Merlin Mk 66 for Spit IX

[Zimme83]

Isnt it time for us to have the Merlin 66 in the spit IX? Our IX is the earliest version with the Mk 61. It would increase speed at sea level to 340mph and climb rate to 4000+ fpm up to 13k.

Pliiiiiz.

http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit9v109g.html

[Karnak]

The Spitfire Mk VIII has a Merlin 66 in AH, and while the Spitfire Mk XVI had a Merlin 266 in reality, in AH the Spitfire Mk XVI is actually a Spitfire LF.Mk IXe also powered by a Merlin 66.

So no, the Spitfire Mk IX in AH should not be swtlitched to a Merlin 66 as that whould shrink Spitfire coverage and variety.  If you want a Merlin 66 just grab a Spitfire Mk VIII or a Spitfire Mk XVI.

[Zimme83]

Its a valid point. Maybe we should wish for a real XVI then.

[Karnak]

Its a valid point. Maybe we should wish for a real XVI then.

It makes very little difference.  Other than the Merlin 266's full throttle height being 1000ft higher they are identical.  It would be more practical to just relabel the Spitfire Mk XVI to Spitfire LF.Mk IXe.

Of course we'd then have people asking for the Spitfire Mk XVI to be added back into the game the way we have people asking for the Bf109G-10 that we never had to be added back into the game.

[Zimme83]

I want my XVI to look like this:


Asking for the HF variant w Merlin 70 meets the same problem (besides noone will use it, like the XIV) so im not gonna ask for that..

[Karnak]

My best guess for why HTC decided to call it a Spitfire Mk XVI rather than a Spitfire LF.Mk IXe is because while most WWII aviation enthusiasts are used to subvariants of Bf109s, particularly Bf109Gs, being massively different, most people think of a given mark of British aircraft as being all the same and HTC likely wanted to avoid confusing less informed players by having a Spitfire F.Mk IX and a Spitfire LF.Mk IXe.

I even see authors mistaking the clipped wings as being relevant to the LF designation.  It really isn't all that complex, not nearly as varied as Bf109Gs, but for whatever reason the Spitfire Mk IX family throws people off.

Spitfire Mk IX family:

Spitfire F.Mk IX = Merlin 61 or Merlin 63, universal wing
Spitfire LF.Mk IX = Merlin 66, universal wing
Spitfire HF.Mk IX = Merlin 70, universal wing
Spitfire LF.Mk IXe = Merlin 66, e wing
Spitfire HF.Mk IXe = Merlin 70, e wing
Spitfire Mk XVI = Merlin 266, e wing

EDIT:

Bubble canopy Mk IXs, Mk XIVs and Mk XVIs missed the war for all practical purposes.  It would be kind of like adding the Me163 or Ta152.  Well, not quite as bad as the Ta152.

[Zimme83]

Clipped wing was more or less a field mod right?

[Karnak]

Clipped wing was more or less a field mod right?

Not so much a mod as an optional configuration for the Spitfire's wing.  The tips could be changed between clipped, standard and extended in about 30 minutes.  I've seen photos of Spitfire HF.Mk IXs (high blown Merlin 70) with clipped wings.  It was just a matter of having the desired wing tips available, unbolting the currently mounted tips (pretty much just a wing end cover for clipped) and bolting the new tips on.

[bustr]

Ask Hitech to allow you the option to take up the MkVIII with empty wing tanks. If you take up an MkVIII with 75% and burn down the wing tanks, then burn down the bottom tank until 1\4 is left, you just about have the beast you really want.

By that point you also have 3-4 minutes flouncing around on WEP before you have to RTB.

Spits in our game are dogs until just before you have to DD out of Dodge. But, those few minutes of just the right amount of weight are intoxicating.

So up a MkVIII with 50% and a dropper.

All of the spits XI and on, the hand book also says to burn some amount of the bottom tank before entering into combat maneuvering. Have you bothered to read up about that and try to burn the tanks to give you the best weight for performance? Both the VIII and XIV need the wing tanks burned down and just a bit of the bottom for the best combat performance.

[Butcher]

I even see authors mistaking the clipped wings as being relevant to the LF designation.  It really isn't all that complex, not nearly as varied as Bf109Gs, but for whatever reason the Spitfire Mk IX family throws people off.

I remember having to learn the whole Spit/Hurri family; that was a headache. Low flying, High Flying; different wings. I'm curious to why Hitech has never added the C or E Wing? The only difference is having the two 20mms and 50 calibers or two 20mms and 4x 303s or simply 4 20mms.

[Karnak]

I remember having to learn the whole Spit/Hurri family; that was a headache. Low flying, High Flying; different wings. I'm curious to why Hitech has never added the C or E Wing? The only difference is having the two 20mms and 50 calibers or two 20mms and 4x 303s or simply 4 20mms.

The universal wing, sometimes referred to as the c wing, couldn't take rockets or the two 250lb bombs, only the centerline 500lb bomb or drop tank.  The guns on the e wing could not be changed.  Both the Mk XIV and Mk XVI have the e wing in AH.

