Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Kev367th on August 02, 2005, 12:23:28 PM
-
This is what he is thinking of -
Spit I - 12lbs boost if sufficient evidence.
Spit Vb - 12lb boost (hold on don't scream)
Spit F IX - Fix of current Spit 9
Spit LF VIII - Maybe if he thinks enough use for it.
Spit F XIV - Possibly 21lbs boost
Spit LF XVI - At 18lbs boost initially, possibly 25 in future (clipped wing)
Seafire III - Merlin 55M with high boost as current Spit V
PS check cost of Spit 14, it's down to 15 perks. :)
Thanks for taking the time to chat Pyro. If I got anything wrong please correct.
PS Anyone got climb rate figures for a Spit 16 @ 25lbs boost. The only thing putting Pyro off it is his figures show a climb rate of 5000-5700fpm.
-
Sounds reasonable to me, although I'm not a big fan of adding that many extras. I'd definitely be behind the Spit I, Spit Vb, Spit F IX, Spit XIV and Seafire III changes that you have down there. We need more difference between the Spit V and the Spit IX most definitely, and adding another carrier based plane wouldnt be a bad thing.
-
imo spit 16 should be clipped wing.
-
It will be 1K3, tried to talk him into adding bubbletop also, but too much extra work :(.
Not adding another CV palne, it is replacing the IIc.
It will be basically our current Spit V (same motor and boost) but it can carry ord.
The XVI is being added to fill the late war 'free' spit gap we currently have.
As I said check the MA now, the Spit 14 is now a base 15 perks.
OHH HELL :)
Spit 16 @ 18lbs boost
0- 5000ft = 5000fpm
5000 - 10000ft - 4970fpm
10000 - 15000ft - 4970fpm
15000 - 20000ft - 4280fpm
20000 - 25000ft - 3720fpm
-
"It will be basically our current Spit V (same motor and boost) but it can carry ord." - Nope thats incorrect.
Seafire L.IIIc had a Merlin 55M with +18 lbs boost. Not +16. All the Seafire IIIs had the low alt Merlin "Ms" that boosted +18. These are late 1943-45 varients. Spit IIc had a Merlin 46, not the same animal at all.
I beleive the source can be found on the Spit performance page re the Seafire IIIs engine.
...my source is "Spitfire in Action".
The Spit F. VIIIc was widely used in MED, ITALY and FAR EAST.
Agree on the Spit 16 (XVI) should be an E wing (20mm and .50s) with clipped wings and 3 weapon pylons. Since they all served in late 44-45 Im not sure there is a "non 150 octane" version though. They all served in NW Europe with 2nd TAC AF.
The Spit Vb +12 looks ok to me, the Spit F. IX can make up the slack for 1942. You cant have everything and compromises have to be made. Its a good 1941-42 fit.
-
Sorry I meant 18lbs boost for the Seafire III.
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
This is what he is thinking of -
Spit I - 12lbs boost if sufficient evidence.
Spit Vb - 12lb boost (hold on don't scream)
Spit F IX - Fix of current Spit 9
Spit LF VIII - Maybe if he thinks enough use for it.
Spit F XIV - Possibly 21lbs boost
Spit LF XVI - At 18lbs boost initially, possibly 25 in future (clipped wing)
Seafire III - Merlin 55M with high boost as current Spit V
PS check cost of Spit 14, it's down to 15 perks. :)
Please, please yes.:eek:
This looks like a very nice lineup Pyro. I would love to see it in AH.
I would really like to see the Spit VIII in as well. I'd understand not getting it, but I would rather see it than the clipped wing XVI if they'd both be at +18lbs boost.
I do like the reduction on the Spit V's boost and turning the Spitfire Mk IX we have into a proper 1942 Spitfire F.Mk IX.
StarOfAfrica2,
The problem is that your list leaves big, gaping performace gaps in the WWII Spitfire lineup that simply cannot be fudged away. The fact is that the Spitfire was the main RAF fighter through nearly the entire war, excepting only the very start when there were more Hurris, and it served in many progressive versions that had distictive performance changes.
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
OHH HELL :)
Spit 16 @ 18lbs boost
0- 5000ft = 5000fpm
5000 - 10000ft - 4970fpm
10000 - 15000ft - 4970fpm
15000 - 20000ft - 4280fpm
20000 - 25000ft - 3720fpm
geeez
I knew the +25 boost is an OVERKILL:D
here's the one with +25
Altitude feet / Rate of climb Ft Min.
0 / 5740
5,000 / 5080
10,000 / 5080
15,000 / 4470
20,000 / 3720
25,000 / 2950
30,000 / 2200
that kind of rate of climb is close to that of MiG 15s and F-86s.
-
There is a very good book by Dr Alfred Price from Osprey Publishing "Spitfire Mk I/II Aces 1939-41 (1996)"
Pages 18-19 have a section on 100 Octane fuel (Spring 1940) the increase to +12 lbs from +6 lbs on the Mk.I, and 3 bladed Rotol and De Havilland prop types.
Its readily available at many US bookstores for about $18.00.
http://www.warweb.com/books/osprey/aircraft.html
-
Here is another point, did Seafires ever serve off land bases? If not, then should they be only CV enabled?
-
Originally posted by Karnak
Here is another point, did Seafires ever serve off land bases? If not, then should they be only CV enabled?
Yes they did Karnak., in the CBI at least if not more places.
Dan/CorkyJr
Looking forward to that clipped XVI high back. Thanks Pyro :)
-
Originally posted by 1K3
imo spit 16 should be clipped wing.
Spit XVIs were all produced with clipped E wings and three hard points.
Dan/CorkyJr
-
Depends on the map and scenario Karnak. PTO? ETO? MED? 44? 45?
For the "most part" Seafires served aboard the RN CVs and CVEs, just like "most" USN squadrons did with F6Fs and F4Us. There were some exceptions.
Seafire IIIs did serve with the Combined Naval Spotting Pool of 2nd TAC AF in 1944 for Normandy. They did a lot of odd jobs incl escort and sweeps despite the odd name of the unit. Detachements did serve on land in the Far East as well. You really need a book to get all the info, too much for me to type right at the moment.
-
1K3 - True, but the main reason for the 25lbs boost would have been the extra 30+mph for catching the 190/109s.
Even then they are still both faster on the deck than a Spit 16 with 25lbs boost.
Just give you a better chance of catching them if you had some alt on them.
What Pyro is wary of is the climb rate with 25lbs boost.
:( Just noticed and it's got to be wrong -
New ENY values
Pony - 6
Seafire 2c - 6
Spit 5 - 6
Thats insane????????????????????????????????????
getting worried bout the ENY for a Spit 16, prob up there with a Lala.
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
:( Just noticed and it's got to be wrong -
New ENY values
Pony - 6
Seafire 2c - 6
Spit 5 - 6
Thats insane????????????????????????????????????
getting worried bout the ENY for a Spit 16, prob up there with a Lala.
As is natural for one of the best fighters of the war, no? I would be surprised if the Mk XVI had anything other than a 5 ENY value.
As to the ENY of the Spit V and Seafire IIc:
t isn't based on any particular performance numbers, just on usage. HTC allows the players to determine where the true overall performance advantage rests. ENY values just follow the resulting usage.
-
On Kev
If spit LF 16 (with +18 merlin 266) is not fitted witth bubble canopy then spit LF 16 is just a spit LF 8 with an american built engine.
Imo bubble top should be added for spit just like what N.A. did to upgrade P-51B to P-51D mustangs.
-
Originally posted by 1K3
On Kev
If spit LF 16 (with +18 merlin 266) is not fitted witth bubble canopy then spit LF 16 is just a spit LF 8 with an american built engine
Not exactly.
The Mk VIII would be full span instead of clipped, have two 20mm Hispano Mk IIs and four .303 Brownings instead of the two 20mm Hispano Mk IIs and two .50 Brownings, have some refinements like the retractable tail wheel and more fuel.
-
MKII a/b is missing for me
-
Can anyone guess how LF spits will do in fites. Will it be a TnB-er or BnZ/Knife fighter?
-
Originally posted by 1K3
On Kev
If spit LF 16 (with +18 merlin 266) is not fitted witth bubble canopy then spit LF 16 is just a spit LF 8 with an american built engine.
Imo bubble top should be added for spit just like what N.A. did to upgrade P-51B to P-51D mustangs.
Not quite, the LF XVI was basically a LF IX with an American built Merlin 66.
Mk 8 had other differences, retractible tailwheel being one.
-
Looks like a decent list. However, as I pointed out previously having a single Spit V (in this case a b @12lbs max) isn't 'fair' to the RAF fans.
Currently there is no LW plane to match match that time frame. There is no E-7 (DB601N), there's no F-2 or FW 190A-2.
If the Spit Vb that AH currently has was brought up to a true Spit Vc, and keeps the 16lbs boost, I think that would be more fair. Then if in the future (or even now) a Spit Vb @ 12 lbs could be added.
Just my 2 cents...
-
Wotan,
I agree, but as StarOfAfrica2's post indicates there are many that think even one addtional Spit is too many and that what we have now is fine. The one or two more that Pyro plans on adding isn't going to make them happy, let alone the idea of seeing multiple Mk Vs.
-
The Spitfire whiners will whine about whatever Spit they are fighting.
There can never be 'too many variants'. That's just silly. There needs to be as many variants as necessary to make ToD viable through out the war years.
The Spit V with 12lbs boost was in service in Feb '41 (Mason) and in July/August '42 @ 16lbs boost.
The F-4 entered service in June '41 (it was fully deployed by July '41).
The Spit V @ 12lbs had 6 months with out an F-4 then about a year facing it.
The easy thing to do I guess would be just to drop the 16lbs Spit V but I would hope that HTC look at the possibility of doing both. I am not sure how much differences there would be in the physical model but IIRC they are close enough that one, different skins would work.
As for the Spit Mk1a there's no question that it should run at 12lbs (100 octane). Its silly to make claims like 'just because I think...' with out any supporting evidence. The evidence is pretty clear that the Spit 1 could run at 12lbs boost as of March 1940 and fitted with CP props by Aug...
Spit LF XVI @ 25lbs boost would surprise me. This would make its 'usefulness' in ToD and in events very limited.
Spit I - 12lbs
Spit Vb - 12lbs
Spit Vc - 16lbs
Spit F.IX - no more Hybrid
Spit LF.VIII - great choice
Spit F.XIV - I never thought the 14 was all it was hyped up to be. Maybe 21lbs will change that.
Spit LF.XVI - 18 lbs would be the best choice
-
Originally posted by Wotan
The Spitfire whiners will whine about whatever Spit they are fighting.
There can never be 'too many variants'. That's just silly. There needs to be as many variants as necessary to make ToD viable through out the war years.
The Spit V with 12lbs boost was in service in Feb '41 (Mason) and in July/August '42 @ 16lbs boost.
The F-4 entered service in June '41 (it was fully deployed by July '41).
The Spit V @ 12lbs had 6 months with out an F-4 then about a year facing it.
The easy thing to do I guess would be just to drop the 16lbs Spit V but I would hope that HTC look at the possibility of doing both. I am not sure how much differences there would be in the physical model but IIRC they are close enough that one, different skins would work.
As for the Spit Mk1a there's no question that it should run at 12lbs (100 octane). Its silly to make claims like 'just because I think...' with out any supporting evidence. The evidence is pretty clear that the Spit 1 could run at 12lbs boost as of March 1940 and fitted with CP props by Aug...
Spit LF XVI @ 25lbs boost would surprise me. This would make its 'usefulness' in ToD and in events very limited.
Spit I - 12lbs
Spit Vb - 12lbs
Spit Vc - 16lbs
Spit F.IX - no more Hybrid
Spit LF.VIII - great choice
Spit F.XIV - I never thought the 14 was all it was hyped up to be. Maybe 21lbs will change that.
Spit LF.XVI - 18 lbs would be the best choice
There will be no Mk Vc, just a 12lbs boost Mk Vb.
For scenarios the new Seafire III with 18 lbs boost will stand in for the Vc.
The MkXVI at 18lbs will be for a trial period, if it doesn't work out it will go to 25lbs. The only advantage it has over the top 3 or 4 speed demons at 25lbs is its climb rate, 0-10k in under 2 mins.
It would still be slower OTD than the G10, D9, La7 and Pony, Pyro is just conscerned about it phenominal climb rate (5700fpm up to 10k).
-
By God, I'll drink to that.
And one round for the saloon. :aok
-
Somebody in one of these forum threads somewhere mentioned that the Seafire III is more like a spit9 than a spit5. Is this accurate? Where would it fit, performance wise? Between Vc and F.IX?
-
Maybe both the MkV variants can be kept by fiddling the ENY value just a bit and offering 2 skins or more.
I mean, we already have the graphic model. Just needs a wee of performance programming.
Same goes with the 109 F's and basically E's
Right?
-
Wouldn't a Seafire L MkIII with a Merlin 55M @ 1.585 hp would surpass a Vc @ 16lbs boost? Are they doing an F or L MK III?
I guess either would do as long as the ToD gods and scenarios CMs remember that it saw service no earlier then June (June '42 for the F MKIII, Merlin 55 1,470 hp) / July (July '42 for the L MKIII, Merlin 55M 1.585 hp).
-
spit LF 16 with 18lbs boost is a safe choice.
People would cry en masse if +25 is modeled ( for ex: either "pork" it or "perk" it like La-7). Spit LF 16 climbrate with +25 boost is comparable to that of the MiG-15 jet fighter.
BTW is tehre any news on 109s?;)
-
Spit XVI...gotta read up about it :)
-
Originally posted by Wotan
Wouldn't a Seafire L MkIII with a Merlin 55M @ 1.585 hp would surpass a Vc @ 16lbs boost? Are they doing an F or L MK III?
I guess either would do as long as the ToD gods and scenarios CMs remember that it saw service no earlier then June (June '42 for the F MKIII, Merlin 55 1,470 hp) / July (July '42 for the L MKIII, Merlin 55M 1.585 hp).
True. F4F-4 should be used as a Martlet for setups earlier than that.
And who knows, maybe we'll get a SeaHurri sometime.
-
Later than that, 1st Seafire III was @ November 1943, I beleive with 894 Sqn. I don't think any saw combat untill 1944.
Seafire IIc is a 1942 bird, Merlin 46. Served in Torch landings @Nov 42.
Seafire L.IIc is 1943 (transitional type, with a 32 engine, 3 stack exhaust, later ones with 6, but no folding wings). Sometimes mistaken for a Seafire III (looks very close).
Seafire III is 1944, 6 stack exhaust, and folding wings. The definitive type for the rest of the war. Seafire F.III (Merlin 55) was superseded by the Seafire L.III (Merlin 55M) they wanted a version for low alt air superiority, mainly vs the Japanese.
The Seafire L.III all but replaced the F.III within a year according to my book. For info.
Seafire XV was embarked, but did not see action (same fate as the F8F Bearcat).
-
The list seems good!
Thanks for the info Kev and Pyro.
-
How about a clever workaround..
...and do an early Spitfire MkV with 12lbs boost, and just retain the current Seafire MkII instead of a MkIII, using 16lbs, which could dub for the Spitfire MkV with 16lbs in 42 and 43 in scenarios and such?
IMO a MkIII Seafire would totally put an end to the rest of the CV planes as fighters, and limit the F6F and F4U to jabo duties totally.
Already the Seafire MkII is dominating in usage above the Hellcat and the Corsair.. as a CV plane, which I've even posted a separate thread about it. (although, with kind info from the participants of that thread, I did withdraw my initial impressions that the Seafire was a bad choice)
-
Ya, Im just interested in TOD ect, not what the MA ramifications are. I guess that will have to be worked out.
Perk it MA would be a simple solution, to avoid over use, just like the Hog-C.
-
btw, spit 8 peformance
http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit8.html
NOTES: +18 boost will still rule in climb department, +25 is an overkill. Even the spit 8/9/16 with +25 will climb FASTER than MiG-15bis jet fighter (heh i didnt bother comparing it to F-86)...
-
If that is actually what it did then that is the way it should be , dont not do a plane that acctually served because it is good.
-
Out of the list which would be free and which would be perked?
-
Only the Spit XIV (its already perked)...
Seafire IIc is a 1942 bird, Merlin 46. Served in Torch landings @Nov 42.
Yeah, you are right (first time for you :p)...
Seafire IIc June 1942.
The Seafire the Spitfire that went to Sea,
David Brown
Bad memory I guess....
They may end up in the unique situation where by the Seafire Mk III is substituted in for a Spit Vc @ 16 lbs in July '42... But unable to use it as a sub for the Seafire II... ;)
Call it the the Seafire LBO '42 (land based only)...
-
Here is a question...
Does AH actually need Seafire? (probably should be another thread...)
It seems to me after thinking about it that the Spit Vb 12lbs and Spit Vc 16lbs could just as well sub for a Seafire II/III as the other way around...
I know, what about the hooks..?
-
Sounds like a nice list to me, looking forward to flying them!
Wotan:
Originally posted by Wotan
Looks like a decent list. However, as I pointed out previously having a single Spit V (in this case a b @12lbs max) isn't 'fair' to the RAF fans.
Currently there is no LW plane to match match that time frame. There is no E-7 (DB601N), there's no F-2 or FW 190A-2.
If the Spit Vb that AH currently has was brought up to a true Spit Vc, and keeps the 16lbs boost, I think that would be more fair. Then if in the future (or even now) a Spit Vb @ 12 lbs could be added.
Just my 2 cents...
Well, who says that there will be no 109 E7, F2 or 190 A1/A2 etc etc in the future? HTC Have to start somewhere don't they? Might aswell start with the spits lineup and let the rest follow.
-
"Does AH actually need Seafire?"
In my Navy you would be taken into chains for saying that, and shipped off to the Colonies...
