Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: 2Hawks on February 24, 2006, 01:59:15 PM
-
That Bird can do everything and makes flying against it completelty unfun and pointless. I just bail anymore when one gets near. Doesn't matter what I am in.
Make it Hurt to lose one...
-
Originally posted by 2Hawks
WHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAA
:D :D
Bronk
-
[SIZE=10]NO SOUP FOR YOU![/SIZE]
-
Originally posted by 2Hawks
I can't handle the spit16 WHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA :cry
-
Hell I've got more kills from spit16s than anything else... They *ARE* perk-worthy, but saying they are perk worthy "because you can't kill 'em" isn't a valid reason :P
99.9999999999...% of all spit16s are meat on the table simply because folks don't fly 'em well. The other 0.01% fly 'em well but get gang banged because they are in spits, so in the end they all die.
-
Its just to damb funny . I still get killed by pickin lala 7 more than the spit MkXVI. Heck I think lala's have move than all spits combined.
Bronk
-
Actually no, La7 for years has been THE best killer by a large margin, until spit16 showed up, then suddenly the 30,000 kills per month of the Lala are eclipsed by the 40,000+ kills of the spi16 per month.
-
Could some one please start a perk the lala thread?
Thank you
-
Hell i don't want lala perked. I only get picked cause of target fixation.
Krusty I am only concerned with what kills me more not everyone else .:p
What I should have said was . lala have more kills on me than all spits combined against me.
Bronk
-
lol, it was not a responce to what you wrote. Its just that since the spit16 came out, I have not seen one of those threads. I miss them :cry
-
Col. 2hawks: You want the spit16?
Kaffee: I think I'm entitled.
Col. 2hawks: You want spit16?
Kaffee: I want the spit16.
Col. 2hawks: You can't handle the spit16.
[SIZE=10]NO SOUP FOR YOU!! [/SIZE] :mad:
-
I've flown the 16 twice. Once because I was fed up with the billion other Spit XVIs attacking a base so decided to fight fire with fire. I felt so dirty, right up until I got HOed by another fricken Spit about a minute after takeoff.
The other time was in the training arena going over some things with a trainer to port over to the F4U and I had a better opportunity to get a feel for her then. This is what I mostly took away from the experience:
Roll rate is INSANE. Abso-frelling-lutely ludicrous.
She needs a REAL gentle hand on the stick. Even more than the F4U-1 I usually fly it seemed like she wanted to snap right into a spin with any hard or extreme stick deflection, especially back-stick (although I fly with no damping or deadzone). The same trying to roll with any significant application of rudder.
That was really just one flight (well, two) so I know there's more to it. Certainly firepower is good, but not stupendous (I'll take the consistency of six Brownings at convergence over the mixed 20mm/mg armament). From experience in the MA it doesn't take much fire to bring one down as even a brief snapshot can knock off a wing or tail Hell, I fired on a 16 once from less than 200 yards, so close and at an angle that each set of guns was firing down a wing, (3 Ma Deuces hitting each wing) and a 1-second burst took BOTH wings off.
-
I admit to being more than a little cranky when I made that post.
But, I feel I will solve it by taking a 6 month break and focus on RL for a bit. we shall see if HT finds a new balance by then.
2Hawks
-
Originally posted by Saxman
I've flown the 16 twice. Once because I was fed up with the billion other Spit XVIs attacking a base so decided to fight fire with fire. I felt so dirty, right up until I got HOed by another fricken Spit about a minute after takeoff.
The other time was in the training arena going over some things with a trainer to port over to the F4U and I had a better opportunity to get a feel for her then. This is what I mostly took away from the experience:
Roll rate is INSANE. Abso-frelling-lutely ludicrous.
She needs a REAL gentle hand on the stick. Even more than the F4U-1 I usually fly it seemed like she wanted to snap right into a spin with any hard or extreme stick deflection, especially back-stick (although I fly with no damping or deadzone). The same trying to roll with any significant application of rudder.
That was really just one flight (well, two) so I know there's more to it. Certainly firepower is good, but not stupendous (I'll take the consistency of six Brownings at convergence over the mixed 20mm/mg armament). From experience in the MA it doesn't take much fire to bring one down as even a brief snapshot can knock off a wing or tail Hell, I fired on a 16 once from less than 200 yards, so close and at an angle that each set of guns was firing down a wing, (3 Ma Deuces hitting each wing) and a 1-second burst took BOTH wings off.
im not an 'official' trainer :D
-
I tried the MkXVI for the first time and tested it mainly in base defence and hot spots actions.
Well, what can I say, excellent mid-low fighter, great fun and a real beauty. *Thanks God* that 80% of MkXVI pilots dont know how to use them properly.
-
When I was flying the German crates in the last tour, I had more 16 kills than anything else for some reason.
I do agree that the 6/8 50 cals are a better package than the current spit arrangement.
I think that as long as you don't play the tnb game at 200ft off the deck with them and see all your e dissapear, then you should be able to defeat one or escape.
