Spit XVI - please reconsider

[Bronk]

OHHH the humanity spit XVI have 5 min of 25lbs boost.  C'mon the people in ma who will fear this the most is the 10k pork auger crowd. The spit XVI would be awesome to defeat these pests. Spot em max dar grab a XVI and grab till ya get close. Then watch as soil their shorts. I say Bring on this plane. Or any new plane  for that matter. Heck i'd love a Do 355 arrow for killing high alt buffs. Bet the high alt strat guys wouldn't bat an eye if they did introduce it.
                        Bronk

[Squire]

Yes, and the 1942 Spit V only runs at +16 for 5 min but look at all the whining about it.

Good point anyways Bronk.

[1K3]

Originally posted by Squire
In regard to the Spit 16, this doc seems to suggest that there was a time that the Spit 16 ran on 100 octane in RAF 2nd TAF.

Its dated November 1944 (a month after the XVIE came into service, 5 months after the LF IXE came into service).

It would seem to suggest that up untill that time, only ADGB (UK based) Tempests, XIVs (in ADGB, not 2nd TAF), IXs (some) and probably P-51s (some) with the USAAF ran on 150 octane to chase V-1s.

Here it is:

http://www.spitfireperformance.com/2taf150_112044.gif

I think one could conclude that many XVIs did eventually get the clearance, but certainly running on 100 octane was something they did in late 44, and I think its safe to say that a 100 oct XVI did exist. They certainly didnt run on 150 prior to getting clearance to do it.

For info.

Errr this might be a dumb question, but just wanna make sure.

What's the MAX boost of Spit XVI with 100 octane?

[Kev367th]

Originally posted by Krusty
Consider the fact that even with +18 it's faster and performs better than the spit9. The clipped wings increase roll rate (and thus the ability to change lift direction with a snap roll), and the clipped wings reduce wing drag, increasing the top speed.

I think the subtle advantages a spit16 (with clipped wing) has over a spit9 (without clipped wing) warrant the use of +18 on a later plane. It would STILL perform better in most areas than the spit9. I see no reason to make a plane that's vastly superior to the spit14 in all but top speed. And Pyro's said he likes the spit14 the way it is (he said it in one of these spit/109 threads), so there's no reason we would lose the spit14. So why have a +25 spit16? Makes no sense. And that climb rate would be suicide to fight against. We thought the spit14 and the f4u4 and the tempest could zoom NOW, imagine this thing, it would leave the me163 in the dust! LOL

Lol.
Depends which IX you put it up against.
Pick a 1943 LF IX with clipped wing, performance is identical.
At higher alts 20K+ the 1942 Merlin 61 Spit IX would be better.
No direct comparison really.

We are not losing the XIV, its going up to more proper 21lbs boost.

Zoom - Yup but comparing it to those higher alt fighters is inacurrate. At the alt those ones zoom at, the 16 even with 25lbs boost is sadly lacking.

The LF 16 was purely a low alt bird, pref 20K and below. Even at 20k it cant manage 400mph straight and level with full 25lbs WEP.
In fact it can't break 400mph at any alt straight and level even with 25lbs WEP.
The closest it comes is 397 at 20k, plenty of much faster aircraft around that alt, and at 20k its climb is only 3720 fpm with WEP on.

Any direct comparison between a 14's climb rate and a 16's climb is misleading, they operated at completely different alts, where the 14 is just starting to get frisky, the 16 is really hurting.

1K3 - 18 I believe, could be wrong.

[Karnak]

Well, the Mk XIV isn't really suited to it in my opinion.  They could clip it's wings and unperk it I guess.  Wouldn't make me happy though as we'd still lack an end war Spit.  The IX/XVI went to +25lbs  and the XIV to +21lbs and if you don't want a +25lbs XVI, I doubt you'd like a +21lbs XIV.  As I said, for my part I am happy with the idea of two perked Spits or a Spit XVI at +18lbs.  Either makes me very happy.


I'll accept whatever Pyro does, but I am really crossing my fingers to get both the VIII and XVI in adition to a reduced boost V and a fixed F.Mk IX.

[Kev367th]

Originally posted by Karnak
Well, the Mk XIV isn't really suited to it in my opinion.  They could clip it's wings and unperk it I guess.  Wouldn't make me happy though as we'd still lack an end war Spit.  The IX/XVI went to +25lbs  and the XIV to +21lbs and if you don't want a +25lbs XVI, I doubt you'd like a +21lbs XIV.  As I said, for my part I am happy with the idea of two perked Spits or a Spit XVI at +18lbs.  Either makes me very happy.


I'll accept whatever Pyro does, but I am really crossing my fingers to get both the VIII and XVI in adition to a reduced boost V and a fixed F.Mk IX.

Almost guarentee they wouldn't like a 21lbs boost Spit XIV, but it's something Pyro mentioned.