...but in any case, when the Hurricane series gets "redone" at some point, im hoping for a Sea Hurricane which saw a lot of service with the RN. Also we have the F4F, F6F and F4U, which all saw action with the RN.
But, there is a Seafire already in the Seafire IIc we have, and I dont see Pyro getting rid of it, so it comes down to which is the most usefull varient. I would still vote for Seafire III, based on usage in various theaters.
The Spit V thing is tricky. *If* Pyro is going to add some 1941 LW fighters, then the Spit Vb makes some sense, if not, as you have already pointed out, its a bit of a mismatch vs a 1943 Fw 190A-5 and a 1942 rated 109F-4. Its not the end of the world, because you still have a Spit F.IX there you can use to butress up the Spit Vb I suppose, but a Spit Vc would still see a lot of use in other areas.
The Spit Vb and Vc are so close in 3d model its really a shame not to get both versions to plug all the holes. We may yet I guess, but I think we have to be realistic in that every varient isnt going to be modelled for everybody's favorites. Seeing the list he is thinking about I wont look a gift horse in the mouth.
-
Originally posted by Kweassa
How about a clever workaround..
...and do an early Spitfire MkV with 12lbs boost, and just retain the current Seafire MkII instead of a MkIII, using 16lbs, which could dub for the Spitfire MkV with 16lbs in 42 and 43 in scenarios and such?
IMO a MkIII Seafire would totally put an end to the rest of the CV planes as fighters, and limit the F6F and F4U to jabo duties totally.
Already the Seafire MkII is dominating in usage above the Hellcat and the Corsair.. as a CV plane, which I've even posted a separate thread about it. (although, with kind info from the participants of that thread, I did withdraw my initial impressions that the Seafire was a bad choice)
Because Kweassa there were around 300 Mk IIc produced, but there were over 1200 Mk III produced. The lineup is a REPRESENTATIVE selection of the MOST produced Mks with big enough performance differences.
-
Originally posted by Krusty
Somebody in one of these forum threads somewhere mentioned that the Seafire III is more like a spit9 than a spit5. Is this accurate? Where would it fit, performance wise? Between Vc and F.IX?
Seafire L III still closer to a Spit V than a IX, it used the same motor as the late LF Vc (Merlin 55M).
Thats why it can sub for the Vc in scenarios.
Before people continue with the 'Oh not another Spit' whines, remember, the Spitfire WAS the RAF mainstay fighter from 1940 all the way to the end of WWII.
Look at it this way, with the changes -
1940 Spit I
1941 Spit Vb
1942 Spit F IX
1943 Spit LF VIII
1944 Spit LF XVI
1945 Spit F XIV
as opposed to current
1939/early 1940 Spit 1
1942 Spit V
1942 Spit IX
1944 Spit XIV
Notice the difference?
-
Good to hear Kev/Pyro, you've made this spit dweeb very happy:p
-
My wish list for what its worth:
Spitfire Ia (+12 lbs boost) The most common Spit in BoB and a direct foil to the Bf 109E-4.
Spitfire Vb (+12 lbs boost) 1941-43
Spitfire Vc (+16 lbs boost) 1942-late 43
Spitfire F.IXc 1942-late 43
Spitfire L.F. IXc (+18 lbs boost) 1943-late 44 < Far and away the most common IX in service with the RAF/RCAF. The "classic" Mk.IX. Served in ETO, MED, ITALY.
Spitfire L.F. XVIe (+25 lbs boost) late 1944-45 fighter bomber, E wing armament, 3 weapon pylons, clipped wings, bubble canopy. *Optional* as the XIV serves this role.
Spitfire F.XIVe (+21 lbs boost). The definitive late war griffon powered version. Standard wings and canopy.
Seafire L.III (+18 lbs boost) 1944-45 most widely used Seafire.
*I would go with a LF IX rather than an VIII, imho the VIIIs only claim to fame over the LF IX is that it served in Far East, but it was not as prolific as the LF IX was. The LF IX can "stand in" for an VIII just fine, and I feel the LF IX deserves inclusion as the most widely used Merlin 66 Spit in WW2.*
-
Originally posted by SuperDud
Good to hear Kev/Pyro, you've made this spit dweeb very happy:p
No need to thank me I just asked him what his plans were.
Thank ALL the guys who contributed to the couple of Spit threads recently.
The ones where we discussed the various options and settled on what appeared to us to be a representative (i.e. most produced versions) list that covered the whole war.
Apparently Pyro hadn't been happy with the Spit lineup for a long time and had been monitoring our discussions.
I guess we came up a lineup that made sense to him, only thing he isn't sure about is the XVI with 25lbs boost, BUT as he told me it's easier to add than take away. So the 25lbs boost is an option for the future.
Squire - sorry bud you've made some misjudgements there;
The LF XVI is basically an LF IX but with a Packard built Merlin 266, so we are still getting the LF IX really.
The XIV and XVI fulfilled different roles, the LF XVI was a low alt 'fighter/bomber', whereas the F XIV was more a pure high alt fighter. In addition the XVI had the Merlin 266, the XIV a Griffon.
LF VIII - Was the 'replacement' for the IX, it was used by ALL but one squadron in the Far East.
-
The reason to add the LF.Mk VIIIc is that it keeps the .50 cals out of 1943 and it leave open the option of boosting the LF.Mk XVI to +25lbs boost without creating that gap from the Merlin 61 F.Mk IX in 1942 to the appearance of the +25lbs XVI and the XIV in mid 1944.
If the XVI is definately not going to get boosted to +25lbs then the VIII is not really needed.
All things being equal, from what you've said Pyro's plans are, I'd add the Mk VIIIc. It is not massively different than the Mk XVIe other than armament and ordnance options, but given the similarity between the Mk VIII and Mk XIV it should be just a matter of mating the rear fuselage of a Mk XIV model with the wings and nose of the F.Mk IX and it would leave the option to boost the Mk XVI without creating a hole in the coverage.
-
Clarification, I really meant in regards to the requests for the Spit 16 to have clipped wings, broad chord rudder and bubble top. Also if its +25 lbs it cant be used as a 1943 LF IX. Its a so-so "stand in" for a LF IX at best in that configuration.
Copy on the XIV vs the XVI, I was just speaking in general terms that the XIV is a "late-war-very-fast" Spit, for lack of a better term...
The VIII had its place in history, and Im not arguing that, but the LF IX remains the more widely used varient, since the VIII never served in NW Europe at all.
I will be happy with either list, and like I said before, compromise is going to be inevitable.
EDIT: Just remember we will need a gap filler for 1943-mid 44. A 25 lb boost XVI cannot be used prior to @ June 44, same time the XIV comes into service. Be carefull about asking for too many late varients and forgetting the biggest problem with the current Spit series, in that the 1942 F.IX has to go all the way untill mid-44 with no Merlin 66 Spit. Thats the gap we need to fill the most gents, not late 1944-45.
-
Uhm, acording to my sources the Mark IX and Mark XVI are basicly the same planes, same airframe, same cnages from prior versions and basicly the same engine only that the XVI used Packard built engines and the IX uses Rols Royce. May have to look thorugh them more thourough though.
Also, the info I found for the XVI using 100 octane or 130 octane fuel running at +18 boost (150 octane needed for +25lbs boost) had a climb rate of 4700 feet/min at sea level. This would put it pretty close to the XIV but alot slower at alt. Max speed about 386 if I remember correct.
-
I think you are getting mixed up with a Spit XII Wilbus re the max speed at alt.
-
Squire,
If Pyro wants to keep the simple Mk number identification system that people are used to for RAF fighters then the Mk VIIIc would make sense to cover the +18lbs Merlin 66 1943 to mid-1944 period. Remember, to you and I who read book after book about this it is clear, but to the average player who doesn't read the forums and has maybe one general reference on WWII aircraft going with basic mark numbers is probably pretty attractive.
Wilbus,
Max speed was 405 for the XVI, but that is still a lot slower than XIV's 448. SL would be 336 for the +18 XVI compared to the 358 for the +18 XIV.
(Is it just me or is repeatedly refering to the XIV and XVI in the same paragraph really annoying?)
-
Ya the American way was better P-47D-5, P-47D-25, ect ect. Roman numerals can drive you crazy after awhile...
Be happy they aren't considering adding the Spit XVIII hehe.
-
Originally posted by Squire
Be happy they aren't considering adding the Spit XVIII hehe.
That one at least uses different letters instead of the same letters with one tranposition.
Spitfire F.21 would be so much easier. No more Roman numerals. Of course it is pointless from a WWII standpoint.
-
F.21 would have been nice, they made around 120 of them, just crept in at tail end of the war.
But aint no way were going to get them, even a Spit XVIII would have been dodgy getting in.
Only problem I see leaving the Spit XVI at 18lbs boost is its inability to catch late war aircraft. There are still at least 4 that are faster on the deck, including two historical opponents (109/190).
To not give the 25lbs boost because it gives it oustanding performance in one category (climb) I think is a mistake. Most aircraft excel in one way and yet are in the game.
Leaving it at 18lbs loses approx 30+ mph striaght and level, 30+ mph that is needed to even get close to to its historical opponents.
Saying that the Spit I going to 100 grade fuel gives that approx 34+ mph extra (not including WEP I believe), so it should make the next BoB scenario interesting to say the least.
-
So this ends up being the Spit line up (minus the Seafire III as I haven't done a template of one of those yet)
Spit I-1939-40 8 mgs B of B era
Spit Vb-1941-42-2 20mm, 4 303. (60 rounds ammo per 20mm)
Spit FIX -1942-432 20mm(120 rds per gun) 4 303, full span wings, small tail
Spit LFVIII-1943-45Full span wings, tall tail, more fuel, same armament as FIX
Spit LFXVI-1944-45clipped wings, tall tail 3 hard points, E wing with 2 20mm and 2 .5 mgs
Spit FXIVe-1944-45
Can't wait :)
Dan/CorkyJr
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/810_1123099135_spitlinup.jpg)
-
Nice Dan -
Shows despite the 'not another' Spit complaints that there are differences between the diff Mks, shame profile doesn't show stuff like short span ailerons.
Man, does a Spit 14 look evil :) , reminds me of a shark.
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
So this ends up being the Spit line up (minus the Seafire III as I haven't done a template of one of those yet)
Spit I-1939-40 8 mgs B of B era
Spit Vb-1941-42-2 20mm, 4 303. (60 rounds ammo per 20mm)
Spit FIX -1942-432 20mm(120 rds per gun) 4 303, full span wings, small tail
Spit LFVIII-1943-45Full span wings, tall tail, more fuel, same armament as FIX
Spit LFXVI-1944-45clipped wings, tall tail 3 hard points, E wing with 2 20mm and 2 .5 mgs
Spit FXIVe-1944-45
Can't wait :)
Dan/CorkyJr
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/810_1123099135_spitlinup.jpg)
Lordy the Griffin engine was that much bigger than the Merlin???
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
So this ends up being the Spit line up (minus the Seafire III as I haven't done a template of one of those yet)
Spit I-1939-40 8 mgs B of B era
Spit Vb-1941-42-2 20mm, 4 303. (60 rounds ammo per 20mm)
Spit FIX -1942-432 20mm(120 rds per gun) 4 303, full span wings, small tail
Spit LFVIII-1943-45Full span wings, tall tail, more fuel, same armament as FIX
Spit LFXVI-1944-45clipped wings, tall tail 3 hard points, E wing with 2 20mm and 2 .5 mgs
Spit FXIVe-1944-45
I sure hope we get those. If so I would feel the Spitfire line was complete enough for AH purposes to not add anymore. That would be as complete a lineup as any in AH and as complete as we can realistically hope for.
-
(Cashier's voice working in Mc Donalds)
When Spit LF 16 is served, would you like it with...
1. +18 lbs boost, not perked
or
2. (historically) +25 boost, lightly perked (base price 5 or 8)
:)
-
Originally posted by Karnak
I sure hope we get those. If so I would feel the Spitfire line was complete enough for AH purposes to not add anymore. That would be as complete a lineup as any in AH and as complete as we can realistically hope for.
Yup, I would agree.
Only possible change owuld be the Spit XVI to 25lbs boost. Would still have liked the XVI as a bubbletop just to make it look totally different.
Was the bubbletop speed affected?
Dan pop in a bubbletop profile per favore, :)
1K3 - Would prefer 25lbs non-perked: No reason to perk it, it is still not what you would call a speed demon compared to the top 4. In fact as I stated earlier, its two historical opponents (190/109) are still both faster even with the XVI using 150 grade fuel. Only BIG difference is the increase in climb rate, OK it make the climb outstanding, but don't all the mostly used aircraft in the MA have one outstanding feature.
G10 has great climb - It's not perked.
D9 has good level speed and long WEP - It's not perked.
-
Originally posted by 1K3
When Spit LF 16 is served, would you like it with...
1. +18 lbs boost, not perked
or
2. (historically) +25 boost, lightly perked (base price 5 or 8)
Personally I would take the +25lbs lightly perked.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
Personally I would take the +25lbs lightly perked.
Thats the one thing I have never understood -
Get a good performing Spit we have to perk it, yet other good performers go untouched ??????????
What is it? Spit considered just so damn good it has to be perked?
If the Spit VIII is at 18lbs, the Spit XVI must be at 25lbs.
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
Yup, I would agree.
Only possible change owuld be the Spit XVI to 25lbs boost. Would still have liked the XVI as a bubbletop just to make it look totally different.
Was the bubbletop speed affected?
Dan pop in a bubbletop profile per favore, :)
1K3 - Would prefer 25lbs non-perked: No reason to perk it, it is still not what you would call a speed demon compared to the top 4. In fact as I stated earlier, its two historical opponents (190/109) are still both faster even with the XVI using 150 grade fuel. Only BIG difference is the increase in climb rate, OK it make the climb outstanding, but don't all the mostly used aircraft in the MA have one outstanding feature.
G10 has great climb - It's not perked.
D9 has good level speed and long WEP - It's not perked.
Length on a Spit XIV is 32'8"
Length on a Spit XVI with the tall tail is 31'4".
I slapped that together fast so the Spit XIV might be a bit off scale to the others but it definately is a longer beast.
Low back Spit XVI profile for ya Kev
Dan/CorkyJr
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/810_1123100740_spitxvilowbacktaf.jpg)
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
1K3 - Would prefer 25lbs non-perked: No reason to perk it, it is still not what you would call a speed demon compared to the top 4. In fact as I stated earlier, its two historical opponents (190/109) are still both faster even with the XVI using 150 grade fuel. Only BIG difference is the increase in climb rate, OK it make the climb outstanding, but don't all the mostly used aircraft in the MA have one outstanding feature.
G10 has great climb - It's not perked.
D9 has good level speed and long WEP - It's not perked.
Consider the difference between 4500fpm on the G10 (which is about what our spit14 has now, I think 4500-ish is the highest any plane in AH at the moment can climb) and 5700fpm listed for the +25 Spit16. I call that a BIG difference. Couple that with one of the tightest turning aircraft in the game, with a pair of the strongest guns in the game (hispanos) add to that a top speed capable of chasing down a 190D (perhaps in a shallow dive, but close enough) and I think that makes it one of the fastest planes in the game, that can turn the tightest circles, that can rocket into space without even straining, and can kill anything with 1-2 hits.
I sure as heck HOPE it gets a perk!
Spit14 is dangerous enough. Plus by the time doras and G10s showed up there were P47s and P51s to chase them down, so it's not like you're going to totally be limitd only to spits. Also consider that by the time Doras and G10s were around, so were typhoons and tempests. Both far faster than the most common spits.
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
Thats the one thing I have never understood -
Get a good performing Spit we have to perk it, yet other good performers go untouched ??????????
What is it? Spit considered just so damn good it has to be perked?
If the Spit VIII is at 18lbs, the Spit XVI must be at 25lbs.
Only Spit that should be perked somewhat if at all is the XIV.
Gotta let the Spit fans have one that can compete with the speed burners down low to some degree. LF XVIe would be it.
Dan/CorkyJr
-
Originally posted by Krusty
Consider the difference between 4500fpm on the G10 (which is about what our spit14 has now, I think 4500-ish is the highest any plane in AH at the moment can climb) and 5700fpm listed for the +25 Spit16. I call that a BIG difference. Couple that with one of the tightest turning aircraft in the game, with a pair of the strongest guns in the game (hispanos) add to that a top speed capable of chasing down a 190D (perhaps in a shallow dive, but close enough) and I think that makes it one of the fastest planes in the game, that can turn the tightest circles, that can rocket into space without even straining, and can kill anything with 1-2 hits.
I sure as heck HOPE it gets a perk!
my god...
i love it already.
perk it to stop the noobs using it and ruining it!
-
Originally posted by Krusty
Also consider that by the time Doras and G10s were around, so were typhoons and tempests.
Typhoon were present looooooooooooooooonnnnggggggg gg before the Gay10 or the Dorka.
-
(Is it just me or is repeatedly refering to the XIV and XVI in the same paragraph really annoying?)
Agree.
I will check info on XVI again. Squire, no I don't get it mixed up.
-
Originally posted by Furball
my god...
i love it already.
perk it to stop the noobs using it and ruining it!
Which, of course, means more easy kills for the already good pilots. If HTC would just restrict all the lower rank pilots to the Mark I, AH would be paradise....for some.
-
Originally posted by Krusty
Consider the difference between 4500fpm on the G10 (which is about what our spit14 has now, I think 4500-ish is the highest any plane in AH at the moment can climb) and 5700fpm listed for the +25 Spit16. I call that a BIG difference. Couple that with one of the tightest turning aircraft in the game, with a pair of the strongest guns in the game (hispanos) add to that a top speed capable of chasing down a 190D (perhaps in a shallow dive, but close enough) and I think that makes it one of the fastest planes in the game, that can turn the tightest circles, that can rocket into space without even straining, and can kill anything with 1-2 hits.
