Why Spitfire MkIA is overmodelled?

[Sup0ng0]

Hola:

Veamos warras, necesito de vuestra ayuda para que traduzcais esto. Llego la hora de un nuevo enfrentamiento entre HTC y MACHOMAN (osea, yo XD XD XD ).

EXPOSICIÓN

Segun las cartas de HTC sobre el Spitfire MkI del Juego AH la velocidad maxima es aproximadamente de 362 millas/horas (unos 580 Km/h) y como me parecio extraña dicha velocidad decidi consultar una obra de ediciones Osprey (que la verdad, no me gusta, me resulta uy parcial en ciertos aspectos, parcial a los aliados se entiende ) y oh, sorpresa, es cierto, elSpitfire MkI realiza las 362 millas/hora (milla mas, milla menos) pero cuidado, en un solo modelo, concretamente el numerado como K9787, el cual ni lleva blindaje ni ningun otro tipo de proteccion y usa una helice de dos palas.
Sin embargo, el modelo numerado N3171 que si lleva proteccion blindada para el piloto y helice Rotor de paso variable de 3 palas da una velocidad maxima de 568 Km/h (conviertanlo ustedes a millas, que no tengo ahora la calculadora a mano XD ) . No dudo qu este Spitfire es mas apto para el combate que el K9787, pero su velocidad queda por debajo del ME 109E4, como asi lo afirmaban tanto pilotos alemanes como Britanicos durante la parte inicial de la 2WW. Segun datos que lei (y que buscare si hace falta) el ME 109E4 daba una velocidad maxima de 575 Km/h, en AH esta sobre los 560 Km/H.

Mis preguntas son:

* Que tipos de Spitfire se a modelado en AH, el K9787 o el N3171?
* Si es el N3171, por que las cartas de HTC dan una velocidad erronea?
* Cual es, segun los datos de HTC la velocidad real de ME109 E4, 575 o 560 Km/h?
* Por que siempre se representa al Spitfire, sea el modelo que sea, mas potente de lo que en la realidad fue?
* Si segun lo leido en los foros de HTC las pruebas britanicas demuestran que el Spitfire V es mejor que el BF 109 F como se explica la proporcion de 4 a 1 en derribos a favor del BF 109 F en el frente del canal y de Africa?
* Ocurre lo mismo con el Spitfire IX de AH? Tambien esta potenciado en su rendimiento frente a la realidad?
* Los datos de HTC sobre el Spitfire IX son los que efectuo la RAF sobre Spitfires modificas para aceptar combustible de 150 Octanos?
* NIKLAS dio unos datos y una explicaciones sobre el rendimiento del BF109 G10 y K4 que resultaron relevantes a todas luces, y demostraron el perjuicio que el BF109 series G tienen en AH, que se piensa hacer al respecto, seguira todo igual o HTC revisara y actualizara las prestaciones de los BF109G y FW190.
* Para cuando un K4?
* Para cuando MW50 y GM1 que, demostro NIKLAS, no estan presente en AH, a pesar de lo que nos estan diciendo?
* Si me van a venir con que el Zoom del Spitfire de AH es superior al del 109 por su superior aerodinamica me gustaria que repasasen los datos comparativos entre el Spitfire IX y el Ha 1112 Buchon, los 2 con el motor Merlin 66.



Ala, ya pueden ustedes llamarme lo que quieran.

Un saludo

Supongo

[Wilbus]

You wanna know why you haven't got any replies yet?

[RRAM]

Supongo, macho, si te traduzco el mensaje como lo has puesto no es q te vayan a responder mal...es q directamente no te van a responder...asi q voy a "suavizar" las aristas de tu mensaje y quitar los puntos offtopic que no tratan sobre el Spit I y el Emil. No es que no quiera traducirte el mensaje, es que asumo que quieres ser oido de verdad. Si quieres poner leña al fuego (pero ser totalmente ignorado), avisame y te lo traduzco integral


He asks for a translation...well I'll translate


According to HTC's charts regarding the Spitfire MkI in AH, its max speed is around 362mph (roughly 580km/h). I found that speed somewhat strange ,so I checked a book about early spitfires, edited by Osprey, and according to it, its true that the Spitfire MkI reaches those 362mph (mph up, or down)...but that only ONE model did it, more exactly the model with the work number K9787, model which used a 2-bladed propeller, but used no armor or extra protection whatsoever.

