Mustang Mk I

[THRASH99]

He's still unable to tell which one of the P-51s Guppy posted is a B and which one is the C.


ack-ack

With an angle like that you won't be able to tell anything, the side view makes them look to alike for the 5th time now

[Guppy35]

With an angle like that you won't be able to tell anything, the side view makes them look to alike for the 5th time now

Please post photos of a P51B and P51C showing me the differences please.

[Karnak]

.303s instead of .50s.

The bottom one is a Spitfire LF.Mk IXe, so no .303s on it, the two aircraft are visually identical.  Spitfire LF.Mk IXe entered service in early 1944.  Spitfire LF.Mk IX with the "universal" wing (two .303s, one 20mm cannon per wing and no underwing bombs) went into service in early 1943, with the same engine as the LF.Mk IXe  In AH our Mk XVI is actually an LF.Mk IXe as its full throttle height is that of a Merlin 66, not a Merlin 266.


TRASH99,

Most of us don't use searches on the internet for data, but rather books from our personal libraries.  You are revealing your ignorance about the subject quite dramatically.  Guppy knows what he is talking about in regards to the P-51B and P-51C.  The only function of having one of each would be to have one with the Malcolm hood, as our P-51B does in the game now, and one without it.

As to what Ack-Ack is saying about the Spitfire Mk XVI that you seem to be missing is that the 23 hours of combat time you are quoting was for a single example of the 1053 Spitfire Mk XVI's that were built.  A great number of other Spitfire Mk XVI's also saw combat and the total combat time for Spitfire Mk XVIs would be in the tens of thousands of hours.

If you want to read over a good site for WWII aircraft information, try:

http://www.spitfireperformance.com/

Contrary to its name, it has primary source documentation for many different WWII aircraft.

[Ack-Ack]

With an angle like that you won't be able to tell anything, the side view makes them look to alike for the 5th time now

Wonder why that is? 


ack-ack

[phatzo]

try this fellas

[B3YT]

there is a small difference between Mk IX Lfe and the XVI.  the tail of the XVI is more pointed and has and extra fuel cell behind the cockpit . but that's it  . Mind you the Packard merlin was 30-70bhp low on power until they re-bored the engine. but after the first 100 that was no longer needed.

[Karnak]

there is a small difference between Mk IX Lfe and the XVI.  the tail of the XVI is more pointed and has and extra fuel cell behind the cockpit . but that's it  . Mind you the Packard merlin was 30-70bhp low on power until they re-bored the engine. but after the first 100 that was no longer needed.

False.  Spitfire LF.Mk IXes built at the same time the Spitfire Mk XVI was in production have those same features.

[Bronk]

The bottom one is a Spitfire LF.Mk IXe, so no .303s on it, the two aircraft are visually identical.  Spitfire LF.Mk IXe entered service in early 1944.  Spitfire LF.Mk IX with the "universal" wing (two .303s, one 20mm cannon per wing and no underwing bombs) went into service in early 1943, with the same engine as the LF.Mk IXe  In AH our Mk XVI is actually an LF.Mk IXe as its full throttle height is that of a Merlin 66, not a Merlin 266.

My mistake then, looks like "tape" over .303 gun ports.

[B3YT]

False.  Spitfire LF.Mk IXes built at the same time the Spitfire Mk XVI was in production have those same features.

Not false the later MkIX did have an extra fuel tank in the  the rear but was not as large as the XVI . also of note the Power of the XVI was more than that of the IX due to the new super charger that was fitted and gave more power allowing it to keep it's performance similar to that of the IXLFe but with extra weight and range. Also note that the oxygen bottles for the pilot were moved out to the wings outside the  20mm cannon  to allow extra fuel into the main fuel tanks and keep CoG in the best place.

weight for Mk IX was 7500lb ,
Mk XVI is 7900lb.



The spit IX also only had 25 rounds of .50cal  for each gun compared to the load out for the XVI OF 250 rpg due to modifications to the internals of the wings. 
The tail on the Spit IX was kept at a blunter  shape that that of the XVI too.

The IX LFe should never be said as the SAME as the LF XVI as though they share the same engine there is a difference in power output of the engines  , internal fuel load , CoG aswell as other minor but important  differences .