I sure as heck HOPE it gets a perk!
Spit14 is dangerous enough. Plus by the time doras and G10s showed up there were P47s and P51s to chase them down, so it's not like you're going to totally be limitd only to spits. Also consider that by the time Doras and G10s were around, so were typhoons and tempests. Both far faster than the most common spits.
So the Spit fans get penalized because their bird might be better then a LW bird in some fashion? Does this mean unperked LW birds have to be better by default?
The irony is the Spit guys here are saying they understand the Spit Vb in AH is too much of a beast with the boost it has now and that it should be scaled back.
I have yet to hear any of them say anything about changing the 109s or 190s. There is an understanding that the LW guys have their favorite birds too. Give em a G14 or K4, I don't care. They ought to feel like they've got the birds that fit for what best represents the 109s.
What the Spit guys have been asking for is a representative line up of the Spits from 39-45 that they can fly without having to deal with the perks.
Right now the 42-43 Spit LFVc and FIX is all they have and that leaves out a large section of Spits in particular the LF birds whether it be IX, VIII or XVI.
And now you'd suggest perking the XVI. What's the point then?
Better yet, unperk em all. I could care less if everyone else is in 262s or 163s. I'm not going to fly em.
Since my first AW days I wished for an early 38 model and a clipped LF Spit. That's what I fly, that's where my interest lies.
LOL well I guess if nothing else, I'll never have to worry about the 38G getting perked.
Dan/CorkyJr
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
Thats the one thing I have never understood -
Get a good performing Spit we have to perk it, yet other good performers go untouched ??????????
His question was a binary and I answered it within the given rules of the question.
Now, it so happens that I agree with Krusty that a 5,700fpm climb rate and the acceleration that implies would be an absolute monster. It would probably need to be perked, which is why Pyro wants to do it at +18lbs boost instead.
Dan,
Well, you're P-38G habit would certainly fund any Spit 16 habit I'd think.
That said, we'll see it free and at +18lbs boost initially.
-
I want a T-Shirt that says "Spitfire LF XVI was too good for Aces High II". :)
Hehe, I like that "we could have given it to you but its just too damn good".
Just j/k.
-
Lol
HELP I have a Spit XVI chasing my D9 and hes catching me, I better climb,,,,oooppps. I better turn,,,,ooppps.
Whats up LWeebles, scared of a free Spit that can actaully compete with your 190s?
GIVE US 25lbs BOOST!!!!
Of course the 'hope they perk it' crap. Let me have my unperked D9 speed demon but perk a slower Spit XVI...grow some nads. In fact perk EVERY plane that stands the remotest chance of catching a 190, happy now?
As Dan stated I have come to believe the Spit fans are actually more understanding than thier LW counterparts. We realised the current Spit V is too much and as we suggested it is getting scaled back. Dont see much of that type of reasoning coming from the other side.
We wanted, suggested, and got a representative Spit lineup (almost - bar the 18/25lbs thing), no limited run Mks, no exotic Spits, just a good solid 1940-45 Spit selection.
In fact all the guys who participated in the couple of Spit lineup threads can give themselves a well deserved pat on the back, Pyro looked at our suggestions and agreed with them.
In fact Pyro said it would be 'introduced' at 18bls probably, BUT would consider about upping it to 25lbs later. In fact by limiting it to 18lbs he is effectively negating the 'representative' lineup aspect. Yes they did originally run 18lbs boost, much more common after May 1944 it was 25lbs.
But in reality anything is better than the current selection.
Karnak - I wouldn't completely agree that a good climb rate = awesome accelleration. Will try and dig out some stats.
Squire - I want one "Supermarine + Merlin 66 + Hispano + 25lbs = LW poopoo pants"
[edit] Thinking about the whole 18/25lbs boost thing - If he doesnt give us 25lbs boost he is effectively giving us a 1943 LF IX.
-
Not to put a damper on the party, but I don't think all the credit with the +12 SpitVb is due to the "spit fans".. Going by the constant agravation on the CT forum and the ban of the spitv in almost all setups with the 109F4, there were a lot of non-spit drivers that have been calling for the toning-down of the spitV for a long long long time. It's not just spit drivers being benevolent, you know :P
LW pilots "made do" with flight models that HTC (I think Pyro, specifically) admitted were off-base, and not accurate. And "made do" with these for years, in fact. A few vocal minorities gripe and moan constantly, but most people find the LW rides competently modeled, and still adequate to get kills in. So it doesn't do to lump LW pilots vs Spit pilots, as it's an unfair comparison as to who's getting what done with what planeset. Keep an open mind and don't discount outside opinions. Just because a 190D is fast doesn't mean it should be perked, because while it's fast it can't turn for chit, and in the time it takes to turn 180 every spit in the game can turn 720 and do it all inside the 190's turning radius (lol). Just because the 190D is fast doesn't mean it can fight any better, nor does it make it a monster. It is chased down by ponies, it is outflown by every USAAF plane except for the P40s, and the only thing it has going is speed (which most newbies in the MA use to run away from fights, I hear). Historically it had speed. Historically the spits did not. So why you want to chase one down is beyond me, when there are better rides to do it in.
A high-end spit does everything well. Who gives a crap if it's not as fast as a 190D? The Dora was an interceptor, not a turn fighter. Speed was its main defense. When you force it to fight it's dogmeat, easily. Which doesn't stop people from using it to run for the hills, but it doesn't in any way mean it should be perked either, just because it's faster than a spitfire.
-
Your missing the big point Krusty -
If you limit the XVI to 18lbs boost you are effectively making it a 1943 LF IX.
The WHOLE point of the Spit threads was to come up with a Spit lineup that covered the entire war.
If it was limited to 18lbs Pyro would be just as well modelling this lineup -
1940-Spit I
1941 -Spit Vb
1942 - Spit F IX
1943 - Spit LF IX
1944/5 - Spit XIV (perked)
So what we left with, we lose the high boost Mk V, gain a 1943 Spit LF IX and lose a free 1944 Spit.
Sorry not good enough.
LW fans have their free 1944 rides, its not unreasonable to expect RAF fans to want their free 1944 Spit ride.
RE Mk V - Difference is, Spitfans don't mind the V being toned down, LW fans WANT it toned down. But we expect something in return. Giving/taking and compromises.
-
Whats up LWeebles, scared of a free Spit that can actaully compete with your 190s?
Nha bring it on. LW Pilots got the skill unlike the sissyfire pilots :)
"OPS! He's not turning with me, oh dear, what should I do now, oh hell, I'll just keep turning for a while"
-
Originally posted by Krusty
Not to put a damper on the party, but I don't think all the credit with the +12 SpitVb is due to the "spit fans".. Going by the constant agravation on the CT forum and the ban of the spitv in almost all setups with the 109F4, there were a lot of non-spit drivers that have been calling for the toning-down of the spitV for a long long long time. It's not just spit drivers being benevolent, you know :P
LW pilots "made do" with flight models that HTC (I think Pyro, specifically) admitted were off-base, and not accurate. And "made do" with these for years, in fact. A few vocal minorities gripe and moan constantly, but most people find the LW rides competently modeled, and still adequate to get kills in. So it doesn't do to lump LW pilots vs Spit pilots, as it's an unfair comparison as to who's getting what done with what planeset. Keep an open mind and don't discount outside opinions. Just because a 190D is fast doesn't mean it should be perked, because while it's fast it can't turn for chit, and in the time it takes to turn 180 every spit in the game can turn 720 and do it all inside the 190's turning radius (lol). Just because the 190D is fast doesn't mean it can fight any better, nor does it make it a monster. It is chased down by ponies, it is outflown by every USAAF plane except for the P40s, and the only thing it has going is speed (which most newbies in the MA use to run away from fights, I hear). Historically it had speed. Historically the spits did not. So why you want to chase one down is beyond me, when there are better rides to do it in.
A high-end spit does everything well. Who gives a crap if it's not as fast as a 190D? The Dora was an interceptor, not a turn fighter. Speed was its main defense. When you force it to fight it's dogmeat, easily. Which doesn't stop people from using it to run for the hills, but it doesn't in any way mean it should be perked either, just because it's faster than a spitfire.
The answer is simple. You fly it to it's strengths. Don't turn fight in a D9.
The Spit was designed as an interceptor too Krusty. Again, just because it does stuff you don't want it to do it should be perked, and because the LW ride you have doesn't do stuff you think it should do, you think it should be free.
I think it's hilarious that the Spit LFXVIe is all of a sudden a high end late war Spit. What it was in fact was a Spit LFIXe with an American made Packard Merlin 266 engine.
They were producing LFIXes and LFXVIes on the same production line with the difference in designation being determined by whether it was a Rolls Merlin or Packard Merlin being installed.
The 150 octane +25 boost stuff was tested on the IX and was used with them as well as RAF Mustang IIIs from the summer of 44 on. This again, before the D9 even entered the war.
Please don't misinterpret the XVI being somehow better then the XIV just cause the numeric designation is a later one.
If that's what's going to happen, then call it a Spitfire LFIXe as they were identical in performance in their low alt, clipped wing, tall tail, 3 hardpoint, E wing way. The LFIXe was doing the same job at the end of the war as the LFXVIe, which was essentially low alt ground support.
Image is of a late war LFIXe. Note the bomb racks on the wings. This one still has a smaller rudder but it's the same bird as an LFXVIe in terms of performance and if they took out the Merlin 66 and replaced it with a Merlin 266, it would be re-designated an LFXVIe.
Dan/CorkyJr
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/810_1119072892_pt961.jpg)
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
Your missing the big point Krusty -
If you limit the XVI to 18lbs boost you are effectively making it a 1943 LF IX.
The WHOLE point of the Spit threads was to come up with a Spit lineup that covered the entire war.
If it was limited to 18lbs Pyro would be just as well modelling this lineup -
1940-Spit I
1941 -Spit Vb
1942 - Spit F IX
1943 - Spit LF IX
1944/5 - Spit XIV (perked)
So what we left with, we lose the high boost Mk V, gain a 1943 Spit LF IX and lose a free 1944 Spit.
Sorry not good enough.
LW fans have their free 1944 rides, its not unreasonable to expect RAF fans to want their free 1944 Spit ride.
RE Mk V - Difference is, Spitfans don't mind the V being toned down, LW fans WANT it toned down. But we expect something in return. Giving/taking and compromises.
Kev, even at +18 it's still faster than the spit9 and spit8 (the spit8 being the one we may/may not get, I remember now), and still has better engine performance at +18 than the lower marks. It's still a free (unperked) late war ride, even at +18. It's still the best unperked ride of the lot, so it still fulfills its destiny, so to speak.
-
Dan - Never thought the designation may be part of the problem.
To clear it up -
Mk IX/XVI - Same aircraft diffenrent motors Merlin 66 vs American built Merlin 66 known as 266.
You would get the same performance out of a Mk IX at 25lbs boost as a Mk XVI at 25lbs boost.
As I said by making the XVI 18lbs boost it is effectively a 1943 Spit IX.
Of course it has better performance at 18;bs, geez the whole idea was to increase performance throughout the war, not to stop at 1943; and by limiting it to 18lbs you are putting it right at 1943.
So basically Spits should be limited to free rides 1943 and earlier but the LW should get free rides all the way up to the closing days of the war?
Are we finally getting a veiled admission that late war Spits were that good they should only be introduced to AH2 if perked?
Put it this way if I did a late 1944 scenerio and put D9's up against all Spit 14's what you think would be the outcome. On the other hand if I make it D9/G10s vs limited Spit 14 and a mix of Spit 16 (25lb) and Spit 9 its more balanced.
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
Dan - Never thought the designation may be part of the problem.
To clear it up -
Mk IX/XVI - Same aircraft diffenrent motors Merlin 66 vs American built Merlin 66 known as 266.
You would get the same performance out of a Mk IX at 25lbs boost as a Mk XVI at 25lbs boost.
As I said by making the XVI 18lbs boost it is effectively a 1943 Spit IX.
Of course it has better performance at 18;bs, geez the whole idea was to increase performance throughout the war, not to stop at 1943; and by limiting it to 18lbs you are putting it right at 1943.
So basically Spits should be limited to free rides 1943 and earlier but the LW should get free rides all the way up to the closing days of the war?
Are we finally getting a veiled admission that late war Spits were that good they should only be introduced to AH2 if perked?
Put it this way if I did a late 1944 scenerio and put D9's up against all Spit 14's what you think would be the outcome. On the other hand if I make it D9/G10s vs Spit 14/16 (25lb) its more balanced.
Amazing isn't it? :)
Dan/CorkyJr
-
Just to clarify, at least from my persepctive.
When asking for an LFXVIe, part of it was that it was being used along with the LFIXe as a ground attack bird late in the war with the three hardpoints, and clipped wings.
To me that made a lot of sense for the MA environment.
You'd have a Spit that rolled a bit better, carried the ord better and was faster, representing the majority of Spit IXs and all the XVIs that were LF versions with the Merlin 66 or Packard Merlin 266.
I never for a moment thought that anyone would think it was a world beater in terms of performance to the point of perking it.
If you are going fighter sweeping, you'd probably take an LFVIII as it has more internal fuel.
I just saw that the Spit fans, of which I am one, would have something they could fly that might give them a better chance to keep up with the other low alt birds in the TAC war that is the AH MA.
It's amazing to me that somehow it's being seen as some sort of uber Spit.
Also, again my wishing for the LFXVIe was that it opened the door for the skinners do do some of those 2 TAF Spits, while having the standard FIX and a VIII broadened the opportunities for the skinners even more with the SEAC, CBI, MTO and Pacific skins that could be done, along with the early North African one off Spit IXs or high alt birds.
Not claiming to speak for the other Spit fans here but I'd guess their thinking was similar.
Dan/CorkyJr
-
Lol yup.
All the LW fans want their late war rides perk free, but even a hint of late war good performing Spit and its PERK IT.
Even a Merlin based Spit LOLOLOL.
Theyd throw a fit if a Mk XVIII or F.21 appeared.
It would be totally unacceptable if yet again the Spits were effectively stuck at a pre end of war date. All we would have gained is 1 year of development, up from the 1942 F IX to effectively a 1943 LF IX.
While quite happily giving up what is the best free Spit in the game (current mk V)
I even expect a Mk XVI to be at an ENY of 5, and have no problem with that, but ONLY if its at 25lbs boost.
Having intially been very enthused about the new lineup and then realizing exactly what we are getting, only have 1 comment -
SPITS - RIPPED OFF YET AGAIN.
-
IHMO Nothing is wrong with adding a Spit LF 16 that used the historical 150 octane +25 boost for their merlin 66/266 engines. Spit LF 16 is facing teh same delema as Ki-84 4 years ago.
-----------------------------------------------------
Looks like the fear fo adding Spit LF 16s is compared to that of Ki-84 when it was introduced in the "boards" 4 years ago. Like Ki-84, Spit LF 16 has nothing tpo offer other than excelent rate of climb (and that's important for interceptor role) and a decent low altitude speed. Spitfire LF 16's performance at altitude is not so stellar at ~ 407 mph
Spitfire LF 16 is...
50+ mhp slower than 109K-4 at alt
40+ mph slower than P-51B at alt
40+ mph slower than Spitfire Mk. XIV at alt
30+ mph slower than P-51D at alt
20+ mph slower than Fw-190D-9 at alt
Against late war planes.
-
I do agree, but I also see the other side.
5,700ft/min climb means it will have an incredible ability to accelerate. Any La-7 that turned with it would never make it our alive as the Spit just sprinted it down before it ever could hope to get an advantage from it's higher top speed.
Ideally it wouldn't be perked. After all the P-47N is a monster in it's own right and is free.
And yes, I'd take the Mk VIII over the Mk XVI for most of my flights.
All that said, to me a very small perk price is more or less unnoticable. I fly enough sorties in other aircraft to make up anything I'd lose fairly quickly. Newer players would not be so fortunate.
-
I agree with both 1K3 and Karnak.
Its still slow enough at top speed to not be the major threat it is percieved to be.
It may become the base defender of choice, but only because it can climb to intercept the bogies. If the bogies make a pass and run, chances are it won't catch them.
OK La7 turns and gets killed, so? Or would he do the usual and just haul ass.
At 25lbs boost it would be an excellent addition to the low alt furball.
At 18lbs boost, I wouldn't even bother, just leave things as they are. Give me a 16lb Spit V over a 18lb boost Spit IX/XVI anyday.
Yes I totally agree its the Ki-84 hysteria all over again.
No need to perk a 25lb boost XVI.
-
Im glad I dont do the MA thing, because all this perk debate stuff is enough to drive you mad, who needs the extra aggravation. :cool:
-
Yup they all hung up on the main...
A 25lbs Spitifre LF.XVI wouldn't be of much use at all in ToD and scenarios...
If all this was just about the main then no new spits would be needed...
Hell skip the spits all together and do something with those Hurricanes...:p
-
Originally posted by Wotan
A 25lbs Spitifre LF.XVI wouldn't be of much use at all in ToD and scenarios...
Why not? As I understand it most, or all, Spit IXs and XVIs in the European Theater were at +25lbs boost for most of the final year of the war.
-
how many horsepower had the Merlin at that 25lbs rating?
-
Over or close 2000 I believe. Could be wrong
Oops found it, lucky we didn't ask for 28lbs ;)
(http://www.spitfireperformance.com/merlin66hpchart.jpg)
-
All the LW fans want their late war rides perk free, but even a hint of late war good performing Spit and its PERK IT.
Ever gonna stop saying *all*? Really, bring it on, let's see what it can do. It doesn't matter how much we discuss it here, we don't have the plane yet. The plane would be perked on extensive use due to one or many performance specs. 5.7k min/climb rate with the turn rate of a Spit 9 is almost impossible fight without an alt advantage or in a better turning plane.