I was working with pooface (good lad that he is ) in one and will fly one all next week.
I'm assuming that it's med-low alt (18k and down) and it's range looks a bit weak ?
Convergence is what ? 300 or close to it ?
Is the speed at 16-18k comparable with the Jug/Pony ?
-
Originally posted by Big G
When I was flying the German crates in the last tour, I had more 16 kills than anything else for some reason.
I do agree that the 6/8 50 cals are a better package than the current spit arrangement.
I think that as long as you don't play the tnb game at 200ft off the deck with them and see all your e dissapear, then you should be able to defeat one or escape.
I was working with pooface (good lad that he is ) in one and will fly one all next week.
I'm assuming that it's med-low alt (18k and down) and it's range looks a bit weak ?
Convergence is what ? 300 or close to it ?
Is the speed at 16-18k comparable with the Jug/Pony ?
lol ty
its more low alt. i think 16k is it's best speed, but it doesnt really belong up there. convergence should be whever you shoot at, but mine is about 300 yes
and speed is NOTHING compared to a jug or pony. that's why i dont understand the whines. both pony and jug can get over 100mph over it
spit16 is still bottom half of the planeset top speed wise
-
I think it may be because the Spit XVI is a dragster, and for the most part your top speedsters are slower to get going so it gets people thinking the 16 is faster than it should be.
-
BTW, I'm really puzzled how a fighter with such a monster climb rate (really impressive) can have relative low acceleration and max speed at alt. Only drag?
-
those clipped wings though are a liability at lower speeds, especially at stall speeds.
ack-ack
-
Originally posted by gatt
BTW, I'm really puzzled how a fighter with such a monster climb rate (really impressive) can have relative low acceleration and max speed at alt. Only drag?
Because the Merlin 66 in the XVI and VIII was designed for low alt work, best under 22k.
Hence the LF designation (although not on the tag in the game).
Correct would be LF VIIIc , LF XVIe .
Low down the VIII and XVI are 2nd in acceleration to the La7, and it's not by much, 1/10's of a second.
Conversely the Merlin 61 in the F IX was designed for 20k+ flying.
Merlins were produced in 3 flavours -
HF - Exmetre high alt
F - Standard
LF - Low alt
If you look at the first part of any Spit designation it will start with one of them.
The motor decided whether it was a HF, F, or LF the wing tip type, either clipped, std, or extended didn't matter.
You could quite readily find a HF VIII with standard tips. or an F V with clipped tips.
Think of it as taking a high performance car tuned for sea level then running it on a mountain at 25k. Performance will suffer.
-
<--- loves killing Spit16s that think they can turn with anything in her HMk1.
-
Spit XVI probably see some success from people in other planes trying to fight on their terms. I know I've gotten taken by 16's that caught me with low-e, where I should have known better..... I still need practice in fighters.
Aganst other T&B planes, all else being equal, the 16 should come out ahead often, they are probably on average the best non-perked turn-fighter. Nik2 should keep the range open and use it's buckets of lead at range. A Kia-84 should take the fight vertical, where I think it still has a little advantage hanging on the prop, and superior-WEP. There is probably a technique most planes can bring to bear against the 16.....
B&Z planes probably get caught when they try to turn fight --- even for just a few moments to bring the guns to bear -- with a 16. If you miss, or line up poorly, don't try to correct --- keep going, extend, get alt, then dive back in with plenty of E. A little jinking helps. I tend to load fuel on B&Z planes for extended fights rather than keeping it light and hoping for quick kills. I expect to miss on many passes.
Now when the sky is full of 16's, then things are problamatic. Furball last night where Yucca in his Jug was actively being hunted by Rooks also had Spit-16 swarms in it. Rooks turn-fighters were getting chopped up pretty regularly, you out manuver one only to end in sights of another (and we *were* a little fixated on the lone Jug in the sky :t ). Would have been prime for B&Z fighter sweep...but it was very late, and most of us logged as it was still getting interesting.
I'm still discovering which planes suit me well under which conditions, rather than following what's popular.
-
Unless you are up against one of the 'elite' drivers in a Spit XVI, they just aren't that big a deal. The Spit 8 and 9 are both better birds outside of the roll rate, but 9 out of 10 times the XVI driver thinks he is going to out turn the 8 or 9 and those clipped wings leave him hanging.
I'm NOT a great stick but was furballing last night and was up in a Spit VIII. I got bounced by 2 16s and they did the usual try and out turn the VIII bit. Both died.
Of the three Merlin 60 series Spits, the XVI is the last of the three I'd take personally, and I like clipped Spits, Right now I'd lean towards the 8 being the best of the three with the 9 a very close second.
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
Unless you are up against one of the 'elite' drivers in a Spit XVI, they just aren't that big a deal. The Spit 8 and 9 are both better birds outside of the roll rate, but 9 out of 10 times the XVI driver thinks he is going to out turn the 8 or 9 and those clipped wings leave him hanging.
