Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: jmccaul on June 23, 2000, 05:04:00 PM
-
As long as we get the Tempest V (introduced concurrently with the dora of course)
Who could argue with that?
P51'ers mabye (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
I aqgree (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
Ta 152 is the Tempest's TRUE historical rival, the D9 is with the P51.
-
Tempest V - 400 operational during war. First squad equipped in April '44 and started doing sorties into enemy territory in june (according to Roland Beaumont)
Dora - 700 reached service (i've heard 900 too) Not sure of when squads equipped but i'm prepared to bet it wasn't before tempest V's although they probably saw more action.
Ta 152 - 60 odd made it into squadron service (verm did a very detailed break down)
No dates but i am assuming squads were not equipped untill late '44, early '45
Which seem more apt as opponents to you?
Besides i hear the D9 compares pretty favourably under 25K to the 152?
-
Ta 152 can take on the Hawker Fury if it wants a "historical" opponent. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Besides i hear the D9 compares pretty favourably under 25K to the 152?
True - the Ta 152H advantage over the Fw 190D-9 only starts at about 25k and up, and up, and up, and up some more to it's 48k ceiling!
-
I say "Forget the LWs". I'm tired of hearing them b***h whenever we RAF types ask for a new fighter. I haven't noticed them doing this to anybody else.
What is so bad about the RAF?
You LW guys don't seem to raise a fuss about the USAAF/USN, VVS, IJN/IJA or Regia Aeronautica getting new kites without getting compensation. Why raise the fuss about the RAF? You guys already have 7 units to our 3 (1.04 looks to raise this to 8 to 4). You have a couple of late war aircraft already, the Bf109G-10 and Fw190A-8. The Fw might be intended for bombers, but that certainly has its place here. You just got the Fw190A-5, which is a VERY lethal mid-war fighter. Why do the LW guys need to get yet another late-war bird if we RAFs get our first late-war bird?
Plane set as it stands now on fighters:
1939 NONE
1940 NONE
1941 Spitfire MkVb, Typhoon, Bf109F, ??C.202??
1942 Spitfire MkIX, Bf109G-2, Bf109G-6
1943 Fw190A-5, F4U-1D, F4U-1C, ??La5N??, ??C.205??
1944 Fw190A-8, N1K2, P-51D, A6M5b, P-47D-30, Yak-9U, Bf109G-10, P-38L
1945 NONE
I don't want the Tempest V as the first late-war RAF fighter because it would just be another BnZ cannon bird. We've already got one. It is also not something that hasn't been modeled. While WB might not model it, both AOE and EAW did. Their flight models may not be up to snuff, but they do count as priors.
I want the Spitfire MkXIV "bubble hood" because it would be used in a different way than the existing aircraft. I also believe that it would be more competitive with the existing fighter set. Yes, it too has been modeled in other sims, but I think it would be the best choice for the RAF's first late-war fighter.
I would like to see the Tempest V and Fw190D-9 modeled, I just don't see it as high a priority as the Spitfire MkXIV. I don't think that the LWs need to be compensated if the RAF gets the Spitfire MkXIV. We certainly haven't been compensated for each fighter that they've gotten in each release and I would certainly not expect it. I don't think that HTC should foster the idea that a particular group must be coddled and compensated in each release because another group got something in that release. The Bf109G-10 and Fw190A-5 would provide adequate competition for the Spitfire MkXIV for a few weeks/months until the Fw190D-9 could/would be added.
Sisu
-Karnak
[This message has been edited by Karnak (edited 06-23-2000).]
-
I thought TA was a high alt Dora development? Just look at it and see that it's not a frontline fighter.
------------------
-lynx-
13 Sqn RAF
-
Originally posted by Karnak:
I want the Spitfire MkXIV "bubble hood" because it would be used in a different way than the existing aircraft. I also believe that it would be more competitive with the existing fighter set. Yes, it too has been modeled in other sims, but I think it would be the best choice for the RAF's first late-war fighter.
I would like to see the Tempest V and Fw190D-9 modeled, I just don't see it as high a priority as the Spitfire MkXIV. I don't think that the LWs need to be compensated if the RAF gets the Spitfire MkXIV. We certainly haven't been compensated for each fighter that they've gotten in each release and I would certainly not expect it. I don't think that HTC should foster the idea that a particular group must be coddled and compensated in each release because another group got something in that release. The Bf109G-10 and Fw190A-5 would provide adequate competition for the Spitfire MkXIV for a few weeks/months until the Fw190D-9 could/would be added.
Sisu
-Karnak
Lol...you start with no sense, continue with a nonsense and you end losing ALL sense.
Karnak...how can I say this softly...you dont stop squeaking and moaning that you have a 1942-43 plane in the SpitfireIX...now you say that we LW people must match the SPitXIV, a 1944 plane, with the Fw190A5, an early 1943 one?? lol. NOnsense.
You say that SpitXIV will be more competitive with the current planeset LOL!. Of course it would be!. It would be UNBALANCING,sir. A plane faster than Mustang, better accelerator and better climber than 109G10, that can turn more or less with a Spit IX if handled properly...you call that a "competitive plane?" ROFLOL!!! ROFLMAO!!!!
Hey, I dont say you cant get it. Its yours and all yours,but dont DARE to say we MUST match that MONSTER with an A5, sir. This is to say "nah, to the hell with them gimme waht I want and to the hell with balance".
About LW adds...since I came here, "Sir", there has been ONE addition to LW plane set...Fw190A5, while RAF got two aditions, SpitfireV and Typhoon. SO another nonsense on your side.
Again,for if you dont know it, of 4 109 in the planeset, only 2 are competitive, G2 and G10. F4 and G6 are dead meat in MA.
"we haven't been compensated for each fighter that they've gotten in each release "
Name them, please.
Now,another nonsense...when Fw190A5 came into AH people started to yell that was boring to see Fw190s everywhere...You know what will happen with SpitXIV? that ever JG2 pilots will fly it more than LW planes, except me (I'm the only one who will stay with A5 and A8)...because XIV is a MONSTER.
Nah, get your damned monster. As I said, its all yours I'll kill you in XIV as I do in IX. But give me a decent ride to do it, sir.
------------------
Ram, out
Fw190D9? Ta152H1? The truth is out there
JG2 "Richthofen" (http://members.tripod.com/JG2/)
(http://nottosc.tripod.com/ram190.gif)
[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 06-24-2000).]
-
Do not forget that this is a 1944 plane too (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
(http://www.stormbirds.com/warbirds/header.jpg)
Remember it everytime you ask for Spit XIV.
-
If everyone was limited to planes from the same dates the RAF is, the AH planeset would look like this:
109F4
109G2
Spit V
Spit IX
Typhoon
C.202
Looks a bit sparse doesn't it? Any of the Luftwaffles satisfied with their choices from that list?
The Luftwaffe have one of their main fighters from 44, the G10. They have the 190A5 and A8. That looks like 3 competitive planes to me. Every one of them is newer than the best British plane allowed in the game.
-
Then model 1944. All of them that flew.
How about it, RAF types ?
-
Hey I'm with Hristos ! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
It would be great for us BnZ types.
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
"Real Men fly Radials, Nancy Boys fly Spitfires"
-
I'd welcome all the 1944 fighters. I don't know how people who restrict themselves to US planes would cope, having to fight 262s and Meteor IIIs. Bit of a mismatch there I think.
Seriously, the argument against jets isn't just play balance. The 262 was so unreliable when it was introduced that only an AF in desperate straights, like the LW, would ever have introduced it into service.
There is no reliability modelled in AH. That's fine as long as all the planes are mainstream production models like now. The reliability of the 262 is far, far worse. In real life they failed to make much impact because of that reliability, amongst other things. To introduce them into AH without taking that into account would distort the game.
I think the 262 will make a good perk plane, in limited numbers that reflect the limited numbers that flew in combat in 1944.
-
Now wait there ! Stop that demagogy.
If 262 was so unreliable, how come it was encountered in the air at all ? How come it produced aces ? How come it was a terror for any allied bomber caught in its sights ? How come Alied pilots shot some of them ? Should they had waited for 262 to drop down by themselves ?
From Luftwaffe Fighter Aces:
Heinz Baer 16 victories in 262
Franz Schall 14 victoriesin 262
Hermann Buchner 12 victories in 262
Georg-Peter Eder 12 victories in 262
Erich Rudorffer 12 victories in 262
Karl Schnorrer 11 victories in 262
All of these victories were hard earned, in fight against heavy odds. Strange for such an unreliable plane, isn't it ?
How many planes did the best Spit XIV aces shoot down in that particular plane ?
Other famous Luftwaffe pilots that flew 262:
Adolf Galland
Gerhard Barkhorn
Johannes Steinhoff
Gunther Rall
Walter Nowotny
Walter Krupinski
Theodor Weissenberger
Kurt Welter
Heinrich Ehrler
Gunther Lutzow
...the list goes on
Was the 262 perked for them ?
It was the top priority plane for Luftwaffe in late war, many resources were switched from other type production to the 262 production. Otherwise you could have better prop fighters coming out of the factory sooner etc. Is it right to deny Luftwaffe the 262 in this sim ?
To the Luftwaffe enthusiasts this plane represents far more than just a dweeb mobile. In one word, it is the legend !
