Author Topic: Spit and 109 Update  (Read 4231 times)

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23048
Spit and 109 Update
« Reply #75 on: July 16, 2005, 08:26:33 PM »
We don't need two Spitfire Mk Vs.  It is unreasonable to expect to have two unless HTC decides to go IL:2's route and add varients willy nilly.

And the Bf109G-10 is a proper Bf109G-10.  It was not a standardized designation.  We just have one of the top end Bf109G-10s.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline Wotan

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7201
Spit and 109 Update
« Reply #76 on: July 16, 2005, 09:37:05 PM »
Sure you need both, we both know you won't get both but you AH still needs them...

If the Scheißefeuer fans get anthing it will be a 'KeWl bOi' Spifire LF.MK IX clipped wing.

Offline Kweassa

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6425
Spit and 109 Update
« Reply #77 on: July 17, 2005, 07:01:42 AM »
Karnak, taking a hint from IL2/FB's naming scheme doesn't necessarily mean AH needs to go the exact same way. I'm certainly no Spitfan.. but I think I'm actually pretty objective and neutral when it comes down to these stuff. IMO the Spitfire is pretty unique, and it needs to be represented as it is.

 While other countries would add a different suffix at the tail end to differentiate each of the sub-variants, the Spitfires didn't go that way. The generic term "Spitfire MkV" is about as equal as the also generic term "Bf109G".

 Between the timeline of 1941 and 1943 the Bf109s went through F-2, F-4, G-2. and G-6.. just to name the major subvariants. But the Spitfire MK.V didn't go that way. They went the way of LF, HF, F, and continous upgrades in performance but still retained their name, until the Spit9 began replacing them.

 So, I don't really think its unreasonable to ask for multiple Spit5s and multiple Spit9s and such. The Bf109G, through 1943 to 1944, evolved from Bf109G-6 to Bf109G-14. Much the same, the SpitfireMkV, from 1941 to 1942, would just simply evolve from the Spitfire F.MK.Vb(+12) to Spitfire F.MK.Vc(+16).

 The Gustavs have 3 different models in the game. We're currently asking for a fourth - G-14. So I see no reason why we cannot have a 1941 Spit5 side by side with a late 1942 Spit5.

 ....


 As for the Bf109G-10, IIRC there is no data on earth that exists confirming that a Bf109G-10 would do 452mph at 22k. Some Bf109G-10s did have the more powerful DCM engine, but most of the Bf109G-10s used the DBM engine, and it's top speed is usually commented at 690km/h(428mph) at 24,500ft.

 In other words, our G-10 is not a G-10 at all. It's not even a "top end G-10", because no such data exists for this plane. It's a K-4, and literally.

 It's like the IL2/FB Fw190A-9 - a plane that did exist, presumably with very high performance, but no data exists on this plane's performance at all.. and yet, the IL2/FB team decided to just model that plane, based upon guesstimates.

 AH was young, the plane set was still small. There was lot to be done, and many more planes to be added. Pyro didn't have the time to put in two late-war Bf109s, so he just tries to kill two birds with one stone, by naming a K-4 to "G-10" and giving it MG151/20 option for the hub cannon.

 However, since the opportunity is rising now, to correct the various flaws in the planesets, I say do away with the temporary compromises and hybrids once and for all!
 
 The standard Bf109G-6, is quoted at about 622~640km/h(387~397km/h) at 21,000ft.

 The G-14 with the DB605AM, the top speed is usually quoted 665km/h(413mph) at 18.000ft.

 And finally, the real K-4, is the only one quoted at true-blue 452mph.

Offline Kweassa

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6425
Spit and 109 Update
« Reply #78 on: July 17, 2005, 07:40:42 AM »
So, I present you, the really really complete line up of best AH2 Bf109s and Spitfires, IMHO.

* Spitfire lineup is from Karnak.
* SpitVb/Vc idea is from ramzey.



