Author Topic: HT: Can we have alternate loadouts for Hurricane IIC please  (Read 392 times)

Offline Buzzbait

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1141
HT: Can we have alternate loadouts for Hurricane IIC please
« on: December 04, 2001, 02:33:00 PM »
S! HT

The Hurricane IIA and IIC were identical except that the IIA was equipped with 12 .303 calibre MG`s instead of 4 Cannon.  

Also, the IIC`s on the Burma Front and elsewhere often removed 2 of the 20mm Cannon.  The pilots found 2 cannon plenty to deal with the lightly armoured Japanese aircraft, and they got improved maneuverability.

The IIA`s often removed 4 of their .303`s as well for the same reason.

Later model IIC`s also got an air to ground rocket loadout identical to the Hurricane IV.

If we could have those loadout options, then it would help the CM group in the design of TOD`s and Scenarios.   :D

                   Thanks Buzzbait

Offline Maverick

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 13958
HT: Can we have alternate loadouts for Hurricane IIC please
« Reply #1 on: December 04, 2001, 03:38:00 PM »
uh oh,

How many versions of the same plane would have to be moddeled? It would make multiple versions of the same airframe like the 109's, F4U's, 190's. Would this take away from adding differant planes to the game?

  :confused:

 
DEFINITION OF A VETERAN
A Veteran - whether active duty, retired, national guard or reserve - is someone who, at one point in their life, wrote a check made payable to "The United States of America", for an amount of "up to and including my life."
Author Unknown

Offline funkedup

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9466
      • http://www.raf303.org/
HT: Can we have alternate loadouts for Hurricane IIC please
« Reply #2 on: December 04, 2001, 04:31:00 PM »
They could handle it like the Spit IX, which is both an IXc and and IXe.  Just call it the Hurricane II, and allow the different armament configurations to be chosen in the hangar.

Offline Buzzbait

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1141
HT: Can we have alternate loadouts for Hurricane IIC please
« Reply #3 on: December 04, 2001, 04:47:00 PM »
S!

Exactly as Funked Up says.  I am not asking for a new plane, just different armaments options, in the same way that the 190A5 can have the FF Cannon removed if the player prefers.

There would be some graphics changes with the IIA armament, although very simple.  The .303`s are enclosed completely within the wing.

Offline Nifty

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4400
HT: Can we have alternate loadouts for Hurricane IIC please
« Reply #4 on: December 05, 2001, 05:26:00 PM »
I thought the E wing could handle either 2 .50s or 4 .303s as it was a "universal" wing.  The C wing on Spits could handle combinations of 4 Hispanos and 8 Brownings (tho I don't think it ever flew with 4 hispanos and MGs at the same time.  was either 8 brownings, 2 Hispanos and 4 brownings, or the 4 hispanos.  I -think-).  Oh, can you imagine the whines if our Spit V was a Mk Vc???   ;)

The IIc was only mounted with 4 cannons.  So it'd have to be like funked said.  Anyways, I'm all for it.  Hell, I'd love flying the 12 Browning version!   ;)
proud member of the 332nd Flying Mongrels, noses in the wind since 1997.

Offline funkedup

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9466
      • http://www.raf303.org/
HT: Can we have alternate loadouts for Hurricane IIC please
« Reply #5 on: December 05, 2001, 11:44:00 PM »
Nifty:  The AH Spit 9 is an F. Mk. IX with Merlin 61.  Pyro said so.  Which means it had C wing.  But in AH we get to use E wing guns too.  So I consider that we have a realistic F. Mk. IXc and a fantasy model F. Mk. IXe with Merlin 61.  I'd like them to disable the E wing goodies on this plane and put in a proper LF Mk. IXe (most common Mk. IX variant by far) replacing the F. Mk. IXc.

[ 12-06-2001: Message edited by: funkedup ]

Offline gabryl

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8
HT: Can we have alternate loadouts for Hurricane IIC please
« Reply #6 on: December 06, 2001, 02:20:00 AM »
Funked, it would be better if we had Spit XVI (bubble canopy) with wing E.


Gabryl

Offline funkedup

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9466
      • http://www.raf303.org/
HT: Can we have alternate loadouts for Hurricane IIC please
« Reply #7 on: December 06, 2001, 02:38:00 AM »
Gabryl, I think you are right.  What a smart man you are.  I know some good markings for such an aircraft.

