Author Topic: It's official... (Read 8620 times)

Squire · « **Reply #75 on:** December 17, 2005, 03:46:22 PM »

Was going to mention too, just in regards to testing, its not easy when you dont have the HTC graphs to show what the FTH is with the new 2.06 a/c and you have to guess.

Widewing, remember when you are testing climb to 10k its from on the runway. You get very close #s if you do that. Air starts of 300 mph will throw them way off, although, as you did a comparison, the #s are still worth looking at. Im referring to AFDU tests.

Crumpp · « **Reply #76 on:** December 17, 2005, 04:30:04 PM »

I am not asking for the Spitfire to be perked.

The data error on the Spitfire Mk XVI is 2.7% however, Squire. That is 1.2% outside the range of what Supermarine says the aircraft should be capable of doing. The error is 1.5% above or below listed specifications over a 3% spread.

It is outside what a Spitfire Mk XVI should be capable of doing.

The FW-190A5 data in AH is outside that 3 % spread as well. However it is 2.35% BELOW the average FW-190A5 speed.

The FW-190A8 at 565kph on Erhöhte Notleistung achieves the speed it should without position error applied. We have CAS modeled as TAS.

That is also a 2.3 % error BELOW average speed and outside guarenteed performance.

All in all that puts the FW 190 vs Spit considerably off.

All the best,

Crumpp

Guppy35 · « **Reply #77 on:** December 17, 2005, 07:34:23 PM »

Gonna try one last time on the clipped wings.

It was done to improve the roll rate and because at lower levels the performance loss, as in turn radius was minimal.

They were never meant for high alt work. The reason the XVI was produced with clipped wings as were many of the LFIXs in 44/45 was because they were going to be operating down low with 2 TAF in the ground attack role.

You'll find that Spitfire VIIIs and IXs in the MTO that were operating in this roll were also clipped.

If you look, you'll find that many postwar LFIXs, and XIVs, again operating down low in either a tactical or armed recce roll, had clipped wings.

Go check the Spits postwar that the Belgians got, the Dutch, the Norwegians, the Czechs, the Burmese, the Isrealis and so on. If it was such a disaster clipping them, why did they take the Spits that way?

They got clipped Spits because they were using them down low in a tac air roll.

Had the role of the Spit XVI been something besides 2 TAF ground attack, it more then likely would not have had the clipped wings.

Take it up high and the performance penalty was greater. Down low, where it operated for real and where it operates in AH, it's not a hinderance.

The XII drivers operating at medium to low alts found the clipped wing worked to their benefit as they didn't lose the performace in the turn noticably.

This would apply to the LFVb and LFVc operating in a similar role.

Jeez you guys want to beat it to death sometimes when it's right in front of your faces

And again, for the perk the XVI crowd. Keep in mind the guys flying it are acutally thinking they have a chance when they stay in and fight. Don't take that away. Let em turn and burn for a while. They might learn something.

There are always going to be uber sticks out there who can do wonders in whatever bird they fly. We've all run into them. You can tell the minute that plane does something you know you can't replicate.

I do get tired of the same guys coming around moaning about the Spits. The evidence is there for clipped wings on all kinds of Spit variants, yet somehow the RAF screwed up, the records are wrong, the photo evidence is wrong, the Spit was a dog, etc etc.Heaven help us if the RAF fans had some fun for a change.

Now where's my Spit IX?

Squire · « **Reply #78 on:** December 17, 2005, 07:54:49 PM »

Santa knows you have been good Guppy

Spit XVIE, yes indeed, its role was fighter-bomber at low level, hence the clipped wings.

Do you have "Invasions Without Tears" Guppy? its a great read on 126 Wing with 2nd TAF, and sheds a lot of light on the kinds of missions they flew, although Chris Shores books on simikar subjects probably covers the same ground, but its a more close up look at the ops of a fighter wing in France and Holland from the ground staff as well, and has a lot of interesting bits of info on the daily grind of the campaign. It war written from the memoirs of the Senior Intel Officer attached, F/L M. Berger RCAF.

Crumpp · « **Reply #79 on:** December 17, 2005, 08:16:00 PM »

Quote

Heaven help us if the RAF fans had some fun for a change.

I certainly have to scratch my head at this statement Guppy.

Maybe it is because I fly the CT, an arena they very rarely added the AH Spitfire even in AH1, due to it's unbalancing effect. An effect with little basis in reality. I have to say that if it was "realistic" the Luftwaffe would have been destroyed in 1942.

Quote

The evidence is there for clipped wings on all kinds of Spit variants, yet somehow the RAF screwed up, the records are wrong, the photo evidence is wrong, the Spit was a dog, etc etc.Heaven help us if the RAF fans had some fun for a change.

