Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Kweassa on September 07, 2004, 05:42:49 AM

Title: Our AH Spitfires...
Post by: Kweassa on September 07, 2004, 05:42:49 AM
They're all standard "F" aircraft, right?

 Seafire F.MkIIc, Spitfire F.MkVc, Spitfire F.MkIX(c wing/e wing), Spitfire F.Mk.XIV(c wing/e wing)...??
Title: Our AH Spitfires...
Post by: thrila on September 07, 2004, 06:00:30 AM
They were in AH 1.  I don't believe any changes were made- with exception of the spit V.  I'm not sure about the spit V in AHII with the +16 boost
Title: Our AH Spitfires...
Post by: Kweassa on September 07, 2004, 06:23:12 AM
Is it a LF.Mk.Vc then?

 Or, a normal F.Mk.Vc using just higher boost than AH1?
Title: Our AH Spitfires...
Post by: Nashwan on September 07, 2004, 07:33:19 AM
It's a normal F Vc using 16 lbs boost.

The Spit I is the most off, now. It's using enough fuel to be running on 12 lbs boost (which they did on 100 octane fuel), the boost guage claims it's running on 12 lbs.

The performance is only correct for 9 lbs though.

In other words, it's about 15 - 20 mph too slow below FTH.
Title: Our AH Spitfires...
Post by: Guppy35 on September 07, 2004, 07:54:28 AM
The Spit V sure seems to be the new and improved. I prefer it to the IX right now by far, which when you think about it, doesn't make a lot of sense.

Can't think of too many real life Spit drivers  who would have happily given up their IXs for Vs

Dan/Slack
Title: Our AH Spitfires...
Post by: bozon on September 07, 2004, 10:10:28 AM
I jumped into the V the other day for unti-vulch work. This boosted spit V is definitly better than the tuned down IX especially with the new instabilities of the IX. Really feels powerfull when you yank it around, though the maximum speed is still low.

Bozon
Title: Our AH Spitfires...
Post by: leitwolf on September 07, 2004, 12:27:03 PM
SpitV is like a drug now.. Fly it once and you'll never get out of it again..
Title: Our AH Spitfires...
Post by: Dead Man Flying on September 07, 2004, 12:31:05 PM
Soon you will all be assimilated.

Mwahaha!

-- Todd/Leviathn
Title: Our AH Spitfires...
Post by: Squire on September 07, 2004, 12:59:07 PM
The Spit F IX doesnt show its stuff untill you get above 5k. A Merlin 61 Spit F IX wasnt much faster than a Spit V at sea level. Its better as you get higher, up to 30k. Its climberate is also better. As a below 5k dogfighter (Main Arena) the Spit V is almost as good and thats not really surprising. If you had a Merlin 66 Spit L.F. IX the difference would be more pronounced than it is at low level.
Title: Our AH Spitfires...
Post by: Guppy35 on September 07, 2004, 01:19:59 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Squire
The Spit F IX doesnt show its stuff untill you get above 5k. A Merlin 61 Spit F IX wasnt much faster than a Spit V at sea level. Its better as you get higher, up to 30k. Its climberate is also better. As a below 5k dogfighter (Main Arena) the Spit V is almost as good and thats not really surprising. If you had a Merlin 66 Spit L.F. IX the difference would be more pronounced than it is at low level.


Yeah well, all the LFIXE talk has gotten us nowhere :)

Guess we'll have to stick with the boosted Vc.  Now if we can only get em to clip the wings too

Dan/Slack
Title: Our AH Spitfires...
Post by: simshell on September 07, 2004, 03:53:43 PM
what about Seafire?
Title: Our AH Spitfires...
Post by: justin_g on September 07, 2004, 04:44:50 PM
Seafire F.IIc was simply a navalised Spitfire F.Vc - same engine, but slightly heavier. Only 372 built.
Title: Our AH Spitfires...
Post by: Fruda on September 07, 2004, 05:04:24 PM
We should be getting the 1943 and 1944 versions of the Spit 9 and Spit 14, respectively.

The ones we have now are under-powered, and have no reason for the ENY to be so low. There's just no excuse for the 14 to be perked, since it's so under-powered compared to the mainstay 14, which had (I believe) +25 boost.

And our F4U-4 shouldn't be perked at all. It has only slightly better performance than the P-51D (although it's a pain at low speed/low alt), and it doesn't even have cannons.

The solution? We should get an F4U-4C sometime in the future. It was the F4U-4, but with 4x20mm cannons. Oh, and it should definately be perked.
Title: Our AH Spitfires...
Post by: Karnak on September 07, 2004, 05:25:24 PM
F4U-4C did not see sevice in WWII.
Title: Our AH Spitfires...
Post by: Furball on September 07, 2004, 05:37:46 PM
why they decided to model our spit XIV with the version they did to be perked is beyond me.

should have given it bubble hood.

