Spitfires in tour 110: Late war

[BnZs]

You have told us this multiple times Gup, and I have told you multiple times that the SpitXVI could go by the moniker "Whiz-bang flying shooting thingy#3" and it would not change its performance numbers relative the rest of the plane set one iota, which is what its all about.

You do understand that the most produced Spitfire IX was the LFIX with the Merlin 66, and that the Spitfire XVI is nothing more then a Spit IX with an American Packard Merlin 266 which is the same engine?  Do you think folks would say anything if HTC had called the Spitfire LFXVIe that we have in game, a Spitfire LFIXe instead?

There is no difference between the two outside of the engine manufacturer.  Put a Packard Merlin 266 in a Spit IX and it becomes a Spitfire XVI and  if a Rolls Merlin 66 is put in a Spitfire XVI it becomes a Spitfire IX.  They came off the same production lines and the only way to really tell the difference is a serial number or checking the engine data plate.

The AH Mk IX is the early Merlin 61 version.  As I said the largest number of IXs produced were LFIXs with Merlin 66s rated for low to medium alt work just like the Merlin 266 LFXVI.  The E wing was standard when the XVI was coming off the line, and the IXs coming off the line were also getting E wings at the time.  They were both coming off the line with clipped wings at that point too as the airwar was lower and the increased roll rate was an advantage.

[Sincraft]

No plane is shameful.
And there are no dweeb planes either.

(...)

Edited to prevent Skuzzy's ban stick...

lol

[Guppy35]

You have told us this multiple times Gup, and I have told you multiple times that the SpitXVI could go by the moniker "Whiz-bang flying shooting thingy#3" and it would not change its performance numbers relative the rest of the plane set one iota, which is what its all about.

Ahh, well you seemed to be pointing folks to the IX in that post so I wanted to be clear

I guess I'm of the idea that I don't care what the other guys flies.  And yeah I'd unperk em all if I had my way.  I like fighting 16s in my 38G.  The Spit drivers tend to stay in and fight.

[Dream Child]

It takes almost 18 seconds for the F4U-1C to complete a 360 degree sustained turned, the XVI does it in under 16 seconds.

The F4U-1 series does not out-zoom the XVI... I have tested it, and BnZs can confirm the results.  It's a big myth that our heavier aircraft out-zoom the light aircraft with better power-loading.

At 10k ft the XVI is 4mph faster than the F4U-1C.

A 1k lb bombload is not "decent ordinance?"

1: This only works if you've bled all of the energy off of the F4U-1C and he's not using flaps. If all you're doing is going around in circles though, you might want to change your tactics.

2: Post your test procedures and results.

3: If you're only gonna fight at 10k, fine. If you end up on the deck, the -1C can outrun you even if it doesn't have WEP.

4: No, a 1k loadout can't take down anything other than strats and GV's. I suppose you could hit a town with it, but with only internal fuel if you take 1k of bombs, it doesn't have much loiter time and is not much of an offensive weapon. Even the F4U-1C's ordnance, 2k plus 4 rockets, is one rocket short of being able to kill a VH without extra ammo on target, so even it doesn't always meet minimum requirements for JABO duty.

[Karnak]

You have told us this multiple times Gup, and I have told you multiple times that the SpitXVI could go by the moniker "Whiz-bang flying shooting thingy#3" and it would not change its performance numbers relative the rest of the plane set one iota, which is what its all about.

The thing is, that in this post:

I can't fault you for that...of course the far and away most produced variant was the SpitIX.

The SpitIX is a gentle, forgiving plane for the novices. More gentle than the XVI. The SpitIX still has good energy performance and turn performance...just not enough performance to be double-superior to half the plane set. It also has the coolest skins.

you seem to be saying that Spitfire fans should be in the Mk IX as it was the most common Spitfire, when that is a gross misrepresentation of reality.  That is what Guppy and I were pointing out.  There were far more Spitfire LF.Mk VIIIs or Spitfire Mk XVIs built than Merlin 61 powered Spitfire F.Mk IXs.

[BnZs]

I guess I'm of the idea that I don't care what the other guys flies.  And yeah I'd unperk em all if I had my way.

Since you are against the very concept of perking itself, your opinion on whether or not a specific plane should be perked carries less weight. And if I started an "Unperk the Tempest" thread, to be consistent you would have to support that as well.

I think more plane variety could be promoted in the LW MA by lightly perking the Spit16. Its ubiquity tends to make flying "middle-of-the-road" planes to which it is double-superior or close to double-superior far less viable. Very fast planes can avoid it, and very good turners can play the angles game. (Which usually translates to "make it run away). But there are many planes which have moderate speed combined with moderate maneuverability, but the arena is full of SpitXVIs which have moderate speed plus excellent maneuverability plus top-of-the-line E-building properties.

