Author Topic: It's official... (Read 8233 times)

Krusty · « **on:** December 16, 2005, 06:41:08 PM »

Spit16 has been out... what, about 4 weeks now? Despite being released half-way into last tour, and only being half-way through this tour, the spit16 has WELL out-stripped the La7 in kills both tours (breaking 40,000 kills for the spit16, La7 being around 30,000 kills). Close runner up N1K2 (only really close contender) was also left in the dust at about 27,000 kills.

I fear nothing in one. I have landed dozens of multi kill sorties in one. I've taken on bombers, dweebs, turn and burners, a 30k afk 190D heading to my HQ, and you name it I've fought it with ease in the spit16. Much as I actually like the ride, I smell a small perk coming.

Grits · « **Reply #1 on:** December 16, 2005, 07:11:45 PM »

I said the first time I flew it that it would be perked, a light one somewhere around the C-Hog, but perked nontheless.

Krusty · « **Reply #2 on:** December 16, 2005, 07:12:29 PM »

Chog? No... How about Ta152? 5-7 perks? Just enough to lessen its use, but enough to make back in 1 good sortie.

EDIT: Probably should have an ENY of 4 lol

Grits · « **Reply #3 on:** December 16, 2005, 07:58:07 PM »

Nah, I am pretty sure I am correct in guessing it will be perked nearly equal to the C-Hog.

Krusty · « **Reply #4 on:** December 16, 2005, 08:11:50 PM »

That sucks... 17 is a bit high for the spit16... but we shall see what the HTC folk say

Kev367th · « **Reply #5 on:** December 16, 2005, 08:49:46 PM »

Heres the sad thing -
IF, a big if, the XVI gets perked, the VIII will be next, and yet again us poor RAF fans will be back to a 1942 Spit IX as the latest available free Spit, or a 1943 Tiffy that was relegated to ground attack.
Yet the other big two continue to have their free 1944/45 planes, hell the RAF hasn't even got 1 1945 plane, free or otherwise.

VIII - Same motor, turns better, rolls worse, better range, climbs as well: all the XVI guys will turn to the VIII.

As I've said all this fuss over what is essentially a 1943 LF IX LOLOLOLOL.

Shame on ya R.J. Mitchell for producing such an uber bird.

Now give us the F.21 and Seafire XV - They are worth perking

.

If it wasn'r for the inevitable "oh not another Spit" whines and we had got something like -

I, II, Vb, Vc, VIII, IX, XII, (free) XIV, XVI then it would have all got spread around, admittedly prob between the Vc, VIII, XII, XIV, XVI.

With his current lineup Pyro has all the different parts (wings, fuse, tail) needed to make any Spit up to but not including the F.21 (new wing design), and up to and including the Seafire XV.

Grits · « **Reply #6 on:** December 16, 2005, 09:30:09 PM »

The XVI out turns the VIII, look for the charts posted earlier this month.

Kev, I am not anti-Spit, I rather like them actually, but put aside your "RAF doesnt have a free '45 plane" Jihad for a second and tell me why the XVI should NOT be perked? It turns with a V, rolls just shy of a 190, accelerates like an La7, and climbs with a K-4. That sounds like a perk plane to me, regardless of year.

Kev367th · « **Reply #7 on:** December 16, 2005, 09:50:20 PM »

Reasons -

Only has 1.12K/D
Acceleration is almost same as La7 up to the XVI top speed (still sub 400mph)
Roll still worse than the 190
Next inline would be the VIII

So perk the 1944 (cough) XVI, everyone moves to the 1943 VIII, perk that, we're back to a 1942 F IX!!!!

Now might be a good time to try a tour with the XIV unperked, see what happens.

The solution is to give MORE options, not take away what little the RAF has.

With the limited (but much better) Spit lineup, of course the XVI is going to see lots of use, it's the best (VIII very similar) performing FREE one, especially for the MA low alt furballs.
Before I get the "Spit has the most of any type ingame", consider this -
The main opponent was the 109 AND 190, which combined has much more than the Spits available.

The reason you don't see a lot of perk the D9, K4 or Pony threads is because both the USAF and LW have many more planes available to them that are competitve in the MA that none gets OVERUSED.
Solution is simple - Give the RAF more FREE options in the 1943 onwards area.
I would guess that even reinstating the old V as an LF Vc with clipped wings would reduce XVI usage.

Lets imagine we hadn't got the XVI, but just the VIII, we'd still be in the same situation.
So are we saying that any Spit produced after the 1942 Spit IX is going to be perked, because thats the way it's heading.
Even heard it suggested the Seafire should be perked to reduce it's usage of CV's - ITS INSANE.

What would be useful is to find out what planes have lost sortie numbers to the XVI, find out were all the 'extra' came from. Obviously the V and IX sorties have dropped.

RE: Turns with a V? - That I'd like to see.

Kev367th · « **Reply #8 on:** December 16, 2005, 10:28:26 PM »

As a follow on -

The problem isn't overuse but lack of choice.
What if we also had the LF Vc, XII, and a free XIV?

Heres WBIII soon be Spit lineup, and this is only up to the VI, still deciding on later models -
Spitfire M03 Mk I
Spitfire M12 Mk II
Spitfire M20 MkIIc
Spitfire M45 Mk Vb
Spitfire M45 Mk Vc
Spitfire M45M LF Vb
Spitfire M55M LF Vc
Spitfire M47 HF VI

(they will have a total of 22 109's covering whole war)

With more choice comes greater diversity, unfortuneately as it stands the current best 'free' Spit is the XVI, take that away, everyone migrates sideways to the VIII.
Then that gets perked also.
It may have been a mistake to replace our old V, maybe the new one should have been an addition instead.