[FLOOB]

What is the diff. tween the g10 we had vs the g10 we didn't have?

[715]

So Karnak, you seem to be an expert in Spits.  I get the impression that HTC has chosen the very earliest and worst versions of each mark (certainly for V and IX).  Can you convince me I'm wrong?  (Here "worst" refers to aspects important to AH combat and yes, this is a whine as I miss having a Spit V that could actually get out of it's own way.)

Example for Spit V:

Source                                                        Type            init ROC fpm    boost
         
Squadron pub 39                                           Vb                   4750   
Sovereign Series Spitfire                                  F.V                 3250             16
Sovereign Series Spitfire                               LF.V                4720             18
AC of WWII  by Chant                                    Vb                   3950   
Spitfire The History, Morgan & Shacklady    F.V or LF.V      4740              18
         
Aces High                                                      V (mil pwr)         2750             8.5
Aces High                                                      V (WEP)          3200             11.5

[Butcher]

The universal wing, sometimes referred to as the c wing, couldn't take rockets or the two 250lb bombs, only the centerline 500lb bomb or drop tank.  The guns on the e wing could not be changed.  Both the Mk XIV and Mk XVI have the e wing in AH.

Correct me if I am wrong, but I remember specifically reading E Wings could have 4x 20mms or 2x 50s and 2x 20mms, it was a production standard as the C-wing wasn't entirely different in production then the E wing?

I only know the Spitfires LF Mk. IX of No. 485 (New Zealand) Squadron had the 50s and 20mms -  can't recall any units who had the C/E wing with 20mms only. I do know the Spitfire F 21 were put into production but only 120 or so were made?

[Karnak]

What is the diff. tween the g10 we had vs the g10 we didn't have?

The "Bf109G-10" we had was actually simply a Bf109K-4's performance data with the option for 20mm cannons, just like the Merlin 61 Spitfire Mk IX had the option for .50 caliber machine guns.  It was a hodgepodge to give players more options.  The Bf109G-10 was 20-30mph slower than the Bf109K-4, it also entered service a month after the Bf109K-4, which means it isn't a gap filler.  We'd need an entirely new flight model to be produced for it, and while having a high alt Bf109 with 20mm cannons would be nice, I think it should be a gap filler, either the Bf109G-6/AS or Bf109G-14/AS.

So Karnak, you seem to be an expert in Spits.  I get the impression that HTC has chosen the very earliest and worst versions of each mark (certainly for V and IX).  Can you convince me I'm wrong?  (Here "worst" refers to aspects important to AH combat and yes, this is a whine as I miss having a Spit V that could actually get out of it's own way.)

Example for Spit V:

Source                                                        Type            init ROC fpm    boost
         
Squadron pub 39                                           Vb                   4750   
Sovereign Series Spitfire                                  F.V                 3250             16
Sovereign Series Spitfire                               LF.V                4720             18
AC of WWII  by Chant                                    Vb                   3950   
Spitfire The History, Morgan & Shacklady    F.V or LF.V      4740              18
         
Aces High                                                      V (mil pwr)         2750             8.5
Aces High                                                      V (WEP)          3200             11.5

I am not as good on Mk Vs.  I don't know their engine progression like I do the Mk IXs.  I do know that our Mk V has metal ailerons, so it isn't the worst possible Spitfire Mk V.  That would probably be Bader's Spitfire Mk Va with fabric ailerons (think Spitfire Mk I roll rates) and eight .303s (again, like the Spitfire Mk I) as Bader strongly advocated for the continuation of the .303 armament whereas others like Malan and Tuck advocated for cannons.  I do know that our Mk V has the earliest engine, but fitted with Miss Tilly's orifice to help with fuel starvation in negative G maneuvering.

Correct me if I am wrong, but I remember specifically reading E Wings could have 4x 20mms or 2x 50s and 2x 20mms, it was a production standard as the C-wing wasn't entirely different in production then the E wing?

I only know the Spitfires LF Mk. IX of No. 485 (New Zealand) Squadron had the 50s and 20mms -  can't recall any units who had the C/E wing with 20mms only. I do know the Spitfire F 21 were put into production but only 120 or so were made?

You're mistaken.  The e wing was strictly two 20mm cannons and two .50 caliber machine guns, it lost the flexibility of the universal wing, but that flexibility was, in practice, almost never used so it didn't matter much.  The universal wing, introduced on Mk Vs in, IIRC, late 1941, had the option of eight .303s or two 20mm and four .303s or four 20mm.  The heating on the outer pair of cannons was inadequate and the performance impact was significant so in practice it was almost always equipped with two 20mm and four .303s.  On Malta it was flown without the .303s.  One or two Mk V squadrons who were tasked with low altitude ground attack did carry the four 20mm and I am aware of some Mk VIIIs in Australian service taking the four 20mm at an individual aircraft level to hunt Ki-46 Dinah's.  I know of no other use of quad cannon Spitfires prior to the F.21.