Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: SKJohn on November 11, 2005, 09:38:55 AM
-
I was wondering if someone who knew these things could post a brief summary of the strengths and weaknesses, pros and cons of the different Spitfire models. With 7 different models to choose from, it's difficult for those of us who are not students of Spitfire history to know which models would be more suited to different roles.
The only con that I'm sure of is the Spit I's engine cuts out when you push the nose over too fast.
Should probably be a different thread, but the same type of info on the 109's would also be much appreciated. (hint, hint...)
-
It really depends on what you are doing with it. For the AH MA with it's focus on low altitude combat you want to take the Spitfire Mk VIII or Spitfire Mk XVI. Both have lower altitude tuned engines than the Mk IX or Mk XIV and will be a bit better at AH altitudes for it.
Between the two the Spit VIII has full span wings so it'll turn a bit better and it carries a bit more fuel so it'll fly further.
However the MK XVI is a bit faster, climbs a bit better, rolls significantly better, and has two .50 cals backing up the Hispanos instead of four .303s as on the Mk VIII.
The MK IX is an earlier stopgap fighter that has it's best performance altitude at 25,000ft, well above most AH fights. It is armed and winged the same as the Mk VIII, but is slower and has a significantly lower climb rate, and therefore acceleration. It is lighter than the Mk VIII so it will probably turn slightly better, though with a weaker engine it is hard to say.
The Mk Vb is an early Mk V armed with Hispano Mk Is which are drum fed and so have only 60 rounds per gun. It is much less potent than the Spit Vc at +16lbs boost that we used to have. It'll turn better than the later Spits, but other than that is it heavily outclassed. Only reason to use it in the MA is if the others have been disabled by the ENY limiter. It is a much better scenario plane than the old Mk Vc was.
The Spit Ia has had it's boost raised from +9lbs to +12lbs so it performs better than it used to, but in the MA it is still only good for having a bit of fun in or humiliating your opponent. It is a great scenario plane though.
The Seafire is, well, a Seafire. It takes off of carriers. The MK V out performs it, but it does have 120 rounds per cannon.
-
Nice Karnak, good information.:aok
-
Thanks Karnak - that's the kind of info I was looking for. One question with the shorter wings on the 16 vs 8. If I am understanding correctly, the shorter wings give a faster roll rate, but the longer wings give beter turning, right?
So I guess my question is, starting from level flight, which one would get you around a turn quicker. Seems like with the faster roll rate you could roll into your turn and be turning sooner than the Mk. 8, but would it make a difference in the long run?
-
Originally posted by SKJohn
Thanks Karnak - that's the kind of info I was looking for. One question with the shorter wings on the 16 vs 8. If I am understanding correctly, the shorter wings give a faster roll rate, but the longer wings give beter turning, right?
So I guess my question is, starting from level flight, which one would get you around a turn quicker. Seems like with the faster roll rate you could roll into your turn and be turning sooner than the Mk. 8, but would it make a difference in the long run?
The clipped wings came about as the airwar moved down in altitude. The only real place you'd see a difference in turn rate is up high, but since the MA is generally down low, you shouldn't see much difference at all in turn rate. The clipped wing was also a way to improve the roll rate of the Spit in direct response to the high roll rate of the 190 historically.
The better bird down low would be the XVI, at medium to high alts the normal wing of the VIII and IX would make a difference.
-
Getting rid of the later spitV is crazy. Why? Was it hurting anyone by being in the hanger? So you use the early one for senerios and leave them both in the MA for everyone to choose from.
Its like junking a perfectly good car just because you bought another one.
Ditching it for an older one and completely removing the Vc from the plane set is the most asinine thing I've seen yet.
-
Morph, no offense, but if you want to fly a Vc, you can basically go for the Seafire.
I have to admit i havent fought in the new 2c for any lenght of time, nor did i take it 'to the edge' in a stall fight, but to me (on first impression), its basically our good 'ole Spitty.
-
Yup, it is close to the land based spitv that we used to have.
Other than the several hundred pounds of added weight that went into the strengthening the undercarige among other parts of the air frame, and an added tail hook assy. More weight = less performance.
-
Oh yeah... that *hook*...... :D
I know its heavier, but since we wont get the chance to fly it against the old V, were probably never know just how much it affects performance. But it *feels* close to the old V. Id be happy to try it out in DA ;), but im afraid that would be more of a pilot downgrade on my end than a performance change.
-
I'll go play around in the DA if you want. Im curious to see how they all match up in there.
-
The Spit VIII pwns the Spit XVI in the MA. Or maybe its because there were so many inferior pilots flying the XVI wrong (turnfighting).
The Spit VIII has more tanks, and I think has a bitter longer range, too. Or seems to anyway.
I'm going to miss the .50cals in the Spit IX.
-
Originally posted by Schatzi
Morph, no offense, but if you want to fly a Vc, you can basically go for the Seafire.
I have to admit i havent fought in the new 2c for any lenght of time, nor did i take it 'to the edge' in a stall fight, but to me (on first impression), its basically our good 'ole Spitty.
In terms of speed, both are identical (about 303-304 mph on the deck). However, the Seafire is heavier with more ammo and tailhook. Climb rate took a big hit, a loss of about 500 fpm in the Mk.V and about 400 fps in the Seafire (which was less than the Mk.Vc to begin with). Both will have their hands full with the Mk.XVI simply due to the extraordinary vertical performance and excellent acceleration of the newer Spitfire.
That said, try the revised Mk.I with increased boost. It's a fun dueling ride.
You'll also find the Mk.VIII vs the Mk.XVI a fun match-up as well.
My regards,
Widewing
-
Originally posted by Morpheus
Yup, it is close to the land based spitv that we used to have.
Other than the several hundred pounds of added weight that went into the strengthening the undercarige among other parts of the air frame, and an added tail hook assy. More weight = less performance.
Something I tried to get was the Seafire with the more common Merlin 32 fitted, only would have needed a 4 blade as opposed to 3 blade prop on the model.
You would have found this much more similar to the old V.
No idea why we didn't the Merlin 32, only the 1st 166 Seafire II's built got the Merlin 46, and they were all refitted with the Merlin 32.
So in effect ALL Seafire IIc's became L IIc's. (don't let the 46/32 fool you, the 32 produced approx 1640HP and had 18lbs boost)
Essentially, we have the rarest Seafire Mk built, in its rarest, temporary configuration (i.e. Merlin 46).
-
I'm curious what Lev will adopt now that the V is gone?
-
spitVIII....
-
Indeed, Shane.
The Spit XVI is proof that God loves Spitfires. The Spit VIII is proof that God loves me.
:aok
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
A small observation..
..it seems the Mark 16 definately turns a bit worse than the other Spitfires. Planes like the 109 or P-47, 190 or etc won't outturn Spitfires no matter what variant it is so it's a less noticeable for those types of planes, but for planes that have comparable turning performances the difference is quite pronounced.
When pitted against an average level of pilot, the Ki-84 would outturn the Spit5 when both planes are low speed and with combat flaps out. In case the Ki-84 is heavy with fuel and the Spit5 is not, the results are often hard to aniticipate. It will outturn the standard Spit9 after quite many circles with no flaps, or, in 2~3 circles with flaps out.
However, against the Mark 16, the Ki-84 seems to be able to plain outturn it within one or two circles, without flaps required.
I'll probably have to retest all the new planes to update the turn testings, but I'm more or less certain about that.
-
You'd expect that Kweassa, it's a trade off clipped wings for better roll, but with a larger turning circle.
From a thread a ways ways back, it affected the turning circle by around 24ft.
Whereas the VIII has better turn, but worse roll than the XVI.