The worlds worst planes per the BBC

[Debrody]

Pretty sure. When i was new in this game, tested every single aircraft's turning performance on the deck, with fuel for 10 mins (MA settings).
The Spit V could turn around in ~ 15.3-15.6 seconds while the Seafire needed ~16.9-17.3 seconds for the same move. There was some dispersion between the multiple re-tests.
True, it was in 2010.

Edit: the A6M2, the best turning aircraft before the arrival of the Ki-43 and excluding the Val, completed a sustained turn in ~13.7 seconds while the A6M5 needed ~14.4s for the same move.
Both aircrafts lost quite a lot from the dps while opening the flaps, the Zeeks were up in the 15.9-16.2s range, the Spit V around 16.9-17.3s and the Seafire at 18.2s.

[GScholz]

When you were new I think the Spit V had a higher "late-war" WEP boost. Though I'm not sure it was nerfed before or after 2010...

[GScholz]

You could check the weight in-game just to be sure...

[FLS]

The Seafire weights more, about 440 lbs. The performance charts compare both at the same weight. The performance is approximately equivalent with the Seafire at 25% fuel compared to the Spit V at 100% fuel.

[Karnak]

When you were new I think the Spit V had a higher "late-war" WEP boost. Though I'm not sure it was nerfed before or after 2010...

That was changed when the Spitfires were remodeled.  2005 I seem to recall. We've had a 1941 Spitfire Mk Vb ever since.

[FLOOB]

In AH the spitV turns way better than the seafire II. Without using flaps the La7 has a smaller turning circle and better turn rate than the seafire. On Mosq's list the spitV is number 14, the seafire is number 37.

[GScholz]

That was changed when the Spitfires were remodeled.  2005 I seem to recall. We've had a 1941 Spitfire Mk Vb ever since.

Ok 

[GScholz]

The Seafire weights more, about 440 lbs. The performance charts compare both at the same weight. The performance is approximately equivalent with the Seafire at 25% fuel compared to the Spit V at 100% fuel.

Ok. That makes sense considering the navalization equipment added. It is still a far better fighter than the A6M2 though.

I wonder if we will ever get the most produced Seafire, the L.Mk.III. An upgraded IIc, it had among other imporvements, Hisso V's, a more powerful Merlin (low-blown for better performance at low-medium alt which was typical for the Pacific War) and leading edge fuel tanks in the wings for increased range.

Legendary Grumman test pilot "Corky" Meyer got a chance to fly the Seafire in 1943 at the joint USAAF/USN fighter conference at Eglin Army airfield. His impression:

[Karnak]

I would very much like to see the Seafire L.Mk III added to AH.  

The final fighter vs fighter dogfight of WWII was Seafire L.Mk IIIs against a similar number of A6M5s.  While the Japanese did score, the Royal Navy pilots came off the winners in that one.

[Debrody]

I would very much like to see the Seafire L.Mk III added to AH.  

Which land based version is that Seafire converted from?

It is still a far better fighter than the A6M2 though.

Pretty much. And even more, considering how much developement potential the SpitV had (8, 16, 14, Spiteful) while the A6M2 was actually close to the design's limitations.

[Karnak]

Which land based version is that Seafire converted from?

It wasn't.  Seafire Mk III was the first purpose built Seafire.  Folding wings and everything.

[GScholz]

Technically it was based on the Seafire IIc which was a modified Spit V, but it was a heavily modified design straight from from the factory. (But then again, so was the Spit IX.)

[Karnak]

Technically it was based on the Seafire IIc which was a modified Spit V, but it was a heavily modified design straight from from the factory. (But then again, so was the Spit IX.)

(Image removed from quote.)

Yeah, that is true.  But that is about as true as saying the Spitfire Mk VIII is based on a Spitfire Mk II.  The changes to it were significant to the point that it has to be considered purpose designed  and built.

[GScholz]

Yup.

[Zimme83]

Our 163 pilots shut off their engines for cruise. I've seen guys coax them all the way to the middle of the map through a combination of this and not dropping their gear/carriage.

They're probably referring specifically to the F2A-3, which was horrendously overweight and underpowered. We have the stripped-down B-239, which was an excellent fighter. The export version we sent to the Dutch was similar. It was the British export and the -3 used at Midway that tarnished the F2A's reputation (Boyington thought the earlier marks were wonderful little fighters).

The Brewster engine also overheated in tropic enviroment but worked perfect in the colder Finland. The Finns had a kill-to-death ratio of 25-30 to 1 in the brewster during 1941-44.

from the wikisite: after evaluation of claims against actual Soviet losses, aircraft BW-364 was found to have been used to achieve 42½ kills in total by all pilots operating it, possibly making it the highest-scoring fighter airframe in the history of air warfare

Sure the lack of tactic and training in the soviet air force helped the Finns but it´s still a remarkable acivement.