Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: OSU on December 29, 2007, 08:36:57 PM
-
I was flying the Seafire and the Spit 9 for the first time today, and I discovered that they were both very good airplanes. I have looked on the fighter comparison website and the Spits seem like very good airplanes. I was wondering if any one could tell me which Spitfires are the better in terms of turning, speed, and weaoponry. Any help would be greatly appreciated.
-
Do you mean this comparison website? (http://gonzoville.com/ahcharts/index.php)
If yes, it should have told you you the basic performance differences at a glance.
If not, go there ;)
-
Well all are ze EZ mode planes, but i'd go with the spit 9, just because of the extra range from the DT + the awesome looking desert, red nose skin :D .
Hope latrobe doesn't catch me saying i fly spits, he'll never let me live it down :rofl !
-
Originally posted by MjTalon
Well all are ze EZ mode planes,
I wouldn't call the AH2 Spitfire I an EZ mode plane ;)
-
Originally posted by Lusche
I wouldn't call the AH2 Spitfire I an EZ mode plane ;)
niether is the Mk.5
-
Originally posted by Lusche
I wouldn't call the AH2 Spitfire I an EZ mode plane ;)
Aw cmon now lusche, even you have noticed the heli 16 :D .
goes from 0-10k in 30 seconds :rofl
-
Originally posted by MjTalon
Aw cmon now lusche, even you have noticed the heli 16 :D .
goes from 0-10k in 30 seconds :rofl
He was talking about the Spit1. :huh
-
Originally posted by SpikesX
He was talking about the Spit1. :huh
Indeed I was.
-
WHOOPS :o .
Miss read it :( .
-
Spitfire Mk VIII, the most refined of the Merlin Spits.
-
Forget the Spit and fly a Zero. :aok
-
In general terms the earlier Spit marks are lighter and so turn better (lower wing loading). The later marks have more power and so have better climb, acceleration and speed.
The Spit Mk I has 8 .303 inch machine guns which are only marginally effective at close range and useless at long range. It has an early single speed Merlin engine which cuts out when you push the stick forward (negative Gs). It has poor aileron response at high speeds. It is outclassed in the late war arena but can give a nasty surprise to anyone flying a later mark of Spit that tries to outturn it.
The Mark Vb Spit has a two speed supercharged Merlin which gives more power. It can outturn any fighter except a Hurricane, a Spit Mk I or a Zero. It is still slower than just about anything else you will meet in the arena though. The Vb like all the later Spits has better aileron response than the I and no neg G cut out problems. The two Hispano cannons are probably the best guns in the game, powerful and accurate. They have a limited supply of ammo though.
The Seafire is basically a Mk Vb with a hook. Its a little bit heavier, so not quite as good.
The Mark IX Spit has a two stage supercharger which gives more power, particularly at altitude. It is a fair bit faster and climbs better than the Vb, but turns a bit worse.
The Mark VIII carries more fuel than the IX and has a more powerful Merlin. This is the Spit that causes the most problems for my F6F.
The Mark XIV uses a more powerful, but much heavier Griffon engine rather than the Merlin. This Spit performs very well at very high altitudes. It has tricky low speed handling so is best used as a boom and zoom machine.
The Mark XVI is essentially a 1944 Mark IX. Unlike our 1942 era Mark IX it has a Merlin tuned for more power at low altitudes. It also used higher octane fuel which allowed it to run a lot more boost than the Mk IX. This makes it perform much better in terms of speed, acceleration and climb, particurlarly at the altitudes that arena fights tend to take place at. The XVI also features clipped wingtips giving better roll response at the expense of some turning ability. Two handy 0.5 inch guns replace the fairly useless 303 inch guns as secondary armanent.
-
Originally posted by Greebo
The Mark VIII carries more fuel than the IX and has a more powerful Merlin. This is the Spit that causes the most problems for my F6F.
Two questions for you big master of Hellcats from a new Hellcat fan:
1) The F4U-1A is a problem for you 1vs1 with = E and how fight against this anti-stall plane?
2) Best book about F6F?
and sorry for my english.
-
Originally posted by MjTalon
Aw cmon now lusche, even you have noticed the heli 16 :D .
goes from 0-10k in 30 seconds :rofl
It doesnt.
