Author Topic: Spit XVI - please reconsider (Read 3964 times)

Krusty · « **Reply #45 on:** August 04, 2005, 04:47:00 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Squire
You guys drinking before dinner again?

Erm... So what if I am?

Kev367th · « **Reply #46 on:** August 04, 2005, 04:51:52 PM »

Dan ever wished we should have thrown the Mk XII in and seen what happened.
At least that would worth a mild perk, a 25lb XVI isn't, it would be the slowest perk plane!!!! Even slower once your whole 5 mins of WEP ran out.

Drink - sheesh I knew I was lacking sometihng

.

Guppy35 · « **Reply #47 on:** August 04, 2005, 05:04:09 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Krusty
Guppy I believe it was in the original "I spoke to Pyro" thread. Near the beginning. I think Kev relayed that Pyro was concerned about the climb rate a spit16 with +25 would have, and then somebody posted a couple of links about spitfire data, including climb rates and such. It's in the first or second page of the 4-5 page thread.

Good grief. This is what we're arguing about and the numbers weren't even right?

Altitude feet.   Rate of climb Ft/Min.
0 Feet    5740 FPM
5,000 Feet 5080 FPM
10,000 Feet 5080 FPM
15,000 Feet 4470 FPM
20,000 Feet 3720 FPM
25,000 Feet 2950 FPM
30,000 Feet 2200 FPM

Where'd 5700 FPM come from? That's a figure quoted for 0 feet. Note that climb rate continues to drop. At 15K there is no real difference between +25 and +18 and after 15K it doesn't change at all. The rate of climb continues to drop dramatically all the way up to 30K so its not like the +25 boost Spit was climbing 5700 feet per minute to 25K.

Much ado about nothing after all this.

If the issue is straight and level speeds then so be it, but climb rate is a non factor considering there is minimal difference in climb between the +18 boost Spit and +25 boost Spit. with the biggest difference being between 10 and 15K.

Dan/CorkyJr

Karnak · « **Reply #48 on:** August 04, 2005, 05:06:40 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Squire
"I want the list Pyro is thinking of."

No s***, is there some reason we should be saying we dont want or need an VIII if he's considering it.

And yet Kev persists in doing so. I feel like I am fighting a rear guard action against him because he is having a tantrum about the +25lbs boost on the XVI and so wants to throw it all away.

Squire · « **Reply #49 on:** August 04, 2005, 05:08:46 PM »

Well I didnt wait these last years to finally get the Spits redone to tell Pyro "not to bother". Forget that

Kev367th · « **Reply #50 on:** August 04, 2005, 05:10:26 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Guppy35
Good grief. This is what we're arguing about and the numbers weren't even right?

Altitude feet.   Rate of climb Ft/Min.
0 Feet    5740 FPM
5,000 Feet 5080 FPM
10,000 Feet 5080 FPM
15,000 Feet 4470 FPM
20,000 Feet 3720 FPM
25,000 Feet 2950 FPM
30,000 Feet 2200 FPM

Where'd 5700 FPM come from? That's a figure quoted for 0 feet. Note that climb rate continues to drop. At 15K there is no real difference between +25 and +18 and after 15K it doesn't change at all. The rate of climb continues to drop dramatically all the way up to 30K so its not like the +25 boost Spit was climbing 5700 feet per minute to 25K.

Much ado about nothing after all this.

If the issue is straight and level speeds then so be it, but climb rate is a non factor considering there is minimal difference in climb between the +18 boost Spit and +25 boost Spit. with the biggest difference being between 10 and 15K.

Dan/CorkyJr

Been trying to explain this for the last two days, but people are fixated on a Spit with a 5700fpm climb rate!!!
Hell straight and level doesn't even come into it, it doesn't even break the magical 400mph at ANY alt - even with 25lbs boost.

Krusty · « **Reply #51 on:** August 04, 2005, 05:27:02 PM »

I disagree.. The climb rate is still an issue. While it starts out as 5700fpm at sea level, it very slowly drops off. I know for a fact a LOT of aircraft can't even climb at 500fpm at 30k, let alone 2200fpm. Consider that at 15k it's climb rate is just as good as the current 109G10 and the current spit14 at sea level. It's still a significant boost in climb over other aircraft

Guppy35 · « **Reply #52 on:** August 04, 2005, 05:27:54 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Kev367th
Been trying to explain this for the last two days, but people are fixated on a Spit with a 5700fpm climb rate!!!
Hell straight and level doesn't even come into it, it doesn't even break the magical 400mph at ANY alt - even with 25lbs boost.

Irony is we're talking about a full span wing Spit LFIX in testing too, not a late in the war clipped wing LFXVIe with bomb racks and extra internal fuel.

Spitfire-The History lists the fuel for the LFIX as 150 Octane, +25 boost and then goes on to list the rate of climb as 3950 FPM with 5.7 minutes to 20K. This would be what XVI would be as well.

All that being said, I still think the original list is a good one.

Spit I
Spit Vb
Spit FIX
Spit LFVIII
Spit LFXVIe clipped
Spit FXIV

Dan/CorkyJr

Kev367th · « **Reply #53 on:** August 04, 2005, 05:31:47 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Krusty
I disagree.. The climb rate is still an issue. While it starts out as 5700fpm at sea level, it very slowly drops off. I know for a fact a LOT of aircraft can't even climb at 500fpm at 30k, let alone 2200fpm. Consider that at 15k it's climb rate is just as good as the current 109G10 and the current spit14 at sea level. It's still a significant boost in climb over other aircraft

But again you are comparing two completely animals.

When the Spit 14 and G10 are just getting going the poor XVI is really struggling.
Its like comparing the speed of a Lala on the deck to a P47 at 31k, there is no comparison they operate in two completely different environments.

Krusty · « **Reply #54 on:** August 04, 2005, 05:33:04 PM »

Pyro would probably find this interesting, too. Perhaps a PM from you, Guppy? It might smooth out any problems he has with climb rate.

Kev367th · « **Reply #55 on:** August 04, 2005, 05:45:07 PM »

Yeah Dan,
I thought the climb rates looked too good to be true, I mean thats almost ballistic.

1K3 · « **Reply #56 on:** August 04, 2005, 06:02:35 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Guppy35
Spitfire-The History lists the fuel for the LFIX as 150 Octane, +25 boost and then goes on to list the rate of climb as 3950 FPM with 5.7 minutes to 20K. This would be what XVI would be as well.

huh...

is that the initial climb rate?

the one on spitfireperformance.com must be a typo

Kev367th · « **Reply #57 on:** August 04, 2005, 06:04:45 PM »

Just found out something else interesting -

Intially the LF XVI were fitted with the 2x20mm 4x303 option.

At the same time the 'e' wing was introduced the bubbletop canopy was fitted, and the larger tail fitted.

Comments?

Karnak · « **Reply #58 on:** August 04, 2005, 06:12:24 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Kev367th
Just found out something else interesting -

Intially the LF XVI were fitted with the 2x20mm 4x303 option.

At the same time the 'e' wing was introduced the bubbletop canopy was fitted, and the larger tail fitted.

Comments?

Never heard of that. I'll look at my books when I get home.

Krusty · « **Reply #59 on:** August 04, 2005, 06:13:35 PM »

E-wing allowed either 4x303 or 2x50cal. Just depends on what they had their hands on at the time.

I say leave the bubble off -- lol it's personal opinion, but if it's got bubble it's not a true spit!!