I'm NOT a great stick but was furballing last night and was up in a Spit VIII. I got bounced by 2 16s and they did the usual try and out turn the VIII bit. Both died.
Of the three Merlin 60 series Spits, the XVI is the last of the three I'd take personally, and I like clipped Spits, Right now I'd lean towards the 8 being the best of the three with the 9 a very close second.
anyone that has told me the 8 is better than the 16 i have proven wrong. now of course, i am a 16 pilot, and i like to think im reasonably good in it, but the small amount of extra lift from the wingtips cannot match the 16's ability for maneuvering. if you aren't ver experienced with the thing, and just try turning in one plane, be it vert or horizontal, without flying in 3d, then sure, full span spits will get it. but if you fly properly, like you should in any other plane if you were turnfighting, the 16 outclasses the 8, 9, 5 in everything.
oh, btw, just because it is uber, it shouldnt be perked. that would leave the best free RAF fighter as a 1943 ride, now that is lame
and if it is perked, it should be given 25 lb's boost, and a bubble canopy. then i'll still fly it and pwn you all hahaha
-
Originally posted by Pooface
anyone that has told me the 8 is better than the 16 i have proven wrong. now of course, i am a 16 pilot, and i like to think im reasonably good in it, but the small amount of extra lift from the wingtips cannot match the 16's ability for maneuvering. if you aren't ver experienced with the thing, and just try turning in one plane, be it vert or horizontal, without flying in 3d, then sure, full span spits will get it. but if you fly properly, like you should in any other plane if you were turnfighting, the 16 outclasses the 8, 9, 5 in everything.
oh, btw, just because it is uber, it shouldnt be perked. that would leave the best free RAF fighter as a 1943 ride, now that is lame
and if it is perked, it should be given 25 lb's boost, and a bubble canopy. then i'll still fly it and pwn you all hahaha
Problem is Poof that the Mk XVI at 18 boost is a late 43 ride at best.
As far as I can tell a clipped Mk IX with Merlin 66 is the same aircraft.
Someone correct me if I am wrong please.
Bronk
-
Originally posted by Pooface
anyone that has told me the 8 is better than the 16 i have proven wrong. now of course, i am a 16 pilot, and i like to think im reasonably good in it, but the small amount of extra lift from the wingtips cannot match the 16's ability for maneuvering. if you aren't ver experienced with the thing, and just try turning in one plane, be it vert or horizontal, without flying in 3d, then sure, full span spits will get it. but if you fly properly, like you should in any other plane if you were turnfighting, the 16 outclasses the 8, 9, 5 in everything.
oh, btw, just because it is uber, it shouldnt be perked. that would leave the best free RAF fighter as a 1943 ride, now that is lame
and if it is perked, it should be given 25 lb's boost, and a bubble canopy. then i'll still fly it and pwn you all hahaha
But you said the key words. How many guys out there are flying it to the best of it's ability?
The average MA flyer, who thinks that 16 is a bigger number then 14 so it must be uber, thinks it should naturally out perform an 8 since the 8 is half the number :) I'm guessing, like me, you've run into a Spit 14 pilot while flying a Spit V and shot the 14 down when he tries to out turn you. 14 bigger number then 5, so it must do everything better. Yeah right :)
In the end you are talking about 2 LF Spits with low alt Merlin 66 or 266 engines. In a turn fight the 8 should beat a 16. Again, the 16 is nothing more then an LF 9 with an American built Merlin 266 instead of the Rolls Merlin 66 that the 8 has. If the 16 is that much better then the 8 in AH, without the +25 boost then something IS wrong with the 16.
I just don't think the 16 is that big of a deal comparing it to the 8 or 9, but I'm an average stick.
A great stick in most of the birds can make them do things the rest of us can't so it becomes an unfair way to judge the general performance of a particular plane.
Interestingly, I checked model vs model stats and the XVI is even with most everything, but the 190s have a better number of kills vs deaths to 16s as do the Hurri IIc, the Typhoon and the LA7. The Corsairs dominiate it. Even my favorite P38G has 183 kills of 16s to 125 deaths.
All of which seems to speak to the 16s being flown by lots of new guys and average sticks hoping to get better while the others outside of the LA dweebs are better sticks who can handle the 16.
For all the whining of the 190 crowd, the A5 is 345 kills to 302 losses to the 16. The A8 is 503 kills to 470 losses. The D9 guys really dominiate the 16 885-556.
Bottom line is lots of folks fly 16s but not many are doing anything uber in them outside of the few great sticks who would probably do the same in whatever they fly
-
Performance wise you are correct Bronk. The "e" wing hadn't shown up yet, so no .50 cals on a '43 LF.IX, but the 20mms are the lions share of the firepower in anycase.
-
Most of kills are dweebfire 16s. I have 100 kills of dweebfire 16s compared to 79 kills of lgay7s which used to be more popular. But most of my deaths are to dweebfire 16s and lgay7s with 20 each. The dweebfires are not that hard to kill as their wings just fall off with a short squirt from my 38. I love watching their wings rip right off when they try to pull a high g climb.