[Guppy35]

Not false the later MkIX did have an extra fuel tank in the  the rear but was not as large as the XVI . also of note the Power of the XVI was more than that of the IX due to the new super charger that was fitted and gave more power allowing it to keep it's performance similar to that of the IXLFe but with extra weight and range. Also note that the oxygen bottles for the pilot were moved out to the wings outside the  20mm cannon  to allow extra fuel into the main fuel tanks and keep CoG in the best place.

weight for Mk IX was 7500lb ,
Mk XVI is 7900lb.

The spit IX also only had 25 rounds of .50cal  for each gun compared to the load out for the XVI OF 250 rpg due to modifications to the internals of the wings. 
The tail on the Spit IX was kept at a blunter  shape that that of the XVI too.

The IX LFe should never be said as the SAME as the LF XVI as though they share the same engine there is a difference in power output of the engines  , internal fuel load , CoG aswell as other minor but important  differences .

Please show me some documentation of this.  In particular the rear fuel tank and the ammo loads.

You do understand that there were also low back IXs produced.  As for rear fuselage tanks.  You would be talking about lowback vs high back.  Also note that the use of this fuselage tank was limited and I've yet to come across a WW2 photo of a Spit IX or XVI with it installed in a combat setting.

Also understand if you take the engine out of a Spitfire LFIX and swap it with the engine of a Spitfire LFXVI, you will change one to the other as the designation was purely based on engine type, Packard or Rolls Royce Merlin.  They came off the same production lines.

Go read the pilots notes for the Spitfire IX, XI and XVI.  They are combined as they are all essentially the same airframe.  The E wing is the E wing on both the IX and XVI.  The rear fuselage tank in the high back versions of the IX and XVI carries 75 gallons while the low back carries 66.   Their Type designation at Supermarine were the same, 361 as they were built from the same production drawings.  The VIII for example was Type 360.  The Spit I was Type 300.

The ony difference was the engine, Merlin 266 vs 66.  Packard vs Rolls Royce

[morfiend]

And again, anything that sees less than 30 hours of combat shouldn't be in a game, that's like saying put the centurion tank in the game even though it didn't see any action in WWII.

Nice job finding it on the website, still saw no kills recorded.

 


   http://rcaf.com/


  If you want to see some of the kills and or the amount of sorties that the spitfire XVI flew look here!

 I can't be bothered to direct you to the squadron simply because that would be too easy.

 Now that the hijack is over,an allison powered 51 would make a great addition,if HTC could through it together like they did with the 47M that would be fine. Otherwise I'd like to see many others added before this if it would require a complete new plane developement.

   

[Karnak]

They can't do it like they did the P-47M, morfiend. The geometry on the P-47M is identical to that of the P-47D-40 whereas the Allison engined P-51A would need a fair amount of changes to the geometry of the P-51B.

[B3YT]

The air frame may be the same  but weapon loads (.50 rounds ) fuel loads and CoG were different.   You also didn't  comment on the difference of tail profile.  The different supper charger also kept the power to weight  ratio  the same  ( to compensate for the extra 500lb of weight )  . They are not interchangeable as designations  though they are similar. 


recognition of spit IX LFe are:  clipped wings, high back  ROUNDED tail fin.

Spit XVI LFe : clipped wings , low back , bubble canopy , POINTED TAIL  and mounts to carry 50gl torpedo tank.

 

[Guppy35]

The air frame may be the same  but weapon loads (.50 rounds ) fuel loads and CoG were different.   You also didn't  comment on the difference of tail profile.  The different supper charger also kept the power to weight  ratio  the same  ( to compensate for the extra 500lb of weight )  . They are not interchangeable as designations  though they are similar. 


recognition of spit IX LFe are:  clipped wings, high back  ROUNDED tail fin.

Spit XVI LFe : clipped wings , low back , bubble canopy , POINTED TAIL  and mounts to carry 50gl torpedo tank.

 

Trust me on this one.  It's the same airframe.  The Spitfire LFIXe also used the pointed tail.  Both were produced in low and high back profiles.  Both used normal and clipped wings.  Both had E wings that had mounts for bombs and could carry a single rocket.  Both could carry slipper or torpedo tanks.

Spit HFIXe with pointed rudder


Spitfire LFIXe supplied to the Russians. Note pointed tail, clipped wing etc


High back Spitfire LFXVIe with 45 gallon slipper tank.

[Guppy35]

From the official Air Ministry publication on the Spitfire IX

Note the line  "The Mk XVI is the designation given to the Mk IX airframe when fitted with an American built Merlin engine."