Author Topic: Seafire IIc max boost (Read 362 times)

Squire · « **on:** November 15, 2005, 02:14:36 PM »

The Seafire IIC was first issued to the Fleet Air Arm in July of 1942.

The first action they fought in was "Torch" in November 1942 (Supermarine Seafire P.6 John Freeman) with 807, 880, 884 and 885 Sqns.

By that time, the Spitfire V series and the Seafire series had been modified to a combat boost limit of +16 lbs for 5 minutes (summer 1942).

Spit V here: http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spitv.html

"Aeroplane and Armament Experimental Establishment
Boscombe Down
25 November 1942
Spitfire Mk. VC AA.878
(Merlin 45)
Climb, speed, and cooling tests at combat rating

SUMMARY

The operational limitations of the Merlin 45 have been increased, the use of 3000 R.P.M. and +16 lb/sq.in. boost being now permitted for periods not exceeding 3 minutes during combat. Tests have been made to determine the performance of the aeroplane at this new rating, and also whether the oil and radiator cooling are adequate."

Seafire IIC here, http://www.spitfireperformance.com/seafireIIc.pdf and I will quote the entry:

"The increase in performance obtainable by using combat rating (+16 lb/sq.in ; boost 3000rpm) on a Spitfire Vc is given in the Part of Report No. A& A.E.E/692i and this increase will approximately be equal in the Seafire"

Final source is "Spitfire In Action" page 53 "An engine modification was introduced to give +16 lbs sq.in. manifold pressure at low level." -Refs to both the Seafire IB and Seafire IIC.

And finally...the original Seafire IIC in AH was correct, and had +16 lbs boost, it is not a 1941 Spit Vb.

*If there is a concern of over use, simply limit the Seafire to CVs only in the MA*, but imho it should have +16 lbs.

Thank you.

Kev367th · « **Reply #1 on:** November 15, 2005, 02:24:36 PM »

In reality it shouldn't even be modelled as a Merlin 46 Seafire IIc.
Should be a Merlin 32 with 18lbs boost, fitted to all Seafire IIc including the first 1/3 manufactured with the Merlin 46, then retrofitted with the 32.

372 Seafire IIc produced.
First 1/3 with Merlin 46, all subsequent with Merlin 32.
Original 1/3 ALL refitted with the Merlin 32.

Bruno · « **Reply #2 on:** November 15, 2005, 02:25:40 PM »

From a game play perspective it maybe wise to return the Seafire IIc to 16lbs boost (as it should be historically). Even in events, scenarios and ToD the Seafire @ 16lbs could stand in for a Spit Vc @ 16lbs (Aug '42)...

This way you get a better representative Seafire as well as a plane that would stand-in for a 16lbs Spit V, mho anyway...

How this pays out in the main I don't know. I don't imagine many people chosing it over the LF.VIII or LF.XVI. It may be the 1st choice for a fighter off a CV but this will remain the case anyway.

Kev367th · « **Reply #3 on:** November 15, 2005, 02:30:00 PM »

Think this is the prob Bruno, I believe currently it's only at 12lbs.

Historically?
Historically the most produced Seafire was the L III, (over 3x as many as the IIc).
Historically the most produced variant of the IIc, was the L IIc with the Merlin 32.
Historically even the first 1/3 of the Seafire IIc's produced with the Merlin 46 were refitted with the Merlin 32.

Representative - So the the least produced "true" Seafire, in its least flown configuration (Merlin 46), is representative?
Guess my definition of representative is different to yours.

Merlin 32 is a much better stand in for a LF Vc.

Bruno · « **Reply #4 on:** November 15, 2005, 02:33:45 PM »

I meant keep at 16lbs in reference to how it was pre-patch...

I will edit to say 'return to'...

Bruno · « **Reply #5 on:** November 15, 2005, 02:39:42 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Kev367th
Think this is the prob Bruno, I believe currently it's only at 12lbs.

Historically?
Historically the most produced Seafire was the L III, (over 3x as many as the IIc).
Historically the most produced variant of the IIc, was the L IIc with the Merlin 32.
Historically even the first 1/3 of the Seafire IIc's produced with the Merlin 46 were refitted with the Merlin 32.

Representative - So the the least produced "true" Seafire, in its least flown configuration (Merlin 46), is representative?
Guess my definition of representative is different to yours.

Merlin 32 is a much better stand in for a LF Vc.

I said:

The Sptifire IIc (the version currently in AH) should be at 16lbs boost as it was historically. I never mentioned the L.III or any of that. If you have issues with what planes HTC modeled then take it up with them.

They didn't model a L.III or IIc w. Merlin 32. I am dealing with what's already in game. As Squire posted the Seafire IIc that is in AH should be at 16lbs boost.

The quickest way to get this thread ignored is to start a whinefest...

Kev367th · « **Reply #6 on:** November 15, 2005, 02:42:15 PM »

Your quote - "This way you get a better representative Seafire as well as a plane that would stand-in for a 16lbs Spit V, mho anyway...
"

If the current seafire is in your opinion represnetaitve i.e. just over 120 in this configuration -
Then a Seafire XV (390 produced) is 3x more representative, and a Seafire III (1200) produced is 6x more representative, and a Seafire XVII (232 produced) is 1.7 times more representative.

Just pointing out representative has zero to do with it.

Bruno · « **Reply #7 on:** November 15, 2005, 02:43:22 PM »

A Seafire IIc @ 16lbs boost is a better stand in for a Spit Vc @ 16lb boost. It's certainly a better match then a IIc w. Merlin 32 running @ 18lbs boost.

Kev367th · « **Reply #8 on:** November 15, 2005, 02:44:30 PM »

Yeah sorry, doing form work, running between server room and a 'sick' pc.

I suppose it depends which V you want it to stand in for.

{edit} For TOD (1943) an LF V is more suitable than an F V, so it would have to be the Merlin 32.

Bruno · « **Reply #9 on:** November 15, 2005, 02:47:58 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Kev367th
Your quote - "This way you get a better representative Seafire as well as a plane that would stand-in for a 16lbs Spit V, mho anyway...
"

If the current seafire is in your opinion represnetaitve i.e. just over 120 in this configuration -
Then a Seafire XV (390 produced) is 3x more representative, and a Seafire III (1200) produced is 6x more representative, and a Seafire XVII (232 produced) is 1.7 times more representative.

Just pointing out representative has zero to do with it.

Keep it in the context of the thread. We are talking about the IIC at 16lbs boost. Anything else you read into to it is just your imagination getting the better of you...

It would be far more representative then one at 12lbs.

Simply going by total numbers would not be accurate either. The most significant combat seen by the Seafire was with Seafire IIc's at 16lb boost.

Kev367th · « **Reply #10 on:** November 15, 2005, 02:51:06 PM »

Interesting considering the Seafire IIc with the Merlin 46 was only a short (120 ish) build with the Merlin 46, and even these were refitted with the Merlin 32.

Anything to back up the most seen in combat was the Merlin 46 one?

Squire · « **Reply #11 on:** November 15, 2005, 03:13:56 PM »

Appreciate the support re the call for the +16 lbs.

...as for anything further, I want PYRO to be able to read this, so if you want to get into a way off topic Seafire thread pls dont do it here, thats for Aircraft and Vehicles, thanks.