Even because of its beautiful lines alone this plane deserves to get modeled in AH (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
It was there, and we all know it. It fought, it killed, it died.
Reliability issues will hurt all sides and all planes. Nikis losing wings, P 51 with .50 cals jamming etc. And how about that Typhoon engine reliability ?!
IMO, I just recognize your intention to smuggle the best RAF fighter of 1944, and deny Luftwaffe its best fighter in 1944 at the same time.
You mention "limited numbers that reflect the limited numbers that flew in combat in 1944". Well, more 262s were produced that Spit XIV. The second they got airborne over Reich in 1944 they were in combat. Wanna perk the Spitter too ?
[This message has been edited by Hristo (edited 06-24-2000).]
-
Well said Hristo...I couldn't have said it better.
I say this...if SpitXIV is included in uber plane set Its okay with me. If it is included in NORMAL plane set, then I want my D9 and Hristo's Me262.
FAir and square. And still 70% of the arena would fly the XIV most of the time.
[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 06-24-2000).]
-
Well...
The LW fans always get the "Ace" because they can top any other UBER plane of the WWII era with the 262. Really just a pointless and often boring argument to begin with anyway.
A MA filled with 262's does not appeal to me any more than one filled with any other single plane type. Possibly this is one of the "Perk" planes Pyro had made reference to not so long ago.
It will be a "HOOT SHOOT" for darn sure!
One thing to keep in mind about the 262. Historically, it never had to fight itself and was mostly used for bomber interception. That is if I am correct.
Good Luck - Have Fun! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
------------------
Mino
The Wrecking Crew
"Though some art vets, all art dweebish"
Jedi
-
Originally posted by Nashwan:
I'd welcome all the 1944 fighters. I don't know how people who restrict themselves to US planes would cope, having to fight 262s and Meteor IIIs. Bit of a mismatch there I think.
Seriously, the argument against jets isn't just play balance. The 262 was so unreliable when it was introduced that only an AF in desperate straights, like the LW, would ever have introduced it into service.
There is no reliability modelled in AH. That's fine as long as all the planes are mainstream production models like now. The reliability of the 262 is far, far worse. In real life they failed to make much impact because of that reliability, amongst other things. To introduce them into AH without taking that into account would distort the game.
I think the 262 will make a good perk plane, in limited numbers that reflect the limited numbers that flew in combat in 1944.
If reliability was modeled in the game one of the biggest casulties would be the Hispano cannon. Be carful what you ask for.
-
As I said in my first sentence, I would welcome both the 262 and the Meteor III. I don't know how other players would react, but I really wouldn't fear a 262 in either the Spit or the Meteor.
Hristos, you list 6 aces in the 262. Out of how many aces the LW produced? Several thousand, iirc.
It was the top priority plane for Luftwaffe in late war, many resources were switched from other type production to the 262 production. Otherwise you could have better prop fighters coming out of the factory sooner etc. Is it right to deny Luftwaffe the 262 in this sim ?
So all these resources were devoted to it, it operated in a target rich enviroment, it could fly 100mph faster than it's oposition, and in 8 months of fighting it produced a handfull of aces. Doesn't that suggest problems to you?
Of course, bring in the jets and flying buffs will become almost impossible.
The Typhoon suffered terible unreliability in 1941. We are flying in a virtual 1944, and the Typhoon was fixed long before then.
As to the Hispano, I know the Americans had terrible problems with theirs, but I haven't heard much about problems for the RAF. If we are on the subject of gun jams, how about the Mk108? Hardly the most reliable thing around, was it?
-
Shouldn't we be complaining that these Luftwaffles are hijacking a thread about the Spit 14? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
lol..your right the 108 had simular problems.
The 303 was kept on the spit just because the brits never trusted the reliability of the hispano. It certainly contributes nothing to the lethality of the aircraft.
Lots of the things that are "wrong" with german aircraft are results of their war situation. There were many metals and alloys that they could not get the raw materials for. This kind of thing is fundimental in the make up of the German Italian and Japanese Aircraft. Alot of it would have been expressed as poorer fuel and more unreliable systems..but they are handycaped anyway.
The 262 engines were an example of this. They were designed for a certain alloy steel content and the manufaturers were ordered to make due with inferior metal. But certainly the british jet engine was far more refined and robust. it was far less tempermental.
-
Thats my point Nashwan. The LWs screech and holler like a female cat every time the pro-RAF guys mention getting anything beyond 1942. I'm sick of it. This isn't a tit for tat situation. The RAF has 3 fighters, the LW has 6. I don't see any RAF guys asking for a one for one ratio, but the LW guys seem to think that they're entitled to a new late-war fighter if the RAF gets a single, the RAF's first, late war fighter. Its stupid and makes them look like wussy crybabies.
Yes, I want all of the aircraft that flew in WWII, but we're not going to get them all in one release. How can you LWs rationalize that the LW, USAAF, IJN/IJA and VVS can get new '44 planes, but not the RAF. Then if the RAF looks to get one, that the LW must also get yet another? I don't understand you're position.
For what its worth, the Spitfire MkXIV was first delivered to the RAF in November of 1943. The Fw190D-9 first flew (as a prototype) in May of 1944. The Fw190D-9 first saw combat in September of 1944. Even assuming the RAF had the Spitfire MkXIV in inventory for 4 months before it saw action, that is still six months of action before it ever encountered the Fw190D-9. The Spitfire MkXIV was the dominant aircraft of the 2nd Tactical Air Force from mid-1944 through the end of the war.
Was the Spitfire MkXIV, from 1943, so good that it has to be placed in the same category as the 1945 Ta152, e.g. and perk aircraft? If so, how can you LWs argue that the Fw190 was a better fighter than the Spitfire?
Sisu
-Karnak
[This message has been edited by Karnak (edited 06-24-2000).]
-
Originally posted by Nashwan:
Shouldn't we be complaining that these Luftwaffles are hijacking a thread about the Spit 14? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
Go back and read Karnak's post...the ones who started to talk about LW planes were RAF people,not the inverse. And he did to justify "his" need for a Spit XIV.
So thank karnak for this. My first reaction was:"ok get a tempest but if you get the XIV give us a D9". Now is:
"Spit lovers only support their need for a uber plane like Spit XIV because arent good enough to live in a spitIX. The ones who are good enough dont rant for a XIV, they only wait for it"
I never support introduction of planes because dweeb people die a lot in their favorite ride. ANd this is just the case. Karnak I offered myself to help you in TA. If you think that with a hit % of less than 2% you will survive more in a Spit XIV than in a Spit IX then you are only half right...My grounds on asking for a Fw190D9 is that it was in enought numbers, at the right time and is a good plane,not unbalancing.
Spitfire XIV would be clearly unbalancing in a MA and I still dont say "no" to it. Karnak say "to the hell with them if they want D9, ,To the hell with game balance, gimme a XIV AND GIMME IT NOW!"
Thee only reason given (with some solid evidence) by karnak to have a XIV is this reasoning:
"BWAAAA BWAAAA they kill me a lot in SpitIX! BWAAA BWAAA I need a spit that can run,climb,accelerate,and kill or I'll rant!!!
BwAAA BWAAAA"!
Sorry but I only can laugh at this.
And of course, I do it (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 06-24-2000).]
-
RAM, the LWs posted suggesting that we get the Tempest V, another BnZ cannon bird just like the F4U-1C, and they get an Fw190D-9.
There is an ongoing attitude from the LWs that they deserve better fighters than the RAF, or so it seems to me. The LWs don't seem to care about what the USAAF gets, what the VVS gets or what the IJN/IJA gets. Why the massive concern about a competitive RAF aircraft?
If the LWs think the Spitfire MkXIV is too good, yet the Fw190D-9 is more than a match for it, how can you in good faith ask for the Fw190D-9 in one thread and then condem the RAF for requesting the Spitfire MkXIV in another by saying that it is too powerful?
Sisu
-Karnak
-
Originally posted by Karnak:
If the LWs think the Spitfire MkXIV is too good, yet the Fw190D-9 is more than a match for it, how can you in good faith ask for the Fw190D-9 in one thread and then condem the RAF for requesting the Spitfire MkXIV in another by saying that it is too powerful?
Sisu
-Karnak
Karnak I'm not saying D-9 is more than a match for spitfire at least not in the same way. But at least can fight it with some chances of success, unlike an A8 or A5 ,due its better climbrate and acceleration.
But by far SpitXIV is better arena plane than D9. In facti is far better arena plane than ANY OTHER possible. So I say its unbalancing.
RE-read my posts, man. Where do you read that I dont support Spit XIV in AH???? I say that I think it belongs to Uber list but if you get it then we LW people have REAL need for a D9 as 190As are outclassed by it.
What I say is that I dont support the introduvtion of SpitXIV because YOUR reasons. But if people want it in MA, ok have it.
THe whines will be heard in mars.
Fw190D9 belongs to the same league to P51, P38 and P47. So Its fair to ask for it. Spit XIV belongs to UFO list. You want it? ok get it. But gimme a D9 to fight it!!!
