If I Like RAF Aircraft

[Hristo]

More chutes to strafe. So be it  

------------------
 
JG2 "Richthofen"

[This message has been edited by Hristo (edited 05-26-2000).]

[Nashwan]

Pongo can you find one of these threads where people have claimed the Spit XVI is as big an improvement as the the 109G10 is?
It's an interesting comparison you make, because the IX and G6 are contemporaries, as are the XIV and G10. Of course we have the G10 already....

[Jekyll]

Guys... lets just give the Spitdw .... errr.. Spitfire Pilots the Mk 22 or 24.

They will then have nothing to complain about and can feel manly and proud as they bounce 'Sturmbock' Fw190A-8s.

Of course, they are still likely to get their tulips handed to them, but at least they won't be able to complain that they don't have a late enough Spitfire version  

[Karnak]

Why do so many hate the Spitfire?

It was unquestionably one of the best aircraft from WWII, yet the general feeling I get is that most people wish it had never existed.

Why?

Sisu

[funked]

Jekyll, I recently got a copy of the Fw 190A-8 manual.  The climb and speed data almost exactly match the plane in AH.  These are data from Focke Wulf for a standard fighter version.

[funked]

*Edited to be less macho*

Jekyll stop ride bashing please.  My squadron flies Spitfires primarly, and we have several guys who I am confident could wipe the floor with most Spit-bashers in a same-plane duel.    

It was lame in WB when it was bashing HO 190's, P-38's, and F4U-4's, and it continues to be lame here.

[This message has been edited by funked (edited 05-26-2000).]

[Pongo]

wow dont get your panties in a not girls.
find it yourself. Look for threads called "what spit do we have anyway?" or stuff like that.
The part about the G6-G10 comparison was mine not anyone elses.I was responding to this..
"The difference between the MkIX and MkXVI, like the difference between the Bf109G-10 and Bf109K-4, is a slight cosmetic difference"
 But you are incorrect. The difference between a G6A-s and a g10 would not be all that great.
If you cant be very effective in a Spit Ix in this game you are incompetent. It is the easiest most forgiving and probably the most deadly plane in the game. When I run into a good e fighter in the spit Ix it is nightmare time.
It probably should have been I guess. Personly I love the plane. I have a 30X20 inch Stained glass spit picture on my deck  window. I have (quick count) 3 spit V models 1 spit IX model and 2 spit XIV models within arms reach of me. More books about it then Fw books.
But its a candy bellybutton plane in AH. Almost any plane you meet you have several advantages over. And then you throw its guns into the equation.
My point about the Spit XVI is still that if the IX is an early version engine wise. Why not give the late war version first and see if that satisfies the girls. Hey an extra 10mph and you would be able to out run, out climb,out turn out dive everything. That would be good practice for when you get your XIV.

 

[This message has been edited by Pongo (edited 05-26-2000).]

[This message has been edited by Pongo (edited 05-26-2000).]

[funked]

Oh that's great Pongo, call the people you are having a discussion with "girls"...

[Nashwan]

Pongo, spend a month flying nothing but a 1942 109g6. See if you still think a 1942 plane is still that effective against late 44 aircraft.
Virtually every other plane a Spit meets has an advantage, it can run away if it's in difficulty. It is far easier to survive in a plane when you can engage or disengage at will. I suppose as a LW fan you enjoy flying a 109G10 against planes that are so much older, but pehaps it would do you good to face a challenge now and then.  
BTW, why is it every RAF thread has to end up as a Luftwaffe debate?

[This message has been edited by Nashwan (edited 05-26-2000).]

[Sundog]

How about we forget this nonsense about Spits. The Spit IX that is in there now can take on anything when flown properly. If we put a late model Spitfire in that can catch P-51Ds and out turn everything but a zero, no one will fly P-51s unless they put in the H model, etc. My guess is they will probably make the Spit XIV, not XVI (I know what you are talking about Nashwan) for one of the uber plane perks. But hey, lets go for the throat! How about Spitefuls and 262s?    

Seriously, I think the late model Spit will be added as a `perk' plane. I would like to see a clipped wing Spit IX though (added to the regular line-up), just because it looks so cool!

       



[This message has been edited by Sundog (edited 05-26-2000).]