(http://www.vintagefabrics.co.uk/images/nh799_02.jpg)

(http://www.vintagefabrics.co.uk/images/nh799.jpg)
Title: Our AH Spitfires...
Post by: Guppy35 on September 07, 2004, 06:47:55 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Furball
why they decided to model our spit XIV with the version they did to be perked is beyond me.

should have given it bubble hood.

(http://www.vintagefabrics.co.uk/images/nh799_02.jpg)

(http://www.vintagefabrics.co.uk/images/nh799.jpg)


The teardrop canopied birds didn't show until roughly March of 45.  The mainstay 14s were the high backs starting with 610 and going from there.

That applies to the XVIs as well

Dan/Slack
Title: Our AH Spitfires...
Post by: Nashwan on September 07, 2004, 06:58:26 PM
Nice pics Furball.

I'm trying to find a couple of clear pics that show the radiator exits with flaps open and "closed".

Anyone got any suitable?

Thanks
Title: Our AH Spitfires...
Post by: Guppy35 on September 07, 2004, 07:19:10 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Nashwan
Nice pics Furball.

I'm trying to find a couple of clear pics that show the radiator exits with flaps open and "closed".

Anyone got any suitable?

Thanks


From photos in the collection.  Open and closed views close up of a Spit XIV radiator.

Hope the angle works ok

Dan/Slack
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/169_1094602685_spitxivradopen.jpg)
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/169_1094602662_spitxivradclosed.jpg)
Title: Our AH Spitfires...
Post by: Squire on September 07, 2004, 07:41:46 PM
According to this doc, there was little improvement for the XIV at 25 lbs boost.

http://www.fourthfightergroup.com/eagles/merlin66_18_25b.jpg

I think the version we have is plenty fast?
Title: Our AH Spitfires...
Post by: mw on September 07, 2004, 07:56:21 PM
Hello Squire:  That document from 11 July 44 shows that +21 had been cleared but was not yet implemented at the operational level.  This (http://www.fourthfightergroup.com/eagles/no610orb.jpg) page from No 610's ORB shows that their Spit XIV's were modified to +21 about a week later.  The improvement at +21 boost  (http://www.fourthfightergroup.com/eagles/spit14at21.jpg) amounted to about 6 to 8 mph at SL. +25 boost (http://www.fourthfightergroup.com/eagles/merlin66_18_25.jpg) on the other hand yielded much stronger performance, but operational documentation of its use falls into the 109K 1.98 fuzzy area ;)
Title: Our AH Spitfires...
Post by: Fruda on September 07, 2004, 08:07:23 PM
Then, if the F4U-4C didn't see service in WWII, our F4U-4 shouldn't be perked.

Seriously, it out-performs the P-51D, but not enough to warrant a perk price.

And I think that the F4U-1C should have a default perk price of 5, since it's an F4U-1 with 4 20's (and a nicer cockpit).
Title: Our AH Spitfires...
Post by: Fruda on September 07, 2004, 08:09:05 PM
408mph at 4,000 feet with a +25 boost Mk XIV...

Now that's what I'm talking about!!!

Oh, and I like the Spitfire Mk III's superior performance with the Griffon III/IV @ 12lbs boost, compared to the Spitfire Mk IX's Merlin 66 @ 18lbs boost.
Title: Our AH Spitfires...
Post by: mw on September 07, 2004, 08:21:04 PM
Hmm, on further review, RAE Tech Note No. Eng. 316. shows the following for a Spit XIV at 3,000 ft': +18 - 372, +21 - 393, +25 - 410. :)  Those higher boost speeds would have to be for a filled and polished aircraft ;)
Title: Our AH Spitfires...
Post by: Urchin on September 07, 2004, 10:32:13 PM
Fear not, I imagine that after HT fills in the PacWar planeset, and maybe the Russian early-war planeset, we'll get some new Spits.  

I do agree we need a higher performance Spit for the 1945 MA.. the Spit 14 would do the job nicely I think were it not perked.
Title: Our AH Spitfires...
Post by: Furball on September 08, 2004, 08:01:41 AM
Quote
Originally posted by Guppy35
The teardrop canopied birds didn't show until roughly March of 45.  The mainstay 14s were the high backs starting with 610 and going from there.

That applies to the XVIs as well

Dan/Slack


we have the 3 x B.20 option on lgay's, when did they enter service? (i know it was late, im not being a smartarse, just out of curiousity)
Title: Our AH Spitfires...
Post by: Nashwan on September 08, 2004, 08:09:39 AM
Quote
From photos in the collection. Open and closed views close up of a Spit XIV radiator.

