Wich Spit IX do we have

[GRUNHERZ]

The real 1944 Americans prefered the F4U1D to the F4U1C.....

[Nashwan]

The real 1943 British prefered the Spit IX LF to the F.
Going through a list of Spit IXs produced, I can't find any that remained in squadron service after the summer of 43. All were either lost on operations, or relegated to various test and training establishments. A few recieved Merlin 63s, with more power, and continued to serve.

[Toad]

Originally posted by MANDOBLE:
Now lets imagine different settings:
- no enemy icons.

Please visit the Gameplay thread and see if you can answer the two questions in the "Visual Realism" thread.

Thanks!

[juzz]

That's only part of the icon matter - the 200ft tall "HERE I AM" red neon signage is the other part...  

[SirLoin]

I don't know why all this talk on Spit IX..I find the Spit V a better killing machine..The most underated plane in AH..  

[MANDOBLE]

Toad, I dont want a "no icons" arena. I was talking only about how the icons and other factors can change the "popularity" of a plane like the Spit.

With our actual icon system, there is no chance to set up "surprise" attacks. Surprise is just one, if not the most important, part of B&Z attacks. Planes like P51 or D9 cant use its extra speed to run-hit-run because they'll be always noticed by the enemy and any highly maneouverable plane, like the Spit, will negate quickly an easy firing solution.

Our actual Spit IX F is a perfect machine for our actual environment. And people are asking for LF version. why? Just because it will be an even most efficient lo-loevel furbaling fighter.

Do we have hi alt buff masses to intercept? no. Do we have very fast med alt jabo formations to intercept? no. Do we have hi alt buff masses to protect? no. Do we have hi-alt vital targets like reconaisanse aircraft? no.

What we have is an up-to-10k constant furballs over bases. And this is where Spit IX LH could shine the most.

Anyway, I'm still waiting for HTC to post SpitIX performance charts to confirm whether our spit is the F or not.

[Vermillion]

Karnak wrote:
 

Is the F4U-1C a 1942 aircraft? No, I didn't think so.

Ohhhh boy..... did you just open up a huge can of worms  

Remember my constant point that the Spit IX in AH is a 1944 aircraft because it has .50 cals? And you guys keep saying that NO its a 1942 plane, but that it just has the 1944 gunset?

Well, the same could be said of the F4U-1C.

The F4U-1C is essentially, a slightly modified F4U-1A.  Where they replaced the x6 .50s with the x4 20mm cannons. Otherwise, its almost exactly the same.

So if the AH Spit is a 1942 plane, then by your arguements, the F4U-1C is also a 1942 aircraft.  

So which way you wanna have it?  

[Nashwan]

The AH Spit IX is an F model, not the LF.
I have done climb tests in it in the past, and they gave the right figures for an F, not the LF.
xHamMerx and Karnak have both done speed tests, and they show it is an F, not the LF.
Considering all your points about icons etc, I take it you would support unperking the Tempest?

[Nashwan]

Vermillion, the F4U-1C was a real aircraft, that entered service in 1945.
The Spitfire F IXE is not a real aircraft, almost certainly no such plane existed, apart possibly from  prototypes.
The US Navy rated 1 Hispano as equivalent to 3 50 cals, and I don't think many people would argue that they are less effective than 3 50cals in AH.
So your real plane, which first entered service in 45, has twice the firepower of the earlier F4U-1.
Our mythical plane has about 14% more firepower than the real Spit IX F.
Anyway, isn't the F4U-1C in AH based on the F4U-1D? Which is a 1944 plane.

[Vermillion]

There's a debate as too whether it was based upon the -1A or the -1D depending on which source you use, but if I remember right, the navy documents that F4UDOA presented here on the -1C showed it was based upone the -1A.

Really the only difference in the -1D and the -1A even, was the addition of ordinance pylons on the wings, and a change to the fuel tanks/system.

The entire F4U-1 line is very very similar.