No one has claimed anything of the sort Guppy. The documentation is clear and says what is written.

As I stated earlier, some chance is better than no chance. It makes sense to clip the wings.

Clipping them did not perform aviation miracles however.

What does not make sense is the fact it seems perfectly ok for some rides to exceed their published specifications while others are consistantly lagging behind.

As long as it good for the fans, right?

All the best,

Crumpp

Guppy35 · « **Reply #80 on:** December 17, 2005, 09:04:04 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Crumpp
I certainly have to scratch my head at this statement Guppy.

Maybe it is because I fly the CT, an arena they very rarely added the AH Spitfire even in AH1, due to it's unbalancing effect. An effect with little basis in reality. I have to say that if it was "realistic" the Luftwaffe would have been destroyed in 1942.

No one has claimed anything of the sort Guppy. The documentation is clear and says what is written.

As I stated earlier, some chance is better than no chance. It makes sense to clip the wings.

Clipping them did not perform aviation miracles however.

What does not make sense is the fact it seems perfectly ok for some rides to exceed their published specifications while others are consistantly lagging behind.

As long as it good for the fans, right?

All the best,

Crumpp

Never claimed the clipped wing was a miracle worker, just trying to clarify the point as to its use.

To be honest, all I go by is what I see when I fly AH. I don't see the XVI as being uber. Like I mentioned I now fly the IX when I fly a Spit cause it works better then the XVI to me.

Folks seem to be concerned that lots of folks are flying the XVI. Yep it does things well. It's easy to fly.

As mentioned before, in talking to a present day Spit driver. His comment was that he thought they should have started pilots training in Spits, then moved them to Tiger Moths and later Harvard/ T6s. It's that easy and forgiving of an airplane.

His group has a Hurricane and a Spit and he often takes the Hurricane because it's more of a challenge to fly.

So be it. So lots of AH pilots are flying an easy plane to fly that has good performance that lets it compete with anything out there in one way shape or form. Now maybe some of the runners will stay in and try and learn to dogfight.

That's my point. Why take that away if it can help make guys more willing to mix it up, instead of HOing and running in their LA7s?

Obviously your last comment is in reference to your concerns about the 190.

You'll not find any spot where I ripped the 190 or said quit complaining or you are wrong about it etc etc.

I hope that it gets to where the LW drivers think it needs to be. So be it for the 109 fans too.

It gets hard as a Spit fan to have been stuck with for so long a 1942 hodge podge Spit IX as well as listening to the whines about the Spit Vc we had.

So now we have 44-45 variants and the call is out that it/they should be perked because too many people are using them. In the end a Spit fan can't win, or at least has to be limited to Spits that aren't too good.

Guppy35 · « **Reply #81 on:** December 17, 2005, 09:05:49 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Squire
Santa knows you have been good Guppy

Spit XVIE, yes indeed, its role was fighter-bomber at low level, hence the clipped wings.

Do you have "Invasions Without Tears" Guppy? its a great read on 126 Wing with 2nd TAF, and sheds a lot of light on the kinds of missions they flew, although Chris Shores books on simikar subjects probably covers the same ground, but its a more close up look at the ops of a fighter wing in France and Holland from the ground staff as well, and has a lot of interesting bits of info on the daily grind of the campaign. It war written from the memoirs of the Senior Intel Officer attached, F/L M. Berger RCAF.

Yep, have Invasion Without Tears. Also have "Blue Skies" by Bill Olmsted, who flew Spits with 126 Wing. Interesting to read alongside the other book.

hubsonfire · « **Reply #82 on:** December 17, 2005, 09:20:46 PM »

Call me crazy, but I think things would be a great deal easier for many of us if everyone else flew crappy planes.

Just my pointless $.02.

Kev367th · « **Reply #83 on:** December 17, 2005, 10:54:56 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Guppy35
It gets hard as a Spit fan to have been stuck with for so long a 1942 hodge podge Spit IX as well as listening to the whines about the Spit Vc we had.

So now we have 44-45 variants and the call is out that it/they should be perked because too many people are using them. In the end a Spit fan can't win, or at least has to be limited to Spits that aren't too good.

45 variant?
Anyway, yup thats the whole point Dan, there isn't a way to win.
It's a lose/lose situation - If we get more variants and therefore spread people out we get "OH NO NOT ANOTHER SPIT", if we get anything halfway decent (and yup it will get used a lot) we get "PERK IT".

People really need to have a close look at the big 3 planesets -
USAF and LW - 60%+ single engine are 44/45
RAF - 30% are 44 (no 1945, a total of 3, and two are perked at this time).

LW - Has more than a few at their MAX performance boost levels
USAF and RAF - Not ONE plane uses 150 grade fuel.

So leave the XVI unperked, let the RAF fans have our toy, the other 2 'sides' have more than their fare share of toys.