Quote


- Spitfires-

Spitfire MK.Ia ('40)
Spitfire F.MK.Vb ('41)
Spitfire F.Mk.Vc ('42)
Spitfire F.Mk IXc ('42)
Spitfire LF.MK.VIIIc ('43)
Spitfire LF.MK.XVIe ('44)
Spitfire F.MK.XIVe ('44) (perked)

7 planes, representing 5 years of combat

Notes:

* Spitfire F.MK.Vb('41) will be restricted to the 'b-wing' armament option. Total 120 rounds of 20mm cannons(60rpg)

* Spitfire F.MK.Vc('42) will be allowed the use of the 'universal wing' armament options. It will be given a hangar armament option of;

 a) 8x 30cal
 b) 4x 30cal + 2x 20mm(120rpg)

 The 4x 20mm option for all the Spitfire variants with 'c' wings, is open for debate.

*The Spitfire F.Mk IXc ('42) will be removed of bombs, rockets, and M2 50cals.

*The Spitfire LF.Mk VIIIc will use the Merlin 66 engine, full length Universal wing. It will substitute the 1943 LF.Mk IX, as well as be suitable for Med. and Pac. theater usage.

*The Spitfire LF.Mk XVIe, will use the 1580 hp Packard R.R. Merlin266 at +25lbs Boost. Clipped wings, bubble canopy, and "E" wing option, with M2 50cals available. It's performance is between the Spit8 and the Spit14, and will be the best performing, free Spitfire.

*The Spitfire F.Mk XIV, will be raised to +21lbs boost to justify it's perked status and keep it as the ultimate Spitfire in AH.






Quote


- Bf109s-

Bf109E-4 ('40)
Bf109F-4 ('41)
Bf109G-2 ('42)
Bf109G-6 ('43)
Bf109G-14 ('44)
Bf109G-10 ('44)
Bf109K-4 ('44) (perked)

7 planes, representing five years of combat

Notes:

* All the Bf109 models(E-4~G-6), that does not use MW50, will be corrected in the WEP duration time, shortened to 5 minutes.

* The Bf109G-14, will use the DB605AM.  MW50, 10min. WEP duration. 414mph max. speed

* The Bf109G-10, will be using the DB605DBM, 428mph top speed. This will the best performing free Bf109.

* The Bf109K-4, will be modelled separately from the G-10 - different engine cowl, fully retractable tail wheel.

 This model will retain the former AH G-10 top speed of 452mph, and become the ultimate Bf109. It will be perked. Perhaps, inclusion of rare equipment such as Fletnners, or type U6 option with 2x MK108 wing gondolas could be justified, due to the newly introduced perk prices.



Offline Fruda

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1267
Spit and 109 Update
« Reply #79 on: July 17, 2005, 08:23:16 AM »
The list above looks very, very good.

Offline Kev367th

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5290
Spit and 109 Update
« Reply #80 on: July 17, 2005, 10:10:23 AM »
Vc should be the LF not F version.
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T
Asus M3N-HT mobo
2 x 2Gb Corsair 1066 DDR2 memory

Offline justin_g

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 260
Spit and 109 Update
« Reply #81 on: July 17, 2005, 10:49:38 AM »
Can someone tell me what a Spitfire Mk IXB is? ;)

Offline Crumpp

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3671
Spit and 109 Update
« Reply #82 on: July 17, 2005, 12:39:56 PM »
Quote
It's like the IL2/FB Fw190A-9 - a plane that did exist, presumably with very high performance, but no data exists on this plane's performance at all.. and yet, the IL2/FB team decided to just model that plane, based upon guesstimates.


Hey Karnak,

Just to inform:

Lots of information exist´s on the FW-190A9 and its performance.  In fact I have several copies of the BMW801TS service manuals, including a handwritten edition copied during classes on it given at the Geschwaders.

Over 43 BMW801TS motors have been identified from recovered wrecks.

What I do not have is a clear boost progression on the engine.

The manual gives the following engine limits:

5 minutes at 1.65ata/2700U min = Start und Notleistung

30 minutes at 1.45ata/2500U min = Steig und Kampfleistung


Also stated in the manual,  "An additional power boost (Boost pressure increase or C3 / specialadditive injection) is not intended for the BMW 801 S-1."

The printed manual is dated Nov 1944.  The handwritten notes are dated July 1944.

Two additional reports which I have recieved to examine yet are about the need to increase performance in the engine and what was done to increase performance.  