-
In fairness RAM, you're not one of the LW fans that I'm refering to. You're arguements seem much more consistant and rational than the few who irk me. I do want the Fw190D-9 in AH. I think that it is a very significant model of the Fw series and a required aircraft in any complete WWII planeset. I don't quite agree with you about how powerful the MkXIV is though. I agree that it would be very good, one of the top three I think, but I also think that the Fw190D-9 and Bf190G-10/K-4 can face it on basicly even ground. I don't think that any of the three American staples from the European Theatre, the P-38, P-47 or P-51, are equal to those three if the pilot skill is the same and the aircraft start from a neutral position.
The only one of your arguments that I can't agree with at all is the statement that the Spitfire MkXIV is a late '44 plane. It was first delivered in November of '43 and was the dominant aircraft od the 2nd TAF from Mid-'44 through the end of the war. Because we are discussing something that will affect the game balance, this only ammounts to trivia in the context of AH.
Sisu
-Karnak
-
Originally posted by Karnak:
The only one of your arguments that I can't agree with at all is the statement that the Spitfire MkXIV is a late '44 plane. It was first delivered in November of '43 and was the dominant aircraft od the 2nd TAF from Mid-'44 through the end of the war. Because we are discussing something that will affect the game balance, this only ammounts to trivia in the context of AH.
Sisu
-Karnak
Search for the Word "late" before "44" in my earlier posts. I say that Spit XIV is a 1944 plane.Period. It was only used against german planes "en masse" after D-day. Before they flew against V-1s, But I dont regard that as combat missions...not at all.
Anyway I refer to Spit XIV as a 1944 plane, no "late" there.
ANd it would unbalance the arena. As I said before a plane with the speed of the mustang, the climbrat and acceleration of a G10 and turning of a SpitIX is simply a monster. And D9 is nothing near it.
But you want it in MA? if it depended on me I'd put it on uber list. you want it on standard list? ok. Yours. but gimme a 190 able to fight it, gimme a D9.
If you think that is unfair, I disagree 100%. Only G10 could be near SpitXIV...and I dont like G10, I love 190s. ANd the only 190 able to fight a SpitXIV is a dora-9.
and that is a fact.
-
RAM, er here you go:
Originally posted by RAM in the "OK, the Yanks got theirs, the LWs got theirs, now how about an RAF bird?" thread of the "Aces High General Discussion" forum:
then give us 190D9. SpitXIV is a late 44 plane,P47D-30 too and Fw190A5 is 1943
Ya did say it was a late 44 plane.
I'm quite weary of this long, multi-thread and endless discussion. I don't think that I'm going to mention the Spitfire MkXIV again. If HTC asks for opinions on which version to give because its imminent, I'll give my 2 cents, but other than that, no more. Its too divisive.
I really do hope that you guys get the Fw190D-9 and Me262.
I just hope that our Spitfire MkIX, Spitfire MkVb and Typhoon provide an adequate challenge for them.
Sisu
-Karnak
[This message has been edited by Karnak (edited 06-24-2000).]
-
Ram, I don't think any RAF fans are calling for the D9 to be kept out. I would love to see it in AH, and as the LW lobby is vocal enough, I think we will.
I'm suprised you say the Spit XIV is too unbalancing, and that it is the best possible arena plane. This is what you had to say on the subject a few weeks ago:
I am really doubtful that Hristo is scared by Spit XIV. I, for me, am not scared by it...if well modelled.
What do I mean by "well modelled"?. Easy, model the Griffon's torque and low speed Spit handling will suck as it did in RL, requiring constant triming and rudder input...something that SpitIX doesnt need at all.
Model the Spitfire's bad handling at high speed and it will suck ,as it did in RL.
So you get a plane that at low speed feels a lot the torque of its engine, and one that over 350 mph is like a piece of rock. Roll problems and hard controls.
I dont fear that kind of plane. Bring it as it was and I'll kill em as I kill SpitsIX today.
Fw190D9 on the other hand retains its wonderful handling at all speeds, rollrate, and turns better than a A8...it accelerates very well too. If we add MW50 to it (and we should do it), then we have a plane to be scared of. It may be not the better climber nor the faster...but it still is like a powered-up light Fw190A8...and if you dont fear such a plane then you arent very wise
Now you say the Spit is unbalancing? I reluctantly came to the conclusion some time ago that the Spit 14 was too good, but this argument has been twisted and turned so many ways, by all it's participants, that I no longer know what to think.
-
Hristo - could you split those aces between fighter/bomber kills? AFAIK 262 was designed to kill B17s/24s and for no other purpose.
Let's have 262s IN NUMBERS SHE WAS AVAIALBLE and lets have Tempest Vs. And lets see how many of those 262s make it out of the ack range. That (and unreliability/accidents) accounted for most of 262s losses, right?
Heinz Baer had 16 kills? Was it with quad 30mm cannons flying at (at least) twice the speed his targets flew and against REAL 50 cals (not the stuff we're facing) as defensive armament? That's kinda nothing, don't you agree? I mean for all the hype and stuff?
I guess I'm one of those "RAF types" who have 3 (that is THREE) planes to chose from. 2 of the 3 are 1941 and the third - 1942...
And for chrissakes you "LW types" get off your high horse about Hispanos, will you? Let's have it - let's have reliability issues etc but for all planes... I suspect the very first effect would be virtual grounding of all 109s with their crappy undercarriage... Really - careful what you wish for...
------------------
-lynx-
13 Sqn RAF
-
Nashwan When I wrote that I thought what I was writting. After that on MA, some talk and a little of research I found that the only nasty thing in low speed SpitXIV handling was its opposite torque. It seems that it had not so bad handling at least not by far the one I thought it had.
SO, you see you are quoting a post of me that is basically wrong...or at least that is what I think now after I looked into it with more caution.
-
This thread reminds me of the one I had recently with Pongo. I'm just too tired to fight this "war". RAM give me a reliable information on why SpitXIV is uber.
I'm waiting...
mx22
-
Originally posted by mx22:
RAM give me a reliable information on why SpitXIV is uber.
I'm waiting...
mx22
Speed----------->faster than a P51
Climbrate------->Better than a 109G10
Acceleration---->roughly equal to a 109G10 if not better
Turning--------->Equal if not better to SpitIX (only that has more problems due to higher and opposite torque)
Weapons--------->Heavy firepowed, as all the spits.
E-Retention----->Simply wonderful, as every spits.
General Performance at all altitudes is outstanding. Low on the deck or high at 25K SpitXIV retains its performance.
The only 3 problems with a SpitXIV are:
Low endurance------->not serious problem in an arena environment.
Weak airframe------->To note it you must be hit (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
HIspeed control----->All spitfires suffer from stiffening controls over 350IAS. Still, Me109 has much worse problems and we all see how it does perform.
Mx22, must I have to keep on with this or is enough?. SpitXIV is an unbalancing monster, you want it or not. Still I say: put it on the planeset. but please gimme a D9 in wich I can hold my own against such a monster!
-
(http://www.mindspring.com/~nathownsj00/spitXIVvs109190.gif)
-
Nath, hehehe I love you (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) nice study...
Mx22.....DANNNNG DANNNNNG!!! you hear the bells?...
I do
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
<cough>,
Spit14 max speed at is 420 --> Less then that of P-51
Climb ---> max of 4,580. Again BF109G10 beats Spitfire in this.
acceleration---> have no idea, my books does not give this one.
turning ---> similar to SpitIX. I have previously posted information on this. Enormous torque of Griffon engine will though make it quiet a problem to fight at slow speed.
So what's in this is so WONDERFUL, that you consider this to be an uber plane? If you regard it as uber, please put FW190D9 alongside, as well as BF109G10 (because it just climbs better then rest of planes). Of course that would again leave RAF in deficit of even a midwar (1943) design Spitfire. Tempest is not an answer to the question either, why is that one of the most influencial planes of WW2 should be stopped in AH at 1942 design? You have both 1944 FW190 and BF109, but RAF can't have planes of same time period?
I might belong to RAF squadron in AH, but I lately don't see a reason for me to fly any of the RAF planes. They just simply don't have what it takes to make the job done in arena full of planes that can do it all much better.
mx22
-
Nath,
Have this book, though next time it would be helpfull to know where the scan came from. Note to RAM, this trials were conducted in 1943 with captured German planes. I belive this would be FW190A3 and BF109G6. Opps RAM seems like tests were run against earlier model German planes....
mx22
-
Originally posted by mx22:
Nath,
Have this book, though next time it would be helpfull to know where the scan came from. Note to RAM, this trials were conducted in 1943 with captured German planes. I belive this would be FW190A3 and BF109G6. Opps RAM seems like tests were run against earlier model German planes....
mx22
lol!...good try. But not enough. You first come with asking for a proof about SXIV's uberness and when they put it just in front of your face you set it aside and say "nah, I think that is not right"
Spit 420m MPH?...re read the article...says that spit XIV is 25-35mph faster than IX at all altitudes...what is 20k SpitIX speed? (not in AH as here is faster)...410mph.. so the SLOWER that XIV will be is 435...hummm...that sounds near Mustang....
and low in the deck, 25-35 mph faster thna Spit IX makes XIV FASTER than P51....
hummmm...something to think about isnt it?
. I belive this would be FW190A3 and BF109G6. Opps RAM seems like tests were run against earlier model German planes....
First...re read the article because you need glasses...it says: "Early in 1944 the air development unit of..."