[Bronk]

I can hear "Spit XIV perks need to be back to tempst level." screams already.



                    Bronk

[Squire]

Yes, and no more hybrid Spits of any model. Model one at a time, and have them each with the right fuel load, engine, armament and performance specs based on the best data avialable. Thats what makes AH a great sim.

[Karnak]

Originally posted by Bronk
I can hear "Spit XIV perks need to be back to tempst level." screams already.

Please, lets stop taking potshots at other players.

Lets play nice.

[Kev367th]

Originally posted by Karnak
Well, the Mk XIV isn't really suited to it in my opinion.  They could clip it's wings and unperk it I guess.  Wouldn't make me happy though as we'd still lack an end war Spit.  The IX/XVI went to +25lbs  and the XIV to +21lbs and if you don't want a +25lbs XVI, I doubt you'd like a +21lbs XIV.  As I said, for my part I am happy with the idea of two perked Spits or a Spit XVI at +18lbs.  Either makes me very happy.


I'll accept whatever Pyro does, but I am really crossing my fingers to get both the VIII and XVI in adition to a reduced boost V and a fixed F.Mk IX.

Realistically we are still missing a late war Spit. Taking a 1943 LF IX throwing and 'e' wing without the performance gain, it basically still leaves you with a 1943 Spit LF IX, only with 50 cals.
If I throw 2005 wheels and rims on a 2004 car it doesn't make it a 2005 car!

[Krusty]

Kev, you say the 16 clipped wouldn't be any better than the LF.9clipped... But we don't have an LF.9 clipped. We have a F.9 unclipped. So add to the clipped wings an engine rated at lower alts and you get a much better aircraft (even at the same boost levels) that performs better than its predecessor.

I'd like to try out a spit16 a few times. I think it has more of a purpose than a spit8 (which is 99% identical to a spit9, which we will already have)

[Karnak]

Originally posted by Krusty
I'd like to try out a spit16 a few times. I think it has more of a purpose than a spit8 (which is 99% identical to a spit9, which we will already have)

No it isn't.  Merlin 61 in the F.IX vs Merlin 66 in the LF.VIII.  That is a very significant change.

In the proposed lineup we need to fill the 1943-early 1944 period.  You can't do that with a F.Mk IX and you can't do that with an LF.Mk IXe/XVIe.  That is what the LF.Mk VIIIc is for.

[Bronk]

Karnak,
 Sorry i just get a little PO'ed with the "you MUST fly like I do" or "Perk every thing thats better than [insert plane of choise here]" people. I just want more planes not more PERK planes.
    Once again sorry i just needed to vent a bit. My posts are not directed at any one person just the type of people.


                        Bronk

[Kev367th]

Depends on the alt Krusty.

The F and HF models are always faster than their LF counterparts. Even to the point of earlier F and HF being faster than later Mk LF's.

As the war went lower, it was decided to concentrate more on low (20k and below) performance, yes this required more powerful engines but leads to some wierd situations.

As described a 1942 Merlin 61 F IX has a higher top speed (400+) than a 1944 Merlin 66 LF XVI (even with 25lbs boost it cant hit 400 at ANY alt).
The big difference is that at the lower alt the LF's outperformed the H and HF models.

That was basically the difference between LF, F and HF models. The fastest Spits were all F or HF, the more powerful were all LF.

Typical Merlins
LF - 66 - 1580HP - 397 @ 20000 (this is with 25lbs boost) 1944
F - 61 - 1565 HP - 408 @ 25000 (assuming 16lbs boost, prob 18) 1942
HF - 70 - 1475 HP - 413 @ 26600 (ditto) 1942/3

All fitted to Mk 9's etc, fastest one out the lot was the HF verison, even with the lowest HP motor.

Hope it makes sense, depends what you mean by better I guess.

[Krusty]

Karnak: Ahh, I forgot the spit8 was an LF, I thought it was just an F, that makes a bit more sense.

Kev, I know the difference, yes. That's why I'm saying that the spit16 with +18 boost and clipped wings won't at all be like the spit9 with +18 boost and unclipped wings. The flight envelope would be very different, thus allowing better performance from the later plane -- the spit16. Better peformance would be found in all alts below 20k, which, frankly, in AH nobody flies anywhere near that high unless they're in scenarios or the CT, in which case there are still spit F.9's to do the work at higher alts, and spit F.16s if more speed is needed.

To boil down what I'm saying, "You say there's no reason to put in a +18 spit16. We've supplied some reasons. So it could/would/should be put in with +18".

Back to Karnak: Pyro said he wasn't sure people would fly the spit8... Maybe this is because he's planning on the +18 spit16, as was mentioned... The spit16 at +18 would probably perform better than the spit8, and maybe he was thinking they were too close to each other?