A "Tour of Duty" Spits needed thread.

[Squire]

The other thread(s) have once again disintegrated into a Main Arena perked whats not perked debate ad nauseum, so Im starting my own ToD thread re the Spits we need for Scenarios, ToD and other historical events in AH2.

Ok, PYRO's list was (cut and pasted from another thread):

Spit I - 12lbs boost if sufficient evidence.
Spit Vb - 12lb boost (hold on don't scream)
Spit F IX - Fix of current Spit 9
Spit LF VIII - Maybe if he thinks enough use for it.
Spit F XIV - Possibly 21lbs boost
Spit LF XVI - At 18lbs boost initially, possibly 25 in future (clipped wing)

Seafire III - Merlin 55M

So, as somebody who was a Squad Ops CM, and somebody who spent a lot of time in the CT, and many other events, my opinion is that this is the absolute minimum list we need for ToD.

A Spit XVI alone cannot adequately cover the 1943-45 period.  It will have an "E" wing (20mm and .50s), 3 bomb pylons and probably clipped wings. It is a poor substitute for a Spit LF IXc, wether its boosted +18 or +25.

So, we absolutely need either a LF VIIIc, or an LF IXc to cover 1943-late 44, after which, the Spit XVI can cover late 44-45 as a "standard Spitfire" in other words not the limited Spit XIVe which served with the Tempest.

As for the varients above I will state my views on them:

Spit Ia: should be +12 lbs boost as the overwhelming evidence supports it. The Spit Ia saw little to no combat before the BoB, it makes no sense at all to have an 87 oct version of it.

Spit Vb: 1941 +12 lbs if there is going to be a 1941 LW fighter type to opose it, otherwise it should be a Vb rated at +16 lbs (1942). We need a dt for it too.

Spit F IX: No E armament. This should be a C wing only, other than that, its fine.

Spit LF VIII: C wing armament. Needed for 43- late 44 setups.

Spit LF XVI: E wing armament ( 3 bombs+ 20mm and .50s), clipped wings, +18 lbs boost. Why +18? because 2nd TAF didnt go to 150 untill very late in 1944. This is the "premier" Spit version used in large #s later in the war.

Spit XIV (Griffon engine): E wing armament, standard wingtips, +21 lbs boost. Why +21 lbs? because thats what it used by the time it went to the Continent in September 1944 along with the Tempest. The "best" Spit used in WW2, but not in large #s.

Seafire L.III: Most widely used Seafire late 43-45. Served in all theaters with the Royal Navy. Has a C wing, carries 1 bomb or a dt.

*We need the proper series of drop tanks for all of them. V-XIV.

Thats how I see it as a ToD/Event dude.

Fire away.

[Kev367th]

Totally agreed Squire,
THE BARE minimum.

But thats how we worked out which ones in the various Spit threads. Bare minimum without going way over the top.

Luckily enough Pyro agreed, but seemed to hmming and hawing over the MkVIII which is THE Spit for Far East scenarios, all but one sqn used them.
Without the Mk VIII you either use the F IX or LF XVI.

But as of yet very very little is known of TOD apart from a lot of speculation.

[Guppy35]

Have to agree with you Squire.

Of course I'd take a Spit XII for some cross Channel ops in 43 since 91 was the high scoring Spit squadron in the Fall of 43, but that's just me

Definately have to keep the VIII in the mix for MTO, CBI, SEAC, Pac, or whatever else you want to call the airwar against Japan.

Ultimately there needs to be a full span LF whether it be an LFIX or LFVIII with universal wing for the 43-44 period and the clipped E wing with hard points for the post D-Day 2 TAF work.  This could be either the LFIXe or the LFXVIe.   Again, same bird, different versions of the Merlin 66 series.

Definately a change in roles for the Spitfire prior to and after D-Day causing the changes as the airwar died down and the need to support the guys on the ground picked up.

It would be interesting to see a post D-Day scenario where the Spit XVI and Tiffie pilots were tasked with air to ground while the Tempest and Spit XIV guys were hunting for the LW.  

You can see where that extra boost would come in handy down low since the Spit drivers were the bouncees not the bouncers.


Dan/CorkyJr

[Karnak]

I agree and that list matches the list I posted weeks ago almost exactly,  I consider that to be the bare minium coverage to get the whole war covered.  Without the Mk VIII, the one that is most iffy, we will end up having to use the grossly outdated F.Mk IX until mid 1944 in any scenario.

I VERY strongly advocate for the inclusion of the Spitfire LF.Mk VIII.  To me it is just as crucial as the Spitfire LF.Mk XVI.

[Wotan]

Spit Ia: should be +12 lbs boost as the overwhelming evidence supports it. The Spit Ia saw little to no combat before the BoB, it makes no sense at all to have an 87 oct version of it.

Spit Vb: 1941 +12 lbs if there is going to be a 1941 LW fighter type to opose it, otherwise it should be a Vb rated at +16 lbs (1942). We need a dt for it too.

Spit F IX: No E armament. This should be a C wing only, other than that, its fine.

Spit LF VIII: C wing armament. Needed for 43- late 44 setups.