The biggest complaint I have about them is that theyre practically the best plane especially if flown in the hands of a good pilot. They are one of the best planes to turn with, hold E very well, not many things can out climb it, a somewhat fast plane but hard to outrun cause of their acceleration and will catch in the long run, and have decent guns.
I know I have read in the past that its not in the top 25 as the fastest planes but I always get caught by them from underneath me in my 38 or even in a 51 and am lucky to get away from them in a temp. They hold E to well that they can climb up from 3k under me and still get within 400 of me to spray at me and hit something. There are not many options that can be done with a dweebfire 400 off and close to the same speed and when there are 2 of them might as well start digging your grave.
Couple weeks after it came out I wondered how good of a plane it was so I upped it from a base getting swarmed over by enemy. I got into a 7v1 after I had already shot down 4 and was trying to rtb to a base as the fight was getting to overwhelmed to the point I was the only rook. Somehow I won that 7v1 just by getting them all slow and outturning them and made it home. After that I thought, "Wow what a dweeb plane, this thing is way to overmodeled and needs to be perked." I only fly it now in desperate situations where a base is crawling with enemy planes. But most of the time I prefer the spit 8 as it has more fuel tanks which can be hit, to me it seems to turn better even though it isnt as fast.
-
the fact is though that it is vastly undermodelled, and even pyro and HT have admitted this, because they dont want to perk it.
if popular demand does lead to it being perked, ok, but i expect it to be given a quick makeover, with 25lb boost and a bubble canopy
-
Yea I find it suprising that it is undermodeled. A plane that is this good in the MA, I can only imagine what it would be like if it was modeled correctly. It wouldnt be totally worth flying anything else as that plane would be too perfect.
-
Originally posted by Pooface
the fact is though that it is vastly undermodelled, and even pyro and HT have admitted this, because they dont want to perk it.
Crap like this realy gets under my skin. Almost getting to the point of post like this will be deleted. Just because someone doesn't agree with our modleing , next comes we undermodelled it, now claims come we admit it, had it as a purpose for undermoldling it.
The point is, we do no such thing.And is 100% the oposit of what our goals are.
HiTech
-
Originally posted by hitech
Crap like this realy gets under my skin. Almost getting to the point of post like this will be deleted. Just because someone doesn't agree with our modleing , next comes we undermodelled it, now claims come we admit it, had it as a purpose for undermoldling it.
The point is, we do no such thing.And is 100% the oposit of what our goals are.
HiTech
I have nothing against how they model planes, and HT and his staff make the game and not us so go by their rules. (Not trying to suck up to HT :aok ) Too many times have I heard that the plane is undermodeled but I cant see it being increased in performace as it would be too good of a plane and make the temp look like child toy of a perk plane. The arena would be crawling with them planes and wouldnt be too much fun only seeing one plane.
-
Originally posted by hitech
Crap like this realy gets under my skin. Almost getting to the point of post like this will be deleted. Just because someone doesn't agree with our modleing , next comes we undermodelled it, now claims come we admit it, had it as a purpose for undermoldling it.
The point is, we do no such thing.And is 100% the oposit of what our goals are.
HiTech
oooh, sorry :(
i seem to recall pyro saying he was worried about it being unbalancing?
the 1944 boost level was 21 lbs, and later became 25lbs. i was just a bit forceful with my suggestion, sorry. what i was suggesting is that if it waa to be perked i would like to see it updated to a later model, to justify the perking
-
Originally posted by Hoarach
I have nothing against how they model planes, and HT and his staff make the game and not us so go by their rules. (Not trying to suck up to HT :aok ) Too many times have I heard that the plane is undermodeled but I cant see it being increased in performace as it would be too good of a plane and make the temp look like child toy of a perk plane. The arena would be crawling with them planes and wouldnt be too much fun only seeing one plane.
yup, and i seem to recall that pyro said that for that reason they would model it as very early model, so as not to unbalance the arena. correct me if i am wrong
-
Okay, it's not "undermodeled". Neither is our 1941 Bf109F-4. Neither is our 1941 SpitV. It is modeled at the boost HTC chose for it.
Sometimes a plane, regardless of what year its from, can 100% dominate any fight anywhere and still survive against the worst odds and the best opponents. The plane used to be the 1942 version of the SpitV. Now it is the 1944 version of the Spit16 with 18 boost. Note that the 16 *IS* a 1944 plane. If you don't think the 50cal are better, you've never stayed in the fighter after your 20mm are gone. The 50cal in the 14/16 are worth at least 3-4 more kills. The 4x303s in the 5/8/9 are worth only 2 kills at best. 1 50cal round is worth just over 3 .303 rounds. So 2 50cal is still worth 6 .303s, not to mention convergence is simplified, etc etc.
