in turning circle.  Something you definately do not see in AH.  


     Try turning with a 190 and following him if he rolls out of the turn circle. A common 190 manuver was to flick out of the circle, enter a shallow dive and zoom climb above the spitdriver.  Even the Gryphon powered spits had difficulty with a test pilot giving them radio warning in following a 190 in this manuver.  It was impossible for the Merlin powered varients.  

And here again... how long is this shallow dive?  How far back is the spit when the 190 zooms?  Sure, if the 190 dives to the deck, runs for 25 miles and gets a 5 mile lead on the Spit, it will be able to then zoom and turn around with an energy advantage.  If the 190 doesn't "extend" far enough away, the Spit will just "cut the corner" on the 190s zoom and blow him away.  A bullet goes a hell of a lot faster than a plane does, and a plane doesn't need to be going very fast to shoot bullets.

    Cpt Eric Brown in an interview for "Flight Journal" Magazine relates a story about flying a MkIX spit varient in late 1943 over France. He  ran into an FW-190 and fought him for 40 minutes to a standstill.  The entire time the 190 driver kept doing the same manuver described above.  Brown just extended his turns and slowly brought the fight out over the channel until both fighters broke it off.

You ever been bore n zoomed by a particularly timid yet persistant fast plane?  The kind that will hover above you, make a lazy, poorly executed pass, then zoooooom for the heavens again?  The kind that will chase you when you try to just leave, and vulch you when you try to land (in fact... most of them will suicide onto the ack trying to vulch a landing plane, which puzzles me greatly)?  They consider that a "fight".  
 

This holds true throughout the life cycle of the 190A vs Merlin Powered Spit.  If you study when the different A/C were cleared for various engine upgrades/settings you will see it.  You will also see the overlaps in which for short periods of time One of the them is superior to the other.  Usually it is the spitfire, the RLM was great about getting a model into service but just seemed to drag their feet in Engine upgrades.

Going by the criteria of the times, sure, they were equal (or close to it).  The 190 was usually faster, and it could run away from the Spit any time it wanted to.  A 190A can run away from any Spit we have in the game, that doesn't mean it is a better fighter, or even a good fighter.  The 190 is an excellent plane for cherry-picking, for flying in a horde (you always have people to run to when the guy you are chasing decides to fight), and for Bore n Zooming if your opponents are low (as in below 10k low).  It is not a good plane for fighting in.  As I said before.. the deciding factors in a fight, be it energy or angles, are turning radius, turning rate (both important for angles fighting), and acceleration (which is important for both).  Top speed is a factor in whether or not there IS a fight, but it is not important once the fight starts.

Aces High is a game where historical planes are used in a-historical ways.  The Spitfire was not intended to be a mad whirling furballing machine.  It was intended to destroy bombers and enemy fighters.  The method of this destruction was not to be the turn-fight.  WW2 pilots, as a general rule, did not turn-fight.  WW2 pilots bounced planes that were not aware of their presence.  That was the preferred method of destruction.  Turning was a defensive manuever used to keep you alive until your friends could arrive.  

I am very familiar with scissors.  It's one of the manuvers in AH a 190 is good at.  However that is not the most common manuver 190's employed in reality.  I am also familiar with Energy Combat.  Turning is for sissy's who can't think of anything better to do.

Crumpp

Actually, the 190 is *not* good at scissoring.  It is fairly good for one or two "revolutions" of the scissors, where both planes are going fast, trying to slow down, and changing direction faster than the other guy can is useful.  After the initial one or two "revolutions" (for lack of a better word), once both planes are going slow, guess which two traits become far more useful than a high roll rate?  I bet you can guess... they are...  (I'm not trying to keep you in suspence) turn rate, and turn radius.  The Spitfire is a far better choice if you intend on fighting defensively (the scissors is a defensive move... not an offensive one).  

