Can we have our old Spitfire Mk. Vc back?

[B3YT]

I know it was in combat, I'm almost positive it didnt have an Air to Air kill

don't forget that all late war spit IXLFe was pretty was also a Spit XVI  (just an American engine and supercharger assembly )

[Karnak]

don't forget that all late war spit IXLFe was pretty was also a Spit XVI  (just an American engine and supercharger assembly )

Not to mention the fact that our Spitfire Mk XVI in AH is actually a Spitfire LF.Mk IXe.  The full throttle altitude it has matches a LF.Mk IX's Merlin 66, not the Mk XVI's Merlin 266.  Other than the engine, the two are identical.

[Kev367th]

Not to mention the fact that our Spitfire Mk XVI in AH is actually a Spitfire LF.Mk IXe.  The full throttle altitude it has matches a LF.Mk IX's Merlin 66, not the Mk XVI's Merlin 266.  Other than the engine, the two are identical.

Thought they would have changed that by now :-( .
But yes our XVI IS a mid 44 (prior to D-Day) LF.IXe

AH old LF.Vc was a blast, wish we never suggested to ditch it. Would be better if re-introduced clipped though.
Plus the Seafire LIIc or LIII.

Oh well.

[Plawranc]

I want a 4 cannon Spitfire, ohhh the whining I would cause 

[Bruv119]

I want a 4 cannon Spitfire, ohhh the whining I would cause 

screw the 4 cannons just give us the uber mode mk V, clipped options on all that had them and more boost to catch the runners.   

Need to stop nerfing the Spits in AH and let the tears flow   

[dirtdart]

Low density planes et al.....

Why not.  Who cares.  Seriously, you want a clipped spit, why not.  Perk it, why not.  The Mustang 1A with four cannon, sure, why not.

Anything that brings more players into the game, retains people, or for that matter adds to the game.... the better.  I would love to see a "A"/"B"/"C" wing option on a spit in the hanger.  I can pick between 6-8 guns on a jug, 4-6 on a pony, right?   

Why not I say....  every plane....every plane has a weak spot.  Every pilot will never always have an advantage.  There is only one uber ride in this game and we all know what that is right wmaker...

Run with it!

[morfiend]

Just so you know, one of the skins for the Spit XVI is for TB752 KH-Z of 403 Squadron.  It had 4 kills to it's credit, a 109, 190, 111 and FW189.  It still survives in a Museum at Manston England.

  Guppy,

  I was going to bring the 403rd to the attention of those who doubt the air to air kills,but I think the 401st would be a better squadron for these guys to check. It appears there were claims on a 262 September 5th/44.


   

[RTHolmes]

FYI its 403 and 401, not the 403rd and the 401st

thats why my sig doesnt say 71st ...

[AWwrgwy]

FYI its 403 and 401, not the 403rd and the 401st

thats why my sig doesnt say 71st ...

 

Yay!!  RT's #1 pet peave!

 

wrongway

[RTHolmes]

[Guppy35]

  Guppy,

  I was going to bring the 403rd to the attention of those who doubt the air to air kills,but I think the 401st would be a better squadron for these guys to check. It appears there were claims on a 262 September 5th/44.


   

401 was still in IXs at that point as was 403.  They made the switch to the XVI in November-December I believe.

[Krusty]

AH old LF.Vc was a blast, wish we never suggested to ditch it. Would be better if re-introduced clipped though.

Fly the Spit16. Same old UFO. Same old BS.

If you go back before the spitvc we had in-game was over-boosted, you'll find it had this early boost. Whatever reason they decided to over-boost it was a bad one. As-is now the main competing plane in any historic matchup is the  109F4 and the Fw190A5. The over-boosted SpitVs were not a historical match for these early 1942 planes, and was in fact more of a late 1943 performance envelope.

It's the one time frame where the LW might have had an arguable edge in performance over the RAF. And it was a slim margin if that. The late boosted spit5 did not fit.

[Guppy35]

Fly the Spit16. Same old UFO. Same old BS.

If you go back before the spitvc we had in-game was over-boosted, you'll find it had this early boost. Whatever reason they decided to over-boost it was a bad one. As-is now the main competing plane in any historic matchup is the  109F4 and the Fw190A5. The over-boosted SpitVs were not a historical match for these early 1942 planes, and was in fact more of a late 1943 performance envelope.

It's the one time frame where the LW might have had an arguable edge in performance over the RAF. And it was a slim margin if that. The late boosted spit5 did not fit.

LOL don't Luftwhine Krusty, it's not becoming of you   You do understand that the 'clipped, cropped and clapped" Spitfire V was a 1942 development right?

I'm still waiting for those differences on the 109E4 and E7 btw.  Just got myself Radinger and Schick's book on the 109A-E development and production.  It basically says the 109E4/N and 109E7 were the same bird except the E7 had the bomb/DT rack. And of course there was the 109E4/B as well as 109E-1/Bs and 109E-3/Bs  It also talks about the simplicity of the conversion to the DT carrier and that many 109E-1s and E-3s were upgraded to E-7s.  The airframe being the same.

[Krusty]

Oh? Sorry, didn't bother going back to that thread after the trolling started.

100 extra horsepower, give or take (as compared with early E-7s and FTH horsepower), slightly less drag (pointed spinner), early models based off 109E-4/N later models E-7/Z with even more boost at altitude, possible use of 90-round drums on the MF/FF (still hard to find details about this later ammo drum, even Tony Williams couldn't help on the matter of when it was used and where). And, of course, plumbing for the centerlne drop tank to nearly double fuel capacity.

EDIT: As you mention the major parts of the airframe were the same -- but the same is true of 109Es to 109Ks... Essentially the same frame. The total package is different though.


P.S. Outside the "same old BS" that was not a luftwhine. A description of why the overboosted spitvc was not good for AH. Also note the 109F lost use of its gondolas and its bomb (I agree with the gondolas on historic principle but not necessarily the bomb).

[Megalodon]

LOL don't Luftwhine Krusty, it's not becoming of you   You do understand that the 'clipped, cropped and clapped" Spitfire V was a 1942 development right?

I'm still waiting for those differences on the 109E4 and E7 btw.  Just got myself Radinger and Schick's book on the 109A-E development and production.  It basically says the 109E4/N and 109E7 were the same bird except the E7 had the bomb/DT rack. And of course there was the 109E4/B as well as 109E-1/Bs and 109E-3/Bs  It also talks about the simplicity of the conversion to the DT carrier and that many 109E-1s and E-3s were upgraded to E-7s.  The airframe being the same.

Far as I'm concerned lets have the Vc back... I will get my F-4 gondies and egg back as it should be..... 


all good,