It doesn't matter if the plane is modeled at +18 boost. It doesn't matter if Spit LFIXs in 1943 had the same boost. It doesn't matter that the LFXIV moved on to +21 boost. None of that matters because in AH this plane is STILL the best plane in the entire planeset. If we had the spitLFIX y'all would still complain "Oooh, it's only a 1943 ride" or "oooh, it doesn't have 4x20mm hispanos and 200 rounds per gun!!".
The spit16, as we have it now, is the best killer in the game. Consider that this is WITH the 80% newbies and schmucks flying it, it STILL has the most kills by a large margin.
Guppy, I seriously have a problem with your "numbers" argument. "It's a higher number so it must be better, right?" How, then do you explain the SpitV being the most used spit by a WIDE margin for many years? 9 is a larger number than 5! Yet the 5 was the most used. Folks fly the 16 because it lets them do things that the 8 and the 9 and the 5 can't, and the 14 is perked so it doesn't get much use. So your argument doesn't hold water. Folks fly it because they tried a couple sorties in different spits, or asked what was best, and the plane that gave them the most kills in the least amount of time was the 16. Numbers/names have nothing to do with it. You could name it "Spitty-Doodle-Dandy Mk1" and it would still get the most kills. This game thrives on performance, not naming. Sorry for the tangent reply, but you keep bringing that argument up and I thoroughly disagree every time you do. :)
-
Originally posted by Krusty
Okay, it's not "undermodeled". Neither is our 1941 Bf109F-4. Neither is our 1941 SpitV. It is modeled at the boost HTC chose for it.
Sometimes a plane, regardless of what year its from, can 100% dominate any fight anywhere and still survive against the worst odds and the best opponents. The plane used to be the 1942 version of the SpitV. Now it is the 1944 version of the Spit16 with 18 boost. Note that the 16 *IS* a 1944 plane. If you don't think the 50cal are better, you've never stayed in the fighter after your 20mm are gone. The 50cal in the 14/16 are worth at least 3-4 more kills. The 4x303s in the 5/8/9 are worth only 2 kills at best. 1 50cal round is worth just over 3 .303 rounds. So 2 50cal is still worth 6 .303s, not to mention convergence is simplified, etc etc.
It doesn't matter if the plane is modeled at +18 boost. It doesn't matter if Spit LFIXs in 1943 had the same boost. It doesn't matter that the LFXIV moved on to +21 boost. None of that matters because in AH this plane is STILL the best plane in the entire planeset. If we had the spitLFIX y'all would still complain "Oooh, it's only a 1943 ride" or "oooh, it doesn't have 4x20mm hispanos and 200 rounds per gun!!".
The spit16, as we have it now, is the best killer in the game. Consider that this is WITH the 80% newbies and schmucks flying it, it STILL has the most kills by a large margin.
Guppy, I seriously have a problem with your "numbers" argument. "It's a higher number so it must be better, right?" How, then do you explain the SpitV being the most used spit by a WIDE margin for many years? 9 is a larger number than 5! Yet the 5 was the most used. Folks fly the 16 because it lets them do things that the 8 and the 9 and the 5 can't, and the 14 is perked so it doesn't get much use. So your argument doesn't hold water. Folks fly it because they tried a couple sorties in different spits, or asked what was best, and the plane that gave them the most kills in the least amount of time was the 16. Numbers/names have nothing to do with it. You could name it "Spitty-Doodle-Dandy Mk1" and it would still get the most kills. This game thrives on performance, not naming. Sorry for the tangent reply, but you keep bringing that argument up and I thoroughly disagree every time you do. :)
yes, i understand all of that, what i suggested (kinda bad wording maybe) that if it were to be perked, i would like to see it modelled as a later version
-
Ah, poo, yes I understood your request. I guess my reply was to all the other folks saying "Why perk it -- it's ONLY a xxxx year plane!" -- to which I reply even with every slack-jawed yokel flying them they STILL get 30% more kills that even the LA7 and the n1k2, which are BOTH leaps and bounds above every other plane in the game. I was trying to say that perking something because it's too damn good doesn't rely on the year of the plane or the like.
-
Originally posted by Krusty
Okay, it's not "undermodeled". Neither is our 1941 Bf109F-4. Neither is our 1941 SpitV. It is modeled at the boost HTC chose for it.
Sometimes a plane, regardless of what year its from, can 100% dominate any fight anywhere and still survive against the worst odds and the best opponents. The plane used to be the 1942 version of the SpitV. Now it is the 1944 version of the Spit16 with 18 boost. Note that the 16 *IS* a 1944 plane. If you don't think the 50cal are better, you've never stayed in the fighter after your 20mm are gone. The 50cal in the 14/16 are worth at least 3-4 more kills. The 4x303s in the 5/8/9 are worth only 2 kills at best. 1 50cal round is worth just over 3 .303 rounds. So 2 50cal is still worth 6 .303s, not to mention convergence is simplified, etc etc.
