Author Topic: Clarifications about the Spitfire Mk IX and XVI  (Read 17110 times)

Offline 715

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1835
Re: Clarifications about the Spitfire Mk IX and XVI
« Reply #180 on: October 16, 2013, 01:37:20 AM »
Sorry to be a bit off topic but:

Widewing: I'm confused by your Figure 1.  You describe it as Spit Vc but the figure says Spit Vb.  Am I reading it wrong or is it really a Spit Vc? 

The reason I'm curious is it shows an initial rate of climb of 4700 fpm, which matches most of the sources I have, while the AH Spit V IRoC is an anemic 3200 fpm on WEP and 2750 on mil pwr.

(I really miss the old AH Spit V.  Spit Vs have almost zero usage now in AH MA.)

Offline bozon

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6037
Re: Clarifications about the Spitfire Mk IX and XVI
« Reply #181 on: October 16, 2013, 04:19:43 AM »
Spit V is under used because of the cannon ammo load.

The previous spit V was a later model than our current early spit 9 and completely superior to it in typical arena conditions. The AH FM tends to favor light planes with relatively high power that makes them fly like helicopters.
Mosquito VI - twice the spitfire, four times the ENY.

Click!>> "So, you want to fly the wooden wonder" - <<click!
the almost incomplete and not entirely inaccurate guide to the AH Mosquito.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RGOWswdzGQs

Offline nrshida

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8576
Re: Clarifications about the Spitfire Mk IX and XVI
« Reply #182 on: October 16, 2013, 05:23:09 AM »
How many of the Spitfires Mark XVIs in squadron service had the bubble canopy?

"If man were meant to fly, he'd have been given an MS Sidewinder"

Offline Franz Von Werra

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 410
Re: Clarifications about the Spitfire Mk IX and XVI
« Reply #183 on: October 16, 2013, 08:57:31 AM »
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.

Lyric's book shows 27 built, and it ground attack only! No mention of air to air combat.

Other source in this thread (that I cant find, its too spammed up)...
says... almost 600 total in June 1945 (for both American and England powered engines)
All based in England...
Wikipedia says 1053 but that's total, not by end of war.

No sources that it ever saw combat... you guys post no sources, or too broad of a source, no specifics...
Yes I'm done, none of you have proven anything BECAUSE YOU DONT HAVE SOURCES.
fuel burn 1x please! - '1x Wednesdays?'

Offline Scherf

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3409
Re: Clarifications about the Spitfire Mk IX and XVI
« Reply #184 on: October 16, 2013, 09:24:51 AM »
You're a twerp, sources have been posted up and down this thread.
... missions were to be met by the commitment of alerted swarms of fighters, composed of Me 109's and Fw 190's, that were strategically based to protect industrial installations. The inferior capabilities of these fighters against the Mosquitoes made this a hopeless and uneconomical effort. 1.JD KTB

Offline Baggy

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 193
Re: Clarifications about the Spitfire Mk IX and XVI
« Reply #185 on: October 16, 2013, 10:48:37 AM »
Oh look I found one! That took almost 2 seconds to do!

SUPERMARINE SPITFIRE MK XVI (LF) - TYPE 361 SERIAL TB 752

TB 752 is one of the few surviving Spitfires with a wartime record. Built at Castle Bromwich in the early part of 1944 she entered service with the famous No. 66 Squadron at RAF Linton-on-Ouse in March 1945 bearing the Squadron Code LZ-F. Carrying an armament of 2 x 20mm cannons and 4 x 0.5 machine guns as well as a 500 lb bomb and 2 x 250 lb bombs: she was used initially against road and rail targets in Northern Holland and Germany.

On the 25th March 1945, TB 752 was classified as Cat C AC (badly damaged) after the port undercarriage leg failed to lower for landing, the main damage being to the wing and propeller blades. She was removed to No. 409 Repair and Salvage Unit and re-issued to No. 403 "Wolf" Squadron RCAF on 19th April 1945, operating from Diepholz in Germany and bearing the Squadron code KH-Z. On the 21st April and on his very first flight in TB 752, the Squadron 'C.O.', Squadron Leader 'Hank' Zary DFC RCAF destroyed a Me 109. Four days later Flying Officer David Leslie destroyed an unidentified German aircraft but believed to be a Fw 189 reconnaissance aircraft.