 

 

Offline gabryl

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8
HT: Can we have alternate loadouts for Hurricane IIC please
« Reply #8 on: December 06, 2001, 03:12:00 AM »
Huh, beautiful pics  :)

Gabryl

Offline Seeker

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2653
HT: Can we have alternate loadouts for Hurricane IIC please
« Reply #9 on: December 06, 2001, 07:26:00 AM »
A Spit question:

How would you classify the various Spits? For instance, it's my understanding that the FW A5's the dogfighter, the A8 the Jabo, the D-9 the buff hunter etc.

I know these classifications are always subjective, but how would you rank the Spits, especially those differeing versions that were produced at the same time? (must be a reason for producing differeng versions at the same time, right?)

I've often heard it said that the Merlin was highly tuneable for a specific alt range, which are the hi/low Spits?

I know the cliped winged varients were low alt, does it follow they were jabo too? That log book Funked posted had almost nothing but Jabo ops in it....

Offline Bombjack

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 55
HT: Can we have alternate loadouts for Hurricane IIC please
« Reply #10 on: December 06, 2001, 08:04:00 AM »
All Spits were dogfighter-interceptors, notwithstanding that post-1944 most were doing ground-attack work.

The special low-altitude versions that I recall are the LF Mk.V, the LF Mk.IX (and XVI) and the Griffon-engined Mk.XII.

The high-altitude variants were the Mk.VII and the HF Mk.IX (not sure if there was an HF Mk.XVI).

Practically speaking the Mk.XIV was a high-altitude variant too, since the Tempest was tasked with air-superiority work at lower altitudes.

Offline gabryl

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8
HT: Can we have alternate loadouts for Hurricane IIC please
« Reply #11 on: December 06, 2001, 08:28:00 AM »
All of Spit XVI were low-altitude version with Packard-Merlin 266

Offline Nifty

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4400
HT: Can we have alternate loadouts for Hurricane IIC please
« Reply #12 on: December 06, 2001, 09:55:00 AM »
:)  well, Spits are classified by their Marks first of all, yeah, I know that's obvious.  The letter after the Mark indicated the type of wing the Spit had in terms of armament.  a was the 8 .303 calibre Browning machine guns, b was the 2 20mm Hispanos and 4 Brownings, c was a "universal" wing which supposedly could handle either a or b sets, or 4 Hispanos and no MGs (this was the standard on the MkVc for example.) and also added pylons for 250lb bombs on the wing, like we see in the Spit IX we have, the E wing was another "universal" wing which added the option to carry 2 .50 calibre MGs instead of the 4 Brownings.  The F designations were for if the plane was to perform better at a specific alt range (L.F., F., or H.F.)  The L.F. models had clipped wings and usually a different engine (at least in the case of the Mk V).  The F and H.F. had full wings but different engines.

Our Spit IX is a F. MkIXc or e.  As funked said, very few F. MkIX Spits were fitted with the e wing, it usually was a c wing with the b armament (how's that for confusing?) so that's why you hear people saying our Spit has options (the .50 cals) it shouldn't have, OR that we should have a L.F. MkIXe instead of the F. MkIXc/e and be done with the argument (and also have an even better Spit for the Main Arena furballs.)

Lastly the Spit IX that we have can carry 1000lbs of bombs (1 500lb centerline, and 2 250's on the wings; I'm not sure about historic rockets for the Spit) so it was a good little JABO bird.  I'd assume they would use L.F. models more for JABO, but I'm sure they put the other models to use in the role as well.

One final thing, some Spits had special air filters put on the intakes for the "tropical" versions that flew in North Africa.

Here's a concise listing of the Marks and variations.  http://www.spitfires.flyer.co.uk/marks.html
proud member of the 332nd Flying Mongrels, noses in the wind since 1997.

Offline Tac

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4085
HT: Can we have alternate loadouts for Hurricane IIC please
« Reply #13 on: December 06, 2001, 10:09:00 AM »
"The Hurricane IIA and IIC were identical except that the IIA was equipped with 12 .303 calibre MG`s instead of 4 Cannon. "

YES! Gimme 12 .303's!! Let the lead fly!  :D  :D

Offline Seeker

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2653
HT: Can we have alternate loadouts for Hurricane IIC please
« Reply #14 on: December 06, 2001, 10:10:00 AM »
Good link, thx!
Can't help it  :), from Nify's link....