As far as "energy combat", there are several methods.  The first method is to eke out every last drop of alt you can out of any zoom, which leads to the d4.5K seperation between every pass.  I refer to this as Bore N Zooming.  It is a form of energy combat, for sissies who can't think of anything better to do.  The 190's are relatively good choices for this kind of "combat", but the P-51 and Typhoon are more common choices.  

The second is actual E-fighting, where you rely on your planes ability to climb and accelerate better than your opponents.  Rarely will the two planes be seperated by more than 1,000 yards in this kind of fighting.  Very few pilots actually do this kind of fighting, because if you screw up, you die.  In AH, this is becoming almost a big a sin as screwing up and dying in real life.

The 190's suck at this form of E-fighting.  The Spitfire IX (and N1K2) excel at it, as do the 109F-G6 (outclassed by the G10, La-7, and Spit 9/N1K2), the 109-G10 (virtually a tie with the Spit 9/N1K2 and La-7, but lacking in high speed handling (important on the initial merge, much less so later) and more importantly in firepower (the La-7 has ~3 times the firepower, N1K2 and Spit roughly 5-6 times the firepower).   The 190 is a relatively heavy airplane, with very poor low speed handling.  The "agressor" in a true E-fight will almost always be taking advantage of low-speed handling, because you need to get your opponent slower and lower than you, before translating your potential energy advantage into a lethal firing opportunity.   The 190 lacks this handling, and it also lacks the acceleration it needs to stay above a slow opponent when it is slow.

[GScholz]

Urchin, I consider the 109G-10 to be the supreme non-perked E-fighter in AH. Only the La-7 comes close and that's only at low alts. Turning radius means nothing to an E-fighter (as long as it is not dismal). Climb, acceleration and speed are the important factors. I fly the 109 heavy with 30mm and 20mm gun pods, it has a helluva snapshot, and the rudder authority is great. In the MA E-fighting in the 109 is like stealing candy from babies.

[Kweassa]

Urchin, I consider the 109G-10 to be the supreme non-perked E-fighter in AH. Only the La-7 comes close and that's only at low alts.

 I agree. The notable rise of usage in Bf109G-10s and Fw190D-9s is probably the most interesting phenomenon in AH2 after the new gunnery and fuel consumption was surfaced. The La-7 was seriously hit by only 17 minutes of flight time on full throttle(despite able to push up to some 40 minutes by careful management..), and lost its place as the supreme CAP fighter solely due to the lack of range and flight time.
 
 We'll have to see if its just placebo or for real, when the stats come out, though..

Turning radius means nothing to an E-fighter (as long as it is not dismal). Climb, acceleration and speed are the important factors.

 I disagree.

 I used to think so too, but when it comes to hands down real 1v1 duels, or in multiple engagement situations, I now think that maneuverability is still very important as ever. Ofcourse, speed is in the end, much more important, but maneuverability is not something to be laughed at.

 In actual combat, be it the real one, or the furball fights AH offers, it is rare to get a chance where all of your team mates are always advantageous in E so he may fight E-wise.

 In the end, somewhere in the battling skies there is always a situation where fighting is just more than BnZ or E-wise management, and sometimes you have to just plain blow all the E, and stick to turn fighting in whatever you are in, in order for everyone to survive as a whole.

 One may always remain the sole survivor by flying the 'lonewolf', or if all of one's squaddies insist in always getting E advantage before engaging(implying, that they will retreat from battle and leave all other friendly fighters to their doom). However when the going gets tough and air battle gets chaotic, sometimes people have to forget all the speed, climb and etc etc, and start duking it out, helping others as much as they can, and trust that others will also sacrifice their E or alt advantage when your in trouble.

 In the end, if a plane must choose one attribute it'd definately be speed. However, maneuverability is as important as all the others except speed, IMO.

[Flyboy]

Originally posted by Crumpp
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

what game have you been playing?
batter yet, what have toy been smoking?

[Crumpp]

LOL

I think that's why Pyro is going to examine the Flight Model.

Crumpp

[_Schadenfreude_]

Originally posted by artik
What is the difference?

climb rate