Early in 1944. umm...44...that is not 43. And in early 44 RAF had A5s captured in their stock...umph. MX...MEEECC!!! you missed your target, sir...best luck next time.
Anyway, and for any doubts involved, Fw190A3 had 100hp less in an airframe much lighter than A5. So the performance should be the same. MEEEEC! Missed target another time, mx!
So the test would be comparable in a fw190A5...ooo...you missed your target AT ALL!.
About your "torque" problem...yup I thought it had it too. Well seems the only problem was the opposite direction of the torque. but that is not a big problem. The torque itself wasnt quite more noticeable than in Spit IX re read the study please...
"its maneouvrability is as good as a MkIX. It is easy to fly but should be handled with care in take offs and landings"
MEEEC missed target again...your aim is very bad Mx...that or your reading skills are really poor, sir.
Not so but you say that you dont know how will SPit XIV accelerate...LOL in a 2200hp plane lighter than a 109G10 you ask that?...hehehe MEEEC!!! missed target again!! hey man...your aiming sucks!!!!!
Mx22...as I said good try but I know to read. That study says enuf. a prototype of spit XIV was making a Spit IX seem a little kitty and with a Fw190A was making the wuerger seem a birdie.
[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 06-24-2000).]
-
Mx22, as a side note, if you want a 420mph, 4500feet/minute, monster torque plane labelled as a SpitXIV, its all yours and I wont ask for a D9.
If you want a accurate modelled SpitXIV gimme the damned dora-9 and be happy that its not in the uberplaneset.
-
I know I said I wouldn't talk about this again, but Mx22, RAM is right about the numbers.
Speed: Maximum of 448 (Don't know the altitud, but around 20,000-25,000 ft.)
Climb: 4580, almost exactly the same as the G-10. Low alt G-10 is faster, high alt Spit is faster.
Turn: As good or better than the MkIX except in opposite direction.
Acceration: Damn good. Five paddles bladded prop driven by a 2,030Hp engine.
Low Speed Handling: Bad when on ground, fine once airbourne.
Firepower: Good as per all Spits after V. Low ammo endurance.
Structure: Strengthed over MkIX. More armor to deal with 30mm shells.
Visiblity: Good. Sloped nose helps even without the "bubble" hood.
We will see it someday, but lets let HTC do it in their own time, when they judge the balance ready to take it.
Sisu
-Karnak
-
The 262 problem was not the plane itself. It was the disasterous war situation at the time, stupid decisions by authorities and general poor condition of Luftwaffe structure at the end of the war.
Just imagine few hundred 262s allowed to grab alt and intercept buffs back in 1943.
Originally posted by Nashwan:
Hristos, you list 6 aces in the 262. Out of how many aces the LW produced? Several thousand, iirc.
Those 6 have 10+ victories. There are more with less than 10. Given the time span and situation they flew, the record is impressive.
So all these resources were devoted to it, it operated in a target rich enviroment, it could fly 100mph faster than it's oposition, and in 8 months of fighting it produced a handfull of aces. Doesn't that suggest problems to you?
The reason is that Luftwaffe fought against incredible odds at the time. The record of 262 is quite remarkable. Often 20 262s would attack formations of up to hundreds of bombers and escorts.
262s were vulched on takeoffs and landings. How about the orders to strafe 262 chutes ? (oops, guilty for some of those myself (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif))
-
I'm a Luftwobble and i'll die in LW planes.
give the tommies the spit14
and give us a right modelled 190D9
that's all
------------------
(http://saintaw.tripod.com/habichtnew.gif)
"Die Ta 152 war meine Überlebensversicherung in den letzten Tagen des Krieges" OFw Willi Reschke, Ritterkreuzträger, 38 Abschüsse
[This message has been edited by HABICHT (edited 06-25-2000).]
-
Ya know it really don't matter what the books say, 'cuz you clowns will be driving it (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) some of you will be very good, some, ah, not so good (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)But I really don't expect anything approaching reality in this arena.
"Hi-tech, that wind shear at 10k is too much to deal with, turn it off please" Bah would ya ask GOD to turn off the frigging wind so you can pretend to be a flying badass? bring on the 14,and the D9,Ta152,ME262, (hell go down the list and add them all) just stop crying about it already. "I want to be competitive" you know what? so did the Poles in '39, BFD life is what happens while you were making other plans (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
I've gone against 262's in a zeke in WB's I died often, but I did kill one (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) now that is competitive.
------------------
pzvg- "5 years and I still can't shoot"
-
TEMPEST! TEMPEST! TEMPEST! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
Quote RAM
=============================================
Before they flew against V-1s, But I dont regard that as combat missions...not at all.
=============================================
In that case i don't regard shooting down bombers as combat missions (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
Originally posted by jmccaul:
In that case i don't regard shooting down bombers as combat missions (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
At least the bombers fire back!! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
bombs have a tenndancy to explode when you fire at them (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
V-1, Runstang - what's the difference?
-
Originally posted by jmccaul:
bombs have a tenndancy to explode when you fire at them (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
And bombers used to go at 25K feet escorted by P51s and P47s (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
What degree of danger do you need to encounter before you qualify for active service?
If V-1's had no significance in WW2 why did the RAF expend a lot effort shooting them down?
-
Originally posted by jmccaul:
What degree of danger do you need to encounter before you qualify for active service?
If V-1's had no significance in WW2 why did the RAF expend a lot effort shooting them down?
hey hey hey hey I dont say that V weapons had no significance in WW2...They had more significance AFTER the war (v1 the predeccesor of the cruise missile and V2 the predeccesor of the Ballistic missile)...but in the meanwhile 500kg of TNT in the middle of london was quite a threat.
I dont say that hunting V1s were easy thing...what I say is that it was easier than to deal with a thousand bombers escorted by hundred of fighters. Its different, but you must agree with me that the latter missions are more hard.
Meteors also hunted V1s, and noone regard that as air combats. Is a hazard mission but its not an AIR combat mission.
IMHO.
-
My only experience with the 262 was AW...and it was an irrelevant plane when they let em in. The dora was much more dangerous as far as i'm concerened...now that was a decidedly different enviornment and FM...but even so if it's modeled like I think AH will be interesting plane.
-
Was the German invasion of Poland "combat" for the Luftwaffe? Or the early stages of Barbarossa? The invasion of Greece?
In all these cases the Germans had suprise, numbers (at least locally) amd vastly superior equipment on their side. A lot easier than shooting down V1s, imho.
-
Originally posted by Nashwan:
Was the German invasion of Poland "combat" for the Luftwaffe? Or the early stages of Barbarossa? The invasion of Greece?
In all these cases the Germans had suprise, numbers (at least locally) amd vastly superior equipment on their side. A lot easier than shooting down V1s, imho.
Humpf...I guess that the downed Ju87s and ME110s over poland disagree. And the me109s over France. And Remember, that the Greek AF had been fighting Italian AF for one full year, and that yugoslavian AF had Me109Es...
Anyway, and to my point. A V1 is a fast, not evading, not shooting flying bomb. Even polish Plz11 had 2 machineguns and tried to kill their enemy. V1s only exploded.
Nashwan IMHO yours is not a valid argument, because V1 were DUMB weapons. And even an outclassed airplane has an intelligent pilot, so making it a much more dangerous opponent than a V1.
So, again V1 hunting cant be classified as Air to air combat. Maybe they were combat missions but in an Air to air combat you fight AGAINST an aircraft, not a dumb bomb that goes the same heading and altitude all the time.
[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 06-25-2000).]
-
Originally posted by Nashwan:
Was the German invasion of Poland "combat" for the Luftwaffe? Or the early stages of Barbarossa? The invasion of Greece?
In all these cases the Germans had suprise, numbers (at least locally) amd vastly superior equipment on their side. A lot easier than shooting down V1s, imho.
Wow that is the stupidest thing I have read in awhile...
Do you have any idea how many German pilots died flying in those campaigns?
Do you know that there was a Hurricane pilot that reportedly claimed 50 kills during the Greece campaign?
How many pilots died droping V1s?
I used to think you were just a rabid and narrow minded proponent of the RAF in the game. Your above statement leads me to believe you might just not be worth discussing things with.
EDIT
but I agree with you that shooting down V1s is definatly "combat". My objection to the XIV is based on the IX being more then good enough for the arena balance. Not on any assumption that the XIV was not a valid combat aircraft in 1944. I feel it may be in the catagory of the 262...just too imbalancing. The combat accounts I read of the spit XIV vs the 190d9 indicated to me that the spit eat them up...but the LW had few good pilots by that time so who knows.
[This message has been edited by Pongo (edited 06-27-2000).]
-
Ahm, excuse me?
1939 was not combat for the LW?
Hmm, I guess its just a myth that the LW lost as many aircraft to the Poles as they shot down - the PZL P.11c for example, had a kill ratio of almost 1 to 1. This is quite remarkable considering that the main Polish fighter was 100 kmh slower then the Bf109D, and as someone said, it had 2 machine guns (although some versions had 4).
-----------------------
S/L skalski
No. 308 (Polish) Sqn
Royal Air Force
-
Exactly
and the balkan campaign was just as bad.
This guy doesnt have a clue
-
I applaud you for your skill at pissing off both the Allies AND Axis with that comment Nashwan
-
Ok guys ppl make mistakes now lets get back to the spit 14 , eh? ;-p. And i suport the spit 14 btw, even tho RAM will probably tell me that my opinion is worth nothing.