[Nashwan]

Verm, you've seen for yourself from the performance figures this is a basic 1942 Spitfire. It has the wrong armament option, but 2 50cals in place of 4 303s, when you already have 2 Hispanos mounted is hardly significant, especially as the E armament adds weight. (Does AH model the added weight?)
Whichever way you look at it, the Spit was one of the great planes of WW2, one of the few that was in from the begining to the end. In AH it is in from the begining to 42, and that is a travesty.
Imagine the wailing and whining if the 109f4 and 109g2 were modelled, and no others, or cast your mind back to when the 190a5 and a8 were the only 190s (and the a5 was the best of the a series)
Verm, my very first post on this board was
 

Please don't flame me as it's my first post and I'm just looking trying to find an online sim I can join.
As I understand it the only RAF aircraft in Aces High is the SpitIX. Why are other British aircraft like the SpitXIV and Tempest from early 44 only considered for inclusion along with late/post war planes like the TA152 and P51H?

(it was an uberplane discussion)
your response was
 

Nashwan currently there is no Ta-152H or P-51H in the game, and I don't expect to see them anytime soon. There is the Fw190A8 (1944) and the P-51D (1944).
The Spitfire Mk IX in the game is a 1944 model F.

It has just been announced officially, that the very next new plane after this coming version will be the Typhoon Ib.

Realistically, I would also expect to see the Spit XIV and the Tempest, at least someday.

So I don't think the British Pilots are getting the short end of the stick.

Hell if you want to see it bad, just look at the Russian (VVS) aircraft in the game. Their most advanced model is the La-5, which is a midwar 1943 aircraft. They deserve a La-7, or a Yak-3, or a Yak-9U.

At least the Spit IX is competitive in the arena.

What's changed since then (Feb 2000).
The Spit IX has been proved to be a 1942 model. Of the 3 planes you say the Russians deserve they've got 2. The Tempest is in, as the most expensive perk.
It's been a year and a half since then, and the RAF planeset hasn't moved with the others. Every non perk British fighter has a K/D of less than 1/1 against other fighters.

[MANDOBLE]

Originally posted by Nashwan:
Considering all your points about icons etc, I take it you would support unperking the Tempest?

In out actual arena (furball-oriented, long range enemy icons), Tempest should keep perked (IMO, also SpitIX, La7 and Yak9U) and Ta152 unperked.

In a mission oriented arena, with no icons, mass hi buff formations, etc. Tempest should keep perked, as Ta152, P51 and 190D9. Perhaps, even 109G10. Everything else, unperked.

I know this is not a thread related to perk or unperk Tempest or anything else.
But, IMO, perking or unperking should be related to the type of arena we have. For example, in a ground combat oriented arena (lots of tanks, flaks, etc) the perked ones should be the hvy jabos (F4U, Typh, P51, P38 and P47). In a hi buff oriented arena, the perked ones would be the interceptors (109G10, D9, P51, P38, Ta, Tempest). In a furball related arena (our actual arena), the perked ones would be the pure dogfighters. And so on.

[Pongo]

You guys are fogging the issue for no reason.
A real 1944 spit ix lf(or spit xvi) with a merlin 66  and a bubble canopy and clipped wings would be a great addition to the high cost non perk stable of AH.
As would a 4 hispano Spit Vc.
There is no reason at all not to include these aircraft. They where common variants of one of the most signifigant and recognised Aircraft of the war.
They will not unballance anything except to make the current spit ix more rare. That is fine with me deligate it to Dieppe scenarios where it belongs.
This has nothing to do with the chog the la7 the ta152 or the space shuttle. It has to do with a reasonable request for a relelvent version of a non uber but very competitive plane to be added to the game.

[Hooligan]

2 comments.

1) Pongo's last post makes a lot of sense.

and in answer to the question what spit IX do we have?

2) All of them -- every single one ever manufactured.  I know this cause I saw them in one place last night.

Hooligan

[gripen]

Why not a clipped wing Spitfire V with that low altitude Merlin 50M (18lbs boost). Lighter than the IX and less drag (smaller radiators). Who cares what happens above 10000ft  

Gripen