However, the model numberer N3171, which did carry armor protection for the pilot and Rotol variable-pitch 3 bladed propeller, just was able to reach 568km/h -roughly 352mph-

(supongo, peacho putarra VAGA!! usa la calculadora de windows! ...si es q te tengo q hacer todooooo )


There is no doubt that this Spitfire is much more apt for combat than the k9787, but it's max speed is under that of the Bf109E-4 (as it was, according to pilots germans and british during the first months of WW2). According to certain sources -that I'll search and provide if I'm requested to- the Bf109E-4 reached 575 km/h at its best altitude, while in AH it tops 560km/h


Questions:

*Which type of Spitfire Mk.I is modelled in AH?. K9787 or N3171?

*If it's the N3171, and HTC charts show K9787's speed, that means that the plane's performance may not be accurate?

*According to HTC's data, which is the top speed of the Bf109E4, 575 or 560km/h?



* Si me van a venir con que el Zoom del Spitfire de AH es superior al del 109 por su superior aerodinamica me gustaria que repasasen los datos comparativos entre el Spitfire IX y el Ha 1112 Buchon, los 2 con el motor Merlin 66.

Si tienes algun dato sobre esto, plis, ponlo aqui, no solo di que lo "repasen". No tengo idea de que datos comparativos hablas asi que si tienes algo, usalo y postealo!!!



(Translation: He talks about some comparative test data done on Spitfire IX and Ha1112 "Buchon" -Bf109G with Merlin66 engine-; which show the Ha1112 having a better zoom than the Spitfire IX...I asked him to give the data he has on the matter -may be a good topic to discuss- ).




P.S. for supongo:
Machoman?...jodoooo pues cuando el otro dia te ponias el liguero rosita no decias lo de machoman ehhhhhhhhhh? :;)

[thrila]

yay! i can understand it now:)

[Nashwan]

Google's translations of Spanish to English are funny, but I think I got most of it.


The Spitfire squadrons converted to 100 octane fuel before the Battle of Britain. That allowed much higher boost pressures, up from 6.5lbs to 9 or 12lbs.

The data of HTC on Spitfire IX are the ones that efectuo the RAF on Spitfires you modify to accept fuel of 150 Octanes?

The AH Spit IX has the worst performance possible of all the Spit IX.

Altitude 0ft  5000ft  10000ft   20000ft
AH Spit 320 340mph 360mph 388mph
LF  Spit 336 358mph 380mph 399mph
150 Oct 351 364mph 370mph 388mph

By far the most common of the Spit IXs was the LF model, the middle column in the table. Late in the war, the use of 150 octane became common.

Edit: Started typing before Ram's translation.

[Soviet]

Originally posted by Nashwan
Google's translations of Spanish to English are funny, but I think I got most of it.


The Spitfire squadrons converted to 100 octane fuel before the Battle of Britain. That allowed much higher boost pressures, up from 6.5lbs to 9 or 12lbs.


The AH Spit IX has the worst performance possible of all the Spit IX.

Altitude 0ft  5000ft  10000ft   20000ft
AH Spit 320 340mph 360mph 388mph
LF  Spit 336 358mph 380mph 399mph
150 Oct 351 364mph 370mph 388mph

By far the most common of the Spit IXs was the LF model, the middle column in the table. Late in the war, the use of 150 octane became common.

Edit: Started typing before Ram's translation.

Game balance, The Spitfire IX in AH now is uber enough and there are enough of them.  Add a better non-perked spit and why fly anything else?