Spit LF XVI: E wing armament ( 3 bombs+ 20mm and .50s), clipped wings, +18 lbs boost. Why +18? because 2nd TAF didnt go to 150 untill very late in 1944. This is the "premier" Spit version used in large #s later in the war.

Spit XIV (Griffon engine): E wing armament, standard wingtips, +21 lbs boost. Why +21 lbs? because thats what it used by the time it went to the Continent in September 1944 along with the Tempest. The "best" Spit used in WW2, but not in large #s.

Seafire L.III: Most widely used Seafire late 43-45. Served in all theaters with the Royal Navy. Has a C wing, carries 1 bomb or a dt.

A few things, the Spit Ia in AH is rated for 12lbs at least according to the gage. It may beed some FM tweaking but its clear 12 lbs is what is should have.

Spit Vb - getting rid of the 16lbs boost Spit V would be a mistake. If I were god AH woul dget both A Spit Vb @ 12lbs and a Spit Vc @ 16lbs...

Spit F IX - just as you suggest...

Spit LF VIII - just as you suggets

Spit F XIV - it should be at 21lbs...

Spit LF XVI - 18 lbs. This based on events and ToD, CT etc. Other wise it ahs no real use outsid ethe main...

I have np if were to be at 25lbs, I just dont see the usefulness in it.

Seafire L.III - I no opinion really on what version of Seafire. I will ask though regardless of which version II / III was prodeuced more, which one would have hte most use in ToD...

For what little i know of the Seafire the II we have now would be of more use. But my knowledge base is limited and mostly covers the MTO...

If the Spit Vb drops to 12lbs max then I guess a Seafire III might be able to fill for a 16lb Vc. However it would appear that the Sea III would perform a little better...

However, how often will ToD being seeing Seafires (outside subbing for a Vc?)

Pyro, please give these guy a VIII, it won't go unused... The clip the wings on XVI..

[Kev367th]

Luckily enough Wotan the Seafire L III can double quite nicely for a Spit LF Vc (serves a dual purpose Seafire III and Spit LF Vc). Just pretend the hook isnt there.
It should perform marginally better than a Vc having 18lbs as opposed to 16lbs boost.
Of course in order to complete the deception it would be nice if Pyro would allow 1 RAF skin on it, the rest being FAA etc.

Mk VIII is essential, if you have to use either the F IX or LF XVI in a scenario you are creating a whole new set of problems.
i.e. XVI - lighter, 50 cals instead of .303s., and would be clipped.
F IX - designed higher alts

Assuming TOD will cover not only Germany but the Med in the future, the Seafire will get used, Op Torch etc.

Spit 1 guage is incorrect, it read 12 but the aircraft is at 6.

Yes
It would be nice to get the Vc and LF IX also, but we were trying to keep it to a bare minimum where included ones could double for excluded ones.

[Squire]

I wish we could get a +12 and +16 version of the Spit V as well. As I stated in my post and in other threads, unless the LW is going to get a 1941 fighter ala the 109F-2 the Spit V should be a 1942 (+16) version since all its opposition is. The earliest FW 190 we have is a 1943 Fw 190 A-5.

Either a Vb or a Vc at +16 lbs.

I have the feeling that the considered change to the Spit V has occurred over MA considerations and not ToD ones.

[Kev367th]

Well I can suggest is that you call or email Pyro, see what his plans are and go from there.

[Krusty]

From a scenario standpoint, the +16 spitV doesn't fit anywhere in 1942. It unbalances every scenario. On the other hand, everybody seems to agree that historically the +12 spitV has been the ultimate perfectly equal match to the 109F4 we currently have in AH. SpitV at +16 is so unbalancing that no CT mod has used one in a 1942 setup since I can remember.

Spit at +16 just isn't balanced, gameplay wise. I fully support Pyro's choice to go back to +12, as many have argued that the +12 spitV is the best match for the plane in AH2 that was traditionally its best match in real history (the 109F-4).

Making it a Vb is fine. The spit9 will take over for any 1943 setups. And we have a VIII to choose from. Or a XVI to fill in for anything. And let's not forget a seafire III, and oh yeah, then there's the XIV. So I think with the lineup Pyro's already thinking of, we get some overlapping redundancy, and it allows for the most flexibility for CT/SEA/TOD and the like.

[Squire]

How did you get his home # Kev? hehe.

I suppose, I figure he reads some of these anyways, all we can do is hash it out and maybe bring a sensible discourse to the issue.

**************************************************

As to the comments regarding the CT. First off I dont subscribe to the notion that the CT staff are the high priests of what is a realistic matchup or not. Im not bad mouthing them, but they had thier own reasons (right or wrong) for keeping Spit Vs out of setups. I have seen many other historical matchups in other events where the 109F-4 did very well when flown to its strengths (which is rarely).

The +16 Spit, for all the wailing about it, is slower, climbs poorer, and has 1/2 the wep time of the 109F-4. Its not overmodelled, again, despite all the baseless accusations from the proffessional spit haters (tm) who just hurl childish rants at it, and have been doing that since Air Warrior came out on DOS.