But like I said, bring it on, would be fun to see how it performs.
The reason some may want it perked is that the spitfire is already a widely used plane in AH MA, not because it was historicly famous but because it is one of the very easiest planes to fly and score kills in. Granted some very good pilots fly it and there is nothing dweeby about it but it is considered a "n00b" plane. And consider this, n00bs often get their first kills in it and fairly quick aswell even though it is a 1942 fighter in a 1944 environment.
-
OK my apologies for the *all*.
It just gets infuriating. Spitfans don't mind losing the uber Spit V, but we expect something in return apart from what would be a 1943 Spit LF IX if the XVI was held at 18lbs.
Whilst meanwhile the LW fans get their 1944 speed monsters again.
Funnily enough this is the whole crux of the argument, LW have 1944 perk free rides, wheres our free 1944 Spit ride?
How would you feel if the LW free planeset stopped being free after 1943?
It will NOT have the turn radius of Spit IX, where do all these misconceptions come from?
Having clipped wings its turn radius will obviously be worse, but it will roll better.
Result - Incorrect assumption (1/2).
Fine, if you want to perk it for overuse, how many others fall into that category? Top 2 used planes La7, N1K. Prob P47N up there by end this tour?
Result - Argument dismissed.
Impossible to fight without an alt advantage or in a better turning plane?
Well I guess you pick any plane eg a P51D and say that a Spit V requires an alt advantage, and we know it turns better.
Or a Spit IX and say that a Hurri 2 requires and alt advantage, we know it turns better.
Sorry that argument doesn't hold up under ANY rational scrutiny, can pick various pairs of planes and say the same thing.
Result - Argument dismissed.
n00b plane - Nothing to do with current discussion, attempt to throw in red herrings.
Overall - 1/2 out of 4 (gave the 1/2 for at least getting the fact that it is a Spit IX really, but failing to realise it was going to be a clipped wing version).
NEXT
Expected more rationalle from you Wilbus.
[edit] It 'may' have the best climbrate in the game (low level), we don't know as we don't know whats planned for the 109s.
-
I have a Q. for the 109 lads:
What if the 109G-14 with MW50 was added? is that a rough equivilant to a Spit XVI with 25 lbs boost? yes, no?
Cuz that varient might be coming...
And, more importantly would it be perked? , sry I slipped, just ignore that last part. ;)
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
OK my apologies for the *all*.
It will NOT have the turn radius of Spit IX, where do all these misconceptions come from?
Having clipped wings its turn radius will obviously be worse, but it will roll better.
Result - Incorrect assumption (1/2).
Fine, if you want to perk it for overuse, how many others fall into that category? Top 2 used planes La7, N1K. Prob P47N up there by end this tour?
Result - Argument dismissed.
Impossible to fight without an alt advantage or in a better turning plane?
Well I guess you pick any plane eg a P51D and say that a Spit V requires an alt advantage, and we know it turns better.
Or a Spit IX and say that a Hurri 2 requires and alt advantage, we know it turns better.
Sorry that argument doesn't hold up under ANY rational scrutiny, can pick various pairs of planes and say the same thing.
Result - Argument dismissed.
n00b plane - Nothing to do with current discussion, attempt to throw in red herrings.
Overall - 1/2 out of 4 (gave the 1/2 for at least getting the fact that it is a Spit IX really, but failing to realise it was going to be a clipped wing version).
NEXT
Expected more rationalle from you Wilbus.
LOL Did I hit a tender spot there?
Perk it for overuse yes. There will always be top 2 used planes Kev but the spit XVI would probarly be overused (like the C hog if you were here back in those days) thus perk. (I don't care really, I gave you the reasons most people would want it perked). Neither LA7 or the Niki are overused. So your correction of my so called misstake just failed. So you can dismiss your own argument instead of being an a** about it.
Yeah I forgot about the clipped wings, turn will be a bit worse but not by much, it will still turn on a dime, roll great and climb like a rocket no matter what boost used.
Any special reason you try to be an a** about it or did it just come out that way?
Attempt to throd in red herrings? Like I said, trying to be an a** or just happens that way? I don't in anyway try to throw in "red herrings". The spit is and will always be a n00b plane in AH thanks to its great performance and it does have to do with the discussion.
:rolleyes:
-
Wilbus I'm not getting into a slanging match.
Sorry if it came off like that, just tired of the same old reasons for not having one, but if we do get one it has to be perked.
Ok - Yes it does have a great climb rate down low, all the top rides have at least one outstanding feature -
La7 - Speed low down and fairly agile
P47N - Speed at alt and carries a lot ord.
P51 - Has to be one of the best all round planes in the whole planeset.
D9 - Speed low down and roll rate
G10 - Great climb at alt and fast down low
etc etc
Its not going to be the fastest, nor the best endurance (24% higher fuel burn 25lbs), nor carry the most ord, even a Spit IX will outurn it.
No I wasn't here for the Chog, but I've heard about it.
If thats the case I fully expect a lowly Seafire III to be perked when it is introduced, it will most likely see the most use off a CV of any plane. Speed of our current Mk V but with ord carrying capabilities.
See how perking planes on usage starts to get into the realms of ridiculousness? It would be a 1943 plane probably not in the top 10 speed wise getting perked for usage.
Sorry - you have your free 1944 LW rides (2 or 3 in current planeset), is it too much to ask for ONE free 1944 Spit? Not asking for another Griffon engined beast (which I would agree should be perked), just a Merlin.
-
Kev I know you're better then giving me that kind of treatment. I guess you're just a bit too tied up in this discussion.
I'm trying to look at this from more then one point of view, gave you a few reasons why it might be perked (overuse being the most obvious). Simple fact is, this kind of discussion happaned before The Ki84 was added, it happaned before the P47 N was added, it happens now. Same old stupid discussion. We won't know anything untill it is released.
Look at the ENY values of the spits in AH, they aren't that low because of the planes superior MA performance, it's that low to try and limit it and get people to fly planes in which they will earn more perks. The XVI would own the current spits in AH except for the XIV while being as easy to fly as the spit IX in AH (XIV generally alot tougher to handle).
Like I said above, I don't give a damn if it is perked really, I am waiting for ToD, there it won't be perked I am quite sure. The MA is nothing but a Training Arena to me, an arena to enter and try and have some fun while working on gunnery, ACM, SA and all other things (even though I tend to get pissed off sometimes).
Waiting for ToD then the MA guys can fly around in Jets 24/7 for all I care.
-
Wilbus, yeah I'm probably a little to close to the discussion.
But us poor Spitfans have fought long and hard for fair, balanced and most importantly representative Spit lineup.
We have been saddled with a mongrel 1942 Spit 9 as the latest free Spit available for a long long time.
Bring the 16 in at an ENY of 5, that will reduce its usage, most importantly when the numbers really start to skew, but only at an ENY of 5 if it is at 25lbs.
Was so excited when I heard the 16 was coming, until I realized that at 18lbs boost all it is is a 1943 Spit IX :( .
If thats the case would much prefer Pyro just sorts out the Spit 9 and remodels the current ones as is.
Don't mind losing the uber Spit 5 for a representative 1944 Spit 16, but for a 1943 Spit 9, and still having no free 1944 Spit - no thanks.
Just like to see fairness when at all possible - LW have 2 or 3 free 1944 fighters, all we're asking for is ONE free 1944 spit, that too much?
See ya in the sky, hopefully soon in Spit 16 @ 25lbs lol. Just realised the graph I posted shows they were tested to 28lbs (2200HP), now that would have been worth a perk or two ;) .
-
But us poor Spitfans have fought long and hard for fair, balanced and most importantly representative Spit lineup. We have been saddled with a mongrel 1942 Spit 9 as the latest free Spit available for a long long time.
Agree with you there :)
Well the reason LW has got 3 non perked 1944 birds (Dora, A8 and G10) is that non of them are really easy enough to fly to get the massive overuse and thus get perked.
While the G10 easily beats a spit 9 if flown the right way, very few people know how to fly it the right way and very few people have the time/patience to learn. The A8 is a 1944 bird but way too heavy for most people and together with its 190 sister Dora the worst turner in the game. The Dora, is very competative, but like the A8 it turns bad, it's fast as hell but very few people can use the speed in other ways then just run away. And running away don't get you kills.
What we have to think of is that many people, specially new people (the new people being a big part to why the spit 5 and 9 are used as much as they are) fly the spits because they are "easy" (ment in a good way). Good guns although a bit low on ammo, combined with exelent turn rate and good climb make it the plane of choice for many dogfighters. It's a 1942 plane yes and slow but that speed is not needed for people who just care to enter the arena for an hour or so and get a couple of kills, don't care wether they die or live and the speed is not needed to get kills in a furball.
It would be great to have the XVI non perked but I personally think it would be "overused" in a way that MAY unbalance the arena.
So conclusion, LW non perked vs RAF... the Spitfire is by far the best choice for 95% of the players which is why it is SO popular. They aren't overused the way they are now but a XVI might (or might not) change that. We can only way and see I guess.
(Still waiting for ToD )
-
Funny you should say that -
In Bishland the most question often asked by newbs is "Whats the fastest plane".
Only one answer and off he goes in his Lala, may account for the Lala being the most used of any plane.
But proves one thing, in the MA speed is everything.
At typical MA furball alts the 16s speed is approx 380mph, hardly stunning compared to others.
Its max speed is at 20k and its still less than 400mph, hardly a bit threat to Ponys etc.
OTD its only 354mph still way behind what could be considered the big 4 or 5.
It won't turn as well as a 9 because of its clipped wings, all it will really have is a great climb rate. Good for intercepting IB bogies, unless they decide to run.
How many 262, Temps etc are killed by slower planes diving in from higher alt, Spit 16 would be no different.
Thats why I dont think a 25lbs Spit 16 would be that much of problem, there's just too many planes can catch it at all alts. You can also bet it not only being chased by say the invetible Lala, you can almost guarentee there will be slower better turning planes there also.
Whats worse the single Lala chasing you, knowing you can prob get to the Lala to run away. Or the Lala with say a couple of Spit V's tagging along behind just waiting for him to turn you?
The MA is so chaotic in a furball I doubt a Spit 16 at full boost is going to be anymore of a problem that your average late war ride.
Actaully a good example is the Spit 14, bet you've seen a lot more now the perk cost is down, I know I have. I have also seen a lot shot down, yet this is the uber Griffon engined monster.
The only problem I see is misunderstanding. People will assume as it's a 16 it must be better that a 14 not realising it really just a 1944 Mk 9. Yes probably see a lot of use initially, but most will go back to their usual Lala, Pony rides etc. It would prob become the Spit ride of choice for low alt furballs, but the 9 would be used for higher alt stuff, and for range the 8 would be used. Whatever happens once the 5 is de-rated it will rapidly becamoe a hanger queen.
My own personal choice at the moment is the Tiffy, only because it stands a chance of catching the late war stuff. My ride of choice would be the 16 @ 25lbs, slower that the Tiff, 2 less 20mms, but its a Spit. Wont even bother trying a Spit 16 at 18lbs.
Just my thoughts.
-
Heh, thinking about 190A8 -44 vs. Spit IX -42 matc-up. Which wins hands down? Any guesses? We certainly need faster free Spits. ;) MA will be more fun and -44 scenarios will be hilarious...
-C+
-
Actaully a good example is the Spit 14, bet you've seen a lot more now the perk cost is down, I know I have. I have also seen a lot shot down, yet this is the uber Griffon engined monster.
The Spit 14 actually is Uber in AH but it has to be flown right. The way to fly it is more the way you fly a G10 then it is you fly a Spitfire IX in AH.
That is also the reason I fear the XVI (slower speed or not) might see overuse. It is the same plane as the Spit 9 but with clipped wings. It will have more or less the same stability as the IX compared to the much more instabile XIV. I think that in the current MA, even if unperked totally, the XIV would see less use then the IX. Not because the IX is better, but because it is far easier to use and gets you up in the saddle quicker.
As for LA7's I agree with you, it's not the plane it self that is a threat but the cherry pickin horde behind it.
The LA7 is a big problem even in the fast Dora. Problem with Dora is that it lacks the turning capebilities to fight the LA.
As for the most common question in Knit land, it is "What is the best plane" or "what is the best plane for n00bs". My answer is always the same. Spitfire MK IX or N1K2.
I hope it is added as a free plane, and even with 18lbs boost I think you should bother with it, it would be a beast in the MA even with that "low" boost much thanks to 4.7k/min climb rate.
Persoanlly I look forward to seeing it, and the other spits, I will definatly give them a try although I don't find spits in AH any fun at the moment.
-
Agreed Wilbus, the problem is tha MA is not a place where planes are usually flown right.
It's just total organized choas.
If you flew the P47N at its best alt of 31k you be lonely, so you have to come down lower to alts where other planes start getting the edge.
Disagree that if the 14 were unperked you still less use than the 9, I think you'd see almost exclusively 14s just for its speed.
Spit 16 would be a novelty when 1st introduced (as are all, look at current rash P47N's) but once people realise its not the be all and end all of Spits depending on what you want to do, its usage would decline to acceptable levels as people go back to their usual rides.
Whatever Pyro does once the Spit 5 is de-ubered (back to 12lbs boost) and given the proper cannon loadout for a Vb (lot less than current), you'll see more people in whatever Spit is introduced and the V usage decline. thats something that he should be ready for.
Look at it this way -
Take a Tiffy:
Chop off top end speed at all alts.
Make it dive less stable at high speeds and compress earlier.
Remove two of the four 20mms.
Add a better climb at low level (16 not much good over 20k ish)
Better turn rate
You have a spit 16 @ 25lbs, nothing major to worry about. I'd still be more worried about the 20k Tiffy diving on a field than a 16.
Defensively its best bet will usually be a climb, unless the guy has dove in with a lot more 'e' (MA usual). Then you could try a turn, remembering of course it will turn worse than a 9. Against a 190 its slightly improved roll (clipped wings) is still no match for it.
alt - speed
0 - 354
3200 - 367
8000 - 367
10000 - 377
14400 - 397
20000 - 397
25000 - 394
Nothing there that should make anyone nervous.
alt - fpm
0 - 5740
5000 - 5080
10000 - 5080
15000 - 4470
20000 - 3720
25000 - 2950
30000 - 2200
Yup down low it has outstanding climb rates, but nothing that makes it uber compared to its other performance figures.
Now if it had those climb rates AND speeds like the top 4 or 5 aircraft ingame I would say no, use 18lbs boost.
In fact I believe at 20k there are quite a few that are faster and climb better, definately quite a few that are faster alone. Up high it would get eaten alive by quite few rides, down low there are enough that are faster to keep it in check.
Typically it should be found below 15k (20k max)were it stands the best chance of survival.
-
Yay now kev im sure we will be doing more
spit fightersweeps, other than the typhys! :D
-
ONLY if we get the 16 at 25lbs boost, wouldn't waste my time flying the 18lbs boost version ( just Spit bait).
-
Originally posted by Squire
I have a Q. for the 109 lads:
What if the 109G-14 with MW50 was added? is that a rough equivilant to a Spit XVI with 25 lbs boost? yes, no?
Cuz that varient might be coming...
And, more importantly would it be perked? , sry I slipped, just ignore that last part. ;)
No a G-14 wouldn't have any where near the performance of a Spit XVI with 25lb boost...
A G-14 is just a G-6 (just like the one in AH now) with MW-50.
All MW-50 does is allow if higher boost to be run below FTH. It does this but cooling the charge.
The current G-6 does a max of 386 mph. A G-14 would be a round 415 mph.
The G-6 and G-14 wouldn't have any where near the performance of the AH G-10 at altitude. The G-10 and K-4 have a larger supercharger (DB603). It provided better performance at altitude...
The reason I prefer a G-14 is it will give better speed then the current G-6 at and below FTH (low alt speed) and still be as maneuverable as the G-6.
I will provide a few SS comparisons taken from IL2 compare. I only provide these to give a general understanding of the performance differences in the 109s in question. There's no need to debate the specifics here.
First the G-6 - G-14
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/thumbs/334_1123154821_g6g14.jpg) (http://www.onpoi.net/ah/picpopup.php?ImgId=23618)
At mil power the G-6 and G-14 are about the same. Only at wep do you really see a difference.
G-6 Entered service and saw action with II/JG 53, II/JG 77, JG 27 and JG 51 in February 1943. (Prien & Rodeike)
So the G-6 is a '43 aircraft
About 5500 made (abt. 1000 of which were G-14/AS versions)
G-14 entered service with II/JG 11 and Stab/JG 53 in July 1944.
G-14 would be July '44.
If Pyro keeps the a 'G-10' then we need not worry about a G-14/AS or G-6/AS. The G-10 can sub...
Next the G-14 - G-10 (real G-10 not AH's hybrid G-10/K-4):
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/thumbs/334_1123154885_g14g10.jpg) (http://www.onpoi.net/ah/picpopup.php?ImgId=23619)
The G-10 is faster all round plus has a higher FTH then the G-14 at both mil power and wep. In WETO ToD the higher FTH will be important in dealing with the escorts and bombers. Neither the G-6 nor G-14 can match the G-10 (or the G-6/AS, G-14/AS; which the G-10 can sub for).
The G-10 entered service Oct '44. The G-6/AS entered service in May '44, the G-14/AS in or about July...
Here's a G-14/AS - G-10 comparison:
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/thumbs/334_1123154929_g10g14as.jpg) (http://www.onpoi.net/ah/picpopup.php?ImgId=23620)
Its labeled as a G-6/AS in FB but it really is a G-14/AS because it has MW-50 (remember G-6 + MW-50 = G-14)
Now a real G-10 - K-4 comparison:
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/thumbs/334_1123154967_g10k4.jpg) (http://www.onpoi.net/ah/picpopup.php?ImgId=23621)
Now you see there's quite a difference.