[Karnak]

Soviet,

He didn't ask for the Spit LF.IX with 150 octane fuel, he just refuted Sup0ng0's claim that the AH Spit IX had 150 octane fuel, which it most clearly does not.

I agree about not adding the Spit LF.IX, but for purely selfish reasons as I don't think the LF.IX would see staggeringly more usage than the F.IX we have.  I don't want the LF.IX because my Mossie would have more difficulty escaping from an LF.IX than it does from an F.IX.


Sup0ng0,

As to the Spitfire Mk Ia (Maybe RAM can translate) I agree that it is overmodeled, but not so much in speed.  The number I most often see for the Spitfire Mk I is 355mph, which is slightly faster than the usual number for the Bf109E-4 of 352mph.  The points that I find most questionable about the SPit I are its roll rate and its climb rate.  I think both are too high.

On the other hand I think the Spit I and Hurri I both suffer from an excessively sensitve float carburator.  Even the slightest twinge of negative Gs kill the engine instantly.  I don't think it happened that rapidly.

[Nashwan]

Karnak's right, I wasn't asking for a better Spit.

I wouldn't mind seeing an LF IX, normal fuel, as a cheap perk with a Spit icon.

[Chris]

The 362 mph speed most often quoted for a spit mk1 is for aircraft K9787 the first  production model.  It tipped the scales a 5819lbs and lacked,   1. a three bladed prop 2. any armour protection. 3. iff equipment (added 40lbs and  aerials took 2mph off top speed)

By the summer of 1940 the all up weight of a spit I was around 6150 lbs and top speed was around 350 mph.

The mkII was faster but still a bit short of 362mph.

Regards

Chris

[Wotan]

The spit 1 and hurri cut off when ever u pull -1 g.  Your guage always reads +1 so 1 neg manuver would read 0. Thats not excessive. What the problem is you feel no stick forces so it may seem as if it cuts out easily.

There also is no indication ofs fuel starvation when it cuts out. Its on then its off. It returns to full power immediatly.

the spit 1 can zoom with the 109. I think its climb maybe a bit off but I am not sure about its roll. I do think that maybe its a case where the 109 rolls to poorly that it makes it seem like the spit rolls to fast. I cant find any numbers for the 109e4 roll between 200-300 mph. When ever I fly the spit 1 it rolls like a pig.

However as it has been shown bwefore the spit ix rolls better at high speeds then it should so maybe the mk1 roll is off.

[Nashwan]

The spit 1 and hurri cut off when ever u pull -1 g. Your guage always reads +1 so 1 neg manuver would read 0.

1 G is what you get in leel flight.

0 G is just that, zero. Not negative G. The early Merlins should run fine at 0 G.

-1 G is negative G, and should cause a cutout.

[RRAM]

Originally posted by Nashwan

1 G is what you get in leel flight.

0 G is just that, zero. Not negative G. The early Merlins should run fine at 0 G.

-1 G is negative G, and should cause a cutout.

that's not the way I understand it, nashwan.


the Merlin engines of the Spit and Hurri I had a gravity-fed carburattor. That means that the mixture entered the carburator using gravity.


In 1G, the mixture would enter the carburator nice. at 0G the mixture would "float" and not enter the carburator any more, thus cutting the engine.

[Urchin]

At one point in time someone had posted a link to the roll rates for a 109E and a Spitfire I.  The 109E's matched the AH data pretty closely (showing just under 2 seconds for a 90 degree roll between 200 and 300 mph), while the Spit I didn't match it at all (showing OVER 2 seconds for a 90 degree roll between 200 and 300 mph).

As it is, the 109E4 in AH has about an 8 second roll both ways between 200 and 300 mph (above 300 mph it is appreciably worse).

The Spitfire I has a 6 second roll both ways between 200 and 300 mph.

I don't think it is too fast, but it definately rolls to well according to all the secondhand information I've ever seen, and that flight test data.