[Jekyll]

 

Jekyll, I recently got a copy of the Fw 190A-8 manual. The climb and speed data almost exactly match the plane in AH. These are data from Focke Wulf for a standard fighter version.

Was MW50 factory-installed or was it a field modification?  And is your data for the MW50 version or not?

As for why people don't like the Spitfire, well, I don't know that you're right there.

It's not the PLANE people don't like.  

Personally, I happen to think that the Spitfire, in all its Marks, was perhaps THE greatest air-superiority fighter of WW2.

But I'd still hate to see AH reduced to a one-plane sim, and I really believe that to be the case if the Spit XIV is introduced in the short term.

[Karnak]

Erm, let me say this at the top this time:  I'd be perfectly happy if the Spitfire MkIX was the latest Spitfire they ever put in the game.

Nashwan, I'm going to have to go with Pongo on the having advantages bit.  Yes, almost every plane has some advantages over the Spit IX, but it has the same over them.

As far as the MkXVI out climbing the 109G-10, uh, no.  Nor would it outrun the P-51, P-38, Bf109G-10, F4U, Yak9 or Fw190A-5.  It REALLY is just a MkIX with a Packard Merlin 266 (I was wrong when I said it was a MkIIIV with an American engine).  The MkXVI's engine produces the same amount of power as the MkIX's engine.  The Brits were into giving new mark numbers just because the engines were built somewhere else.  They did that with a Lanc mark as well (same American built Packard Merlin 266s as a matter of fact).  Us low quality colonials, you know.    

Heh, Jekyll.  I can't speak for others, but I definately don't want the Mk22 or Mk24.  If the Ta152 gets added, I'll certainly request the MkF.21 though.

Sisu

[This message has been edited by Karnak (edited 05-26-2000).]

[Pongo]

 

Originally posted by Nashwan:
Pongo, spend a month flying nothing but a 1942 109g6. See if you still think a 1942 plane is still that effective against late 44 aircraft.
Virtually every other plane a Spit meets has an advantage, it can run away if it's in difficulty. It is far easier to survive in a plane when you can engage or disengage at will. I suppose as a LW fan you enjoy flying a 109G10 against planes that are so much older, but pehaps it would do you good to face a challenge now and then.  
BTW, why is it every RAF thread has to end up as a Luftwaffe debate?

[This message has been edited by Nashwan (edited 05-26-2000).]

I fly the 190A8 bub. Its a degraded version of a 1942 plane.
So you are maintaining that the IX is a 42 version now. Was there know real improvment by 45 then?
I was really posting based on the impression I got from this news group severl months ago that there was more that could be done with the mk IX then was implemented in the game.
Thats all. If that is not the case then I appologize for seconding Funkes suggestion. You all probably have better numbers then me to know if there was a diff or not.
 
And I hope soda doesnt strangle me for slagin his ride...
I think it might be more informative for you too try to fly that uber G10 for a few flights..

And this debate was turned into a LW one by your friend Karnack and yourself. I was only saying I hope that the spit guys can get a late war ride that wont destroy the arena. Look at my first very positive response to Funkeds post.
It seems that people are now focusing on the fact that the XVI has a packard. I know that ,lets make it a spit IX buble canopy-high tail-150 octane whatever then...

[Karnak]

Pongo, let me say this again and please, Please, PLEASE read this:  I'd be completely happy if they just left it at the MkIX.

Got it this time?

Yeesh, I even backed you up on the advantages of the Spit IX vs other planes bit.

Where is the LW mentioned?  I'm not having an RAF vs LW debate.  I used 109s as a comparison because the service life of the two aircraft are so similar and allow for comparisons to make things clearer.  Or so I thought.

The only problem I have with what you've said is that you keep calling the MkXVI a late war plame.  Its not.  Whatever its pros and cons are, its still a mid war plane.

Sisu

[This message has been edited by Karnak (edited 05-27-2000).]

[juzz]

Spitfire LF Mk IX(Merlin 66) using 150 Octane, +25lbs boost. Top speed: 360mph at 2,000ft. 390mph at 14,000ft. Climb: 20,000ft in 4.5 minutes. 30,000ft in 8.28 minutes.