-
Isn't she lovely ?
(http://perso.libertysurf.fr/Batfredland/SpitMKXVISqn340en41945.jpeg)
-
Originally posted by straffo:
Isn't she lovely ?
(http://perso.libertysurf.fr/Batfredland/SpitMKXVISqn340en41945.jpeg)
Sure it is lovely...it is a Spit XVI!!! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
Torquila------>I wont fall in your trap, Mr Burglar.
-
I know ram (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
But in real life (tm) I'm a glider pilot so I don't realy care of the performances (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
I just want a pretty plane (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
However in MA I'm like you a 190A8 fan (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
<edit>
more (http://perso.libertysurf.fr/Batfredland/G03_SpitfireMkXVINZ.jpg)
(http://perso.libertysurf.fr/Batfredland/G20_SpitfireLfIX.jpeg)
I've to admit it ...even if I don't like flying the spitfire I'm in love with her (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
but my all time favorite is
(http://perso.libertysurf.fr/Batfredland/G28_2Su27et1F15.jpg)
hint : she's not build in the USA (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
[This message has been edited by straffo (edited 06-26-2000).]
-
DING! sorry folks, V1's don't count (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
(anything you can <shoot down> by flying alongside and tipping it over with your wing hardly counts as combat,dangerous yes)
And y'all missed the point{again} I don't care if the 262,D9,and 14 show up,in fact I'd like 'em all to show up, but this whole pointless debate about performance numbers,"uberness" god I'm starting to hate that word,yada yada, It don't mean squat ok?
If I'm up in a spit 14,and encounter Mitsu in a zeke, the chances are damn good I'm gonna die. Is the zeke overmodelled? no if anything it's Mitsu that's overmodelled (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
My point(read slowly so this time it sinks in) on any given day in any given aircraft, you WILL find somebody up there who is having a much better day than you are. And you will go down in flames,and when you start hollering about Uber this or Overmodelled that, all you do is take that rare experience of going up against a live foe and turn it into a disgraceful playground squabble that would shame my 8 year old. Enough is enough, start enjoying what you have here, hell, the way some of you carry on, start enjoying life in general.
Most folks are in this game for recreation, that's spelled fun, and I sense that some of you have a rather weird,(and not very healthy) idea of what fun is. Which is your problem, The constant on-running tit for tat verbal exchange of vitrol, both here and on Ch1, that's my problem, mine and the guys who don't bother to post or reply. Be civil, you are entitled to your opinion,evry last one of you, but you are not entitled to act like a crowd of foul-mouthed,overbearing 16 year old Quake doods (stereotype,lotta cool 16 yr olds here) Just stop the bitterness ok?
Be what you were when you came into this hobby, excited,happy,enjoying every dogfight.
Don't lose what you have folks, 'cuz at this rate you gonna have a shiny new plane,and no one to fly it against.
(exceedingly long rant post off,in fact post mode off,this was the swan song of reason, I have better things to do. From now on)
------------------
pzvg- "5 years and I still can't shoot"
-
My point is that V1's while not air-to-air it is "action" think of it as ground attack in the air. Also a not insignificant number of people died attacking V1's and if you read "my part of the sky" by Roland Beaumont you will see the pilots were very weary of shooting these things down.
-
Originally posted by Pongo:
Originally posted by Nashwan:
Was the German invasion of Poland "combat" for the Luftwaffe? Or the early stages of Barbarossa? The invasion of Greece?
In all these cases the Germans had suprise, numbers (at least locally) amd vastly superior equipment on their side. A lot easier than shooting down V1s, imho.
Originally posted by Pongo:
Wow that is the stupidest thing I have read in awhile...
Do you have any idea how many German pilots died flying in those campaigns? .
Not enough.
Originally posted by Pongo:
Do you know that there was a Hurricane pilot that reportedly claimed 50 kills during the Greece campaign?
Never heard of him. Please enlighten me as to this Allied ace, who must surely have been one of the top Allied pilots of WW2.
Originally posted by Pongo:
How many pilots died droping V1s?
Too many.
Originally posted by Pongo:
I used to think you were just a rabid and narrow minded proponent of the RAF in the game. Your above statement leads me to believe you might just not be worth discussing things with.
Pongo, I used to think you werte just a rabid supporter of the Luftwaffe. I am not so sure anymore. Every German plane was the greatest thing ever created. The Luftwaffe thugs who murdered thousands and helped to murder tens of millions are Heroes to you. Don't you think that is strange?
My comments were in response to this from RAM:
I dont say that hunting V1s were easy thing...what I say is that it was easier than to deal with a thousand bombers escorted by hundred of fighters. Its different, but you must agree with me that the latter missions are more hard.
Were the early German invasions that hard? That seemed to me to be the hurdle that RAM was trying to set for combat missions. As is usuall, it is one rule for the Luftwaffe and another for everyone else.
Do I believe that shooting V1s was harder than the early German invasions? No. Do I think shooting down V1s was combat? Yes, undoubtedly. Those pilots were risking their lives in combat against the enemy.
I don't know if you do it deliberately or not, but you constantly try to claim the superiority of German equipment, German tactics, and above all German pilots. Anything, like the Spitfire 14, that doesn't fit in with that warped view of the world is ignored, or trivialised, or simply lied about. Wasn't it Dr Goebbels who said "tell a lie, tell it often enough and people will believe it"? The Spitfire was superior to other German planes at the time, but that doesn't fir in with your view of the master race, so it must be changed. The facts of it's performance are freely available, so the time of the Spitfire must be changed, so that it can be favourably compared to a German plane. Problem solved, Germans once again the superior race.
Pongo, you frighten me. There used to be a Dutch/Jewish branch to my family. They were distant relatives, who I probably wouldn't evven know about if not for WW2. Now they are gone. I worry that with people like you rewriying history, saying the Germans were better than everybody else, that it could all happen again.
[This message has been edited by Nashwan (edited 06-26-2000).]
[This message has been edited by Nashwan (edited 06-26-2000).]
-
I only say this. I am saying that Spit XIV is too uber for the MA...that seems to be like I say that a brit plane was better than Anything the germans could field to counter it...exception made of the Me262, but that is another story.
I simply refuse to answer any more posts of this moron. I hope that the rest of the people with a single neuron in the brain supports the boykott.
-
Nashwan.
You have some big decisions to make.
The whole premise of your accusation that I am a Nazi seems to be that I think the German planes were better then the allied planes.
But the whole point of this argument (was) that the Spit XIV is too supperior to the german and american and russian and japanese and italian planes for the game to handle.
You better come up with some theory about my political bias to explain that.
In your confused mind that means I think the germans were supperior. I can see how it is easier to make silly accusations about my pollitical beliefs to match your silly concepts of the air war in europe but you would be better served to read some of my posts on what I think about those nazi butchers and a few books more in depth than squadron signal Spitfire in Action.
So I am pulling a goebles am I..
Some one said that the Balkan Invasion and the Invasion or Poland were equivilent to shooting down V1s.
I think you just said that cause you got a head of steam going and do not know any better. Both operations where very grimly fought in the air and the loses on the germans side were quite heavy.
I dont have the numbers in front of me but I would wager that the loses in AC to V1s were near identical to non operational attrition losses for the same forces in the same period.
It was probably more dangorous to land at a fighter strip in normandy than to shoot down v1s.
The allies did not count a V1 kill to be anywhere equivilent to a plane kill, strange that you do.I will let the readers of the post decide who is rewritting history and who is not.
As to the Hurricane ace. I believe his name was Tuttle(i believe). He died fighting that little skirmish and the records of his kills were lost in the evacuation. His fellow pilots credited him with 50 or so kills.
Yes he would have been the top scoreing western allied ace of the war if its true. (You didnt revise the Russians out of the war did you?)
-
First, I am sorry for some of my comments. I perhaps went too far, as I recieved some very bad news yesterday.
I didn't mean to imply you were a Nazi, I just believe that the more the "heroes" of the third Reich are venerated, the easier it is to forget the atrocities the Nazi's carried out. In 50 years time, when people only remember how the "heroes" fought bravely to defend their country against overwelhming odds, what is to stop it happening again? Veneration of ANY part of Nazi Germany is in my view dangerous. Whilst I am not accusing you of being a Nazi, neo-Nazis in Europe admire the German military, and their "Heroic" exploits, much more than they admire the Holocaust. Nazi's would like nothing more than to have such unpleasant details forgotten, and only the "glorious" parts of the Third Reich remebered.
The Hurricane pilot you are reffering to is Pat Patte, I believe. Anywhere from 40-60 kills. Most of those were against the Italians, long before the Germans entered the Balkan campaign.
As I said, I intended to draw comparison to RAMs comment that if it wasn't going up against thousands of bombers escorted against hundreds of bombers, it wasn't combat. Viewed against that yardstick, it wasn't combat. Against any reasonable measure, it was. As was flying at 400mph at low level, and ramming another aircraft with your wingtip, because the risk of firing at the V1 was so great. Several pilots died intercepting V1s, yet they are dismissed as non combat casualties. That is unfair.
-
Thanks for your statements.
It is unfortunate that the discussion was sidetracked away from the SpitXIV.