IMHO the 109s (covering '43 onward...) needed for AH would be:
G-6 '43
G-14 July '44
G-10 May - Oct '44 (depends on if used as a sub or not for the AS')
K-4 Oct '44 with a small perk...
All of these have their roll.
The G-6 is needed for '43 WETO and Ost Front
G-14 would be preferred over the G-2 and G-6 in the main but not any where near the performance of the current G-10. Used in both WETO and Ost front. They could use the same Late G-56 model and adjust the FM/performance.
G-10 why get rid of it? Just adjust the FM/performance. It will use same model as K-4. Just a different skin.
K-4 - final late war 109...
-
Strange you'd like 3 1944 109's (2 free, 1 perked?), yet merry hell breaks loose when we ask for ONE free 1944 spit.
Add to them the free 1944 190s.
Just how much of an advantage do some of the community want?
No the LF XVI at 18lbs boost is NOT 1944, more accurately its a 1943 Spit LF IX. Spits ran 18lbs boost starting with the Merlin 66 in 1943.
Not aimed specifically at you Wotan, but as a general comment on the whole 1944 Spit/190/109 situation which is totally one-sided as it stands, and would still be if the 16 comes in at 18lbs.
-
I told you before the dates of introduction are irrelevant. Every 109 could be from '44 and it wouldn't matter.
A G-14 is not a G-10 and a G-10 is not a K-4...
Each are unique important variants and there inclusion in AH isn't based on dates but on 'need'.
With all the excitement about Spitfires folks over look the fact that the Spitfire in '44 was all but irrelevant. Hell there were more RAF Mustang IIIs at 25lbs boost then Spit squadrons running 25Lbs...
So don't confuse your want for certain Spitfires with 'need'. As I said I don't care one bit about the main. That's the only place a planes like a 25lb boost Spit XVI would make any impact.
There is no reason that just because one country has 10 aircraft to chose from that another country must have the same number. Or if one country has 3 from ;42 another country needs 3 from '42...
So you introduce planes based on 'need'...
Ah needs a G-14, it needs a G-10(or AS 109) and it needs a K-4...
Does it 'need' a 25lb Spit XVI? Not hardly... Does it need 15 version of 44 spitfires? Not hardly...
You seem to forget all about the Ami planes that the LW faced... Many of these planes were being flown by the RAF. Not to mention the '44 variant Typh and the Temp that's already in AH...
There is no Spit v 109 competition to see who gets the most ingame...
-
No-one has asked for 15 spits, in fact during our discussions we threw out a lot of Mks because they were either irrelevant or too small production runs. We came up with 6 including the perked XIV.
We actually thought about discarding the Mk 8, but it is NEEDED for Far East scenarios.
3 to choose from in 1944? We should be so lucky, how about giving us ONE.
After all a 1943 Spit LF IX is NOT a 1944 Spit LF XVI.
Spitfire in 1944 was irrlevant?
Try looking at the makeup of Home Command and 2TAF then feed me that again.
http://www.raf.mod.uk/dday/rafu.html
I still can't believe you expect anyone to believe that?
Irrelevant enough to help finish the War in Europe
Irrelevant enough to continue the war in the Asia.
Irrelevant enough that Seafires scored the last kills in the Far East.
Fighter Command ordered 3000 F.21s (would have 3rd highest made Spit), but order was cancelled at end of war after only 120 had been delivered. Lot of time, effort and money to waste on such an irrelevant aircraft.
Spits served in almost every WW2 theatre right up until the end, something NO 109 or 190 can claim. Irrelevant, I laugh at you.
I did have a lot more after the above, you may know your 109's, but I think your Spitfires were all but irrelevant in 1944, just about sums up your ignorance on Spitfire history.
-
You edit your post 2 hours later...?
Any way, you have complained from time immortal about how HTC 'hates Spits' so lets not pretend you are only 'asking for this or that...'
You are straight up whining...
Who cares if there were 3 '44 109s in the set? The Spit XIV is @ 21 lbs boost is a 44 ac btw...
So would a Spit XVI @ 18 lbs boost clipped wing, tailer tail and bubble canopy etc... would be a late '43 / '44 Spitfire...
There is no reason that just because one country has 10 aircraft to chose from that another country must have the same number. Or if one country has 3 from '42 another country needs 3 from '42...
Quit the dramatics...
There will be no 'Far East Scenarios' in the near future... (if at all, whose gonna fly for Japan? No one...)
If you can read, this is what I said:
With all the excitement about Spitfires folks over look the fact that the Spitfire in '44 was all but irrelevant.
I didn't say irrelevant I said all but...
The Spitfire's contribution to the WW2 was very limitied to begin with in the overall scope of things. It wasn't a primary in BoB. During the Circus / Rodeos it wasn't a 'war winner'.
Into late '43 and on into '44 it was the the big 2 Ami planes that carried the air war, P-47 and P-51... There are plenty of those in AH some that can be skinned as RAF...
The only place the Spitfire had any real impact is the MTO. Even then it was mixed in with half dozen other decent aircraft all of which are equally desireable to have in AH. Spits may have served 'every where' but no where was the 'Spit' a deciding factor.
The 109s and 190s served from Norway to North Africa, France to Russia ect...
5500 G-14 were produced alone, 12 G-6s etc...
All your complaining about an 18lbs Spit XVI is nothing more then another version of 'everyone hates Spitfires'...
The RAF has plenty of planes in AH..
P-51B/C, F4F (Martlet), F6F, F4U Typh, Temp, Hurris etc...
The Spitfire line up that has been suggested is a fine one. Why start whining now? It ranks right up there wiht you 'we need a 2 x 20m Vc' whine a while back...
Pyro called it right:
There has been some advocacy for a +25lb boost clipped wing Mk XVI. I really don't see what hole that fills. It would pretty much fall into the same category as the XIV. I have no qualms with that plane, but I think going with a 2000+hp version of it would be a waste as it would end up perked and CM's wouldn't use it much either.
Outside the main its usefulness would be limited so much so that folks would wonder why bother adding a XVI at in the first place...
-
I edited my post when I realised what I had put was way out of line.
Thats the whole point.
For a late war 1944/45 scenario it is NEEDED. Unless you are going to have the RAF represented by wholly Spit 14's.
As for perking it, were Mk XVI Spits that damn good in actuality. or is it knee jerk reaction along the lines of big Ki-84/P47N it has to perked hysteria.
When it gets to the point you would have to perk a Merlin based Spitfire I'm sorry my whole attitude towards this game is starting to change. This old private LW/US boys club is really starting to get old.
We are not getting a bubbletop Spit so your premise is invalid. As I stated a Spit XVI at 18lbs is exactly the same as a 1943 Spit IX at 18lbs boost. Only difference is where the engine was manufactured.
Yes the Spit 14 is a 1944 aircraft, we NOT allowed a free 1944 Spit?
Spit 8's equipped all but one of the Far East squadrons.
Just because the LW never got to serve in the Far East it's no reason to rule out the Spit 8.
But what the hell ,have your free 1944 LW rides, be smug when you beat up on a earlier Spit, enjoy your hollow victory.
When it comes to usefulness a certain TA-152 spings to mind.
Personally you wouldn't want any Spit that could beat up on a 190/109, just admit it, and get it over it.
-
Wotan,
That Bf109G-14 looks really nice for AH. I'll definately have to play around with that one.
The use of the Spit XVI at +18lbs boost would be to increase the roll rate and keep the "e" wing in 1944 where it belongs. The use of the Spit XVI at +25lbs boost would be to represent the improved Spit performance of the 2nd TAF from mid-1944 to the end of the war.
Kev,
You're over reacting. The concerns about the +25lbs XVI are well founded.
-
Quick question. All these boost levels you are talking about on the spits...
Is that normal military power or WEP that the boost ratings you are giving?
-
Hi Karnak,
So slap an 'e' wing on 1943 Spit IX and call it 1944 Spit XVI - sigh, no performance improvment, nothing.
Thank god in real life they continued to develop it and didn't cease increasing performance.
Odds looking good for high ENY (poss 5/6) perked Seafire L III.
Conscerns would be well founded if it had the speed to go with climb rate. It just doesnt.
Over reacting, yeah possibly, but the 'almost irrelevent' part of the last dribble got to me I guess. All of that post wasn't almost irrelevant it was irrelevant and I possibly should have just ignored it. Oh well.
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
Is that normal military power or WEP that the boost ratings you are giving?
WEP.
Kev,
See my post in your Spit XVI - Please reconsider (http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=156834) thread.
-
Personally you wouldn't want any Spit that could beat up on a 190/109, just admit it, and get it over it.
Keep telling yourself that... It won't make it true...
Your problems are with HTC not me... After all they 'hate Spitfires' right...
Go ahead say it a few more times...
Guppy's suggestion that the Spit XVI be a clipped 'e' puts it into '44...
A G-14 isn't necessarily a '44 aircraft, they were re-designated as G-14s. They were originally referred to as 'G-6/U2' and were in limited service as early as Aug '43...
Not only are you whining about the Spits, you are whining about 109s and have very limited knowledge to do so...
Why do keep harping on the 152? No one even flies the damn thing... It has zero use in ToD or scenarios...
Mein Gott im Himmel!!! We may end up with no '44 109s if the G10 is taken away and the the K-4 perked!!!!
We only have a 109 thats really a '43 variant!!!!!
Sweat jesious!!!!!
HTC hates 109s... You all just afraid that a decent 109 will pwn you alll!!!!!!!...
-
I had an interesting conversation at the Legends Airshow, with Clive Denny, who flies restored Spits. He has a bit over 150 hours in them, many of those in a restored Spit Vb.
I asked him what they were like to fly. His comment was that they were almost too easy. He laughed and said it would have almost made more sense to start pilot training in Spits and move on to Tiger Moths and Harvards afterwards.
So what's the point? Apparently the folks who designed the Spit got it right.
As a "Spit Dweeb", I can quit feeling guilty for flying them, even though it's been hammered into me that the Spit is a dweeb plane since my first days in Airwarrior way back when.
Now we've heard that we're going to get a good representative list of wartime Spit variants, but the XVI is too good to let it have the performance it had in 44-45.
You end up going from all excited to heavy sigh as here we go again, thankful for the new variants but disappointed you don't get the performance because it might upset the applecart in the arena.
In the end i'll go tooling around in a clipped XVI at +18 boost just cause it looks good and will fit my Spit fanatic's history imagination.
But I'll be wishing for that +25 boost when the runners go racing by and I can't catch em :)
Where's Kurfurst when we need him, to tell Pyro what a hunk of junk the Spit is?
It's still why I say unperk em all. The 109 Junkies should have all the variants at their disposal. The 190 fans as well. As should the Tiffie Tempest boys or the Corsair fans.
It's my fault if I get in the way of their guns. Let em have their fun too
Dan/CorkyJr
-
OK got to the point where I think this is all we need
Spit I 12lbs boost
Spit Vc 16lbs boost
Spit LF IXe 18lbs boost (clipped wing)
Spit F XIV 21 lbs boost
Seafire III
No extra Spits still only 3 free ones, 1 perked one + the Seafire. ( keep the 'not another spit' brigade happy)
Just gives us them I'll be happy
-
Dan,
I understand, but all things being equal I would rather have a Mk XVI at +25lbs with a low end perk price than a free Mk XVI at +18lbs.
If the choice is between historical performance but perked lightly and underperforming but free, go for historical performance. The goal is to have a range of Spit performances covering the development of the Spit through all of WWII and for that we really need it to be +25lbs boost. If it needs to be perked, so be it, but we need the full performance range.
What I'd like is to see it come in free and then be perked if it needed to be, as happened to the F4U-1C.
I'd also like us Spit fans to be understanding about the needs of the AH Main Arena and understand how ideally suited to that environment the LF.Mk XVI at +25lbs boost is. It is almost the perfect fighter for the way the AH MA works and that is all that MA perk status means. It has nothing to do with ToD really.
Kev,
That list would make me quite unhappy. I don't like clipped wings and I don't like the "e" wing. That would mean no Spit for me. If that is what Pyro does so be it, but you have the tone of stomping your feet for not getting exactly what you want right now, e.g. "Fine, see if I care, just keep it how it is!" I think you might need to calm down a bit.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
Kev,
That list would make me quite unhappy. I don't like clipped wings and I don't like the "e" wing. That would mean no Spit for me. If that is what Pyro does so be it, but you have the tone of stomping your feet for not getting exactly what you want right now, e.g. "Fine, see if I care, just keep it how it is!" I think you might need to calm down a bit.
As for the clipped E wing. That's the production Spits from mid 44 on. The XIV, IX, XVI all had the E wing.
I picked up a book while at Legends called 2 TAF Spitfire, and in there it suggests that there was a factory mod to the Universal wing that allowed for essentially E wing armament as early as late 43 with some 485 pilots and armorers claiming that as early as October 43, their Spit IXs were so equipped with 2 20mm and 2 .5 cal MGs
With the Spit LFIX and LFXVI being used by 2 TAF most were clipped wing birds.
I'd still go with the original list even if it means only an +18 boost clipped LFXVIe.
The FIX with universal wing for 42
the LFVIIIc with more internal fuel and univeral wing for 43-44
The LFXVIe clipped with 3 hard points for 44-45
Too many skinning options and scenario uses not to do all three if possible.
The idea of flying 457 RAAF shark mouth Spit VIIIs in a scenario would be a blast as would flying 417 RCAF VIIIs in the MTO or USAAF VIIIs in the MTO
And of course 602 Squadron LFXVIes in a scenario at some point too :)
Dan/CorkyJr
-
Originally posted by Lye-El
Which, of course, means more easy kills for the already good pilots. If HTC would just restrict all the lower rank pilots to the Mark I, AH would be paradise....for some.
here you are, sir, your keys to your very own Mk. I Spitfire!! ;)
-
Actually Karnak I would happier with that lineup that the proposed one.
IXe/XVIe same thing, could be tagged as either. Give the option we currently have for 50s or 303s as the 'e' wing did and you have best of both worlds. Clipped/unclipped, either I'm easy.
Its not exactly keep it as it is, every plane changes apart from the current Spit V.
-
That is my feeling too Dan. Even at +18lbs, it still keeps the wings and guns in their correct years. I'd like the +25lbs even if it were lightly perked, but I'll happily accept whatever Pyro determines is the way to go. I am just a bit giddy looking at that list and your profiles.
Spitfire Mk Ia
Spitfire Mk Vb
Spitfire F.Mk IX
Spitfire LF.Mk VIII
Seafire L.Mk III
Spitfire LF.Mk XVIe
Spitfire F.Mk XIV
If we get that list in AH, regardless of boosts, I'll be thrilled. That just looks so good to me.
Kev,
And you abandon 1941 and 1943. You're playing sour grapes now.
-
Not abandoning, as has been pointed out to me, it shouldn't be done by years.
I'm surprised you have given up so easily.
Take a 1943 LF IX slap and 'e' wing wing and WOW you have a LF MkXVI without ANY of the performance enhancements that came with a true 1944 Spit XVI
Rather keep the nice Spit V we have, and just see the other planes made more accurate.
Make you a bet now - no 25lbs Spit = no Mk VIII, no need for it, the Mk VIII was also to be standin for the 1943 LF IX.
As the proposed Spit XVI is a 1943 LF IX with an 'e' wing, all you have to do is ensure that the 50 cal and some ord options arent used and viola a 1943 Spit LF IX.
Bye Bye Spit VIII.
-
I haven't given up at all. I have stated my preference, to have the +25lbs XVI, and my recognition that it is Pyro's choice.
I have also explained, based on my experiences in AH, why I do agree with those concerned about the potential of the +25lbs XVI.
As I have already stated I think that a small perk price is preferable to having it at +18lbs, but having it and the others is vastly better than not.
You know as well as I do that what you suggest will not work as there is no way to prevent the use of guns and ordnance in setups earlier than 1944. Thus you leave 1943 and 1941 performance levels bare, and in the case of the Spit years do work as a pretty good guage.
Without the Spit VIII Pyro will not ever have the option of boosting the IX/XVI to +25lbs without opening that huge hole again.
I really don't understand your problem with having it perked. You would really rather not have it at all, and lose the Mk VIII, and lose the ability to do 1941 and 1943 scenarios than to have it lightly perked? Why? To me that is just a tantrum reaction.
-
Even with both at +18lbs boost the Spit VIII and XVI would be distinct:
Spit VIII: Full span wings, two 20mm and four .303s, greater interal tankage, single hard point.
Spit XVI: Clipped wings, two 20mm and two .50s, three hard points.
They'd both serve their purpose. I'd love the +25lbs on the XVI to differentiate them even more, but I'll take what I can get.
-
yes they do Karnak, but as Wotan has so ably pointed out, year should not be the only reason for inclusion/exclusion of a certain ride.
The list with the current Spit V (posted above) would be more than adequate for the MA, would just require a little fudging around for scenarios, but we do that all the time anyway.
Hell perk them all, if you can perk what would appear to be the 11th fastest plane in the set anything is open to it. (Seafire III anyone?)
That will be another fudge, Seafire L III operated off land bases, in AH it will be CV only, because it will be the only way to limit it's use.
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
The list with the current Spit V (posted above) would be more than adequate for the MA, would just require a little fudging around for scenarios, but we do that all the time anyway.
The whole idea is to do away with fudging anything significant. You can't put a Spitfire LF.Mk IXe/XVIe into a 1943 setup and expect people to not use the .50s, three bombs or rockets. The Vc does not work for 1941 setups as it is much to potent.
The whole idea is to fix that and with your list they might as well not change anything as it'd be much the same. You're just chaging where one of the holes is.