More choice not less is the solution.

Crumpp · « **Reply #9 on:** December 16, 2005, 10:32:29 PM »

Quote

As I've said all this fuss over what is essentially a 1943 LF IX

Examining the science and technology of the aircraft just exactly what should make the Spit XVI so uber? Nothing that I can see.

According to Supermarines published guarenteed performance specs for a production aircraft it only hits 322mph TAS at SL with a maximum speed of 386 mph at . With a 3% variation of course. It's climb is only a maximum of 3900 fpm again with a normal variation.

It should hardly be a perked plane as it nothing but a 1943 LF IX!!

What exactly did HTC model?

Is someone trying to pass 100/150 grade performance off as normal 1943 performance for the type?

According to Shacklady and Morgan, the Spitfire Mk XVI was not using 100/150 grade until after the trials conducted in November 1944. Then it needed to be much faster than it's 100/130 ratings to remain competative with the Bf-109K's and Dora's entering service with the Luftwaffe.

As for any clipped wing Spitfire rolling with an FW-190...

I am sure the RAE thought so when they compared roll data against RAE 1231. Unfortunately that report does not represent the rolling ability of a normal FW-190A in Luftwaffe service. Hence the results when Spitfire pilots flying clipped wing spits were surveyed to see if their combat experience backed up RAE measurements.

http://img129.potato.com/img.php?loc=loc10&image=5b3b7_715_1094128429_rolltestonspit5_9_12_conclusions.jpg

All the best,

Crumpp

Kev367th · « **Reply #10 on:** December 16, 2005, 10:37:29 PM »

It's definately not using 150 grade fuel.

That would give it 25lbs boost and an initial climb rate of 5700fpm.

Even with clipped wings its roll rate is inferior (though better than std wings) when compared to 190.
Your link doesn't work, but it could be the same report which basically says, "yes it's still inferior, but better than standard wings".

Trials were way before Nov 1944, Spit IX's started using 150 grade from May 1944.
Final clearance for 2TAF was Nov 1944, conversions started Dec 1944/Jan 45. Probably because initial 150 grade supplies were provided to sqns tasked with chasing down V1's.

Yes it needed to be faster, thats why the F.21 was being introduced starting Jan 45, although not operational until Mar/Apr 45.
If it wasn't for the end of the war the F.21 would have become the RAF's frontline Spit.

Crumpp · « **Reply #11 on:** December 16, 2005, 10:46:19 PM »

Quote

Even with clipped wings its roll rate is inferior (though better than std wings) when compared to 190.

No it's the one that says "Don't clip the wings, the loss of handling and performance is not worth the small gain in roll rate."

According to Boscome Down, it was November 1944 for the Spitfire Mk XVI.

All the best,

Crumpp

Kev367th · « **Reply #12 on:** December 16, 2005, 10:50:04 PM »

Isn't that the same one that is posted somewhere way back on another thread?
If so I remember some heated debates over it.

Think it basically came down to - If it was so pointless and not recommended why would all the XII and XVI be manufactured with clipped wings, and a lot of V and IX have clipped wings?

Your right Krusty it's not so uber - It's just the best performing FREE Spit, although the VIII is so close its negligable. Thats why it's seeing a lot of use.

As I said the solution is more choice, not less.

Heres an intersting theory - Put in an 1943 LF IX with 20mm's and .303's, clip the wings so its exactly the same performance wise as the XVI. then give it May 1944 150 grade 25lbs boost.
I wonder how many people would choose it over the XVI?
Then also unperk the current XIV and add a perked 21lbs boost XIV.

Crumpp · « **Reply #13 on:** December 16, 2005, 11:01:55 PM »

Quote

Think it basically came down to - If it was so pointless and not recommended why would all the XII and XVI be manufactured with clipped wings, and a lot of V and IX have clipped wings?

That is a good point. They were certainly better than not clipping the wings to combat the FW-190.

However it is also a fact that Spitifire pilots using clipped wing aircraft did not feel they it made much of a difference when fighting FW-190's. It was certainly improvement over a non-clipped wing but still unable to match the Focke Wulf.

It is also a fact that clipping the wings reduced the turn ability, raised the stall speed, lowered high altitude performance, degraded the handling characteristics, and detracted considerably from the fighting characteristics of the aircraft as this report concluded.

Clipping the wings was not a magical solution during the war nor should it be a magical solution in AH.

All the best,

Crumpp

Kev367th · « **Reply #14 on:** December 16, 2005, 11:06:57 PM »

Thats what strange about that whole report -

All the pilots say its definately better with clipped wings, can still outurn the 190 with clipped wings, improvements in lateral control.
Yet the reports conclusion is not to clip the wings, doesn't make sense.

Add to that the mention of seaborne operations - Seafires were flown with clipped wings on trials and had NO problem getting airborne.

The guy writing the conclusion seems to have missed the whole point of clipping the wings.

It's not just the clipped wings thats the difference, the low alt Merlin 66, tall tail, all improved the later Spits over the early F IX we have. Don't forget this is the one that everyone is comparing the new XVI to, or is used to fighting against.

Would be a similar situation if we had been stuck with a Mk I, then HT introduced a clipped wing LF Vc, of course it would seem uber compared to the earlier Mk I.