-
Co E, if the F4U-1A pilot is any good, I'm pretty much screwed. In AH2 the 1A has a slightly better instantaneous and sustained turn rate and is faster. Its the instantaneous turn rate of the F6F that lets me turn inside fast Spits, but against an F4U I can rarely get the first shot in on the second merge even if I lead turn him. After that I'm into a scissors and just hoping he screws up. The AH2 F4U is more stable than the F6F in a low speed fight which doesn't seem right given their RL reputations. Riding the stall horn with flaps out, the Hellcat can get into a weird stall which takes a lot of alt to recover from.
To be honest, I've not read a good book on the Hellcat. The ones I've got are Squadron or Osprey books which give a good overview of types and history, but which were bought as sources for skinning projects (lots of profiles etc).
Sorry if this is hijacking your topic OSU.
-
Originally posted by Greebo
In general terms...
great analysis :aok
about those .303s, I havent really been using them untill a week ago when I was chatting with a squaddie and said they were a bit useless. he said that used properly they were like the minigun of wwII!
set convergence at D200-250, only use em at D200-250 and in a turn fight its like taking a chainsaw to the other plane :D so they can be very effective (high RoF + high muzzle V + lots of ammo?)
-
Ty Greebo.
-
Originally posted by DarkglamJG52
Two questions for you big master of Hellcats from a new Hellcat fan:
1) The F4U-1A is a problem for you 1vs1 with = E and how fight against this anti-stall plane?
2) Best book about F6F?
and sorry for my english.
Greebo covered the issues vs the F4U... The Hellcat suffers an odd instability in its roll axis. This gives the F4U an advantage in a flaps out stall fight. Given equal pilots, the F4U will win more than lose. Hopefully, HTC will fix this oddity and adjust the F6F-5's speed curve to reflect the gobs of test data available.
As to the books... A good history of the F6F was written by Barrett Tillman. Barrett is a good guy, very meticulous and skilled at writing an entertaining story. His book is titled Hellcat: The F6F in World War Two. It is published by the Naval Institute Press in soft cover, ISBN 1-55750-991-3. It can be found on Amazon. Here's a link. (http://www.amazon.com/Hellcat-F6F-World-War-II/dp/1557509913/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1199035697&sr=1-1)
My regards,
Widewing
-
Originally posted by Widewing
As to the books... A good history of the F6F was written by Barrett Tillman. Barrett is a good guy, very meticulous and skilled at writing an entertaining story. His book is titled Hellcat: The F6F in World War Two. It is published by the Naval Institute Press in soft cover, ISBN 1-55750-991-3.
I have a hardback copy of that book on my shelves, so far I've only used it for reference, but after your recommendation I think I'll give it a proper read.
Thanks.
Badboy
-
spit 8 and seafire are the only spits i fly spit 8 has long range:aok
-
Greebo,
All Spitfires in AH use 100 Octane fuel. The Mk VIII and XVI have higher boost ratings due to their Merlin 66 and Merlin 266 engines compared to the Merlin 61 in the Mk IX. On 100 Octane fuel the 66 and 266 have a boost limit of +18lbs, the 61 has a boost limit of +15lbs. With 150 Octane the 66 and 266 have a boost limit of +25lbs and the Griffon 65 in the Mk XIV has a limit of +21lbs. I am unaware of any tests to determine the boost limit of the 61 on 150 Octane.
-
Thanks Karnak, my bad. I'll look out for that book Widewing.
-
spitfires are made of Lego's. Their wings pop right off.
-
^ true, they dont take damage well :(
-
one of my legoes broke i decapitated it for real i could not repair it
-
Originally posted by splitatom
one of my legoes broke i decapitated it for real i could not repair it
:huh :huh :confused: :confused:
-
Originally posted by VansCrew1
:huh :huh :confused: :confused:
Think he means one of his leg broke, so he cut it off :rolleyes: .
-
The Spitfire VIII is truly the best overall in-game.
There's not too much too complain about with it, though compared to a IX the VIII actually maneuvers worse ... marginally. Those who fly Spitfires religiously know that well. Just dont forget a DT.
I personally like the Spitfire V the best. challenging yet still fun. It really shuts up the HOiccane drivers. as WW once put it, its only, if not, main disadvantage is its speed. I'd welcome a Spitfire Vc with the standard 1942 Merlin boost of +16 lbs. .. like in AH:I.