  I like fighting 16s in my 38G.  The Spit drivers tend to stay in and fight.

Only because they think your P-38G is an easy victim which they will easily out-turn. Been there, done that, as practice leading up to the last Tunisian FSO.

[BnZs]

The thing is, that in this post:you seem to be saying that Spitfire fans should be in the Mk IX as it was the most common Spitfire, when that is a gross misrepresentation of reality.  That is what Guppy and I were pointing out.  There were far more Spitfire LF.Mk VIIIs or Spitfire Mk XVIs built than Merlin 61 powered Spitfire F.Mk IXs.

To be perfectly honest, I need to look up the performance numbers on the LFIXe. But my major point, the SpitIX is still a very competitive plane in the LW MA, and the VIII certainly is. Spitfire fans don't "need" the unperked XVIs anymore than F4U fans need the C-Hog or -4 unperked, so the argument fall back to whether or not relative performance justifies perkage, especially as compared to other planes which are already perked.

[BnZs]

1: This only works if you've bled all of the energy off of the F4U-1C and he's not using flaps. If all you're doing is going around in circles though, you might want to change your tactics.

The sustained turn rate of the XVI is superior to that of the F4U-1c whether or not the C-Hog uses flap, and turn rate is the decisive factor in nose-to-tail turns (think two guys chasing each other in a left turn), whether they are flat or angled. There is a very nice video from Widewing demonstrating how the La5 out-turns the Hog and gains the kill position in sustained nose-to-tail turning, do you think a SpitXIV can't?

In nose-to-nose turns (think flat scissors) radius will be the deciding factor, but the SpitXIVs roll-rate  makes it no push-over here if the pilot manages the throttle AND it can use its superior muscle in the vertical to refuse the scissors entirely.

3: If you're only gonna fight at 10k, fine. If you end up on the deck, the -1C can outrun you even if it doesn't have WEP.

Incorrect. The top speed of the SpitXVI on WEP is 342, exactly the *same* as a C-Hog without WEP. And with the SpitXVI's acceleration being what it is, in no way is the C-Hog guaranteed the ability to disengage at will, even with WEP. Further, the C-Hog's top speed of 356mph at WEP on the deck needs qualification. Here is the chart:



Note that the speed on the deck is a small "bump" it slows down quite abit above there, not getting back to 356 'till 5K...

Now here is the chart for the SpitfireXVI


For all intents and purposes the SpitXVI is as fast as the C-Hog in the 10K and below region where it tends to all happen in the MA anyway. The C-Hog has firepower, a smaller turn radius, and a marginal top speed advantage. The Spit has roll-rate, and a huge advantage in climb, acceleration, and turn rate. I think its very defensible to make the claim that these two should be considered equals for the purposes of perking.

[Guppy35]

To be perfectly honest, I need to look up the performance numbers on the LFIXe. But my major point, the SpitIX is still a very competitive plane in the LW MA, and the VIII certainly is. Spitfire fans don't "need" the unperked XVIs anymore than F4U fans need the C-Hog or -4 unperked, so the argument fall back to whether or not relative performance justifies perkage, especially as compared to other planes which are already perked.

Performance numbers on the LFIXe and LFXVIe are identical.  It's the same bird.  There were a small number of LFXVIe with full span wings too just as there were many LFIXes with clipped wings in 44-45.

Personally I believe the VIII is the better of the 2 stage Merlin Spits in AH.  

The other part for me I guess, is that as long as I've played flight sims, going back to AW in 96 there has been a genaric Spit whine.  It's always the one that the scenario guys tend to have to leave out or limit as the LW guys would get all bent out of shape about it.

Whats the difference in the end if the guy is flying a 16, 9, 8 5 or 14?  

I just don't see the 16 as any kind of arena unbalancing kind of bird.  And getting folks to fly less then uber birds is a bit like pulling teeth.  Do we then tell the 109K drivers they can only fly G6s?  

I'd rather have them enjoy what they fly and feel confident enough to fight.

[E25280]

I think more plane variety could be promoted in the LW MA by lightly perking the Spit16. Its ubiquity tends to make flying "middle-of-the-road" planes to which it is double-superior or close to double-superior far less viable.

Here you are with this nonsense again.

If "ubiquity" is what rates a perk, the Pony is the first in line, not the XVI.

[Karnak]

To be perfectly honest, I need to look up the performance numbers on the LFIXe. But my major point, the SpitIX is still a very competitive plane in the LW MA, and the VIII certainly is. Spitfire fans don't "need" the unperked XVIs anymore than F4U fans need the C-Hog or -4 unperked, so the argument fall back to whether or not relative performance justifies perkage, especially as compared to other planes which are already perked.