I will also say that if it is reduced to +12 that the crying wont likely stop there, it will still do well and more conspiracy-ridden- rants about how it does X or Y do well will start again very soon, likely after it shoots down another Ego Ace in his Fav Machine...

[Wotan]

From a scenario standpoint, the +16 spitV doesn't fit anywhere in 1942.

BS, The Spit V was cleared for 16lbs boost in July '42...

How does it 'not fit'..?

unless the LW is going to get a 1941 fighter ala the 109F-2 the Spit V should be a 1942 (+16) version since all its opposition is

Squire is right...

Besides a 16lb Spit V @ 16lbs till can't hang at 'secenrio', ToD combat altitudes...

Waht doesn't fit is forcing the (set aside a Seafire III for moment) RAF fans to fight as '42 planes with basically a'41 Spit Vb @ 12lbs.

[Kev367th]

I would assume the Spit used in 1942 scenarios will be the current fixed F IX. So no need to force the RAF to fight with a 1941 plane.

Basically we can't win - It's either go for the bare minimum or get the 'On no, not another Spit" whines.
Yes a 1942 Spit Vc, and a 1943 LF IXc would have been nice, but even we realised 8 Spit models was a little over the top.
In all honesty if we could have 1 more i'd have niether of those 2. I would rather have the one Spit specifically designed for chasing 190's, and the first production Griffon Spit - clipped wing LF XII.
It would be nice to have an 'exotic Spit', the 14 with nearly 1000 produced doesn't really fall into that category, this one does. Maybe every country should have one.

Two reasons
1 It would make it hard to distinguish between it and the clipped wing XVI we are getting.
2 From a test flight:
..........The manoeuvrability of the Spitifre XII is considered to be excellent. It was compared with the Spitfire IX (R.M. 10 SM engine), also designed as a high performance low-altitude fighter, over which it has an advantage in speed but not in climb, and found to be much better in rate of roll. Above 20,000 feet however, the Spitfire IX with standard wing tips has a better all-round performance and was able to out-manoeurvre the XII. It was unfortunate that in the trials the Spitfire IX was only an average aircraft on controls and was inferior to both of the Mk. XIIs flown. It is considered that when used below 20,000 feet it will be able to out-pace, out-turn and roll as well as the FW.190. The general manoeuvrability for dog-fighting is slightly limited by the fact that the engine cuts under negative acceleration forces.

OK, it would be perked, but a light 5 perks would be more than enough.

Kinda wish we had included it in the suggested Spit lineup, you never know.

[Squire]

There are many exotic Spits and 109s, most of them too specialized to justify inclusion into AH2, despite being interesting types. Even sticking to major types its hard to get a list down.

[Guppy35]

Originally posted by Kev367th
I would assume the Spit used in 1942 scenarios will be the current fixed F IX. So no need to force the RAF to fight with a 1941 plane.

Basically we can't win - It's either go for the bare minimum or get the 'On no, not another Spit" whines.
Yes a 1942 Spit Vc, and a 1943 LF IXc would have been nice, but even we realised 8 Spit models was a little over the top.
In all honesty if we could have 1 more i'd have niether of those 2. I would rather have the one Spit specifically designed for chasing 190's, and the first production Griffon Spit - clipped wing LF XII.
It would be nice to have an 'exotic Spit', the 14 with nearly 1000 produced doesn't really fall into that category, this one does. Maybe every country should have one.

Two reasons
1 It would make it hard to distinguish between it and the clipped wing XVI we are getting.
2 From a test flight:
..........The manoeuvrability of the Spitifre XII is considered to be excellent. It was compared with the Spitfire IX (R.M. 10 SM engine), also designed as a high performance low-altitude fighter, over which it has an advantage in speed but not in climb, and found to be much better in rate of roll. Above 20,000 feet however, the Spitfire IX with standard wing tips has a better all-round performance and was able to out-manoeurvre the XII. It was unfortunate that in the trials the Spitfire IX was only an average aircraft on controls and was inferior to both of the Mk. XIIs flown. It is considered that when used below 20,000 feet it will be able to out-pace, out-turn and roll as well as the FW.190. The general manoeuvrability for dog-fighting is slightly limited by the fact that the engine cuts under negative acceleration forces.

OK, it would be perked, but a light 5 perks would be more than enough.

Kinda wish we had included it in the suggested Spit lineup, you never know.

And they fixed the negative G cuttout right away.

Of course that you'd even have to suggest perking a 1943 Spit speaks volumes

Dan/CorkyJr
and Spit XII fanatic

[gatso]

RE Seafire and scenarios.

Would it be fair to say that a Seafire III would be too late a model to participate in a 1942 Op Torch type of event and our current Seafire IIc is the appropriate mark?

If the Seafire III could at a pinch sub for a Spit Vc at 16/18lbs would the Spit Vb at 12lb be of any use subbing for a IIc?

Also a quick question, what were the Mark V's delivered to Malta rated at?

Just wondering.

BTW I'd love to see the VIII too and I'd just like to say thanks to those who've done so much work on this whole subject, its much appreciated.

Gatso