The XVI in real life had some 1000' difference concerning the 2nd stage supercharger kick-in/kick-out vs. the LF IX or the LF VIII (which we have in-game) but I don't know much about the AH:II Spixteen since i don't fly it much except on field-cratering runs.
Even if they do manage to fix the odd stall on the Hellcat, the Corsair's still going to be able to outrun and out-accelerate the Hellcat :D through energy fights will be more interesting.
-
Originally posted by MjTalon
Think he means one of his leg broke, so he cut it off :rolleyes: .
read or get a beter vocabulary i said decapitate which meads no head:( that sad aa you lost your account we will miss you and o ya your entire squadron changed teams and the reson i have a sad face is that you have a bad vocabulary
-
As a long-time Spit dweeb here's my observations:
Spit XIV: I'll address this one first as it's unusual among the Spit family. The XIV loves altitude. Above 23K it's at it's best. It's actually got a performance flat-spot between ~20-23K but once over that it really shines and is among the fastest high-alt planes.
It's got a high power/high torque Griffon engine which rotates in the opposite direction of other Spits. Because of this you need to remember your best turn rates are in the opposite direction of the other models but it's not the turner that the other Spits are. Because of this you see it used in a B'n'Z role a lot.
Spit XVI: Probably the best of the family for LW MA action. It does everything well (near the top of the plane set) so there's always a strength you can exploit against another planes weaknesses.
Aside from the XIV it has the most power of the Spit's. It has 2x.50's instead of the 4x.303's of most of the other models (this is the better gun package) and it's clipped wings help it's roll rate a lot.
Spit VIII: Virtually equivalent in performance to the XVI the VIII carries more fuel but trades the .50's for the .303's. With full wings it doesn't roll as well as the XVI but it's more forgiving in a low speed stall fight where the XVI has a tendancy to snap-roll.
Spit IX: Maybe the "purest" Spit. It doesn't have quite the power of the VIII or the XVI and still carries the .303's but it's silky-smooth handling make up for it's deficiencies.
Seafire MkII: Carrier-based and pobably closest to the IX among the family but there's really no reason to take this out of the hanger unless your taking off from a carrier. If you are and you like the Spit's it's a fine choice.
Spit V: Underpowered compared to those above the V is the best turner among the non-carborated Spits and will turn with nearly anything in the game. If furballing is your thing, where speed, acceleration and climb rate are less important than pure turning ability this is the Spit to choose.
Spit I: Carborated, the Spit I's engine will cut out under negative G loading. Not to worry, it will re-fire on it's own once back in a positive G state unless you've starved the fuel supply (pulled negative G's too long), then you'll have to manually re-fire it. Unlike any of the other Spits this one has no cannon, but 8x.303's are like buzzsaws in close and it is the best turner of the family. Choose this one for the challenge or for perk-farming.
-
read or get a beter vocabulary i said decapitate which meads no head that sad aa you lost your account we will miss you and o ya your entire squadron changed teams and the reson i have a sad face is that you have a bad vocabulary
....
I admire you for being a shining example of the importance of "vocabulary" and "grammar".
-
I flew this one today, no idea what if it's the IX or V (the owner did not know). However it had an extremely gentle stall, rolled well, unlimited vertical climb and the most difficult thing was the landing because it just keep on gliding. Luckily we were flying from a frozen lake so there was plenty of room. Picture was taken about 14:30; flash was needed because it's darkening so early this time of year here in Finland.
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/852_1199129602_spitti.jpg)
-
cool.
-
Thx for the info WideWing.
-
Spit9 is my fav for staying alive against multiple enemies and general also general furballing. + it comes in pink :aok
-
Originally posted by Greebo
The Spit Mk I has 8 .303 inch machine guns which are only marginally effective at close range
Set your convergence to 200, hold your fire until you're within that range, and these marginally effective guns will take a wing off.
-
Originally posted by Stixx
Set your convergence to 200, hold your fire until you're within that range, and these marginally effective guns will take a wing off.
Yup. I've even moved convergence down to 175 on the 8-gun British fighters. At close range those little .303s can really chop a plane to little pieces.