While I dissagree with your statements about how easy the mentioned campaigns were, my dissagreement was mostly about the revisionism required for your statment to be true. Not because I feel there was any heroism involved in the german efforts in those campaigns.
I aggree with you about the dates of introduction of the spit XIV. I also agree that it is definatly "combat" to shoot down V1s. The V1s were the biggest threat the germans presented in the air in early 1944. The Brits put their best planes there to contest it and take advantage of the extra speed of the XIV. They could have put those planes anywhere. If the germans had been able to put AC over england in daylight in early 1944, they would have been met by spit XIV. So what they shot down is a mute point to me.
Good luck with the spit XIV campaign
-
Nash, clearly you have little idea about the early pre-Battle or Britian or pre-Pearl Harbor war. I am not suprised, since many people in the US are like you.
What ticked me off is your attitude and comments to Pongo. I also disagree with him about the Mk14, but its just a conflict of opinions about a game - camparing him to a nazi just becasue he loves LW iron is quite sad.
...and PS, you should REALLY read up on that early war stuff. 1939 or other compaigns were just as much a "real" and "bloody" as the early Japanese victories in the Pacific, or the Battle of the Bulge (so famous in the US).
-------------------------------
S/L Skalski
No. 308 (Polish) Sqn
Royal Air Force
-
RF-A you mean Nashwan right, not Nash?
-
hehe, yup - sorry Nash! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
uhmm..hmph..aaa... OH YES !!! Bring V-1 TO AH !!!
-
Why no Spit XIV? AFAIK Spit XIV had excelent top speed, excelent acceleration, excelent climb rate, good turning rates, but poor high speed control and average roll rate. IMO, 190D9 is a much more dangerous opponent. It had excelent top speed, excelent acceleration, good climb rate, poor turning rates but excelent high speed control and roll rate. In fact, 190A5 or even A8 could be more than a match for any Spit XIV, remember that this is "The Arena", not a 1 vs 1.
-
I didn't mean to compare Pongo, or anyone else, to a Nazi. I am not very good at getting my message across most of the time.
I would like to try to explain why I overreacted like that.
Luftwaffe fans have frequently stated the opinion that the Spit 14 was not active before Oct 1944 because fighting against V-1s doesn't count. That is an opinion I don't share. It required skill and courage to shopot down a V-1, most pilots though ramming them whilst flying at 400mph was safer than opening fire on one, that shopuld tell you the danger involved. I can find no record of the number of pilots killed, only 1 book lists several, and names one pilot, Jean-Marie Maridor DFC, who died making his eleventh V-1 kill.
Despite the fact that pilots died doing what Luft fans dismiss as not even worthy of being called combat,any challenges to the Luft point of view are made quite peacefully by RAF supporters. No insults are flung, it is just politely challenged.
I posted a light hearted jibe at the Luftwaffe, claiming they had it easy early in the war. It was my intention, when this was challenged, to point out that RAM was saying combating V-1s wasn't combat because it wasn't as difficult as the job Luft pilots had in 44, intercepting huge American bomber formations with their enormous fighter escorts. Judged by that standard, what the Luftwaffe did early in the war wasn't combat. Judged by any normal standard it was.
Wat shocked me was the vehemence of the reaction of the Luft supporters. I would have expected something similar if I had walked into a mosque and shouted "Mohammed was a liar". In fact I am still expecting the JG2 Fatwah any day.
I underestimated the devotion of some people to the Luftwaffe. To me they were another part of the Nazi regime, one of the military arms that was used to futher oppresion and tyranny.
I have no respect for the Luftwaffe. They may have been brave and skilled, but they were brave and skilled murderers. No German had as much oportunity to defect as a pilot, and few defections would have been as benifical to the Allies as that of a pilot with his aircraft. Several Luftwaffe pilots did, and they, in my opinion, are the only Heroes the Luftwaffe produced during the war.
Luftwaffe pilots killed their enemies in the service of the Nazi regime, and it shocked me how so many people leapt to their defence with such passion.
As I said, I don't consider someone with a passion for the Luftwaffe a Nazi. That doesn't mean that I don't thing the glamourization and hero worship of the Luftwaffe isn't dangerous. Glamourize the Luft and some of that glamour rubs off on the rest of Nazi Germany. It is that which worries me. A man like Haider in Austria doesn't go around praising the concentration camps, he praises the bravery and skill of the German (and Austrian) fighters.
In short, I was disgusted by the attitude that a true hero like Jean-Marie Maridor did nothing, not even worthy of being called combat, whilst people leap to defend German pilots who may have been more skillful, may have been as brave, but were not fit to lick the boots of a man like Jean Marie Maridor.
Rfa, I am British not American. I do know about the early war, and I am sorry if my comments offended you. I did not mean to imply the Poles put up little resistance to the Nazis, and if thats the way it came across I am sorry. I know how fierce the fighting was early in the war, and I also know that in most cases the Luftwaffe had not only the advantage of suprise but numbers and superior equipment.
[This message has been edited by Nashwan (edited 06-29-2000).]
-
Originally posted by MANDOBLE:
Why no Spit XIV? AFAIK Spit XIV had excelent top speed, excelent acceleration, excelent climb rate, good turning rates, but poor high speed control and average roll rate. IMO, 190D9 is a much more dangerous opponent. It had excelent top speed, excelent acceleration, good climb rate, poor turning rates but excelent high speed control and roll rate. In fact, 190A5 or even A8 could be more than a match for any Spit XIV, remember that this is "The Arena", not a 1 vs 1.
Mandoble D9's acceleration wont be better than A5's. SpitXIV's acceleration is better than 109G10's.Watch the powerloading of both planes. Climbrate has the same problem.
And Hispeed maneouverability? is that so SERIOUS problem? Spit XIV should have way better hispeed handling than 109G10 and he all know how dangerous a G10 is in AH.
I still keep on saying that the monster would unbalance the arena. A d9 wouldnt.
-
RAM, D9 (MW50) acceleration should be better than A5 and even better than Spit XIV, and high speed, and, of course, high speed handling, IMO, is the most important thing for this arena. For example, 109G10 acceleration and top speed are superb, but in a high speed duel, P51 can fight them without problems. Spit XIV can negate 109G10, ok, but not the 190 series. And dont try to compare 109G10 with 190D9, 109G10 has just no chances (stalemate or dead). I thought you knew what 190 was able to do ...
-
Originally posted by MANDOBLE:
RAM, D9 (MW50) acceleration should be better than A5 and even better than Spit XIV
So a 2000hp plane way lighter than Fw190D9 has worse acceleration than a 2100hp heavier plane?...that doesnt sound very well, MANDOBLE (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
and high speed, and, of course, high speed handling, IMO, is the most important thing for this arena. For example, 109G10 acceleration and top speed are superb, but in a high speed duel, P51 can fight them without problems. Spit XIV can negate 109G10, ok, but not the 190 series. And dont try to compare 109G10 with 190D9, 109G10 has just no chances (stalemate or dead). I thought you knew what 190 was able to do ...
I know what is 190 able to do. I know, too what is a 109 able to do. And believe me, hispeed handling doesnt matter at all if you are good pilot enough. Of course some planes will be able to run from you, but still noone will catch you.
And the only handling problem with spits was the poor rollrate. Elevator control was just as good at 400IAS than at 200IAS.
D9 is fast. SpitXIV faster
D9 accelerates well. Spit XIV accelerates better
D9 has good weaposn. Spit XIV has better.
D9 climbs quite well. SpitXIV climbs like a rocket.
The only 2 advantages on a D9 are rollrate and range. And while rollrate means a lot in combat range means nothing.
SpitXIV would outclass anything in MA. do you want to see an arena full of spits?
I dont.
-
Do I realy need to post this again?...
(http://www.mindspring.com/~nathownsj00/ww2/spitXIVvs109190.gif)
[This message has been edited by Nath-BDP (edited 06-30-2000).]
-
With the introduction of A-5, my opinion is that it can defend itself against Spit XIV. It can't press fight against it, only defend itself and even capitalize on Spit pilot's bigger mistakes. In fact, I'd rather chose A-5 over G-10 to fight Spit XIV. The planes are way different and it can be exploited in combat, while G-10 and Spit XIV are more similar. However, lack of speed will make it easier for Spits to gangbang A-5, while being able to escape if things get rough. Still, there will be many long faced RAF types after they tangle with properly flown A-5 (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Dora, on the other hand, can fight Spit XIV on equal footing. Partly because of increased performance over A series, partly because 190 pilots are better than Spit types. How's that for a bait ? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Spit XIV top speed, climb and acceleration means little in an arena enviroment. Dora's dive, deck speed, and high speed maneuvering are far more important IMO. Unlike A-5, dora can actually disengage.
262 ? Oh boy, BnZing the arena, listening to favourite music, talking to your wife, eating popcorn.
-
Totally agree with you Hristo, but IMO, A5 can press fight against Spit XIV. Remember, in this arena we dont need to fly alone, team work will do the rest.
-
Nath-BDP, your scan do not specify wich version of 190A is refering to (suppose 190A4). And when talking about the DB603, the comparison is based on estimations only, not in facts.
RAM, do your 190A5 use MW50? 190D9 do.