If you can't take Ethells word, who's can you take?  :)

Flying a Spitfire
The symbol of Britain's refusal to give up during that dark summer of 1940, the Spitfire won the hearts of both pilots and public in World War II. Regardless of the version, with either Rolls-Royce Merlin or Griffon power, all Spitfire cockpits are virtually identical and wonderfully compact. Climbing in really is (to use a very worn turn of phrase) like pulling the machine on. If everything is done correctly, the Spitfire is one of the easiest aircraft to start. The engine usually fires within two blades and runs like a clock.
While the Merlin-engine versions run very smoothly, the larger Griffon-engine machines feel as if they are angry. The sound from the exhaust stacks and the vibration transferred to the seat of the pants communicates visceral power, almost a desire to go kill something. Any hot-rod lover would enjoy this sensation of unbridled horsepower, this impatience to be turned loose and hunt. Every fighter I've been in is great fun to fly but only a very few are brutally straight about why they exist. The Griffon Spitfire is one such machine.
With enough warmth in the coolant and oil, a flip of the parking brake catch releases the brake lever on the spade control grip and the aircraft is taxiing with minimal power. The first time I had the opportunity to fly a British aircraft with this hand operated air brake system I was sceptical about it being very effective compared to hydraulic toe brakes. Within a very few minutes I was completely won over. It is far easier to manage, particularly on run up when one has to really stand on most American fighter rudder pedals. The source of high-pressure air is controlled by the brake lever on the spade control grip, or stick. The rudder pedals modulate the distribution of pressure to the left and right main wheel brakes. If the pedals are even, equal braking is applied to both sides; as one rudder pedal is applied then more brake pressure is fed to that side. Strength of application is delivered by the hand lever on the grip. The major benefit to all this is having one's feet and legs almost completely relaxed most of the time.
Lining up for take-off is intimidating with that Rolls-Royce engine sticking way out in front. There is no sense in thinking too much about it. Throttle up slowly to prevent a lurch to the right (if in a Griffon Spit where the propeller turns the opposite direction from American aircraft)...left foot moves forward almost in concert with the left hand to keep the nose straight. Monster torque shoves the right wing down rapidly, very much like the P-40, until full left aileron and full (give or take a minuscule amount) left rudder is held. The Rolls is a wounded dragon bellowing horrendously.
There is so much raw power and noise, and you are so tightly focused on keeping everything under control, the actual lift-off at around 90 kts goes by almost unnoticed. Switch hands, move the gear lever down to disengage it from the slot, inwards through the gate and then smartly all the way forward, hold momentarily, then let go. If all is well, the lever snaps outwards through the upper gate, then springs back into the upper slot. Its easy to spot a new Spitfire pilot...the aircraft porpoises as the pilot changes hands and works the gear lever.
Sitting behind this demon V-12 churning out so much power is intoxicating...the earth falls away at a rapid rate, at least for something with a propeller. A look around reveals the excellent visibility out of the bubble canopy. This lessens, to a degree, the impression of being buried within a Spitfire, though that feeling of being a part of the machine does not change. The elevator is very light while the rudder is stiff and the ailerons even more so. Every Spitfire I've flown takes a bit more muscle to roll than most fighters. As speed increases both rudder and ailerons get heavier, resulting in a curious mismatch at high speed...one has to handle the almost oversensitive elevators with a light fingertip touch while arm-wrestling the stiff ailerons. Pilots had to keep this in mind during combat, particularly when going against the FW 190 which had a sterling rate of roll and exceptionally well harmonised controls. That being said, the aircraft is very well balanced and delightful to manoeuvre. Whipping a Spit around the clouds ranks right up there at the top of aviation's great experiences.
The aircraft stalls like a Piper Cub. Though a wing tends to drop, there isn't the slightest mean streak in it unless you cob the power, which produces a very violent torque roll. Power off, gear and flaps down, main fuel tanks full, it stalls at 65 kts, which is ridiculously slow. Add a slight bit of power and that drops to 60 kts. With that enormous snout, I try to make a curving approach to landing at about 100 kts in order to keep the runway in sight as long as possible. By the time I'm rolling out across the field boundary, if at max landing weight, I should be no faster than 85 kts with power and 95 kts in a glide. At lighter weights these speeds can be reduced by 5 kts.
All Spitfires are exceptionally easy to land with no inherent tendency to swerve or groundloop. Just reduce power to idle, flare to a three point attitude and she sets down on a feather almost every time. This is a great surprise to most considering the narrow track undercarriage and full swivel, non-locking tailwheel. Why doesn't it drop a wing violently or make the pilot stomp on the rudders? I wish I knew. The genius of managing to combine light aircraft characteristics with such high performance is nothing short of miraculous compared to most other wartime tailwheel types. One or two landings in the Spitfire and you are in love for life.

[ 12-06-2001: Message edited by: Seeker ]