- oldman
-
Spit V: Underpowered compared to those above the V is the best turner among the non-carborated Spits and will turn with nearly anything in the game. If furballing is your thing, where speed, acceleration and climb rate are less important than pure turning ability this is the Spit to choose.
FYI, the SpitV still had a carburator, but with a modification to prevent the negative G cutout experienced by the Spitfire MkI and Hurricane MkI.
Without fuel injection, the throttle response of the Merlin was not comparable to, say, the DB601 or DB605 series.
-
Originally posted by Anaxogoras
FYI, the SpitV still had a carburator, but with a modification to prevent the negative G cutout experienced by the Spitfire MkI and Hurricane MkI.
Without fuel injection, the throttle response of the Merlin was not comparable to, say, the DB601 or DB605 series.
The high tech mod -
A diaphragm with a calibrated hole called "Miss Shillings Oriface" as it was developed by Beatrice "Tilly" Shilling.
-
Originally posted by splitatom
read or get a beter vocabulary i said decapitate which meads no head:( that sad aa you lost your account we will miss you and o ya your entire squadron changed teams and the reson i have a sad face is that you have a bad vocabulary
Oh god, can we ban him from posting anymore until he learns the English language? Is that possible? HTC? Anybody?
-
I like the Spit IX for most fights. Decent speed/excellent turning ability/good weapons. You can usually out turn what ever you can't out run. And not usually Eny affected.
-
All of them had carburators. After Mk II they were modded (pressure) so that they wouldn't cut under negative G's.
And, AFAIK carburators work fine in high altitude....
And Gripen...coool :aok
I envy you a lot here, and the funny thing about the little thing floating on forever before landing fits very well with live accounts of the Spitty. Same goes with the climbing.
-
Angus they also got induction carbs which were fuel injection devices.
Did the P-51 have 'carb' issued?
-
By the time the P-51 entered service with the Merlin engine, the carburettor issues were largely cured. The P-51 was using an engine similar to the Spitfire IX's Merlin 60-series and it therefore did not have the negative-G cutouts experienced by Spit/Hurri crews had felt in 1940.
-
Throttle response is something that is missing from AH, as well as adjusting mixture and other engine controls. But too many people would complain if it took 5 seconds of adjusting controls to engage WEP in an La-7, while LW pilots would barely lift a finger. I'm no engineer, but Spitfires and P-51s (to name two) would certainly suffer compared to 109's and 190's with the introduction of more accurate engine models.
-
True, the game was based so that pilots could get more familiar with the game and have fun instead of give up... its all in HTC's business plan.
We're also having too many things... Spitfires never flew in WWII combat with aileron trim but we've got it on all planes! More accurate prop pitch modeling would affect planes as well... some more than others. The 109's prop pitch adjustment system, as I've heard, is quirky and isn't as simple as a Hamilton Standard or Rotol on the Allied planes. Also, hydrodynamic propellors should run away on the pilot once the oil system is hit since the prop relies on the oil pressure. But, we don't have that either. A good amount of Allied planes would suffer from that... F4U, Tempest, P-51, Spitfire to name a few. The P-38, though wouldn't .. all the more reason to add a P-38H!
Mixture is something that a pilot could really help pilots especially pilots lifting heavy ord off of CV's. The extra power could also be very useful when running. P-51's and Spitfires wouldn't really have that extra advantage but then again, I don't think Spitfires run and P-51's are fast enough.
-
Ok guys, a couple of points..
1. You don't have to worry much about a runaway prop due to loss of oil pressure. Pitch CHANGE is dependent on oil pressure. Loss of pressure means the prop will stay where it was set, or creep up to the high rpm stops under dynamic load. Normally, the prop will be at high RPM/Low pitch for combat.
2. The P-38 was far more prone to runaway props with the Curtiss Electric propellers than any fighter with an Hamilton Standard prop installed. This problem plagued the B-26 as well.
3. There are three mixture settings in a US fighter type. Idle Cutoff, Auto-Lean and Auto-Rich. There are no cockpit adjustments. Takeoffs, landings and combat require Auto-Rich. A pilot would shove the mixture lever to Auto-Rich, the prop lever up to max rpm, then push up power and he is ready for combat (in the order I present them). Typically, this condition was set long before actual combat occurred. Pushing the throttle up before the prop(s) is at max RPM can easily lead to an overboost condition, which can cause detonation and engine damage, especially if allowed to persist.
