Clarifications about the Spitfire Mk IX and XVI

[Karnak]

With two minutes of searching, the earliest combat loss I can find with the Mk XVI is a single loss on the 9th of November 1944. There might be an earlier loss.

I can find the following RAF squadrons that operated the Mk XVI in 1944 and 1945 and lost aircraft in combat:

66
124
126
127
322
451
452
453
502
504
601
602
604

That's far from exhaustive, just a quick scroll through a Mk XVI produciton list.

And keep in mind that from a game perspective you'd need to also look at all squadrons that flew the Spitfire LF.Mk IXe as it has almost exactly the same performance, handling and armament.  If you don't think the difference between the two .50s and four .303s is that much, look for all combat by Spitfire LF.Mk IXs which began delivery in mid 1943 as it also had almost exactly the same performance and handling.

The idea that the Spitfire Mk XVI is not appropriate for AH and that aircraft functionally the same did not see combat in mass numbers in WWII is simply misinformation propagated by anti-Spitfire dweebs.

[MiloMorai]

With two minutes of searching, the earliest combat loss I can find with the Mk XVI is a single loss on the 9th of November 1944. There might be an earlier loss.

I can find the following RAF squadrons that operated the Mk XVI in 1944 and 1945 and lost aircraft in combat:

66
124
126
127
322
451
452
453
502
504
601
602
604

That's far from exhaustive, just a quick scroll through a Mk XVI produciton list.

Not all those squadrons operated the Spitfires in WW2.

ie 604:
April 1944    April 1945    de Havilland Mosquito    Mk.XIII
October 1946    May 1950    Supermarine Spitfire    LF.16e

[Ack-Ack]

Spit14? We were talking spit16... DUH, learn the alphabet and to count! : P

Oops, I made a typo. 

ack-ack

[Jabberwock]

Not all those squadrons operated the Spitfires in WW2.

ie 604:
April 1944    April 1945    de Havilland Mosquito    Mk.XIII
October 1946    May 1950    Supermarine Spitfire    LF.16e

Thanks MiloMorai.

I have the first delivery of the Mk XVI to 604 in March 1945 (TD135 'NG-U' delivered 23-3-45) and then two more in April and then about a half dozen in June and July, but it looks like they didn't operate them until well into 1946.

Weird.

That's what I get for not double checking though.

[nooby52]

Karnak, great post. Thanks!

[Debrody]

anti-Spitfire dweebs.

lol at that phrase 

[Wmaker]

The headings of those performance charts for the Spit F.Mk.IX say: "Performance of Spitfire F.Mk.IX fitted with various marks of intercooled Merlin engines". Production F.Mk.IX had Merlin 61 running at 15lbs boost. Those charts list 18lbs boost pressure which most likely means standard Merlin 66 or similar which production LF.IXs / Mk.XVIs had.

[Franz Von Werra]

So some of the posted info is false... and the rest is either not complete, or not sourced...

SORRY, BUT IM NOT TROLLING, JUST STATING THE FACT THAT I AM NOT YET CONVINCED!   

[Ack-Ack]

So some of the posted info is false... and the rest is either not complete, or not sourced...

SORRY, BUT IM NOT TROLLING, JUST STATING THE FACT THAT I AM NOT YET CONVINCED!   

All the info that has been posted showing the Spitfire Mk XVI serving operationally in squadron strength and seeing combat isn't false or incomplete.  The only falsehoods in this thread have been perpetrated solely by you and no one else.  You've failed miserably in trying to prove your point as you've failed time after time to show any verifiable data to prove your point.  All you do is stick your head where the Sun doesn't shine and chant your little mantra of "Luftwaffe had all the aces...." over and over.

Face it Schlowy...you're wrong and it makes you bitter Germany lost the war.

ack-ack

[FLOOB]

Karnak, what happened to the old spit5 and spit9? Why were they changed?

[MiloMorai]

So some of the posted info is false... and the rest is either not complete, or not sourced...

SORRY, BUT IM NOT TROLLING, JUST STATING THE FACT THAT I AM NOT YET CONVINCED!   

What posted info is false?

You expect other people to do your research, dream on. You were given this link, http://www.airhistory.org.uk/spitfire/home.html, so go do your own research on the Spitfire XVI.

[Karnak]

lol at that phrase 

Quite intentional I assure you. 

Karnak, what happened to the old spit5 and spit9? Why were they changed?

Spitfire Mk Vc was changed to Spitfire Mk Vb to fill the empty 1941 spot.  Having the Spitfire Mk Vc and the Spitfire F.Mk IX gave double coverage to 1942 and left 1941 uncovered.  So long as we have the limited number of versions of Bf109 and Spitfires sacrifices have to be made for coverage sake.

The Spitfire Mk IX wasn't changed much.  It retains the same performance it had in AH1, that of a Merlin 61 powered Spitfire F.Mk IX running +15lbs boost.  It simply had the "e" wing options of .50s, 250lb bombs and 60lb rockets removed as they were not appropriate to the F.Mk IX.

[FLOOB]

Why does the spit14 in game perform so differently than described in RAF tactical trials of the spit14?

[Tank-Ace]

Schlowy, as a squad mate, I think you should throw in the towel.

Now I hate them as much as you do, maybe even more, but it's been proven it deserves to be in the game. Just let it go, dude.

[BaldEagl]

let's not reward the skilless with more options.

DA?  Anything you want to fly. 

I mean look at my score.  Certainly you can beat me.