I understand you are frusterated about Spitfires, perks and ENY values. I have posted similar things in the past. But I think you need to step back and take a few deep breaths and think about what the lineup we hope to get allows, both in terms of possible future boost increases and in terms of ENY values. Having that variety would help ensure that at least the Spit F.IX and Spit Vb would be available whereas if nothing is changed, or your new list is used, we end up in the same boat with only the Mk I being available to people like Selector.
Recognize that the Spitfire is an awesome brawler for MA style combat and take it as a comliment to your favorite fighter. Then look at the options that the seven Spit list gives us and gives HTC. It is tremendous.
-
Gee, we were doing well there guys maybe cool down the temperature.
Ok, so the 109G-14 would not be a match, interesting graphs appreciate the info.
Again, endless discussion about "perking" does nothing except muddy the waters on the point of the conversation.
As an entire WW2 history thread on the relevance of the Spit, Im going to save that for another day too. However, I do think that the 2nd Tac AF did a lot of work 44-45, and the Spit varients and Typhoon did the lion's share of the work.
Any 1943-44 Merlin 66 Spit will be a vast improvement on the F.IX we currently have, and MUCH more representative of the type. So, the LF IXc or LF VIIIc should be given the highest priority. Thats 1st. Anything after that is gravy, imho.
I do hope a XVIe or IXe fighter-bombers are added to give the late 44-45 versions rounded out, but remember the Typhoon, Mustang, and Tempest are also in the RAF lineup, as well as the Spit XIV.
Spit XIV I would like to see as a standard wing version, E wing. Normal canopy (Spit XIVe).
-
Karnak - So it's OK to have a historical matchup in scenarios with relatively equal planes up to 1943, but 1944 is a no,no?
ENY - I got over it.
Perk - Nice to see the Spit 14 down, crazy to perk a Merlin spit.
Anyone thought about this-
Seafire L III - Merlin 55M @ 1585HP and 18lbs, and people complain about our current V at 16lbs.
That thing will be a menace, our current Spit V plus an extra 2lb boost, drop tanks and ord carrying capability (2k total?).
Will be the pick of the bunch.
Forget CV attacks using F4U, F6F etc anymore, Seafire III will rule that aspect of the game.
NO - It shouldn't be perked, the day a Seafire is perked will be one sad day for AH2.
Assuming it should be available on land (no reason it sohuldn't) will prob split my time between that and the Tiffy.
-
Kev,
The MA is not for historical matchups so being perked in there doesn't matter that much. Besides, that is for the future only as it will be +18 initially unless Pyro changes his mind.
As to the Seafire, I looked it up in my books last night and it didn't look too good. 351mph max speed, 320ish on the deck. I doubt it could carry 2,000lbs of ord. I've never heard of a Spitfire/Seafire exceeding 1,000lbs.
We'll see how it works out. Let's just stick with the list Pyro is thinking of. It covers a lot of bases and leaves future changes open.
-
Seafire III still uses the same motor as our current much complained about Spit Vc.
Only diff is it has an extra 2lbs of boost, can carry ord (maybe 1k thats why I put the ?, couldnt remember) and unlike our current Spit V carries drop tanks.
One of big limitations of the current Spit V is its range, well thats no more.
Same ammo load out also, once people discover them, i expect to see the current Spit V guys migrate across.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
As to the Seafire L III, I looked it up in my books last night and it didn't look too good. 351mph max speed, 320ish on the deck. I doubt it could carry 2,000lbs of ord. I've never heard of a Spitfire/Seafire exceeding 1,000lbs.
timeout
isnt that the seafire variant that fought against the A6M5s in the last last last days of WWIII?
looks like a good match-up. let the TnB begin!;)
-
Kev,
It is a bit heavier and wings a little weaker too.
I think the flight model will need to be looked at a bit as the charts I've seen don't match the numbers on the current Mk V.
1K3,
Yes, the final fighter vs fighter fight of WWII was A6M5s vs Seafire L.Mk IIIs. I seem to recall the Seafires won, 8 to 2 or some such.
-
Yes, its a hell of a machine.
Like I said almost identical to our Spit V, but with droptanks, ord and an extra 2lbs boost, 4 bladed prop, same ammo loadout.
Anything but the 55M would be a fudge
Although originally fitted with a Merlin 50 this lasted a very short period, in fact only the initial batch were supplied with Merlin 50s. All subsequent batches and the orignal batch were then fitted with low alt 55M's.
Biggest thing will be the drop tanks, current Spit V's are a royal pain, with droptanks Seafires could become a nightmare.
Extra weight wont matter, load it 75% fuel, take DT's. Just before you start combat ditch the DTs.
Yeah Karnak something along those line 8-2, not bad for almost irrelevent aircraft, the final kills of WW2.
Can't find data for a Merlin 55M at 18lbs
Maybe hazard a guess, a Merlin 50 @16lbs at 10500ft gives it 351 mph.
So go from a Merlin 50 1470HP at 16lbs to a Merlin 55M 1585HP at 18lbs.
-
We have been over this already:
Seafire L.IIIc had a 55M Merlin with +18 lbs boost. < NOT the same engine as our current Spit V. It did 358 mph at 6000 feet (FTH)
Merlin 55M is the same engine as powers a Spit L.F. Vb (+18 lbs).
It had a single centerline rack for 1 250 or 500 lb bomb OR a drop tank.
It had the same wing as a Spitfire Vc did. No capacity for wing ord at all. Its ground attack ability is no better than a Spit V is.
http://www.spitfireperformance.com/lr765.html
-
I don't know the answer to this, but the pilots notes on the Merlin 66 in a Spit VIII popped up something interesting in regards to boost and max climb.
Spit VIII with +18 max boost for 5 minutes. This is a Merlin 66 same as the LFIX, or Merlin 266 in the LFXVI
Max climb is limited to +12 boost with the Merlin 66.
Since that seems to be the big fear of the XVI is that it will climb at +25 boost I wonder if there is a difference in Boost limit for max climb on the XVI as well? Wonder if it's limited to +18 boost on climb with 150 octane fuel?
Don't have pilots notes on the LFIXe or XVIe
Dan/CorkyJr
-
Thats what I was looking for Squire thanks.
Now the interesting bit, the Mk IX/XVI at 18lbs boost only manages 364mph at 10000ft, dont get caught by a Seafire on the deck boys.
It will outurn you and with 'e' keep up with you in a climb.
I would hazard a guess there a slight possibility that under 10k theres almost nothing between them.
Better hope he didnt do the old - come with DT's and 75% fuel so hes a lot lighter than you also.
Now tell me it doesnt have the makings of being a real MA problem, even moreso than our current V people whine like crazy about.
Better perk it huh.
Squire do you have data for say 0k up to 20k?
-
The thing that gets me is the LW fanboys are worried about 5 min of 25 lb boost. Thats just SAD. Think about the average MA player . I'd bet that boost is all but gone before he even enters the fight. Then it becomes just another spit.
I can see it now . Dora driver to squad " I just compleated porkin troops 18 fields back.". Squad " wtg good job". Dorka driver "EEEEEEPPPPPP spit XVI diving on me and gaining fast please advise.". Squad " Stirr stick faster. then after he shoots ya down go to the bbs and post a perk spit XVI whine."
Bronk
-
Originally posted by Bronk
The thing that gets me is the LW fanboys are worried about 5 min of 25 lb boost. Thats just SAD. Think about the average MA player . I'd bet that boost is all but gone before he even enters the fight. Then it becomes just another spit.
I can see it now . Dora driver to squad " I just compleated porkin troops 18 fields back.". Squad " wtg good job". Dorka driver "EEEEEEPPPPPP spit XVI diving on me and gaining fast please advise.". Squad " Stirr stick faster. then after he shoots ya down go to the bbs and post a perk spit XVI whine."
Bronk
Lol , you'd think the Spit XVI's were going to be cruising round the MA at 25lbs boost for hours on end instead of 5 mins.
Hell if he uses it to scramble for IB bogies, most of its gone by the time he gets to say 25k.
-
Kev,
I think you will find that " THE SPIT XVI MUST BE PERKED " people. Are the same people who "FREEKIN AMERIKA IRON GAMEY FLAPOMTIC HTC PLEASE FIX SO MY LW BIRD CAN SHOOT IT DOWN " crowd. I mean cmon just say ya dont want any AC than has any chance of catching a D9. C'mon just say it. Admiting your problem is the first step in solving it. I'll say it again for ya slowly so ya understand.
IT
ONLY
HAS
25lbs
FOR
5
MIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Bronk
-
Why I want all three Merlin 60 series birds.
There are enough differences to make it worthwhile, although I think the FIX would be non-existant in the MA, and purely a scenario bird.
Think I got the differences nailed down. But feel free to add to it.
Dan/CorkyJr
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/810_1123185701_merlin60spits.jpg)
-
Originally posted by Furball
here you are, sir, your keys to your very own Mk. I Spitfire!! ;)
Click...Click.. HEY! Can I get a jump start over here? I've got 190s to catch! :D
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
Why I want all three Merlin 60 series birds.
There are enough differences to make it worthwhile, although I think the FIX would be non-existant in the MA, and purely a scenario bird.
.
Beg to differ. This will alow HTC to change the eny value. Spit IX with a high eny bring it on . PLEASE:aok
Bronk
-
Originally posted by Lye-El
Click...Click.. HEY! Can I get a jump start over here? I've got 190s to catch! :D
Bad news, your going to struggle catching a 190 in the neutered Spit 16. Was going to be tough enough in a full blown 16.
-
Originally posted by Wilbus
Nha bring it on. LW Pilots got the skill unlike the sissyfire pilots :)
"OPS! He's not turning with me, oh dear, what should I do now, oh hell, I'll just keep turning for a while"
Hahem ...
Isn't it more like :
"OPS! He's not turning with me, oh dear, what should I do now, oh hell, I'll just keep Rurning for a while"
-
You know what? Seems most of the gripin' and moanin' is because you want to chase down dweebs. Don't make more dweeb planes for the dweebs. Just shoot them down and move on. Don't go on a freaking CRUSADE to include super fighters just because you only know how to fly a spit, and spits don't seem to catch the dweebs you want to fly. That's backwards logic. If you have problems catching a select few aircraft, FLY A FASTER PLANE. There are many that are all within 20mph of each other (and to most planes that's close enough to catch).
I see a lot of UNHELPFUL posts, that add nothing to the subject, bringing in flamebait about how they hate group X or how they claim group Y is freaking out.. when in fact I see nothing but those in these discussions freaking out.
The conversation was helpful and constructive, until lately.
Keep the flamebait out, this is important to AH2 and what aircraft are included.
-
A crusade for super fighter ?
Why is it super fighter when it's RAF and not when it's LW ?
After 5 hours training any dweeb can survive in the MA with a D9 or a G10.
What is your MA handle Krusty ?
-
Krusty,
Just show me the brit counterpart for the D9 thats unperked. I don't think you can find one. If you were refering to my posts as flamebait . Sorry you feel that way. They were not directed at any one person. They were for the fly my way and the perk x plane is better than my favorite ride crowd.
Ohhh and as to a dweeb ride to shoot down a dweeb ride coment . I am sorry the spit such a nice all around plane and a joy to fly.
Bronk
PS just noticed the easy mode schmuckfire in your sig. Now i understand why ya want it perked.
-
Originally posted by Bronk
PS just noticed the easy mode schmuckfire in your sig. Now i understand why ya want it perked.
You understand nothing, apparently. I will not explain the quote in my sig, nor will I explain off-topic things to you, after I just posted to everyone that we should keep on-topic posts only, in here.
-
Krusty ,
Ok topic is we might get holes filled in plane set. So once again . Show me the brit counterpart for the D9 thats unperked.
Bronk
-
I don't have time right now to read most of the newer post but I just want to point something out...
I don't care about the 'boost' in so far as the boost chosen gives the greatest range of usage possible...
What I mean is I think an 18 lbs Spit XVI would have more use over a larger date range then one at 25lbs...
Kev seems to think the if it doesn't have 25lbs then it doesn't matter at all.
If Pyro models it with 25lbs and is swayed by the arguements of some of the Spit guys here that would be fine.. I would not think twice about it...
Things like this should be debated before hand.
Pyro has said:
There has been some advocacy for a +25lb boost clipped wing Mk XVI. I really don't see what hole that fills. It would pretty much fall into the same category as the XIV. I have no qualms with that plane, but I think going with a 2000+hp version of it would be a waste as it would end up perked and CM's wouldn't use it much either.
And I agree with him...
I don't agree with removing a 16lb Spit V for the same reason. A 16 lb Spit V would give us a greater range. We lack the LW planes to reallly match well with a 12lbs Spit V.
But these points are just minor and any new plane is a good plane...
If the list as suggested ends up as follows:
Spitfire Mk Ia
Spitfire Mk Vb
Spitfire F.Mk IX
Spitfire LF.Mk VIII
Seafire L.Mk III
Spitfire LF.Mk XVIe
Spitfire F.Mk XIV
Regardless of the boost settings adding the above Spits will be a good thing over all.
-
Originally posted by Krusty
You understand nothing, apparently. I will not explain the quote in my sig, nor will I explain off-topic things to you, after I just posted to everyone that we should keep on-topic posts only, in here.
Hear , Hear,
Krusty has been one of the few LW who are willing to at least discuss the 25lbs Spit XVI and not immediately come out with "YOU CAN'T HAVE THAT".
Like we have said Wotan, yes it is a good list, but in the long run the boost settings are very important.
The Mk VIII at 18lbs boost will have an almost identical perfomance to the Mk XVI at 18lbs boost, in that case we don't need both, and probably won't get both, it almost duplication and a waste of effort.
There were more reasons to selecitng a 25lbs boost XVI than the extra performance, one of them was to avoid duplicaiton, the other was to allow the Spit LF VIII to stand in for the LF IX in scenarios.
-
Just show me the brit counterpart for the D9 thats unperked.
The D-9 was not developed as a counter part or in response to any Spitfire...
It was there to basically deal with P-51s, What P-51 is perked?
-
Originally posted by Wotan
The D-9 was not developed as a counter part or in response to any Spitfire...
It was there to basically deal with P-51s, What P-51 is perked?
True, but more to the point is that perked status isn't done that way and it is irrelevant in the MA in the first place.
Bring in the Spits as:
Spitfire Mk Ia - 12lbs boost
Spitfire Mk Vb - 12lbs boost
Spitfire F.Mk IX - 15lbs boost
Spitfire LF.Mk VIII - 18lbs boost
Seafire L.Mk III - 18lbs boost
Spitfire LF.Mk XVIe - 18lbs boost
Spitfire F.Mk XIV - 21lbs boost (perked)
That will work for AH2, ToD Scenarios and the CT.
-
No point 'duplicating' the 8 and 16, will get one or the other - not both.
Almost no differnece in performance, very little difference if layout.
May 1944 - 1st use of 150 grade fuel/25lbs boost (Spit LF IX).
Oct 1944 - Spit XVI delivered.
Nov 1944 - 2TAF cleared to use 150 grade unit wide.
I wonder if there would have been same fuss if we'd asked for a 1944 Spit LF IX with 25lbs boost?
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
No point 'duplicating' the 8 and 16, will get one or the other - not both.
Almost no differnece in performance, very little difference if layout.
How many times does it need to be explained to you? I have told you over and over why it is a good thing to have both and yet you insist on pouting.
If we have only the XVI we will never have a chance to get it at +25lbs because of the big gaping hole that would open. Further there would be endless whines about using it in any scenario where a universal wing Spit should be used or a non-clipped Spit should be used. If you don't think that would be used to justify keeping Spits out of scenarios you haven't watched the CT for the last year.
In order to keep all options open we need both the VIII and XVI.
-
I'd be very surprised.
-
That will work for AH2, ToD Scenarios and the CT.
As I pointed out I have no interest in the main so my points are always based on ToD.
No point 'duplicating' the 8 and 16, will get one or the other - not both.
Almost no differnece in performance, very little difference if layout.
A CW SpitXVI will be a different plane then a standard VIII. It's roll rate for one will improve, it wont turn as well etc...
They will be differences and players jumping from one to the other will have to learn those differences even if they are subtle. A lot complaints that come from folks about the Spit XIV is that they try to fly it like the Spit IX or V.
Any way why does there need to be such a huge difference in performance to justify both? Look at the G-2 and G-6 in AH...
The G-6 is a bit draggier but other then that they perform real close to each other...
-
The difference is so minimal.
The full span 8 with turn better, roll worse and vice vesa.
Performance wise you are talking so close as to not be a factor, same engine, same boost.
Still think the gem of the bunch is the Seafire III, people complained about the current Spit V, they're gonna love this little beauty.
Within a tad of being as fast as a Spit VIII and XVI under 10k, but much more nimbler.
Can carry a drop tank so gets rid of our current V's main drawback - range.
Same ammo loadout as current V.
Carries 1 1000lb or 500lb
Boost up from +16 to +18 :) .
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
The difference is so minimal.
The full span 8 with turn better, roll worse and vice vesa.
Performance wise you are talking so close as to not be a factor, same engine, same boost.
Still think the gem of the bunch is the Seafire III, people complained about the current Spit V, they're gonna love this little beauty.
Within a tad of being as fast as a Spit VIII and XVI under 10k, but much more nimbler.
Can carry a drop tank so gets rid of our current V's main drawback - range.
Same ammo loadout as current V.
Carries 1 1000lb or 500lb
Boost up from +16 to +18 :) .
Gonna disagree with you on the minimal differences between the VIII and XVI.
Two different birds used for different things in different theaters of the war. I'd give up the FIX before I'd want to lose the VIII. Too many options outside of the MA for the VIII, Barney Newman's 79 Squadron Spit 8 for one :)
The MTO and SEAC birds would be well represented by the correct Spit variant then, not with a bastardized FIX. And of course the USAAF flew their share of VIIIs in the MTO too.
