Time for the Spitfire Mk.XII.

[Guppy35]

The Vb has a wing specific to a 20mm cannon and 2 303s.  It's cannon is fed by a 60 round drum

The Vc has the universal wing that allows for belt fet 20mm doubling the amount carried.  The tropical Vc would also have the Vokes filter under the nose that changes the look and performance

[RTHolmes]

As for the Spits.  I'd love it if they updated the Seafire to the Seafire III.  I'd also like the IX to be an LFIX.  And if I'm really wanting something done, I'd wished for a clipped Spitfire Vb and a Tropical Spitfire Vc to cover the MTO birds and the Aussies

Seafire LF Mk.III for sure, and maybe junk our IIc for the earlier Ib for use in earlier snapshots/events (if there were any significant ones)?

the IX probably should be a clipped LF version (although imagine the whines about a MW "XVI"), which leaves no HF version (which we really should have). maybe a HF Mk.VIII or VII?

how similar is the seafire to seafire II, IX to be LFIX?

Seafire LF Mk.III had beefier low-alt optimised engine with ejector stacks, clipped wingtips (like our XVI), Mk.V Hispanos (like the Tempest), wing tanks (like VIII) plus some more carrier mods.

our IX is the HF version, the LF had low-alt optimised engine and (generally) clipped wingtips.

[oakranger]

OK, so there really not much to do on the changes. 

[gyrene81]

Just want to clarify.  As an example.  How many P47 operational variants?  I count 1 B model, 4 C models,  24 different D models, 2 G models, 1 M model, 4 N models.  That totals 35 production model P47s.

And the first production Jugs rolled off the line 5 years after the first Spit.  BTW it was an all metal aircraft.  No wood in the production

Based on your description of production models, the Spit list would be the I/II as the II was built in a different factory then the I, similar to the P51B vs C.  The Spit V, the Spit VI, VII VIII, IX/XVI and XII, XIV and 21.

So that's 9 production variants vs your 6 P47s and the Spit was in service 5 years prior to the Jug. 

Ok, there were 21 variants of the D model which consisted of minor improvements.

However, the Spitfire did use wood and fabric on the control surfaces, some even used spruce inside the wings, especially the early models. I thought it was common knowledge among the Spit fans.

The skins of the fuselage, wings and tailplane were secured by rivets and, in critical areas such as the wing forward of the main spar where an uninterrupted airflow was required, with flush rivets. In some areas, such as the rear of the wing, the top was riveted and the bottom fixed by woodscrews into sections of spruce later, pop-riveting would be used for these areas.
From 1943 on, flush riveting was used throughout the entire airframe; the first version of the Spitfire to change to flush riveting being the Mk XII Supermarine Spitfire (Griffon powered variants) closely followed by all Castle Bromwich built Mk IXs. At first, the ailerons, elevators and rudder were fabric-covered. However, when combat experience showed that fabric-covered ailerons were impossible to use at high speeds, fabric was replaced with a light alloy, enhancing control throughout the speed range.

[RTHolmes]

no wood was used in the control surfaces, they were alloy, originally fabric covered. after BoB in late '40 they were alloy skinned.

no wood was used inside the wings. the clipped version of the replaceable wingtips were, however, made from a block of wood (they were only a few inches wide.) iirc the standard and extended tips were all alloy.

[Bronk]

So, we would not need a LFIX since there is no difference? It would be like asking for the P-51K where it the exactly the same as the "D" except the prop is 2 inch shorter. 

less fuel= less weight, no retractable tail wheel, different tail configuration


This is just off the top of my head.

[Karnak]

our IX is the HF version, the LF had low-alt optimised engine and (generally) clipped wingtips.

No, our Mk IX is a Merlin 61 powered F.Mk IX.  Spitfire HF.Mk IXs were powered by the Merlin 70 and were optimized for even higher altitudes.

[Kev367th]

Lets clear up the Seafire -
IIb - Converted from RAF F.Vb's
IIc (as in-game, maybe) - Merlin 46, only produced for approx 2 months (maximum)
LIIc - Improved low alt Merlin 32 engine (remaining production), all IIc converted to LIIc
LIII - Merlin 55M, first Seafire with folding wings, MOST common of all the Seafires manufactured.

Prod numbers -
IIc / LIIc - 372
LIII - 1220 or 1218 (sources quote both numbers)

Interestingly the Navy didn't learn from their mistake with the Merlin 46 on the IIc and the LIII started off as an FIII with a Merlin 55. Very quickly changed to a Merlin 55M. Looking at pics it seems a great many LIII were flown clipped off carriers.

All used the standard Spit Hispano (no Mk V's).

Reason for 'maybe' on the in-game model - In-game model seems to be hybrid Merlin 45 F.Vb with a 'c' wing.

[RTHolmes]

No, our Mk IX is a Merlin 61 powered F.Mk IX.  Spitfire HF.Mk IXs were powered by the Merlin 70 and were optimized for even higher altitudes.

oh yeah, got it into my head our IX was the high alt version because its our high(er) alt version. we need an HF merlin spit!

[Kev367th]

Be intersting if it would be possible to change things to support different engine configs from the hanger (can't be done at the moment)

So you pick a IX and get a choice of -
LF IX - With Merlin 66
F IX - With Merlin 61
HF IX - With Merlin 70

Maybe include a choice of wing tips also.

[SgtPappy]

Seafire LF Mk.III had beefier low-alt optimised engine with ejector stacks, clipped wingtips (like our XVI), Mk.V Hispanos (like the Tempest), wing tanks (like VIII) plus some more carrier mods.

our IX is the HF version, the LF had low-alt optimised engine and (generally) clipped wingtips.

Not all Seafire L III's had clipped wings. For some reason, they were also designated L III's and not 'LF Mk.III'. Don't know why, maybe Guppy can answer that.

Also, Spitfire F IX's were starting to be equipped with a Merlin 63 rather than the 61 when the LF and HF designations came about, but I don't think we'll have a chance to have a 63-powered Spit IX 

[RTHolmes]

All used the standard Spit Hispano (no Mk V's).

got that from wiki, dont laugh though the reference is morgan and shacklady. by coincedence I ordered a copy last week, hasnt arrived yet though. I'd bet my car guppy has a copy

[froger]

I'M thinking we need a few new 190s and extend the two week trial to four weeks
just to see what happens next.


I guess a few new British dweeb rides wouldn't hurt either.

while we are at it, why not make it all radar all the time and remove strats and towns just to be safe 




froger

[RTHolmes]

my book finally arrived

Production of the (Seafire) Mk III was increasing and with it many major modifications were being added on the line. The Hispano Mk II cannons were replaced by the Mk V, a short barreled light weight weapon. The wing was also adapted to receive four 25lb or 60lb head rockets; two x 250lb GP bombs; one x 500lb bomb under the centre section.

theres also plenty of pics of Mk IIIs with the Mk V hispanos - the short barrel is a dead giveaway.

edit: theres also 2 versions of some docs for transporting Mk IIIs including a table of weights for removable items, one says "20mm Hispano cannon" the other says "20mm Mk V Hispano cannon."

I'm making the case for a clipped L Mk III with Mk V hispanos and proper bomb/rocket loadout

[Viperius]

+1  

Without the Spitfire you all would be speaking german today  

And also Spits > any US Plane   When in doubt, check my sig which is from an US Pilot