The IX is only competitive if you don't mind almost everything else being able to run away from you at will as its top deck speed on WEP is an anemic 321mph while also having on middling acceleration/climb rate, poor range and being very fragile.  Personally, I prefer the Mk VIII, but it is really the Mk XVI that has identical performance to the LF.Mk IX that was the most common Spitfire IX.  Why should Spitfire fans have to use a fighter from mid-1942 against late 1944/early 1945 monsters?

As to your perk reference, Spitfire fans already have a perked Spitfire, the Mk XIV, and look at the stunning usage and success numbers for that thing.

[Guppy35]

To be perfectly honest, I need to look up the performance numbers on the LFIXe. But my major point, the SpitIX is still a very competitive plane in the LW MA, and the VIII certainly is. Spitfire fans don't "need" the unperked XVIs anymore than F4U fans need the C-Hog or -4 unperked, so the argument fall back to whether or not relative performance justifies perkage, especially as compared to other planes which are already perked.

To clarifiy.  I do get what you are trying to say, but it will come down to trying to get folks to fly less then uber birds.  At a certain point folks don't want to do it.

Look at EW, MW LW numbers.  Folks want the latest and greatest.

What would happen if we actually broke it down by years.  39-mid 41 arena.  Late 41 to 42 arena.  1943 to mid 44 arena.  Late 44-45 arena.  Where do you suppose the majority of players would be?

I'm afraid I might not have many with me in the 43-mid 44 arena, and my 38G was long gone for the late 44-45

Look at the folks who fly less then uber birds.  They do it for the history, or the challenge.  But their numbers are minimal compared to the typical MA player who is much more concerned with other things besides that kind of challenge.

[BnZs]

Here you are with this nonsense again.

If "ubiquity" is what rates a perk, the Pony is the first in line, not the XVI.

The Pony is not double-superior to anything except the 190As and Fs. Its out-standing strength is top speed, where it is exceeded by the D9, 109K4, and La7. The latter two out-turn the P-51 as well. It is severely challenged by the Typhoon (actually, Typhoon is  faster down low) which also turns slightly better and the P-47N (practically neck and neck with the Pony at WEP.), which also its equal in maneuverability. It is a poor angles fighter in general. Compared to the set, as far as I know the only fighters which it both out-runs and out-turns are the 190 A-5, A-8, and F-8, and the A-5 can give it a run for its money in a maneuvering fight. Its firepower is about as average as it gets, and its climb and acceleration also leave something to be desired.

You are in fact the one arguing from a position of ignorance and thus spewing nonsense.

[RoGenT]

Just throwing in my two cents here. Well first off, I respect spitdweebs both in the game and the ones who flew it back in WW2. In regarding the game, it is awesome plane with skilled pilot, either with that plane or someone who is skilled in general, its deadly big time. I agree with anyone who likes whatever plane he or she likes the best, by all means fly and fight the way best suited for their style of play.  As for perking the 16, I think the chances of them perking that is about as equal as the chances of  upgrading the pony D; NADA , but I've accepted both and sticking to my beloved pony D.

[BnZs]

  Why should Spitfire fans have to use a fighter from mid-1942 against late 1944/early 1945 monsters?

Most of these unperked late-war "monsters" you speak of have top speed as their *only* real advantage against the XVI, and for many that is not even the case. For instance, the P-38L, 343mph on the deck, P-47D-40, 340mph on the deck, 190 A-8, 349mph on the deck. Speed margins either non-existent or too narrow to give any practical ability to disengage from a SpitXVI with closure on you. As compared to the other so-called  LW "monsters", many, if not most Mid-War planes actually perform better in maneuvering...the exception here being the SpitXVI, whose ubiquity I argue kills the viability of planes with "mid-war"-ish combinations of decent speed and decent maneuverability. The SpitXVI and La7 are the "monsters of all monsters" amongst the unperked. The latter at least is somewhat self-regulated by fuel range and horrible ballistics.

As to your perk reference, Spitfire fans already have a perked Spitfire, the Mk XIV, and look at the stunning usage and success numbers for that thing.

The SpitXIV quite possibly deserves a lower perk price, what is your point? The XVI is arguably the better plane for the MA.

I propose the VIII remain unperked, because although its performance is superficially similar to the XVI's, there are lots of little points where it is inferior, especially roll-rate at high speed, which I think add up.

Oh, btw, before we go any further, I don't hate Spitfires, don't call people flying Spitfires nasty names (the tool is there free for anyone to use...), fly Spitfires in the MA myself, grew up reading about the Battle of Britain, *and* I have a copy of "Spitfire", 1942 with David Niven and Leslie Howard, which I have watched many times and could go into my video collection and put my hands on right now.