SpitIX compared to SpitV, SpitVIII and SpitXVI

[TexMurphy]

Ok so I know that the SpitXVI is more or less a wing clipped SpitVIII and hence faster and rolls better at cost of turn rate with climb beeing equal.

The SpitV beeing an older engine makeing it slower, worse climbing but better turning then the VIII and XVI.

But where does the IX fit into the equation and how does it compare to the other non perked Spits (no need to compare it to mkI).

Tex

[SpinDoc1]

While I'm no expert, I can offer some anecdotal advice...

First off, the Spit I got a power increase, to make it match its Battle of Britain performance, so its top speed is now 301 mph (making it closer to the Spit5).  The Spit 5 was reduced to 12 lbs of boost and had its ammo load reduced in the cannons from 240 rds to 120 rds (60 rpg due to drum fed cannon).  The Spit5 was developed as a counter to the new 109F that was making its appearance over Europe.  During that period in history when the FW190 first appeared, the Spit5 was vastly outclassed in speed and performance (other than turning).  The Spit 9 was developed as a stopgap measure and as a better high-altitude performance plane to contend with the FW190's (and, was developed from a strengthened Mk 5 airframe).  Supermarine added the newer belt-fed Hispano Mk II with 120 rpg (240 rds total) and it's top speed is ~405 mph at 27k, while a more realistic speed is ~376 mph at 15k (thanks Soda! link below to his page).  The Spit 9 does not have the turn radius of the Spit5, but should be able to defeat it with energy style fighting tactics.  The Spit8 and Spit16 actually share the same airframe, while the Spit8 was developed as a low-altitude fighter, the 16 incorporated the new clipped-wing design in its manufacture.  The clipped wing had been experimentally used on other marks before (even a Mark 5), but was first manufactured in the 16.  The 16 will show much better speed and rollrate (it reminds me a lot of a lightweight P47N), but won't have as great a sustained turn rate.  In my limited flight experience with these planes so far, I have found the 16 feels a bit mushy in the bottom of loops, whereas the 8 feels like it can out-turn anything!  I easily defeated a Spit5 in vertical loops with a Spit8 during my first encounter.  While the Spit5 lost some power and ammo, it is anything but weak.  The Spit will still be a deadly little tincan, but it will require a little more patience, planning, and effective use rather than be thrown around like it was in the MA all but two weeks ago.  During "Fire Over Malta" I had the pleasure of flying the original Spit 5 (2.05 version) during the first frame, and the new Spit 5 (2.06 version) during the second frame...  While I did run out of cannon ammo sooner, and have a bit tougher time catching the 109F's and C202's, they still feared a fight with a Spit5.  I managed to down 2 JU88's and give a 109F and 202 some missing parts while still managing to reload with 7 rds of Hispano remaining.  To me, that indicates that although the Spit5 used to be a real monster, it still retains its bite after the changes!

Soda's Aircraft Evaluation Page (needs updates for new version):
http://members.shaw.ca/soda_p/models.htm

[SuperDud]

SpinDoc pretty much nailed it. Spit9 actually does best at higher alts.

[TexMurphy]

Good write up SpinDoc1.

Unfortunatly it about sums up what I do know. I do feel that I do grasp the development line of the V -> VIII -> VXI. But its the reinforced airframe development of the IX that puzzles me a bit.

So from what you say I gather that the IX should be a better high alt fighter then the VIII, right?

In what ways is it better at high alt then the VIII?

In what ways is the VIII better at low alt?

Tex

[Karnak]

The Spitfire Mk IX in AH is powered by a Merlin 61 engine with a critical altitude of about 25,000 or 26,000ft.

After testing that captured Fw190 the RAF found that the engine in the Mk IX was optimized for too high an altitude.  The Merlin 66 was developed in response to that and most Mk IXs, Mk VIIIs and all Mk XVIs were powered by the Merlin 66, or in the case of the MK XVI the American built version called the Merlin 266.