190D9
Empty weight 7694 lb
Junkers Jumo 213A-1 rated at 1,776 hp. (2,240 hp. with MW-50 boost)
T/W = 0.29 hp/lb
For more info about this engine: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/hzoe/ju_eng.htm (http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/hzoe/ju_eng.htm)
Spit XIV:
Empty weight 6,576
Griffon 65 rated at 2,035 hp (7000 feet).
T/W = 0.30 hp/lb
Spit XIV range is very short, so, if we add some fuel to have the same range than 190D9, the T/W ratio would be the same.
-
Another thing to remember is that both the Spit 14 and the Dora have more powerful engines but no more internal fuel tankage than their predecessors. With the bizarre fuel consumption rates in the AH Main Arena this will be a large factor.
-
Those estimations are in your favor, yet proven false by actual post-war numbers.
Also... MW 50 doesn't last forever ya know, and try reading the whole report, it states that the XIV climbs better than the IX, turns the same and rolls the same.
This means that your gonna have a Spit thats 40 mph faster than the IX, climbs better, turns the same, rolls the same, etc. The only drawback its going to have is high speed handling... no problem here, cut throttle and wait till your opponent lvls out and get him then.
-
The report says the turning circles are identical. To me this means radius. No measurements of turn rate are given. Also they note a variation between left and right turns, but no such variation existed for the IX AFAIK. It's a very inexact comparison.
Turning ability in this sim seems very sensitive to weight. As I've said before, to see what a 500 hp increase in power and a 1000 lb increase in weight does to turning ability in this sim, compare the Me 109G-2 and Me 109G-10.
[This message has been edited by funked (edited 06-30-2000).]
-
OK, I am all for Spit XIV in AH. Bring it in.
That way Dora will be closer too.
-
YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAW N
Whats the point, we all know its TOO UBER FOR THE GAME.
-
Nath,
If you put SpitXIV is uber category, just don't forget to include other late war planes in there.
mx22
-
I have no problem with it if its a 'perk' plane, whatever that turns out to be, as long as I get D-12.
-
Originally posted by Nath-BDP:
I have no problem with it if its a 'perk' plane, whatever that turns out to be, as long as I get D-12.
Whatever you LW whiners say (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif) If SpitXIV goes go to perk plane, so will FW190D9 and D12 for that matter. But then to bring Spitfire line to at least 43 line, I'll demand something like SpitVIII for regular set. I guess it still will be too much for you guys anyway - you'll be satisfied only when you can fly 1945 plane against 1941 Allied set.
P.S. As some of you LW boys love to say, AH is not a game, but simulation. So why can't I fly 1944-5 RAF plane against 1944-5 LW planes? Looking at the arena stats, seems like not so many LW boys ashamed to fly BF109G10 against RAF 1942 set. Ohh well, I've got my Jug now to play with until I get later model of Spitfire so watch above you cause you bet I'll be there. And I bet this time around it wont be so easy for you to run away from me (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
mx22
-
will the 51-D be a perk plane (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
You guys better get along before I have ta use some karate on ya's. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
(http://animationfactory.tripod.com/animgifs/creatures/character2/infant/kick_lg_wht.gif)
[This message has been edited by hblair (edited 06-30-2000).]
-
Sorry for reviving this, but I've found some figures for the RAF losses incurred against the V-1s.
Firstly, the Luftwaffes losses during the Polish campaign are given as
285 aircraft destroyed
279 damaged
734 crewmen dead
by Janusz Piekalkiewicz in The Air War 1939 - 1945
and as
203 destroyed
221 crew killed
218 missing (50 subsequently returned to unit)
by Anthony Robinson in Aerial Warfare
Both books list approx 2000 planes commited by the Luft, as against approx 400 obselescent Polish aircraft.
The number of killed in the Janusz Piekalkiewicz book seems too high, at approx 3 dead per aircraft destroyed. As it has been translated from the Polish I suspect killed has been substitued for casualties, which would include dead wounded and missing.
That works out at approx 10-14% of Luftwaffe aircraft destroyed, and with approx 6500 aircrew (there were far more bombers than fighters in the forces the Luft deployed) a total of 3-3.5% aircrew dead.
The New Zealand Fighter Pilots website lists the casualties for 486 squadron. Flying Tempests, one squadron alone lost 17 aircraft destroyed, another 17 damaged and 3 pilots killed. I don't even begin to know how to work that out, as it represents over 100% aircraft destroyed, another 100% damaged and a pilot casualty rate of approx 25%.
Granted the anti Diver campaign lasted jsut over twice as long as the Polish campaign, but as you can see the comparison I made in the begining was valid.
-
Nath, D-12 was a few prototypes. No soup for you!
[This message has been edited by funked (edited 07-02-2000).]
-
The D-12/13 saw service.
-
tsk tsk tsk
Now how many times am I gonna have to post the same performance chart for you guys. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/tongue.gif)
The D12 was a high altitude variant, its low altitude performance STINKS. The D9 is a much better performer for the arena, by far. Compare the following chart to D9 performance, and then tell me if you want the D12 or D9
(http://web.mountain.net/~arringto/ta152/ta152-3.jpg)
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
"Real Men fly Radials, Nancy Boys fly Spitfires"
-
Umm, I can't make out anything in on that chart.
The D-12 was a ground-attack fighter and supplanted the D-9 in production during February or March 1945 on the production lines operated by Arado and Fieseler. Fitted also with 2x 20mm MG151/20 and Mk 108. Most of the D-12s never saw service but very few did.
-
Surely the tempest and Spit 14 are complementary - & should not be forced choices.
1. The Spit 14 is the RAF's first line high Altitude fighter from mid 1944.
2. The Tempest is the RAF's first line Low altitude fighter from Mid 1944
Closterman (who led a Tempest wing) said that pilots from spit 9 squadrons should convert to spiot 14 and from typhoon squadrons should convert to Tempest
I would like to see both modelled.
-
Oh...yeah baby that spit looks real nice, ya mean on a co-alt merge i can pull the stick back and watch the 109 fall under me...heheheh. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
It would be a forced comprimise due to many people thinking the spit 14 would dominate the arena - despite the RAE judging the tempest 5 to be better under 20k
(although most of the same people believe the 262 would be a welcome addition to the planeset)
-
Lets see some betty bombers with Baka bombs (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
Baka... the ultimate boom and zoom..and BOOOMM!!! Aircraft!
-
Originally posted by Nashwan:
Sorry for reviving this, but I've found some figures for the RAF losses incurred against the V-1s.
Firstly, the Luftwaffes losses during the Polish campaign are given as
285 aircraft destroyed
279 damaged
734 crewmen dead
by Janusz Piekalkiewicz in The Air War 1939 - 1945
and as
203 destroyed
221 crew killed
218 missing (50 subsequently returned to unit)
by Anthony Robinson in Aerial Warfare
Both books list approx 2000 planes commited by the Luft, as against approx 400 obselescent Polish aircraft.
The number of killed in the Janusz Piekalkiewicz book seems too high, at approx 3 dead per aircraft destroyed. As it has been translated from the Polish I suspect killed has been substitued for casualties, which would include dead wounded and missing.
That works out at approx 10-14% of Luftwaffe aircraft destroyed, and with approx 6500 aircrew (there were far more bombers than fighters in the forces the Luft deployed) a total of 3-3.5% aircrew dead.
The New Zealand Fighter Pilots website lists the casualties for 486 squadron. Flying Tempests, one squadron alone lost 17 aircraft destroyed, another 17 damaged and 3 pilots killed. I don't even begin to know how to work that out, as it represents over 100% aircraft destroyed, another 100% damaged and a pilot casualty rate of approx 25%.
Granted the anti Diver campaign lasted jsut over twice as long as the Polish campaign, but as you can see the comparison I made in the begining was valid.
Sofar we have 735 German air crew dead against 3.
And 2000 German Aircraft against 400(excellently flown)
vs 5000 allied aircraft against none..
I am glad you are researching. But you gotta take those blinders off to get anything from it.
Many of the pilots that participated on the Polish side of case white were flying against the buzz bombs too.. Wonder how they would compare the two.
Individual pilots shot down 60 v1s.. did any v1s shoot down multiple planes.
I will try to look up some info on losses to V1s. Like I said I know its combat. I know those 3 guys died fighting the enemy as much as anyone else in any war ever. But I still think your comparison is nonsence. The Germans had the allies overwhelmed numerically at malta. Was that the same as V1s too?
-
So far we have 221 aircrew dead, not 735. If you have also found the 735 figure, then I stand corrected, but I am sure the 735 figure is a miss translation of casualties, which would include prisoners and wounded. A figure of 3 dead per plan seems too high to me. If you take the BOB as an example, on average 1 German bomber (Do17, Ju88 or He111) destroyed resulted in 1.5 dead Crewman. When you add in the fighters and Ju87s, the result is less than 1 dead crewman per destroyed plane. I doubt that ratio would have been 5 times higher in Poland.
There were never 5000 fighters against the V-1s. ADGB comitted 8 day fighter squadrons and 4 night fighter squadrons. I only know the losses for 1 squadron definately. 486 sqd lost 3 pilots and 17 aircraft.