4. Once the mixture and prop is set, there is no need to touch them again, except to cruise home later if fuel is an issue.
My regards,
Widewing
-
Originally posted by SgtPappy
Spitfires never flew in WWII combat with aileron trim but we've got it on all planes!
This has been brought up many times. Spitfires didn't have spring-centered plastic USB joysticks for their inputs. You wanted it to roll a little you moved the stick and it *stayed there* -- that was your trim. This, much like the icon system, is to make up for the lack of technology to allow us to mimick the real deal.
No spring-centered control for any computer out there will approximate what a spitfire flew like, with or WITHOUT aileron trim capability.
The trim is NOT on the plane, but rather on the stick force itself (also why the trim moves the entire surface, not just the trim tabs).
The "trim" from the ailerons isn't modeled, it's the pilot's ability to fine-tune his stick that is modeled.
-
It's all about playability in the end.
All the realisim junkies have to keep it in mind. No sim is going to get it exactly right.
Take any squadron of fighters from any air force during WW2 and you'll have ones that run better then others, some taken care of better then others, some with more dings and dents, some with polished finishes, some with an engine just changed while others are pushing it towards 200 hours and an engine change, etc etc.
As far as I can tell AH meets it about in the middle and for this pretend pilot it allows for my imagination to run wild, without having to worry too much about whether my crew chief tuned my bird right and that I've done a good pre-flight. I really don't want to worry about icing, throwing a rod, fouled plugs, the amount of oxygen in my bottle, or anything else outside of getting into the fight and mixing it up :)
-
I love the "Spits are easy mode" whines. Spits are second only to Zekes as far as inability to handle damage and wing loading.
-
Spits are second only to Zekes as far as inability to handle damage and wing loading.
Inability to handle wing loading? Normally, wing-loading refers to the proportion of lifting area versus weight. Aircraft with high wing-loading turn poorly, and aircraft with low wing-loading turn well.
-
FYI spits are about as easy as they come for being able to out-turn 90% of the planeset, and out-run 80% of it, outclimb 98% of the planeset, out shoot everything (hispano trumps all), and they're pretty decent on acceleration too.
You learn in a spit you can't move to any other plane without re-learning everything. On the other hand, you learn in ANOTHER plane, and it applies naturally to the spit. See what I'm saying? Spit's an easy mode plane, anybody that denies this only flies the spit.
Even a BOB spitfire pilot said the Me109 was a lovely plane, but it took skill to fly. Any old moron could fly a spitfire. And that's how they kept their numbers up, they didn't need to train them as much. The LW had to train their pilots more to do the same thing, so they were behind the numbers curve.
-
Originally posted by Anaxogoras
Inability to handle wing loading? Normally, wing-loading refers to the proportion of lifting area versus weight. Aircraft with high wing-loading turn poorly, and aircraft with low wing-loading turn well.
Misspoke. What I meant was the wings are weak and particularly vulnerable to snapping at high speed and from bullet damage.
-
....which was not the fact in real life.....
-
I was just speaking of in-game experience.
-
Originally posted by Krusty
FYI spits are about as easy as they come for being able to out-run 80% (Sorry dont agree with this even if you include the bombers but I do agree they out accelerate anything which is the real point. Once your closely engaged you cant run)
out shoot everything (hispano trumps all), (Typhoon, Tempest, 262, 110 and Nikki plus the big gun 109 190 late war stuff. Also spit very vulnerable to damage in a shoot out)
Even a BOB spitfire pilot said the Me109 was a lovely plane, but it took skill to fly. Any old moron could fly a spitfire. And that's how they kept their numbers up, they didn't need to train them as much. The LW had to train their pilots more to do the same thing, so they were behind the numbers curve.
Most german fighters were shot down by Hurricanes. Numbers reflected the proximity of bases and shorter distances plus Radar multiplying the effectiveness of Uk fighters and they shot lots of 109's in the back as they ran out of fuel and limped back home.
Ever noticed how the numbers work so well in defence in the game. Huge Dar Bar round the base yet cant be taken because so many planes are always in transit.