TB 752’s ‘Final Victory’ by Michael Turner On the 1st May Flying Officer ‘Bob’ Young destroyed a Fw 190 and two days later an He 111 bomber fell to the guns of Flying Officer ‘Fred’ Town. - TB 752’s ‘FINAL VICTORY’ which is depicted in the superb painting by Michael Turner (prints of which are obtainable from the sales area). After years of neglect ‘752’ was removed to Manston in 1955 and stood for many proud years as station gate-guardian - but sadly corroding away at an ever increasing rate.

It's not hard is it?

Offline MiloMorai

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6864
Re: Clarifications about the Spitfire Mk IX and XVI
« Reply #186 on: October 16, 2013, 12:44:24 PM »
Lyric's book shows 27 built, and it ground attack only! No mention of air to air combat.

Other source in this thread (that I cant find, its too spammed up)...
says... almost 600 total in June 1945 (for both American and England powered engines)
All based in England...
Wikipedia says 1053 but that's total, not by end of war.

No sources that it ever saw combat... you guys post no sources, or too broad of a source, no specifics...
Yes I'm done, none of you have proven anything BECAUSE YOU DONT HAVE SOURCES.

First, the Spit 16 used Merlin 266 engines (American built). The Spit 9 used Merlin 66 engines (British built).

I gave you the book Bodenplatte. The authors are German. Read it!!! How do you think those 7 claims were made if not in air combat?

Never saw air combat? If you say so. :rolleyes:

Yes it was used mostly for ground attack, as was the Spitfire 9, because they were assigned to the 2cd Tactical Air Force and German a/c were as scarce as chicken teeth.

So you are clueless and lazy. You have the Spitfire link, go read it as the build date, disposition and fate of the Spitfires are there. Please note the the locations of the losses (brush up on your geography).

Offline Franz Von Werra

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 410
Re: Clarifications about the Spitfire Mk IX and XVI
« Reply #187 on: October 16, 2013, 02:48:42 PM »
Just going by what you just posted:
mostly ground attack
7 claims
mostly ground attack
7 claims
mostly ground attack
7 claims... hmmm
Its right there... I can almost put it together... uhh, uhh...
Oh my gosh! A revelation... could it have been VULCHES of parked planes?
Very possibly not "air to air combat"...

I am soooo out of here!  :bolt:
fuel burn 1x please! - '1x Wednesdays?'

Offline Squire

  • Aces High CM Staff (Retired)
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7683
Re: Clarifications about the Spitfire Mk IX and XVI
« Reply #188 on: October 16, 2013, 02:51:51 PM »
At the time and ever since I have lobbied for the designation to be Spitfire LF IX rather than Spitfire XVI (16). As has been stated its the same plane and the version we have would be an example of the 1944 varient with the 50 caliber secondary guns and clipped tips. The only thing that changes its its name:

Spitfire I
Spitfire V
Spitfire IX
Spitfire LF IX
Spitfire VIII
Spitfire XIV
Seafire

Seems easier to follow the types with that list than the one we have. Like the Bf 109K-4 vs Bf 109G-10 I think just going with the 109K-4 made the most sense and was easier for players to understand and eventually HTC changed it to that rather than have 3 versions of the 109G. Maybe they will do the same here and we can ease up on the roman numeral alphabet soup and the obvious confusion with some on the details of the type as evidenced by this thread.
Warloc
Friday Squad Ops CM Team
1841 Squadron Fleet Air Arm
Aces High since Tour 24

Offline MiloMorai

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6864
Re: Clarifications about the Spitfire Mk IX and XVI
« Reply #189 on: October 16, 2013, 03:59:24 PM »
LOL, the crap Barbi spewed was bad enough so if you are out here, that is good as we don't have to put up with your crap any longer. :aok :aok :aok

As for air combat, on Jan 1 1945, 403 shot down a Bf109K-4  :eek: (blaue 16, WNr 331395, flown by Gerf. A. Diesing) and a Bf109G-14/AS :eek: (weisse 1, WNr 758992, flown by Uffz P. Gisevius) from JG27. 403 also got a Fw190A-8, <<, WNr 750093 flown by Fw F. Bachhuber of 15./JG54. They were all shot down by P/O S. Butte. Another 403 claim was a Fw190D-9, :eek: schwarze 14,  WNr 210274 flown by UffzW Schmitz of 6./JG26.