The Mk VIII in AH is powered by a Merlin 66 with a critical altitude of 16,000ft or 20,000ft (can't recall off hand which, but significantly lower alt than the Merlin 61).  This has the effect of giving the Spitfire F.Mk IX more power at high altitude, and the Spitfire LF.Mk VIII and LF.Mk XVI more power at lower altitudes.

Basically the Spits cover the years as follows:

Spitfire Mk I: 1940
Spitfire Mk V: 1941-1942
Spitfire Mk IX: 1942-1943
Spitfire Mk VIII: 1943-1945
Spitfire Mk XIV: 1944-1945 (perked)
Spitfire Mk XVI: 1944-1945

[SpinDoc1]

Thanks for the added info, I'm largely unfamiliar with the engine variants.

[Gianlupo]

Originally posted by SpinDoc1

The Spit8 and Spit16 actually share the same airframe

I knew that Spit IX and Spit XVI share the same airframe (even more, they were basically the same plane, the only difference being the location where the engine was build): is that true even for IX and VIII?

[Karnak]

The Spit VIII and Spit XVI do not share the same airframe beyond the fact that they are both Merlin Spits.  The Spit IX and Spit XVI are the same fighter for all intents and purposes, a fighter built off of the Mk V's airframe as a stopgap to counter the Fw190s.  Later production Mk IXs and Mk XVIs incorporate some of the Mk VIII's refinments such as the larger vertical stabilizer.

The Mk VIII was the most refined of all Merlin Spits with all of the planned improvements that Merlin Spits were intended to reach.  Things like the shortened ailerons and retractable tailwheel that the Mk IX and MK XVI never got as well as things like the larger tail that they did.

The Mk XIV was created by mating a Griffon 65 to a Mk VIII's airframe, so the Mk XIV does largely share the Mk VIII's airframe.

[Gianlupo]

Thanks for the confirmation, Karnak.

[Guppy35]

Flew the Spit IX in the Snapshot last night.  I really liked the way it flew against the 190A5s and 109Gs and that was from about 20K to the deck.

It seemed to roll faster then the VIII for some reason.  Flew very smoothly.

Not that it tells you anything, but so far I'd go, in order of preference,

Spit XVI
Spit IX
Spit VIII.

[SKJohn]

Well then, what is the big difference between the Spit 14 and the Spit 16 that has the 14 perked, but he later (?) 16 unperked?
Did the quality of the plane degress between the 14 and the 16?

[Karnak]

Dan,

I suspect they set the Spit VIII's roll rate lower than the Mk V or Mk IX's due to the shorter ailerons.  I've never seen any data that suggests the shorter ailerons reduced the roll rate though.  It seems that you could get greater deflection out of the shorter ailerons with the same force, making the two styles roll pretty much the same in the end.

Originally posted by SKJohn
Well then, what is the big difference between the Spit 14 and the Spit 16 that has the 14 perked, but he later (?) 16 unperked?
Did the quality of the plane degress between the 14 and the 16?

The Spit XVI is a Spitfire Mk IX powered by a 1720hp American built Merlin 266 instead of the Spitfire LF.Mk IX's 1720hp British built Merlin 66.

The Spitfire Mk XIV is powered by a 2050hp Griffon 65.

[Grits]

The 16 will be perked...

[Guppy35]

Originally posted by SKJohn
Well then, what is the big difference between the Spit 14 and the Spit 16 that has the 14 perked, but he later (?) 16 unperked?
Did the quality of the plane degress between the 14 and the 16?

For the umpteenth time!

The Spitfire 16 was a Spitfire LFIX with an American made Merlin 266 engine.  It WAS NOT a Griffon Spitfire like the Spitfire 14.

They gave it a different number because of the American made Merlin which was the same engine as the Rolls Merlin 66 of the Spitfire LFIX.

The Griffon Spitfire XIV was a far more advanced aircraft and better performer then the XVI.

So the Spitfire 16 is nothing more then an LF 9 which is a 1943 bird, updated to 44-45 standards with an E wing and the American made Merlin.

It was used for ground attack in late 44-45.  The XIV was an intercepter, air superiority fighter.

[Gianlupo]

I have a stronger and stronger feeling that people not always read what the others have posted before...