Anyway you make lots of good points Krusty but you do oversimplify. Any plane which is a good turner is easy to master initially as the furball style is intuitively the more obvious fighting technique and the first people adopt.
-
Originally posted by Krusty
You learn in a spit you can't move to any other plane without re-learning everything. On the other hand, you learn in ANOTHER plane, and it applies naturally to the spit.
In premise you are correct, but the brush is a little to broad.
-
Originally posted by Krusty
Spit's an easy mode plane, anybody that denies this only flies the spit.
True enough except for the fact that you're often one of the bigger threats, and therefore one of the first targets.
Also, at least for me, it's such a good plane I too often get into situations I would avidly avoid in anything else.
-
Originally posted by BaldEagl
Also, at least for me, it's such a good plane I too often get into situations I would avidly avoid in anything else.
Same here with the LA-7. One of the best & most dangerous planes in AH2. Yet my K/D ratio in it is far worse than in every other plane I fly - because I usually up it when things really get desperate.
-
Originally posted by Krusty
FYI spits are about as easy as they come for being able to out-turn 90% of the planeset, and out-run 80% of it, outclimb 98% of the planeset, out shoot everything (hispano trumps all), and they're pretty decent on acceleration too.
You learn in a spit you can't move to any other plane without re-learning everything. On the other hand, you learn in ANOTHER plane, and it applies naturally to the spit. See what I'm saying? Spit's an easy mode plane, anybody that denies this only flies the spit.
Even a BOB spitfire pilot said the Me109 was a lovely plane, but it took skill to fly. Any old moron could fly a spitfire. And that's how they kept their numbers up, they didn't need to train them as much. The LW had to train their pilots more to do the same thing, so they were behind the numbers curve.
You really didn't just call WW2 Spitfire pilots "morons" did ya Krusty?
Seperate the game from the real thing please and loosen your leather Lederhosen, they're putting too much pressure on your brain :)
How many hours at an OTU did the average wartime 109 pilot have before he went to a combat unit Krusty? Do you know? I'd be curious as to a 1941 timeframe 109 driver.
I have that logbook of a Spit pilot and he got to his first operational squadron in December 41. When he left 53 OTU to go to 416 squadron he had 208.25 flight hours, of which 42.35 were Spits.
He flew another 56.55 hours on Spits while on the squadron before he flew an operational mission. So roughly 100 hours of flight time on Spits before he saw a combat sortie. I'd suggest this was probably average for a wartime Spit driver.
Too much is made of the rushed to combat bunch in the B of B where guys had 20 hours etc.
I'm sure you will see the same thing with 109 pilots in late 44-45 when they were losing pilots faster then they could train them.
But I'd love to know what a 1941 Me109 pilot had for hours when he saw his first combat sortie.
Not questioning that the 109 was a more difficult bird to fly, but I don't know that for a wartime bird that's a good thing. Seems to me RJ Mitchell deserves a lot of credit for creating a fighter in the mid thirties that was able to stay on the leading edge of fighter development during the war and was also designed to be a pilot's airplane that was easier for a novice to handle.
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
You really didn't just call WW2 Spitfire pilots "morons" did ya Krusty?
No, I didn't. I said a retired british WW2 Spitfire pilot said "any moron can fly a spit."
-
Originally posted by Krusty
No, I didn't. I said a retired british WW2 Spitfire pilot said "any moron can fly a spit."
Who was it? I've never heard that one :)
-
Saw it ages ago. Just did a quick search. This is a shorter clip of a longer thing (the one I remember was longer).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3e-Ra0dH-Lg
EDIT: Name listed as Gerald Stapleton
P.S. Nit-picking correction: He used "idiot" not "moron"
-
Originally posted by Krusty
FYI spits are about as easy as they come for being able to out-turn 90% of the planeset, and out-run 80% of it, outclimb 98% of the planeset, out shoot everything (hispano trumps all), and they're pretty decent on acceleration too.
You learn in a spit you can't move to any other plane without re-learning everything. On the other hand, you learn in ANOTHER plane, and it applies naturally to the spit. See what I'm saying? Spit's an easy mode plane, anybody that denies this only flies the spit.