OR

Give us more late war RAF birds to choose from.

DoKGonZo · « **Reply #84 on:** December 17, 2005, 11:07:11 PM »

I can see some justification for perking the Spit16. Consider that it's only vices are a lack of armor and a tendency to lose wings at very high speeds. On the plus side it has great visibility (better than any LW plane), decent range with the slipper tanks, one of the best guns packages (better than any other 20mm by a wide margin), and top tier climb, speed, and turn rate. It can fight T&B or B&Z equally well - and with the Hispanos it can afford to HO anything that doesn't have 'em.

So, yeah, obviously people will fly it. And they'll get kills in it - and therefore keep flying it.

Maybe there needs to be more of a sliding scale for perks based on frequency of use. That is, any plane with less than 10 ENY can become perked if it gets flown often enough. NOthing more than 5 perks. So take a simple case. Lets say the top 3 uber rides were the Spit16, La7, and P51D - which is more likely than not. The Spit16 would cost 5 perks, the La7: 3 and the P51D: 1. If at the next checkpoint the distribution changed, then the perks would change. And if none of the sub-10 ENY rides crossed the threshhold of being flown "too much" then they'd stay free.

Dunno ... just an idea.

Kev367th · « **Reply #85 on:** December 17, 2005, 11:09:33 PM »

Would be an idea, but there no way on this green Earth a system would be implemented whereby a Pony may become perked. (think about, you'll realise it will never happen)
Theres enough screams when it gets ENV'ed.

Only here would a Spit XVI possibly cost MORE than a Pony D or Lala.

Personally I think perk cost should be based on K/D ratio, maybe once every 6 months make everything free for 1 tour (apart form 262, 163, Tempest, they deserve perking).
At the end of the tour K/D -
1.5 - 1.99 = 5 perks
2.0 - 2.49 = 10 perks
2.5 --> = 15 perks

So next tour (and the following 5 months) if your ride had a K/D ratio of 1.75 it will cost you 5 perks.
After all isn't K/D ratio an indication of how well a plane does in the MA?

After those 5 months are up, they become free for one month again, would also allow for introduction of new aircraft.

Guppy35 · « **Reply #86 on:** December 17, 2005, 11:12:42 PM »

OK so perk the 1944-45 Spit XVI and give me the 1943 Spit XII. Definately not a 45 bird. It was retired from front line service in September 44 and saw it's 'prime time' use in the Summer and Fall of 43. Clipped wings, the earlier Universal wing with 2 20mm and 4 303. No hard points but able to carry the slipper tanks.

Single stage Griffon III/IV so not a high alt bird.

Give me a 1943 XII and you can perk the rest of em.

I know, there's some reason we shouldn't have a Spit XII too

Kev367th · « **Reply #87 on:** December 17, 2005, 11:18:14 PM »

Guaren'dam'tee a Spit XII would come out perked from the get go.
Hell if people want a Merlin 66 XVI at 1943 performance levels perked for overusage, just how much would a free 'Griffon' Spit get overused.

Main reason for perk - Too dam good.

Its partly the answer though Dan, more choice, not limiting them.
Re-instate the old V, make it an LF Vc, hell even clip it.
Add the XII (free).
Add the LF IXc
Make the XIV free
Change the XVI to a bubbletop.
Add the F.21 perked (between XIV and a Tempest)

More choices = less chance you'll see lots of XVI's.

Pyro even has all the 'parts' available to do all that (apart from redo on the XVI)

Here the current beta lineup for WBIII (later Spits not included yet)
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

Kev367th · « **Reply #88 on:** December 18, 2005, 01:43:01 AM »

Did some comparisons between the last two tours.

As HT doesn't monitor actual sorties the figures are based on deaths. HT reckons it's a good guide to plane usage anyway.

There were 31000+ more deaths last tour than the previous one.
So either -
a) People are playing more
b) More customers
c) More likely a combination of a + b (which is GOOD)

Most planes are around the same ballpark figure for deaths for both tours apart from the Spits -

Spit 9 deaths dropped by 7000+
Spit 5 deaths dropped by 9000+

New Spits tour 70
Spit 8 deaths 8500
Spit 16 deaths 36904

So taking (8500+36904) - (9000+7000) = 29404 more Spit deaths.

Conclusion - Looks like the new Spits are probably the newbies choice of plane, in fact it may be what is drawing them, and perhaps keeps them in AH2.

And people want it perked?
Nothing quite like biting off the the hand that feeds you.

[edit] XVI is the highest scoring La7 killer, and that can't be a bad thing

Waffle · « **Reply #89 on:** December 18, 2005, 02:12:25 AM »

Sorry, I've been drinking and think this is pretty funny:

Now back to your regularly scheduled programming....