You can do the research for the other 3 claims.

As you have a problem with geography, Evere is in Belgium, near Brussels.

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23047
Re: Clarifications about the Spitfire Mk IX and XVI
« Reply #190 on: October 16, 2013, 04:00:05 PM »
You can't give Franz examples.  If you do that he claims (knowing full well he is misrepresenting things) you are listing the full total activity of the Spitfire Mk XVI, not just a small subset.

So, unless we produce the full documented (on the internet, books aren't acceptable) production (dates included), kills and losses of the Spitfire Mk XVI it won't do any good.  Hence, I advise, just stop responding to him.  It is a pointless task.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline MiloMorai

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6864
Re: Clarifications about the Spitfire Mk IX and XVI
« Reply #191 on: October 16, 2013, 04:13:20 PM »
You can't give Franz examples.  If you do that he claims (knowing full well he is misrepresenting things) you are listing the full total activity of the Spitfire Mk XVI, not just a small subset.

So, unless we produce the full documented (on the internet, books aren't acceptable) production (dates included), kills and losses of the Spitfire Mk XVI it won't do any good.  Hence, I advise, just stop responding to him.  It is a pointless task.

Well when the brain is the size of a pea......

Agree Karnak but other people might be interested.

Offline Tank-Ace

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5298
Re: Clarifications about the Spitfire Mk IX and XVI
« Reply #192 on: October 16, 2013, 04:52:32 PM »
DA?  Anything you want to fly. 

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

Certainly. K4 agreeable with you?

And score matters how, exactly? I'm proof score doesn't matter a wooden dime's worth.
You started this thread and it was obviously about your want and desire in spite of your use of 'we' and Google.

"Once more unto the breach"

Offline Scherf

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3409
Re: Clarifications about the Spitfire Mk IX and XVI
« Reply #193 on: October 16, 2013, 05:42:50 PM »
Production dates, dates on squadron, dates damaged and dates off squadron are all available in the link Milo posted way back. They tie in nicely with Neil Stirling's strength data. There's several publications which deal with the RAF's order of battle, the squadron locations, as well as their claims and losses on a day-by-day basis. The best source for the 2nd TAF even lists times, places, pilot names, serial numbers, in most cases their Luftwaffe opponents etc.

All one needs is a library card, but that presupposes the applicant has the ability to sign his own name.
... missions were to be met by the commitment of alerted swarms of fighters, composed of Me 109's and Fw 190's, that were strategically based to protect industrial installations. The inferior capabilities of these fighters against the Mosquitoes made this a hopeless and uneconomical effort. 1.JD KTB

Offline Widewing

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8800
Re: Clarifications about the Spitfire Mk IX and XVI
« Reply #194 on: October 16, 2013, 05:44:37 PM »
Sorry to be a bit off topic but:

Widewing: I'm confused by your Figure 1.  You describe it as Spit Vc but the figure says Spit Vb.  Am I reading it wrong or is it really a Spit Vc? 

The reason I'm curious is it shows an initial rate of climb of 4700 fpm, which matches most of the sources I have, while the AH Spit V IRoC is an anemic 3200 fpm on WEP and 2750 on mil pwr.

(I really miss the old AH Spit V.  Spit Vs have almost zero usage now in AH MA.)

Good question.

This was a Vb, but it had the Merlin 50. Thus, it's performance will be virtually identical to the Vc. Note the Vb is a little bit lighter, offset by the Vc's clipped wings.
My regards,

Widewing

YGBSM. Retired Member of Aces High Trainer Corps, Past President of the DFC, retired from flying as Tredlite.