It doesn't matter if the plane is modeled at +18 boost. It doesn't matter if Spit LFIXs in 1943 had the same boost. It doesn't matter that the LFXIV moved on to +21 boost. None of that matters because in AH this plane is STILL the best plane in the entire planeset. If we had the spitLFIX y'all would still complain "Oooh, it's only a 1943 ride" or "oooh, it doesn't have 4x20mm hispanos and 200 rounds per gun!!".
The spit16, as we have it now, is the best killer in the game. Consider that this is WITH the 80% newbies and schmucks flying it, it STILL has the most kills by a large margin.
Guppy, I seriously have a problem with your "numbers" argument. "It's a higher number so it must be better, right?" How, then do you explain the SpitV being the most used spit by a WIDE margin for many years? 9 is a larger number than 5! Yet the 5 was the most used. Folks fly the 16 because it lets them do things that the 8 and the 9 and the 5 can't, and the 14 is perked so it doesn't get much use. So your argument doesn't hold water. Folks fly it because they tried a couple sorties in different spits, or asked what was best, and the plane that gave them the most kills in the least amount of time was the 16. Numbers/names have nothing to do with it. You could name it "Spitty-Doodle-Dandy Mk1" and it would still get the most kills. This game thrives on performance, not naming. Sorry for the tangent reply, but you keep bringing that argument up and I thoroughly disagree every time you do. :)
So explain to me how it is better then the 8 or 9 again? Are you saying it's the .5 mg vs the 303s? That's why it's the beast?
If you are arguing guns that doesn't say anything about performance other then firepower. Well that explains the Tiffie drivers, or Hurri IIc drivers etc.
Funny part about the old Spit V is it was doing what a 1943 Spit V should have. I remember posting the performance numbers for the 43 LFVc vs the FIX and for the alts of the fights in AH the Spit LFVc was the better bird in speed, climb rate etc. AH doesn't get fought at 25-30K, so the old Spit V was the better bird. Folks figured it out when they saw some of the best sticks in the game flying the Spit Vc.
Interesting to note how many more IXs are starting to show up now that those same guys are flying the IX as their replacement for the old Spit Vc.
It isn't the "BEST" killer in the game. You point out how many folks fly it. That explains the large number of kills. By the percentages it doesn't kill as well as other birds that aren't flown as much but have a higher percentage of kills per sortie.
As for complaining if we only had the 43 LFIX. Remember it was folks like myself who like the Spit that suggested taking the Spit V back to 41 numbers. My wish for the LFIX was because that was the predominant variant for the Spit IX. The Merlin 66/266 birds were used most often as the airwar was a tac air war from 43 on and the fight was lower. AH is a tac airwar so a high alt Spit made little sense.
I said it loud and clear at the time when folks were asking for 4 20mms on the Spit because it could carry them, that it would be a mistake because in reality they didn't carry them outside of one Spit Vc ground attack squadron in Italy and no one would want the performance drop from the Vokes filter and extra guns anyway. It was not an air to air bird at that point.
If you want to take out the 45 Spit 16 and change the Spit IX to the LFIX, go for it. I don't care. I like the VIII as it covers the Pac and MTO well but I could live without it. The Spit LFIX could cover for em all.
In the end though it appears the argument is you have a Spit with armament you don't like along with the performance of the Merlin 60 series Spits. Fine. Kill the E wing. I don't care. Leave it an LFIX with a Univeral wing with 2 20mm and 4 303.
As for the 16 is better then 14 bit. OK I'll let it go. It's stuck with me though since I've heard it asked in the arena a number of times when guys thought the 16 must be more 'uber' then the 14 because of the higher number.
-
Fair enough, on hearing players actually say the 16 ws better because it was a higher number, but I'd be more inclined to believe that was joking, or playing a prank on somebody.
If I may digress a little on the reasons the 16 "is a beast"....
I was in the air winging with some players that specialize in spit flying (71 RAF squadron, Knights) and somebody said it best after not flying the 16 in a while then taking it up for a spit16 mission. I'll paraphrase "damn! this 16 rolls like a son of a b****!" and he's right. The roll rate greatly increases manuverability. Somebody did turn tests in AH and found the spit16 was only a few feet off in turn radius compared to the spit8. Wingtips do almost nothing between the way AH has them modeled.
However, the super-human roll rate allows them to jink and break and pull manuvers that the 8/9 cannot, and as for turning -- it's nearly identical, so if you have 2 planes that flat turn the same, but 1 can roll 3x better than the other, can change its lift on a hair's notice, that one will win.
The roll rate, the turn rate equal to the other "best spits" (better than the 14, as well), and MG firepower 50% stronger than the next closest spit, it adds up. And that's only when comparing to the next closest spits! Compared to almost every other plane in the game -- fuhgeddaboudit!.
I've flown it. Hell I've flown it too much. I had to cut back (too damn easy! Was getting 7 kill sorties!). I know what it's capable of, even though I'm not the best stick.
So just saying "Oh this boost is low, these guns are a small difference" okay, fine, but you have to look at the entire package, as its modeled in AH right now.