I have since found at least 2 pilots of 91 sqd that were killed, and another 2 from 322 sqd, which brings us to at least 7 from 3 squadrons. (Note, these are from the descriptions of individual pilot deaths, not a complete record of the numbers killed)Obviously the total is not going to get as high as the death toll in Poland, if every pilot from those 12 squadrons was killed it still wouldn't add up to the numbers the far larger Luftwaffe force lost. Comparing raw numbers is nonsense. If every single one of the 957 Spit XIVs built was shot down, the total number of pilot deaths (about 1 in 4 planes destroyed seems to be average) would only equal the Luft losses in Poland.
The Luftwaffe suffered losses of approx 3-4% of aircrew and 10-15% of aircraft. For the 3 squadrons I have found so far the RAF losses were at approx 20%.
Of course it's possible the RAF squadrons had a much higher percentage of bad pilots, but it seems to me more likely that having to intercept such large numbers of V-1s was risky, and that the small risk each time finally caught up with the pilots. Having to shoot down the final total of approx 2000 V-1s, or ram them if that seemed a safer bet (can't you see how dangerous it was if ramming a bomb travelling at 400mph was seen as a safer alternative?), meant enormous risks for those pilots.
The fact remains that for those tasked with intercepting V-1s it was more risky that the task of a German pilot tasked with attacking Poland.
As to Malta, unlike the Polish airforce, the defenders at least had fairly modern planes. They had the benefit of radar to warn them of incoming German raids. Polish pilots flew outdated aircraft, often with only a 50% ammo load because of supply problems.
As to the Polish pilots who carried on the war from Britain, I am sure they would rate flying against the overwhelming odds they faced in 1939 as more difficult. I claimed that shooting down V-1s was harder than being a German pilot then, not harder than being a Polish pilot.
-
You need to post more specific numbers about losses to V1s befor you should say you were right.
Here is an account by Alfered Price about V1 intercepting from Wings of Fame 16.
"About 90% of the V1s shot down by fighters fell out of control and detonated upon hitting the ground; the rest detonated in mid-air. Provided the fighter was more than 150 yds(137m) from the explosion, there was little risk of serios damage. Somtimes fighters suffered minor damage if they flew through a cloud of burning petrol from the missle's fuel tank after the detonation, or were hit by small pieces of wreckage hurled great distances by the force of the explosion. It could be hazardous if the fighter pilots engaged flying bombs from within 150 yd, however."
What possible reason could the most published Spitfire expert have for down playing the danger of engaging V1s.
Every account I have ever read follows the same thread.
If you want to make a case. Show quotes that say-
Such and such squadron lost 17 planes in 4 months to exploding v1s.
Not they lost so many planes in so much time. They lost em to what?
The details of pilots lost are not even necessary to go into. If the Germans only lost 150 guys that is 5 squadrons of tempests.
Your own numbers make your assertion that V1 intercepting was equivelent to poland the balkans or barbarosa silly.
Perhaps you need to be reminded what you said...
"Was the German invasion of Poland "combat" for the Luftwaffe? Or the early stages of Barbarossa? The invasion of Greece?
In all these cases the Germans had suprise, numbers (at least locally) amd vastly superior equipment on their side. A lot easier than shooting down V1s, imho.
"
Look at that last sentence. It is rediculous.
My quote from Price totaly refutes it. The responses made concerning it were really quite tame. The numbers you present now are just more weight against your statment.
V1s where a real and deadly menace. But not to the RAF only to the civilians. The only casualty I found named was the same one you did.
GIVE IT UP
-
Pongo, all squadrons suffer attrition from non combat losses. This applies to the Luftwaffe as well as the RAF. In fact it probably applies more to the Luft in Poland, who were operating in more difficult conditions, often from unprepared bases. The 109 also had a notoriously high number of landing accidents. If you want to claim that the losses suffered by the RAF squadrons intercepting V-1s were accidents, fine. Remeber that the Luft would also have suffered accidents too. To claim that the RAF suffered only the normal number of losses they would have had in non-combat operations is silly.
The details of pilots lost are not even necessary to go into. If the Germans only lost 150 guys that is 5 squadrons of tempests.
The Germans lost 250 planes out of 2000. "50 crew dead out of 6500. 1 RAF squadron alone lost 17 planes, 3 lost at least 20% of their pilots. You maintain the that a 3% loss rate shows a higher risk than a 20% loss rate? I'm sorry I just can't understand your thinking.
I have often seen quoted that the most dangerous branch of any military force to serve in during the war was the German U-Boat crews. Over 50% of them were killed (28,000 dead). Yet in your view it was safer to be a U-boat crewman than a British civillian (about 50,000 dead through bombing)
Not they lost so many planes in so much time. They lost em to what?
I have a few individual descriptions of combats in the Polish campaign, but the majority of losses could well be down to accidents, if I follow your twisted logic.
What do you believe caused all these losses?
Were the RAF pilots involved particualary inept?
Look at that last sentence. It is rediculous.
My quote from Price totaly refutes it.
Your quote from Price says that if a pilot shot down a V-1 from distance he was safe. The pilots had a mission to carry out, intercepting V-1s. That was often incompatible with staying safe. Shooting at a V-1 from 150-200 yards makes it difficult to score a kill, they were very small targets. Many pilots got to closer ranges to shoot them down, others rammed them. Is that perfectly safe?
I am attempting to find the total number of losses suffered by those 12 squadrons during the 2 months (not 4) that most of them spent engaging V-1s. I think the figure of 17 lost planes in 2 months is rather larger than nomal attrition, if that had been the normal rate then the RAF would have lost 1500 aircraft in acidents alone during the BOB, on top of what the Luft managed to do.
If I ever do find a total figure I will come back and argue with you, as you will obviously accept nothing else. If you haven't discovered what percentages are by then it will be a wasted effort however, because as I said if every single pilot had been killed in the explosion of a V-1 you will still claim it to be safer than Poland because there were simply not enough RAF pilots in 12 squadrons to equal the casualties almost the entire Luftwaffe sustained in Poland.
-
Nashwan,
It simply doesn't pay of to argue with Pongo. Trust me, I know it from my expirience. The guy will stand by his unproven point even after you give him what seems like a definate prove.
mx22
-
Ding! again Uboat losses were more on the order of 80% (ask Erich Topp if ya don't think so)
As to the rather silly discussion of V1 intercepts versus combat, a point.
Defusing an unexploded bomb is a dangerous,high risk job, fact.
Attacking a defended enemy position is about 4-5 times more dangerous than defusing a bomb,fact.
When I read statements dismissing the early war air battles as easy, or never in doubt, I laugh my bellybutton off, just before I get very quiet and very angry, You buncha loud talking clueless jerks! I don't have to ask if you've ever seen COMBAT, your statement makes it rather obvious. I don't think a Luftwaffe pilot in '39 would agree with your assesment of poland as a "cakewalk"
I also think any combat pilot will tell you that engaging what amounts to an explosive-filled target drone is much more preferable than air-to-air combat.
Hell, we get people run over by tanks every year, does that make it more dangerous than war?
I do not think it's even in the running.
-
pzvg,
You missing whole point here. Discussion is not what's more dangerous, but when SpitXIV entered service. Think what you want, say what you want, but SpitXIV was in operational squadrons before Dora even rolled of from assembly line. British government felt that it was important to put their best Spitfire into defence against V1, and that is the only reason it didn't went to frontline right away.
Now, I don't care what's more hazerdeous for pilots, but if you think that hunting down those V1 was a pice of cake, I bet you never seen REAL COMBAT either.
mx22
-
This is idiotic.
The first Spitfire XIV activity was to help prepare France for the D-Day invasions. They were doing fighter sweeps over France by May of '44. The first V-1 is launched against England on June 12th, '44. Therefore it doesn't matter whether the V-1s count as air combat for the purposes of this discussion because the Spitfire XIV's activity was not its first use.
January 4, 1944: 610 "County of Chester" Squadron activates with Spitfire MkXIVs
March, 1944: A Ju88 or Ju188 recon plane is shot down over England by a MkXIV Spitfire
April-May, 1944: Spitfire MkXIV participates in the lead up to D-Day
June 12, 1944: The first V-1 falls on England
September-October, 1944: First use of the Fw190D-9 in combat
Sisu
-Karnak
-
MX22 thank you for your overmodelled opinion
after you look up a couple of little things called "Certain fury" and "Just Cause" I would be glad to resume this funny little conversation (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif)
------------------
pzvg- "5 years and I still can't shoot"
-
Originally posted by Karnak:
This is idiotic.
The first Spitfire XIV activity was to help prepare France for the D-Day invasions. They were doing fighter sweeps over France by May of '44. The first V-1 is launched against England on June 12th, '44. Therefore it doesn't matter whether the V-1s count as air combat for the purposes of this discussion because the Spitfire XIV's activity was not its first use.
January 4, 1944: 610 "County of Chester" Squadron activates with Spitfire MkXIVs
March, 1944: A Ju88 or Ju188 recon plane is shot down over England by a MkXIV Spitfire
April-May, 1944: Spitfire MkXIV participates in the lead up to D-Day
June 12, 1944: The first V-1 falls on England
September-October, 1944: First use of the Fw190D-9 in combat
Sisu
-Karnak
Agreed, stating that combat against V1s is not combat is silly. And insulting to the guys that died for us doing just that.
And that was not the first operational use of the XIV anyway.