Better off going with a clipped LFIXe if there needs to be a specific IX in the mix.
Then again lets get all three, FIX, LFVIII and LFXVIe
Dan/CorkyJr
-
Don't get me wrong, it would be nice to see all of them, just got a nagging doubt, after all I did actually talk to Pyro.
From his point of view its easier to go the other route.
By not too different I meant performance wise, and in a scenario a clipped wing XVI masquerading as a clipped VIII probably wouldn't be noticed if it wasn't for the tag by a lot of people.
But you never know.
-
You're asking for the Spit 1 at +12 boost with wep?
It already goes to +12 with wep.
-
Even Pyro has said our current Spit I only runs to 6 on 87 grade fuel.
I dunno.
Thats what he is going to change on it, its not asking, he is changing it.
-
You said that the Boost ratings everyone is talking about is the boost for Wep.
The current Spit 1 has +6 on full power and +12 on WEP.
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
You said that the Boost ratings everyone is talking about is the boost for Wep.
The current Spit 1 has +6 on full power and +12 on WEP.
No, it is +6lbs. The gauge says +12, but it isn't correct. The performance is as +6 and Pyro said it is +6.
-
The guage is incorrect... i wonder why HTC didnt make corrections on teh last parth
if Spirfire 1 is running @ +12/100 octane fuel....
http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit1vrs109e.html
-
No, it is +6lbs. The gauge says +12, but it isn't correct. The performance is as +6 and Pyro said it is +6.
Fuel consumption is correct for 12 lbs as well, iirc. Performance is definately nowhere near 12 lbs though (although it might be slightly too high for 6.25 lbs)
-
Thx for the chart, Kev.
So that power/weight ratio is very similar to a 109 at 1.98 ata, but yet, the RoC is listed as 1000feet/min higher than a K-4....
-
Originally posted by Meyer
Thx for the chart, Kev.
So that power/weight ratio is very similar to a 109 at 1.98 ata, but yet, the RoC is listed as 1000feet/min higher than a K-4....
Would bet that the greater wing area of the Spit generated more lift than the smaller 109 wing area.
-
Not sure if lift has any relevance in RoC...
-
" The performance is as +6 and Pyro said it is +6."
Proof of the HTC anti-allied conspiracy!!! (in leage with the Freemasons, and Texas Oil Interests...) :rofl
-
Originally posted by Krusty
You understand nothing, apparently. I will not explain the quote in my sig, nor will I explain off-topic things to you, after I just posted to everyone that we should keep on-topic posts only, in here.
Again,what is your MA handle ?
-
If we we get a clipped wing spit i'll be over the moon. IX, XVI, VIII, 18 or 25 boost i don't care. Clipped wing spits just look so damn cool.:)
-
Originally posted by straffo
Again,what is your MA handle ?
He doesn't have one; he's a free loader.
-
Ah ok, he wouldn't answer me in another thread when I asked. He was giving 'how to advice' on how a certain plane should be flown...
Any way that's another thread...
-
Originally posted by Seeker
He doesn't have one; he's a free loader.
Why I'm not surprised ?
Go away Krusty or pay.
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
Hear , Hear,
Krusty has been one of the few LW who are willing to at least discuss the 25lbs Spit XVI and not immediately come out with "YOU CAN'T HAVE THAT".
Like we have said Wotan, yes it is a good list, but in the long run the boost settings are very important.
The Mk VIII at 18lbs boost will have an almost identical perfomance to the Mk XVI at 18lbs boost, in that case we don't need both, and probably won't get both, it almost duplication and a waste of effort.
There were more reasons to selecitng a 25lbs boost XVI than the extra performance, one of them was to avoid duplicaiton, the other was to allow the Spit LF VIII to stand in for the LF IX in scenarios.
Kev,
You are correct that Krusty didn't say "YOU CAN'T HAVE THAT".
But he did say "I shure HOPE it gets perked.". Thats what got me bit miffed.
Bronk
-
Well we got a few guys searching for more data on the XVI.
That 5700fpm is alleged 0-5000ft
If found a source that quotes 4100fpm inital climb although doesn't mention 18 or 25 boost.
Also that 4th fighter group report is for a Mk IX, full wings, no bomb racks, and contains a few typos. I'm pretty sure I read the XVI carried slighly more fuel also so that would affect the climb.
So wait out, we'll get to the bottom of it.
Yeah perking it would be absurd, the 12th fastest plane in planeset perked because of climb, lol. Only 12th fastest for 5 mins after that knock off 25mph+.
Funny how a half decent Spit produces mass panic :) .
Just waiting for the perk the Seafire L III screams, once they find out its better than our current V.
-
Straffo, seeker, bite me. Don't post if you're not helping.
Bronk, what does it matter if I express the opinion that "I sure hope it's perked!" when it appears to be a plane that possesses every best trait of every great plane in this game, all in one package, where any greenhorn pilot can get 15 kills a sortie in after 1 hours learning curve, that when you meet it in a fight it will be impossible to defeat unless you are in the same plane?
What does it matter if my opinion states that I think super powerful planes should be perked? I've been playing enough games for long enough to notice that the most important thing any game can ever have, by far surpassing realism, surpassing graphics, surpassing all else, is balanced gameplay. In the interest of balanced gameplay, and keeping AH2 in the black financially, certain things have to be considered. That includes perking some rides.
There you have my reasoning behind my opinion. Having said that, I ask you why you hold a grudge against me having an opinion?
I'm all for including the plane. But there is that thing called balance. I also think about that.
-
Krutsy - Well hopefully we'll get another source of data for it.
I have sent emails all over the place asking for perfromance data, hopefully I'll get something.
5700fpm seems a little excessive/unbelievable, I didn't want the 25lbs for the climb, but for the extra 24mph.
Found out already that clipped wings affect climb up to 200fpm, so if we can find a few other sources for XVI data, even if for a normal wing we can work out climb for a clipped.
For those who think that the XVI is not needed at all-
1) Was used by the 2TAF - good for D-Day, late was scenarios.
2) Was the RAF LAST mainstay frontline Spit.
-
Originally posted by Krusty
, where any greenhorn pilot can get 15 kills a sortie in after 1 hours learning curve, that when you meet it in a fight it will be impossible to defeat unless you are in the same plane?
.
Sounds like the plane for me! Best I have ever done is 3. But then I don't generally vultch. :aok
-
Originally posted by Krusty
, that when you meet it in a fight it will be impossible to defeat unless you are in the same plane?
By that reasoning 262's should ONLY be shot down by 262's.
The chaotic nature of the MA ensures this is not true.
-
I think a better, more capable example would have been the La7. The 262 is pretty impotent, really.
But imagine if the La7 flew as well as it did, but had the guns and turning capabilities of the spitV we currently have? It would be the predominant threat, no matter how green/new the pilot was.
Okay, I concede. I was being too general and exagerating slightly. I withdraw the comment about only being able to kill it in the exact same ride.
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
Krutsy - Well hopefully we'll get another source of data for it.
I have sent emails all over the place asking for perfromance data, hopefully I'll get something.
5700fpm seems a little excessive/unbelievable, I didn't want the 25lbs for the climb, but for the extra 24mph.
Found out already that clipped wings affect climb up to 200fpm, so if we can find a few other sources for XVI data, even if for a normal wing we can work out climb for a clipped.
For those who think that the XVI is not needed at all-
1) Was used by the 2TAF - good for D-Day, late was scenarios.
2) Was the RAF LAST mainstay frontline Spit.
I have e-mails out to some of my Spit contacts as well. Hopefully we'll get an accurate number.
Dan/CorkyJr
-
La7 is the highest dieing plane in the MA by last tours reports.
You dont need an La7 to beat an La7.
See your point, but your missing one -
It doesn't have the speed even at 25lbs to escape 11 other planes, without WEP its even worse.
Yes I mention speed because we don't know excatly how it will turn, clipped wings, lot more torque etc.
We can assume it will worse that current IX, average is +55ft wider turn clipped, but we dont know what effect torque will have.
Add to that you can guarentee its not being chased by one plane, but by many.
I think too many people are thinking 1v1, MA 1v1, yup that'll be the day.
You know what the real problem will be whatever he does with it?
The majority of spit drivers will jump straight to it ignoring the V,IX,VIII.
Whatever he does your going to see a lot if XVI's, if he thinks by limiting it to 18lbs it will put people off, he's wrong.
If nothing else, it's great to see the LWeebles squirming. ( )*( ) do I see some twitch there lol jk.
-
Originally posted by Krusty
Bronk, what does it matter if I express the opinion that "I sure hope it's perked!"
While I concur with Kev that you're not an average Luftwaffle; and that almost all your posts are reasoned; nontheless it matters beause you're attempting to influence choices in an arena you don't use; don't intend to use, don't contribute to nor intend to contribute to.
As a H2H player; you control your own arenas completly; or choose those that suit you.
As a H2H player; for you, every plane is another plane; and nothing more than that. Any discussions of HTC's perking system; which applies to the MA (and to a lesser extent; the CT) is completly beyond your remit and you're out of place trying to place an agenda in the discussion.
It's _exactly_ the same as MA players trying to influence what goes on in H2H: Out of place and none of their buisness.
Nonetheless; there's an easy way to join in.
Pay. Just like every one else.
-
Originally posted by Seeker
Nonetheless; there's an easy way to join in.
Pay. Just like every one else.
A Kill Has Been Recorded?
:cool:
Drano
-
I have to say seeker, that you choose a very narrow minded view of me, and every other person that has flown HTH.
Originally posted by Seeker
you're attempting to influence choices in an arena you don't use; don't intend to use, don't contribute to nor intend to contribute to.
I do not use it. I do intend to use it. I do contribute, and have several skins accepted and in the MA now. You make false assumptions based on... what? The fact that I fly in HTH rooms? So do many subscription players.
As a H2H player; you control your own arenas completly; or choose those that suit you.
As a H2H player; for you, every plane is another plane; and nothing more than that. Any discussions of HTC's perking system; which applies to the MA (and to a lesser extent; the CT) is completly beyond your remit and you're out of place trying to place an agenda in the discussion.
[/B]
Gameplay balance is the entire point of perks. Gameplay pre balance (keeping rare planes from being seen in massive numbers) or post balance (seeing that there are far too many chogs running around, and adding a perk price) is all that the perks do. Nothing else. By all descriptions the Spit16 with +25 boost would be unbalancing. Perking it would prevent this.
I am not naive. I have been flying AH on and off since it came out. Hell Just after beta I asked on the forums if HT was going to release a software mode for it, and he (or somebody in HTC) said it was geared for the 3D crowd. After that I got a computer with 3D and most of the time since then AH has been on my hard drive.
Do not think me out of my realm. Do not think of me anything other than an Ace High community member. As that is what I am. And the community gets involved and is involved in important issues (which this has been -- an important issue).
-
Whilst in prinicple I agree with you -
If you perked a 25lbs boost Spit XVI, then there are a number of other planes that SHOULD be perked at the same time.
You compared a G10 to a XVI at 15k?
Yet again you compare aircraft that fight in two different realms, what happens if you go up 5k, the G10 gains the edge and keeps on doing the higher you go.
Try comparing overall performance to an aircraft designed to fight low level. Eg La7.
Would guess
Speed La7 - easily
Climb - XVI (unless at real high speed where Spits get sluggish pulling up)
Guns - XVI
Turn - Low speed XVI, med speed ?, high speeds ?
Would actaully say chasing a La7 on the deck approaching his top speed, he 'may' have the advantage in turn, and should pull up better.
Acceleration - comments.
Looks like a la7 Vs Spit XVI would be interesting, at least until the Spit loses 'e'.
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
I have e-mails out to some of my Spit contacts as well. Hopefully we'll get an accurate number.
Dan/CorkyJr
Send our thanks to any that reply on the matter
-
Yeah Dan.
Not got anything back yet :(
Would assume -
Compared to the figures we have
Clipped wing, extra fuel, extra weight should all contribute to a reduction of the 5700fpm?
Do we have base figures for a XVI rather than using a IX, given the XVI was heavier?
Be nice to see base figures, then at 18, then at 25.
Just noticed this
quote: Pyro
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There has been some advocacy for a +25lb boost clipped wing Mk XVI. I really don't see what hole that fills. It would pretty much fall into the same category as the XIV. I have no qualms with that plane, but I think going with a 2000+hp version of it would be a waste as it would end up perked and CM's wouldn't use it much either.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why wouldn't it be used by CMs? Perfect for D-Day and after scenarios. In all honesty could say the same about 50% of the planeset.
XIV and XVI are totally different, XVI low level, XIV high level.
Fills the 1944 onwards hole the 'free' Spits have had since I starting playing (if unperked).
Anyway lets see what figures we can come up first, I think the 5700fpm is gonna drop quite a lot once we get accurate figures.
Teking bets (100fpm only please)-
I'll have 4000-4100
-
Anyway lets see what figures we can come up first, I think the 5700fpm is gonna drop quite a lot once we get accurate figures.
Teking bets (100fpm only please)-
I'll have 4000-4100
4000 - 4100 ft/min?
The Australians tested a Spitfire LF VIII, slightly heavier than the IX, minor airframe differences, should be similar speed, slightly worse climbrate.
They got a climb rate of 4600 ft/min up to about 6,000 ft at 18 lbs boost. 25 lbs boost increased the power about 25%.
4,600 ft/min increased by 25% would be 5,750 ft/min, critical altitude would drop.
However, you might not gain 25% climb rate with a 25% increase in power because the prop probably wouldn't absorb all that extra power. Individual aircraft vary as well, of course.
-
Originally posted by Nashwan
4000 - 4100 ft/min?
The Australians tested a Spitfire LF VIII, slightly heavier than the IX, minor airframe differences, should be similar speed, slightly worse climbrate.
They got a climb rate of 4600 ft/min up to about 6,000 ft at 18 lbs boost. 25 lbs boost increased the power about 25%.
4,600 ft/min increased by 25% would be 5,750 ft/min, critical altitude would drop.
However, you might not gain 25% climb rate with a 25% increase in power because the prop probably wouldn't absorb all that extra power. Individual aircraft vary as well, of course.
I keep going back to the Spit VIII pilot's notes on climb. And I keep wanting to throw out what someone did testing as opposed to what the squadron pilots were operating at.
Image from the pilots notes. Yes I know it's 100 octane and +18 but note how it's limited to +12 for the Merlin 66 for climb and max take off.
+18 is only used for max combat boost and then for only 5 minutes.
We need something to show that +25 was used in all aspects of operating the Spit LFIX or LFXVI.
My primary Spitfire source replied but is out of town for a week away from his resources, but promises to get on it as soon as he returns. Not that we're going to have that much patience :)
Dan/CorkyJr
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/810_1123282052_climbspit.jpg)
-
Oh, certainly much less at climbing power, about 3650 ft/min for the Australian test of the Spitfire VIII, but people aren't really interestd in climbing power, are they? How fast you can climb to whatever altitude you want to fly is important for gameplay, but it seems to me all people are really interested in is the advantage they can get in combat, how fast they can climb/accelerate away from their opponent.
I certainly think that's the important consideration for Pyro, how difficult it will be for people to combat the Spit, not how long it took a Spit driver to get to 20k before he begins his run in to target.
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
I keep going back to the Spit VIII pilot's notes on climb. And I keep wanting to throw out what someone did testing as opposed to what the squadron pilots were operating at.
Image from the pilots notes. Yes I know it's 100 octane and +18 but note how it's limited to +12 for the Merlin 66 for climb and max take off.
+18 is only used for max combat boost and then for only 5 minutes.
We need something to show that +25 was used in all aspects of operating the Spit LFIX or LFXVI.
My primary Spitfire source replied but is out of town for a week away from his resources, but promises to get on it as soon as he returns. Not that we're going to have that much patience :)
Dan/CorkyJr
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/810_1123282052_climbspit.jpg)
I think all its showing is-
That at 18lbs (full boost 100 octane) you can run 5 mins.
12lbs boost allows you to run an hour.
Prob same as variable boost turbos for cars, higher boost = less time.
-
Guppy, what exactly are you getting at?
"Max. Climbing" is just a power rating, like this:
Max. Climbing(UK) = Military power(US) = Climb & Combat(DE)
-
Originally posted by Nashwan
Oh, certainly much less at climbing power, about 3650 ft/min for the Australian test of the Spitfire VIII.
This would suggest it was somewhat higher for an VIII, even at 18lbs
http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit8.html
You guys should sneak a peek at the 109 thread.
Poor old Krusty, thought they were gonna string him up for daring to suggest they perk a 452mph 109-K4
From what I 've seen gonna spend our time chasing them all over the MA hoping they turn. this isn't the complete list being suggested, and of course all free.
G6 - 385
G14 - 415
G14/AS - ???
K4 - 452
This is the best part of AH2, the hypocritical double standards.
-
Uhm, you just linked to the same RAAF flight test Nashwan quoted...
-
let's have this spit (XIX) just for the sake of going somewhere that no other sim manufacturer would have the guts to go...
no...seriously...
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/77_1122044373_spitfiremkxix.jpg)
-
Lol if that was the case how about
(http://website.lineone.net/~roling46/Spitfires/LA226-1a.JPG)
120 delivered, if you count they strafed a midget submarine - they saw combat.
F.21 - A absolute beast. 455mph @ 26,500ft , 4x20mm lazers
Now that would be "Boldy Going'
-
sounds good to me. :D
-
Lol I wish.
IF it ever showed up would be more expensive that a Tempest.
Plus it would cost me a fortune taking the HTC staff out and getting them drunk as a thankyou :)
Funny thing is if the war had lasted another 6 months or so we might have got it.
3000 were ordered, cancelled at the end of the war after 120 were delivered.