The entire package, as its modeled right now, is the best spit in the game, the best dogfighter in the game, and the only weakness it has is top speed -- which is easily exceeded for long periods of time after very shallow dives. It's as close as you're going to get to the perfect plane, right now, and it's unperked. That's the "total package", basically.
-
Wingtips - Due to the redesign for the 'e' wing it was stiffer than previous wings.
This included a revised main spar and the internals for the hard points.
This meant that although clipped it was only marginally worse in turn than a full span 'c' wing.
So to say wingtips do nothing is misleading, the main change was the 'e' wing design.
I would imagine a full span LF IXe would/should turn a lot better than the XVI and the VIII.
As for the XIV vs XVI numbers thing - I'll guess if the XIV were unperked most newbies would still use the XVI as the number is higher.
Your XIV vs XVI turn radius has a flaw -
Again for one minute think of the XVI as a 1944 LF IXe, that way they are identical in all aspects.
Why would you be surprised an LF IXe standard or clipped wings could outurn a F XIVe?
Makes me wish that it had been brought in as LF IXe.
Not going into the perk it debate, you know my feelings.
-
(http://www.kitparade.com/features00/images/images_6/spitfirexvijt_1.JPG)
-
IMHO it should be redesignated Spitfire LF IX in AH2 (since its identical to a late IXe). The XVI handle does nothing but cause confusion, and has since it was announced. All you need to do is view the posts and hear the talk about in on the various channels.
-
"those clipped wings though are a liability at lower speeds, especially at stall speeds."
Actually, I think that the clipped wing probably had better stall characteristics than the full span wing.
***
"I would imagine a full span LF IXe would/should turn a lot better than the XVI and the VIII."
A lot better? How does a stiffer wing assist in turning "a lot"?
AFAIK building those hard-points itself requires a stronger wing structure, again resulting in stiffer wing and the roll rate gets better, aileron reversal happens in faster speed than previously and high speed stall characteristics are better because the wing does not flex uncontrollably in turns.
How much better is it then? Well how much heavier was the new wing?
Was there a noticeable weight increase in e-wing Spits?
-C+
-
Quote from "Report on Seafire Deck Landing", written by Jeffrey Quill in Feb '44 for the FAA.
Removal of the wing tips produces tangible advantages in:-
(1) Aileron control.
(2) Hangar stowage.
(3) A possible slight advantage in reduction of float.
The disadvantages consequent upon their removal are as follows:
(1) Increased landing speed.
(2) Aggravation of the root stall (particularly in steep turns).
(3) Loss in take-off performance.
(4) Loss in rate of climb.
Spitfire IX, XI, XVI Pilot's Notes state that stalling speeds with clipped wings are 3-6mph higher. Also the "rear view" fuselage(bubble canopy) adds 5mph to stall speed, and gives the pilot less warning of approaching stall(buffeting).
-
"those clipped wings though are a liability at lower speeds, especially at stall speeds."
In the F4U clipping the wings helped even out the stall and improved handling characteristics at the stall.
-
P.S. full flaps landing speed being 3 mph faster is nothing. Individual planes on the same production run could vary that much from plane to plane and still be within manufacturer's specs.
Not to mention that nobody turns at stall speed, you are stalling because you are pulling extreme AoA, not because you're so slow. Most turn fights rarely get below 130 in spits, it seems. Especially not the spit16, because it's powerful engine is (for most pilots) set to FFT.
So a couple MPH on the stall means nothing, in AH.
-
Originally posted by Charge
How much better is it then? Well how much heavier was the new wing?
Was there a noticeable weight increase in e-wing Spits?
-C+
Nearly 200lbs heavier dry, over 1200lbs heavier all up weight over a 'c' wing Spit IX.
(approx, didn't give exact load carried details)
You could probably work out weight of 4 x .303s removed, and the weight of 2 x .50s added, remainder would be structural changes. (again approx)
-
Stall is only function of the angle.
-
Quoting Charles Brown, who is probably the high time current Spit pilot out there right now.
Clipped vs Elliptical wing tips:
Clipped wings have the following effects:
-Cruise speed increases by approximately 15 mph
-Rate of roll is markedly increased
-Slight increase in stall speed (3-5 mph)
-Noticable increase in drag during manoeuvre-Elipptical wing-tips really do minimize drag during manoeuvre.
Sounds about right if you compare the full span VIII and the clipped XVI in AH doesn't it.
-
Originally posted by Charge
"those clipped wings though are a liability at lower speeds, especially at stall speeds."
Actually, I think that the clipped wing probably had better stall characteristics than the full span wing.
***
"I would imagine a full span LF IXe would/should turn a lot better than the XVI and the VIII."
A lot better? How does a stiffer wing assist in turning "a lot"?
AFAIK building those hard-points itself requires a stronger wing structure, again resulting in stiffer wing and the roll rate gets better, aileron reversal happens in faster speed than previously and high speed stall characteristics are better because the wing does not flex uncontrollably in turns.
