Author Topic: A poor choice.. the Seafire (Read 2576 times)

IK3 · « **Reply #30 on:** July 05, 2005, 12:07:44 AM »

Im not really familiar with Seafire L 3 but is seafire L 3 a navalised version of Spitfire 9? What version of merilin engine does it have?

Guppy35 · « **Reply #31 on:** July 05, 2005, 12:22:24 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by IK3
Im not really familiar with Seafire L 3 but is seafire L 3 a navalised version of Spitfire 9? What version of merilin engine does it have?

Seafire III was really the first completely navalized Seafire with folding wings etc. It had a single stage Merlin not the two stage like the later Spit VII, VIII and IX

The Seafire III used the Merlin 55 engine on the normal fighter version and the Merlin 55M or Merlin 32 on the L or FR versions.

Deliveries started in April 43 and finished in July 45, so it was in production for a long time. The III was by far the most produced Seafire with 870 built by Westland and 350 by Cunliffe-Owen. 8 of 12 Seafire Squadrons were equipped with Seafire LIIIs at wars end.

It had multiple ejector exhausts and swung a 4 blade prop as well.

Max speed was 359 mph for the F version at 36000 feet. 341 MPH at 6000 feet for the L version.

Climb rate was 3250 feet per minute.

Dan/CorkyJr

IK3 · « **Reply #32 on:** July 05, 2005, 12:41:05 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Guppy35

Max speed was 359 mph for the F version at 36000 feet. 341 MPH at 6000 feet for the L version.

Climb rate was 3250 feet per minute.

Dan/CorkyJr

Hey the Seafire 3 speed is at least on par with A6M5

Its not really gonna overwhelm A6Ms and F4U/F6F except in numbers.

IK3 · « **Reply #33 on:** July 05, 2005, 12:48:22 AM »

From http://www.ww2aircraft.net/?p=info&airinfo=211

Manufacture     Supermarine
Model    Seafire
Type    MkIII
Power Plant    One 1,470 hp Rolls-Royce Merlin 55 inline piston engine, liquid-cooled

Performance
Maximum speed :: 328 mph :: 99.97 m    352 mph :: 566.49 km/hr
Maximum speed at sea level    321 mph :: 516.60 km/hr
Cruising speed    218 mph :: 350.84 km/hr
Maximum range    465 miles 725 miles (1,167 km) with drop tank :: 748.34 km
Initial rate of climb    2,600 ft/min :: 792.48 m/min
Time to 14,200 ft :: 4,328.16 m    5.55 minutes
Service ceiling    33,800 ft :: 10,302.24 m

Weights
Empty    5,400 lb :: 2,449.40 kg
Loaded    7,100 lb :: 3,220.51 kg

Dimensions
Wing span    36ft 8in :: 11.18 m
Length    30ft 0in :: 9.14 m
Height    11ft 2in :: 3.40 m
Wing area    242 sq ft :: 22.48 sq m

Armament
2 x 20mm Hispano cannon (one in each wing) 4 x 0.303 inch (7.7 mm) Browning machine-guns (two in each outer wing)
Max bomb load    500 lb (227 kg) of bombs :: 226.80 kg
Crew    1

Production
Seafire     1,220
Total production (Variants)    2,556
Countries in Service
U.K (FAA), France(Aeronavale), Canada (RCN)

Pongo · « **Reply #34 on:** July 05, 2005, 12:57:46 AM »

Pei · « **Reply #35 on:** July 05, 2005, 01:21:51 AM »

It's just as easy to compare the use of La7s to Yaks in the MA, or Zeros to N1K2s or 190Ds to 190As. Lets face it the MA has never been about realistics usages.

Squire · « **Reply #36 on:** July 05, 2005, 06:39:33 AM »

Seafire L.III with a Merlin 55M with a cropped supercharger was the standard type after the spring of 1944.

http://hsgalleries.com/spitfireiiieb_1.htm

http://www.spitfireperformance.com/lf3.jpg

@4200 ft/min initial climb

316mph TAS at sea level

358mph TAS at 6000 ft which is full throttle height (FTH).

Thats with max combat power (+18 lbs/5min)

It was a very good performer as a low alt fighter and the best all round Seafire version to see widespread use in the Royal Navy in WW2. It was much faster than an A6M5 (not that that was its only opponent).

Oldman731 · « **Reply #37 on:** July 05, 2005, 07:02:03 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by BUG_EAF322
The reason i think they used more US aircraft in the end is because those where very reliable aircraft

Range. Very important at sea.

- oldman

Squire · « **Reply #38 on:** July 05, 2005, 08:07:45 AM »

The reasons were varied, the British required a large number of a/c of all types for both the RAF and the RN as their services expanded to many times the size of their 1940 orbat. They needed a/c from the USA and Canada to fill the need as they maxxed out their own industrial output. Quite simply put, they did not have the industry to manufacture all the needed a/c, so they looked elsewhere to get combat types and employ them. Thats why the RAF got P-40s and other US types, they needed anything that could be used that they could buy. Thats what Lend-Lease was.

Its also important to note that when it came to domestic a/c production, the RAF had more political clout. The RN had to fight hard to get any priority for combat planes compared to the RAF, which was in the process of constructing a very large heavy bomber force, and cared little for what the RN needed. Inter-service rivalries are always a fact of war. The RAF viewed Bomber Command as the most important, followed by Fighter Command, and lastly, Coastal Command. The Fleet Air Arm was somewhere below that on their "do we care" list.

The RN ended up with F4Fs (Martlet) from the USA as early as 1940. So the Fleet Air Arm ended up with a mix of both US and British designs as they expanded the service.

Sea Hurricanes and Martlets in the early years gave way to Seafires and Corsairs in the latter period. They also used the F6F in some quantity. They bought TBF Avengers as well, which saw service along with the British Swordfish and later, the Barracuda.

Angus · « **Reply #39 on:** July 05, 2005, 08:34:27 AM »

And the Firefly, the Fulmar, the early Skua, the Albacore, etc.
And by coastal command, tons of planes

The Firefly could perhaps become an AH candidate some day..

dedalos · « **Reply #40 on:** July 05, 2005, 09:24:51 AM »

What? people are using a plane? Thats just wrong!!! HT, take it away or perk it emidietly

Kazaa · « **Reply #41 on:** July 05, 2005, 11:20:17 AM »

WOW LATE ONCE AGAIN

Right I have just quickly read through this post after seeing it 10 years too late.

Making it short & sweet, doesn't it make you pround to be british, having the seafire used most over the USA nazy planes.

P.S just for the record I always fly the F4U-D

SFRT - Frenchy · « **Reply #42 on:** July 05, 2005, 12:55:33 PM »

I agree with Kweasa, but it's AH (quake on wings). I just prey there's not one higher than me when I'm trying to run away in my jug ... or one behind me when the guy I just shot down is taking of in a LA7.

MAybe TOD will bring them back in their historical context and proportions, and offer something more than the Haloish Mayhem.

SELECTOR · « **Reply #43 on:** July 05, 2005, 02:52:51 PM »

Kweassa has made many good posts over the years and i have always thought he has put his point across well.. same in theis post .. but alas i do have to disagree with him on this one..
seafire was a fantastic plane.. its draw backs were its range..
it was small, easy to maintain, fast and leathal.. all the things you look for in a carrier plane..

i have always thought that AH should replicate the tactical range of aircraft better than it dose at the moment

StarOfAfrica2 · « **Reply #44 on:** July 05, 2005, 03:05:14 PM »

Wait a minute. You mean..................

They put a Spitfire on a carrier??? Well, there goes the neighborhood.

Next thing you know they'll replace my beer with tea.