Even a BOB spitfire pilot said the Me109 was a lovely plane, but it took skill to fly. Any old moron could fly a spitfire. And that's how they kept their numbers up, they didn't need to train them as much. The LW had to train their pilots more to do the same thing, so they were behind the numbers curve.
Your comments on the spit (in AH) are right on. The spit spoils you. A new player can get away with so much and take so much for granted that when he/she decides to try another plane they are often disappointed.
One on the many myths about Adolf Galland's comment 'Give me a squadron of spitfires". Is that he believed that the 109 was inferior to the spit. My thinking is that Galland believed that for the average pilot the spitfire was a better aircraft. For an experianced pilot such as Galland and many of the others the Bf109 was deadly.
Success in war is often putting more superior numbers at a point than the other guy. This was difficult to do with the training time required for the Bf109 series. Look at Hartmann. It took him quite a while before he became proficient. The Luftwaffe in BoB would have been vastly different except for the skills and tactics developed in Spain by many of the key aces.
Having said all this, is the spit superior? As someone who has flown the online spitfires for many years I can say that a good online 109 pilot is tough to beat. I'm not talking about the BnZ 109 guy who runs away. Like it's real counterpart the online Bf109 is deadly in experienced hands.
-
This is why it's very helpful to start on a new plane. I began with the Hellcat and then went to the Corsair and THEN stuck my butt in a Spitfire. I did it because people would continuously insult my Spitfire, but I later learned that it actually DID help... completely changed my view of dogfighting... though with the H2H gone, I'm probably as bad as ever heheh. I'll find money maybe once I get a decent job.
Thanks for the info Widewing, it's a great help.
You said that the prop runaway isn't dependent upon oil pressure loss right? But isn't the prop over-revving at very high RPM from the loss of oil pressure the definition of a runaway prop? Loss of pressure means the prop will stay where it was set, or creep up to the high rpm stops under dynamic load.
I've never read about a prop that stayed at set RPM after oil pressure loss... what determines whether the prop over-revs or stays at its setting?
Also, I understand now that the P-38 handled HS props badly.. it was on the P38K(?) not sure. I meant, however, that the P-38 did not suffer from the prop runaway because it was most often fitted with Curtiss Electric props.
-
Originally posted by SgtPappy
This is why it's very helpful to start on a new plane. I began with the Hellcat and then went to the Corsair and THEN stuck my butt in a Spitfire. I did it because people would continuously insult my Spitfire, but I later learned that it actually DID help... completely changed my view of dogfighting... though with the H2H gone, I'm probably as bad as ever heheh. I'll find money maybe once I get a decent job.
Thanks for the info Widewing, it's a great help.
You said that the prop runaway isn't dependent upon oil pressure loss right? But isn't the prop over-revving at very high RPM from the loss of oil pressure the definition of a runaway prop? I've never read about a prop that stayed at set RPM after oil pressure loss... what determines whether the prop over-revs or stays at its setting?
Also, I understand now that the P-38 handled HS props badly.. it was on the P38K(?) not sure. I meant, however, that the P-38 did not suffer from the prop runaway because it was most often fitted with Curtiss Electric props.
Here's a link that should help you visualize how the Hydromatic prop works to limit pitch.
Link 1 (http://www.enginehistory.org/Convention/2005/Presentations/FeyTom/P02%20HS%20Hydromatic.pdf)
If you examine the cam, you will see that the slot limits blade rotation. Blade indexing determines max and min angle.
If you can scare up a copy of Hamilton Standard, Hydromatic Quick-Feathering Propellers Service Manual, 140A or Rev B, this will absolutely clear up and misconceptions of prop function. Also, some aircraft had a separate oil supply for the prop, operated by an independent pump.
Curtiss props were far more likely to over-speed as the prop blades were set via an electric motor. Loss of electrical power (a common problem in P-38s with a single generator) could result in the prop changing pitch. This could result in various issues, not the least of which was over-speeding (running away).
My regards,
Widewing
-
Thanks WW! Oh yes, that's true loss of electric power would result in prop inefficiency; I should be less vague as the CE props didnt overspeed from loss of oil pressure.
True say about the aileron trim, Krusty. Looking closely I do notice that it's all about the pilot slightly adjusting his stick's 'centre'. Thanks, though, I've had trouble understanding the previous threads on the Spit's mis-leading aileron trim