How much better is it then? Well how much heavier was the new wing?
Was there a noticeable weight increase in e-wing Spits?
-C+
Have to remember that the Universal wing on the Spit 8 was strengthened as well. While I believe the E wing was strengthened for the hard points, I've also come across more and more photos of Universal wings with the hardpoints, including on VIIIs and many IXs that were operating from England during the invasion timeframe.
-
CC the Mk VIII had a "stiffer" wing.
Smaller ailerons, but differently controlled to improve rollrate.
-
Originally posted by Angus
CC the Mk VIII had a "stiffer" wing.
Smaller ailerons, but differently controlled to improve rollrate.
The Mk VIII in AH has the second worst roll rate of all Spits. Only the Mk I's is worse. The Mk V, Mk IX and Mk XIV all have the same roll rate, about 10 degrees/second faster than the Mk VIII at peak.
-
I know.
The ailerons were made smaller to diminish high speed flutter.
That caused worse rollrate. I think that was originally done on Mk IX's which are basically Mk V's regarding the airframe.
On the VIII they countered this with a stiffer wing and different control of the ailerons. Almost every spit pilot who flew the VIII describes it as very much better than the IX. Quill comes to my mind in the first thought.
-
I thought folks already brought up the Spit8 roll rate, and that HTC countered with the place/type of info it used in setting the roll rates, and that all was kosher?
-
This plane doesnt need to be perked at all.I fly the 109's almost exclusively and I've found that to take a spit16 in vertical,weather it be vertical scissors or any other maneuver ,they will fall off in a sustained vertical fight.Ive dueled some very good 16 sticks in the DA who were very surprised to see that the uber 16 wouldnt prop hang as long as the 109g2 could.It boils down to flying the planes strengths that you are in.My squad dueled Batfinks squad of which one of his squadies claims to be VERY GOOD in the spit16 and if I can find the film ,we ended up 1v1 ,he and I,his 16 vs my g2,both times I was successfull at the scissors by agressive throttle control and flaps,speeds were down in the 30's at the top and upwards of 100 at the bottom of the maneuvers,each time we intersected I would go slighty nose up to force him to have to match and at those slow speed the 16 couldnt do it.I find that this tatcic is hard to apply in the MA simply because of other fighters picking you,but in 1v1 forcing the fight low and really slow the 16 has stability issues that the 109 is able to exploit if only by the smallest of margins.Its like we say in drag racing though"it doesnt matter weather you beat them by a block or by a fender,you still win at the finish line"If anything I would think that the stability issue would be more of concern for 16 pileits to worry about.To me its has the same basic problems that all the high power a/c have and that is in the low speed performance area its just gets to squerrly,the k4 is the same way,flown aggressively but at below 75 mph in hard turning fight it get s very unstable,but if you fly the g2 its less power but better in the low end perfomance.Sure you lose acceleration and some climb but most fights end up low and slow and the pilot who can best control his plane on the bottom edge of the envelope will most likely win.These are just my ideas on the spit16,call it uber if you want but it has nothing over the 109k4,with the sole exception of roll rate.
-
Originally posted by Saxman
I've flown the 16 twice. Once because I was fed up with the billion other Spit XVIs attacking a base so decided to fight fire with fire. I felt so dirty, right up until I got HOed by another fricken Spit about a minute after takeoff.
Good! Serves ya right!
had a good fight in the Birdcage Corsair against a spit 16...like all spitfires, they can be beaten if you don't get sucked into their TnB game...and one snapshot...game over...
-
I've started finding some success against Spits trying to break turn and force me to pull lead or let him slip behind me by pulling up into something of a barrel roll instead, coming over the top and dropping onto his 6, sorta like the vertical scissors PF was showing me in the TA (that I'm not very consistent with. Almost forced an VIII to overshoot and held him off long enough for help to shoot him off, most of the time I can't get my Hog to roll over fast enough).
-
Originally posted by Karnak
The Mk VIII in AH has the second worst roll rate of all Spits. Only the Mk I's is worse. The Mk V, Mk IX and Mk XIV all have the same roll rate, about 10 degrees/second faster than the Mk VIII at peak.
I'm not sure on the roll rate anymore. It seems the same as the IX. It sure hasn't been an issue when flying the VIII for me. I'm back to preferring the VIII over the IX again.
-
Originally posted by Saxman
I've started finding some success against Spits trying to break turn and force me to pull lead or let him slip behind me by pulling up into something of a barrel roll instead, coming over the top and dropping onto his 6, sorta like the vertical scissors PF was showing me in the TA (that I'm not very consistent with. Almost forced an VIII to overshoot and held him off long enough for help to shoot him off, most of the time I can't get my Hog to roll over fast enough).
Use the rudder to get your angle, and push stick full left level, then reverse.
Get off the rudder as soon as you change your AoA, then kick hard when you reverse your roll. Pay attention to your level of flight, use nose up-nose down rolls to adjust speed.