However both anecdotal  evidence from FW190 pilots and physical evidence points to 1.72ata-1.82ata being cleared as the "Erhöhte Notleistung" for this motor sometime before Jan 1945.

FW-190A9 performance without "Erhöhte Notleistung":



More FW-190A9´s were produced than FW-190A3´s to put it perspective.

All the best,

Crumpp

Offline Wotan

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7201
Spit and 109 Update
« Reply #83 on: July 17, 2005, 02:41:45 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by justin_g
Can someone tell me what a Spitfire Mk IXB is? ;)


The IXa / IXb designation was used by RAF units to distinguish between the low alt optimized LF.IX with the Merlin 66, i.e. MkIXb, from the standard F.IX with the Merlin 61 / 63 / 63a, i.e. MkIXa.

Spitfire F.IX or unofficially 'IXa'

Spitfire LF.IX or unofficially 'IXb'

Crumpp you are attributing a quote from Kweassa's post to Karnak.

Kweassa there is data avaiable for the 190A-9, the FB A-9 isn't just 'made-up'.

Quote
Vc should be the LF not F version.


Kweassa's list is fine as is but lets keep it real. HTC isn't going to do 2 variants of the Spit V, whether they be LF.Vc's or what ever.

Why you are 'wishing' why not ask for a clipped wing Spitfire LF.Vc  as well....

It fugs up Kweassa's time table a bit though...

Offline Crumpp

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3671
Spit and 109 Update
« Reply #84 on: July 17, 2005, 02:49:44 PM »
Quote
Crumpp you are attributing a quote from Kweassa's post to Karnak.


Oops.  Sorry I just posted too quick.

All the best,

Crumpp

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23048
Spit and 109 Update
« Reply #85 on: July 17, 2005, 03:32:30 PM »
Erm, Crump,  I am aware that the Fw190A-9 existed and there is  data on it.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Spit and 109 Update
« Reply #86 on: July 17, 2005, 03:52:12 PM »
We already have a clipped Spit IX +25, and it's around the MA in ample numbers.
It's called La-7 :D
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)

Offline Crumpp

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3671
Spit and 109 Update
« Reply #87 on: July 17, 2005, 04:15:00 PM »
Quote
Erm, Crump, I am aware that the Fw190A-9 existed and there is data on it.



There is flight tested data as well.

All the best,

Crumpp

Offline Kweassa

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6425
Spit and 109 Update
« Reply #88 on: July 17, 2005, 05:09:48 PM »
I stand corrected.

 Thank you Crumpp/Wotan. :aok

 ...
 
 Wotan, perhaps its best we not judge HTC by our past experiences alone. :) They did a lot of things we think they'd just not do.

 IMO AH1 was just a passing point, development of their basic infrastructures. They wanted it strict and under control, and often gave out the impression that they don't really listen to player opinions.

 But recently... I see HTC is more lenient to listen to what the gamers have to offer.

 I mean... in AH2, they changed the icon ideas to what people have been discussing for a long time, albeit in a compromised fashion - limited distance icons.

 And then, even better, they recently also added in the idea the players suggested. Tas and Temps, F4U-4s and such, show up as just "190", "Typh", "F4U" at long distances.

 Also, HT listened to some of my very hasty ideas as well..  before the current AH terrain was done, I suggested a quick change in sky colors and terrain colors to help it look more real. To my surprise, HT almost immediately responded and had the idea implemented in the game. Wow!

 And remember the Ki-84 WEP discussions.. and the Fw190 forward view discussions, too! HT and Pyro listened to that as well.

 ...

 
 As long as the idea is good, I think we have a very very good chance of seeing it implemented in AH2 nowadays.

 And the Spitfire roster ideas... reasonable Spitfans have been discussing it for years. The list Karnak came up with, seems the optimum for representing Spitfires, the ultimate amalgam of past Spitfire discussions reaching a single result. As for the 109 roster, well, that's just a personal opinion, but I can't think of anything better than that.

 
 So let's try to keep our hopes up! :)

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Spit and 109 Update
« Reply #89 on: July 17, 2005, 06:11:49 PM »
Those lists are well thought by Karnak, and HTC rocks also !
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)