Hope the angle works ok


Thanks Dan

The top one is close to perfect, because although it doesn't show the flaps closed, it's easy to see what they will look like closed.
Title: Our AH Spitfires...
Post by: mw on September 08, 2004, 08:13:35 AM
With regards to  Spitfire LF.IX low level speeds the following compilation is interesting:

(http://www.fourthfightergroup.com/eagles/merlin66comp.jpg)

Its quite informative, and rather amusing, to see how what the Air Ministry considered "Normal Maximum Speed"  compares against trials data. Reports posted in full at the Spitfire IX (http://www.fourthfightergroup.com/eagles/spit9.html) page.  See here (http://www.fourthfightergroup.com/eagles/merlin66_18_25b.jpg) and here (http://www.fourthfightergroup.com/eagles/merlin66_18_25.jpg) for Air Ministry figures.
Title: Our AH Spitfires...
Post by: Crumpp on September 10, 2004, 09:37:53 PM
I just did some calculations real quick on the Spitfire Mk Vc Merlin 45 (+16) vs Spitfire Mk IX Merlin 61 (+12).

I am not going to post the actual results because I am just "guesstimating" the engine outputs.

I have 1515hp at FTH for the Spit V at 13000 feet on (+16) boost.
For the Spit Mk IX Merlin 61 I used 1550 since 13000 feet is just below it's FTH.

If anyone has a Horsepower chart for both engines I will run some calculations for you guys.  

Basically my calculations show that for 3 minutes at a time the Spit V has less drag and better performance than the Spit IX.  The Spit IX though can maintain it's performance for 5 minutes instead of just 3.  

The Spit V has alot less weight than the Spit IX but less drag with roughly the same Thrust to Weight.  Their zoom climbs are probably very similar.  In the turn fight the Spit V would win.

However the correct power output could reveal a completely different outcome.

Anyway if you are interested in knowing let me know.

Crumpp
Title: Our AH Spitfires...
Post by: Guppy35 on September 10, 2004, 10:36:15 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Furball
we have the 3 x B.20 option on lgay's, when did they enter service? (i know it was late, im not being a smartarse, just out of curiousity)


Stuff I have says the LA7s were in service in 1943.  An interesting comment by  Author Bill Gunston  "By late 1943 the LA7 was probably the best all around dogfighter in service in the world."

Dan/Slack
Title: Our AH Spitfires...
Post by: MiloMorai on September 11, 2004, 12:47:56 AM
Quote
Originally posted by Guppy35
Stuff I have says the LA7s were in service in 1943.  An interesting comment by  Author Bill Gunston  "By late 1943 the LA7 was probably the best all around dogfighter in service in the world."

Dan/Slack



The development of the La-7 (design bureau designation La-120) did not start until the autumn of '43, with production starting in the spring of '44 at plants in Moscow and Yaroslavl. Service introduction was in the late spring and early summer of '44. The prototype did not fly until Nov. '44.

Among the first units to receive the La-7 was the 176th Guards IAP.
Title: Our AH Spitfires...
Post by: Guppy35 on September 11, 2004, 12:58:59 AM
Quote
Originally posted by MiloMorai
The development of the La-7 (design bureau designation La-120) did not start until the autumn of '43, with production starting in the spring of '44 at plants in Moscow and Yaroslavl. Service introduction was in the late spring and early summer of '44. The prototype did not fly until Nov. '44.

Among the first units to receive the La-7 was the 176th Guards IAP.


Thanks Milo.

Dan/Slack
Title: Our AH Spitfires...
Post by: Furball on September 11, 2004, 03:31:30 AM
i was talking specifically about the 3 cannon armed version with the 3 x B.20's instead of the ShVaks?
Title: Our AH Spitfires...
Post by: rod64 on September 12, 2004, 12:20:03 AM
I have a reference to the La7 and its' gun armament (Green and Swanborough 1995 pp328 para 1):

Quote
The intended armament comprised three 20-mm Berezina B-20 cannon, but while this armament was installed in aircraft built at Yaroslavl, those built at Moscow reverted to the twin ShVAK cannon of the La-5FN.


This was about the middle of 1944.

I think the reference is referring to the B-20 being less common than the ShVAK.
Title: Our AH Spitfires...
Post by: Furball on September 12, 2004, 04:27:08 AM
yup iirc something like 364 were built with the b.20's.

My point was, i think they entered service very late in the war, and its an option in AH....

SOOOoooooooooooooooo..... we should have the option for the bubble hood on the XIV! :D