-
maybe, after the game is finished , HTC will create a "dreamer's" arena where we can be dweebs in really, really fast rides. naw, that would take their attention away from Aces High - Vietnam. nevermind. :)
-
Krusty,
I realy didn't intend it to be a personal attack . I wanted to poke at the whiners before they started to whine. Your opinion is fine with me but i disagree strongly. The XVI at 25lbs boost will still be some 20+ mph slower with the 5 min of boost. Like you said get in a faster plane and shoot it down whats the problem ? What i would like to see is HTC put it in the MA plane set for say 2 months . Then make a decision on if it should be perked or not . Just for the record I am fine with the way the new perk costs are now except for the Ta 152 . This plane has very little use in the MA and should free imho .
Once again Krusty I appologise if you took this as a personal shot at you . This was not my intention.
Bronk
P.S. The MA has no balance it's controled chaos at all times. Thats the best descripiton for it I'd say.
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
Thats the one thing I have never understood -
Get a good performing Spit we have to perk it, yet other good performers go untouched ??????????
What is it? Spit considered just so damn good it has to be perked?
If the Spit VIII is at 18lbs, the Spit XVI must be at 25lbs.
Maybe it`s not about performance, but the minimal number of Spit IXs running at +25lbs most of the time.
According the Neil Stirling, there were only 2-3 Sqns running at +25 lbs during 1944, out of 37. Less than 10%... There were no XVI sqns, of course. To be honest, I thought to be a lot more around but there wasn`t.
+25lbs was not introduced in numbers until the beginnnig of 1945, by 25 Sqns - about half or less the total number of Merlin 66 engines Spitfires. I remember Kev arguing in another thread arguing that planes with so late introduction and such small numbers should not be included at all. He should apply this to the Spitfire as well, or not to any plane. Asking for the highest performing variants of your favourite type and trying to deprieve others from theirs at the same time is not very tasteful.
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
No the LF XVI at 18lbs boost is NOT 1944, more accurately its a 1943 Spit LF IX. Spits ran 18lbs boost starting with the Merlin 66 in 1943.
[/B]
You accuse others with ignorance on Spitfire history, but you yourself display the finest examples of it.
NO, you are wrong, it appears 95% the MkIXs did only run at +18 lbs in 1944. Yes, you are half right, +18 lbs Spit9s were around from beginning 1943, in small numbers, with 4 MkV being around for every MkIX.
Not aimed specifically at you Wotan, but as a general comment on the whole 1944 Spit/190/109 situation which is totally one-sided as it stands, and would still be if the 16 comes in at 18lbs. [/B]
Hate to break your heart, but it WAS one sided historically. In early 1944, the MW50 and large supercharger 109Gs appeared in LARGE numbers. They were faster at altitude, and they were typical.
+25 lbs Spits also appeared, and in fact the +25lbs IX and the MW50 using 109G-14 are VERY close to each other in performance, the difference being the old story, the RAF only having 2-3 Sqds of the new planes, while G-14s and G-14/AS were literally flooding the battlefield and soon replacing older models.
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
Krutsy - Well hopefully we'll get another source of data for it.
I have sent emails all over the place asking for perfromance data, hopefully I'll get something.
5700fpm seems a little excessive/unbelievable, I didn't want the 25lbs for the climb, but for the extra 24mph.
The 5700 fpm data at +25lbs is believable, if you know how it was arrived.
The 5700 fpm was measured in Spit IX test and noted for the VIII when the coolant radiator flaps were overridden and force-closed. With the standard way of measuring climb rate in other spitfire tests, with the radiators open, they measured 5080 fpm, a believable figure compared to the 4650 fpm measured under similiar conditions but at +18 lbs boost at SL.
Force-closing the rads during the test of course reduced drag and increased performance, but was highly theoretical, given that the radiator flaps were automatically operated and the pilot could not set them manuall on the MkIX/XVI - they would open very soon after the temperature started to rise to compensate (they were thermostatically controlled). Hence why the RAF always measured ROC with open radiators, with the exception of these tests.
For those who think that the XVI is not needed at all-
1) Was used by the 2TAF - good for D-Day, late was scenarios.[/B]
Err, the production of the XVI started a whole 3 months AFTER D-Day...
-
Originally posted by Kurfürst
Err, the production of the XVI started a whole 3 months AFTER D-Day...
Well, according to Spitfire: The History Castle Bromwich had them in production starting in June, 1944 and a single Mk XVI in May on an earlier order.
That said, they clearly didn't serve over tje D-Day beaches.
And that said, the Mk XVI is just a LF.Mk IXe using an American built engine so it is fine to use it in place of the LF.Mk IXe Spits that did server over the beaches.
-
IMHO, the best solution would be breaking down into types :
*LF MkIXc, +18 lbs, normal wings representing the most common type and boost and guns from ealry 1943 to end of 1944.
*LF MkXVIe, +25 lbs, clipped wings representing the few upboosted of 1944, and the major number of upboosted ones of 1945, the stronger armament and also giving the option of clipped wings. Bubblecanopy too, perhaps, but afaik it was really-really late, March 1945 or something, so not very representative of the IX/XVI...
-
We thoguht of that and threw it out for 2 reasons -
1) We wanted the bare minimum of aircraft, even to the point were 1 could sub for another.
2) To help stop the "Not another spit" whines.
First two Spit squadrons ( Spit IX) swapped to 150 grade fuel May 1944, 2TAF given permission to use 150 grade fuel Nov 1944.
Without going through every individual squadron record (feel free I really havent got the time), knowing how many for any given month used it is impossible.
Unless you have a source you can quote, with scanned pages or links to scanned pages to back it up.
E.g. where did you get March 45 from?
As Karnak said they (XVI) could be used in place of the LF IX for DDay. If you actaully bother reading through the whole thread you'll see that the VIII or XVI has been consistently referred to as a standin for the 1943 LF IX. Partly my fault I should have been more clearer.
Thought I'd copy this from other thread.
Paste form Kurfursts own site -
Olivier Lefebvre, noted authority on the BF 109, has stated:
AFAIK 1.98ata boost was cleared late February but it seems to have been slowly introduced into service, I suspect the adjustments needed on the engine and the change of sparkplugs type (supply problems ???) took longer than expected. From other documents I know that C3 and B4 had severe quality problems beginning in late 1944. While it was not much of a problem with low boost, it had some serious effect on higher boost, so it might also have slowed down the introduction of 1.98ata boost. At least DB documents underlined the need for cleaner fuels than those in use at that time. You can safely assume that by March 1945 1.98 ata boost was being introduced, unfortunately I do not have much details for April 1945, but I doubt it would have changed much, given the situation.
So he is advocating a 1945!! 1.98ata K-4 based on an ASSUMPTION, while ignoring a FACT - 150 grade fuel usage started May 1944.
-
Kev,
stop being a pathetic liar.
Furthermore, the statement, or the better, denial becomes futile in view of the orders issued to units to increase boost pressure to 1.98ata, according to a classified order dated 20th March 1945 from the LW high command (OKL, Lw.-Führüngstab, Nr. 937/45 gKdos.(op) 20.03.45) :
"The development in the equipment status of day fighter units is based on the standard types laid down in the emergency program and anticipates :
for Bf 109 units : K-4
for FW 190 units : D-9, D-12 with changeover to Ta 152 H and C
The arrival of the Ta 152 and it`s assignment to FW 190 units will result in an improvement in the equipment status of these units.
Essentially Bf 109 development will conclude with the K-4 an will inevitably lead to the conversion of Bf 109 units - those not scheduled for disbandment - to TL (jet fighters). Homogeneity of the equipment is to be strived for, combination of similar types is temporary and to be accepted based on levels of production."
The proposed changes to units equipped with Bf 109 were as follows :
OKL, Lw.-Führüngstab, Nr. 937/45 gKdos.(op) 20.03.45
No. Unit Present type Convert to Notes
1. III./ JG 1 Bf 109 G-10 He 162 (April/May) -
2. II. / JG Bf 109 G-10 K-4 when deliveries permit -
3. III. / JG 3 Bf 109 K-4 no change -
4. III. / JG 4 Bf 109 K-4 no change -
5. IV. / JG 4 Bf 109 K-4 K-4 -
6. III. / JG 5 Bf 109 G-14 K-4 when deliveries permit -
7. IV. / JG 5 Bf 109 G-14 K-4 when deliveries permit -
8. III. / JG 6 Bf 109 G-14/AS K-4 when deliveries permit -
9. II. / JG 11 Bf 109 G-10 K-4 when deliveries permit -
10. I. / JG 27 Bf 109 K-4 no change boost increase to 1.98 ata
11. II. / JG 27 Bf 109 G-10 K-4 when deliveries permit -
12. III. / JG 27 Bf 109 G-10 no change boost increase to 1.98 ata
13. I. / JG 51 Bf 109 G-14 K-4 when deliveries permit -
14. III. / JG 51 Bf 109 G-14 K-4 when deliveries permit -
15. IV. / JG 51 Bf 109 G-14 K-4 when deliveries permit -
16. II. / JG 52 Bf 109 G-14/U4 K-4 when deliveries permit -
17. III. / JG 52 Bf 109 G-14 K-4 when deliveries permit -
18. II. / JG 53 Bf 109 K-4 no change -
19. III. / JG 53 Bf 109 K-4 no change boost increase to 1.98 ata
20. IV. / JG 53 Bf 109 K-4 no change boost increase to 1.98 ata
21. I. / JG 77 Bf 109 G-14/U4 K-4 when deliveries permit -
22. II. / JG 77 Bf 109 G-10 K-4 when deliveries permit -
23. III. / JG 77 Bf 109 G-10 K-4 when deliveries permit -
24. III. / JG 300 Bf 109 G-10/R6 via K-4 to Me 262 planned, deadline
25. IV. / JG 300 Bf 109 G-10/R6 via K-4 to Me 262 -
26. I. / KG(J) 6 Bf 109 G-10/R6 K-4/R6 when deliveries permit -
27. II. / KG(J) 6 Bf 109 K-4 K-4/R6 when deliveries permit -
30. I. / KG(J) 27 Bf 109 G-10/R6 K-4/R6 when deliveries permit -
31. I. / KG(J) 55 Bf 109 G-10/R6 - -
32. II. / KG(J) 55 Bf 109 K-4 - to industrial defense
33. Ist Italian FG Bf 109 G-10 K-4 when deliveries permit -
34. IInd Italian FG Bf 109 G-10 K-4 when deliveries permit -
35. IIIrd Italian FG Bf 109 G-10 K-4 when deliveries permit -
This order, apart from ordering 90% of the existing 109 units to convert to the Bf 109 K-4 as soon as deliveries permit, also notes in relation of I./JG 27, III./JG 27, III./JG 53, IV./JG 53 to increase the maximum boost pressures to 1,98 ata manifold pressure. It is not known if and how many units had converted to 1,98ata before that order came, but it should be noted these units, in particular III./JG 27, III./JG 53 and IV./JG 53 were the major users of the Bf 109 K-4 in the Lufwaffe.
Overview of unit strenghts for the units that used 1,98ata. As per 9th April 1945.
The list of 1,98ata units is most likely incomplete. Source : Alfred Price : The Last year of the Luftwaffe
Unit On hand Servicable Type
I./JG 27 29 13 Bf
III./JG 27 19 15
III./JG 53 40 24
IV./JG 53 54 27
Total 142 79
-
Why does it not surprise me that somehow this ended up being Spit v 109 again :)
Lets look at it differently.
The 190D9 arrived in October 44, roughly the same time frame that 2 TAF went +25 boost for its Spit LFIXe and XVIe squadrons.
If we're using time frame, you still have the unperked D9 yet we're looking at not having a Spit that was used in much larger numbers in the same time frame, and if we do get it, talk is that it would be perked.
As near as I can tell the biggest beef is the supposed climb rate. Kev and others including myself don't believe the 5700 fpm number is accurate and that in fact it would be a fair amount lower, so that fear of the climb rate shouldn't be the issue.
I suppose what it comes down to is how much the MA is going to play into the decisions Pyro makes.
If this is purely for ToD, then the +18 boost LFIX or LFXVI would fill the bill, but if the MA is part of the equation, what Kev is asking and I agree, is that there should be an unperked Spit that gives the RAF fans a bird that can keep up with the other unperked hot rods whether it be LW, Soviet or American.
Maybe the better option is to beg Pyro for the XII. Then you are talking a 1943 Spit that did see combat from April 43 41 squadron pilots scored first, to September 44 when the last two 190s went down to XII guns of 41 Squadron.
For the lower alt airwar of the MA it would be perfect as it was built to operate in that height range.
No arguments about +boost ratings etc.
9 190s and 109s for no loss October 20, 1943 and apparently no overclaims that day.
Dan/CorkyJr
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/169_1115831054_tangmere-wing.jpg)
-
Lol Kurfurst you keep on spewing that crap - 142...ONLY 79 were usuable.
So I guess what you want everyone to believe is that the order was issued 20 March 1945, and miraculously by April all 79 were running 1.98ata? Despite lack of fuel, parts etc.
Your only firm peice of evidence is that there were 79 usable K4's, you have nothing that actually shows - number of K4s were converted, and I have already said I agree some must have been. I just don't believe ALL were.
On ther other hand I can post 2 docs that clearly show two complete Spit 9 sqns took 2 days off and converted to 150 grade May 1944. No assumptions, no guesswork..a FACT backed up by documentation.
TA-152 - Another one where around 60-70 actualy were used, you make it sound like the skies were full of them.
Proposed changes do not always turn into ACTUAL changes, especially in a country that was in Germanys mess at the end of Mar 45.
Perfect example in your list look at how many (20 out of 32) are listed as "When deliveries permit", didn't happen did it.
I propose you go back to other forums you infest and spew your garbage there...do I have a second?
Dan - I dont think it was Oct, 2TAF didn't get clearance until Nov.
-
Why does it not surprize me that Guppy promotes the XII ;)
Anyway, be aware that Some VIII's and IX's hit 20K in 5 minutes.
For an aircraft with more fuel load as the VIII (as well as tropicalization) that is quite good, - and it is very good up high as well (Merlin 70)
So, - ooops, just hijacked this into a VIII vs XII thread :o
-
low alt. Spit XII and Seafire III would be my vote, and then something new like P39/P63 or Ki 44, Ki 102 or. How about Mig 1, PE 8, Mig 3, PE 2, TU-2, IL-10 or since we have the hardly used in WWII P47n / 20mm F4U how about a Reggiane 2005 only 29 made but, was made and used in 1943. Now that im on Italy
how about Fiat 55 or .Reggiane 2002 and Marchetti SM79. Don't get me wrong any new plane is great but having something new not just more models of planes we have would be great too. Oh and I can't forget the A26
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
Dan - I dont think it was Oct, 2TAF didn't get clearance until Nov.
Yep, that's why I said roughly the same time :)
Point being 25+ squadrons of Spit LFIXs LFXVIs were using it in the winter of 44 til the end.
If we're going to accept a K4 that was operating in smaller numbers from April 45, I'd think that many Spits operating at +25 boost wouldn't be asking too much :)
Dan/CorkyJr
Jumping on the Spit XII bandwagon....not that I was ever off :)
-
Originally posted by Kurfürst
Maybe it`s not about performance, but the minimal number of Spit IXs running at +25lbs most of the time.
According the Neil Stirling, there were only 2-3 Sqns running at +25 lbs during 1944, out of 37. Less than 10%... There were no XVI sqns, of course. To be honest, I thought to be a lot more around but there wasn`t.
+25lbs was not introduced in numbers until the beginnnig of 1945, by 25 Sqns - about half or less the total number of Merlin 66 engines Spitfires. I remember Kev arguing in another thread arguing that planes with so late introduction and such small numbers should not be included at all. He should apply this to the Spitfire as well, or not to any plane. Asking for the highest performing variants of your favourite type and trying to deprieve others from theirs at the same time is not very tasteful.
You know I'm really surpised I missed this one.
You really need to make your mind up.
In another forum you say 3 sqns of Spit 9 in 1944 @25lbs, followed by another 30 @25lbs in Jan 1945.
The only thing distasteful is your apparent thinking that no-one reads any other forums, so you can just put what you want and we should accept it.
Another one
"*LF MkXVIe, +25 lbs, clipped wings representing the few upboosted of 1944, and the major number of upboosted ones of 1945, the stronger armament and also giving the option of clipped wings. Bubblecanopy too, perhaps, but afaik it was really-really late, March 1945 or something, so not very representative of the IX/XVI..."
Ok thanks your advocating a Spit XVI @25lbs should be added. Mention a bubbletop and say its not very representative (I agree), but neither is as unknown number of K4's @ 1.98ata.
Finally
Originally posted by Kev367th
No the LF XVI at 18lbs boost is NOT 1944, more accurately its a 1943 Spit LF IX. Spits ran 18lbs boost starting with the Merlin 66 in 1943.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You accuse others with ignorance on Spitfire history, but you yourself display the finest examples of it.
NO, you are wrong, it appears 95% the MkIXs did only run at +18 lbs in 1944. Yes, you are half right, +18 lbs Spit9s were around from beginning 1943, in small numbers, with 4 MkV being around for every MkIX.
You just confirmed what I said, but accuse me of being wrong.
I said they started running 18lb boost in 1943, not ALL ran 18lbs boost.
Summary - (love this bit)
Jan 1945 - 33 sqns Spit IX @ 25lbs boost = 396 operational ac
Jan 1945 - 7 sqns Spit 14 @ 21lbs boost = 84 operational ac (6 x F, 1 X FR)
Jan 1945 - 11 109-G10 definately on 1.98ata
April 1945 - 79 109K-4 running who knows what because you haven't produced one shred of concrete evidence.
Now which is the rarer bird?
Its like talking to brickwall, probably get more sense out of one.
In fact the best thing I can do is ignore you, until you produce 1 thing that proves beyond a doubt any K4s @ 1.98ata.