Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: BnZs on April 19, 2009, 01:54:03 PM

Title: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: BnZs on April 19, 2009, 01:54:03 PM
Here is the situation as I see it:

When trying to fight SpitXVIs with an XIV at low altitude, you may say to yourself "Why the %$@$^@$ is this plane perked?"

However, if you were to attempt flying a P-51, P-47, 190, etc. and so forth in an arena with free SpitXIVs, you would no doubt soon say to yourself "Oh, THAT'S why it is perked."

So, compromise. Right now, the price of a XIV seems to be the same as the C-Hog. 13 points when I popped in there just a minute ago. Cut it in half I say. Sound good?
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: MstWntd on April 19, 2009, 02:06:09 PM
Think the spit14 is more than the chog at the moment, the average at least.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: StokesAk on April 19, 2009, 02:18:31 PM
Spit16 will beat the Spit14 anyday 20k and under. Just perk the 14 something around 5 and the 16 at 15.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: FYB on April 19, 2009, 02:22:44 PM
Here is the situation as I see it:

When trying to fight SpitXVIs with an XIV at low altitude, you may say to yourself "Why the %$@$^@$ is this plane perked?"

However, if you were to attempt flying a P-51, P-47, 190, etc. and so forth in an arena with free SpitXIVs, you would no doubt soon say to yourself "Oh, THAT'S why it is perked."

So, compromise. Right now, the price of a XIV seems to be the same as the C-Hog. 13 points when I popped in there just a minute ago. Cut it in half I say. Sound good?
Fix the wings of the 14, unperk it, and perk the 16.

-FYB
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: MstWntd on April 19, 2009, 02:25:22 PM
Spit16 will beat the Spit14 anyday 20k and under. Just perk the 14 something around 5 and the 16 at 15.
With the arguments I've seen here, the Spit16 isn't perk worthy. I believe the 14's avg is around 20. Drop the 14's to 15 avg and bump the 16's to 5-10. that way the 16 is affordable but not a noob "go-to" ride.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: BnZs on April 19, 2009, 02:26:31 PM
Fix the wings of the 14, unperk it, and perk the 16.

-FYB

Whaddya mean, "fix the wings"? If it wasn't hard to handle I wouldn't even suggest cutting the price, much less eliminating it.

Even now, the SpitXIV is a more perkable plane than the 16. The XVI is as fast and greatly out-turns, out-climbs, and out-accelerates compared to many planes in the MA...the XIV would flat run down most of the MA while being double-superior to a great deal of it, and run with the fastest of the fast, while being greatly superior in turn and climb to them.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: MachFly on April 19, 2009, 02:33:37 PM
Spit16 will beat the Spit14 anyday 20k and under. Just perk the 14 something around 5 and the 16 at 15.

I have 64 kills on spit 14 right now, have not been killed by a spit 16 a single time. I killed a spit 16 10 times on spit 14.
So the way I see it, spit 14 will beat spit 16 anyday over 1K.


Here is the situation as I see it:

When trying to fight SpitXVIs with an XIV at low altitude, you may say to yourself "Why the %$@$^@$ is this plane perked?"

However, if you were to attempt flying a P-51, P-47, 190, etc. and so forth in an arena with free SpitXIVs, you would no doubt soon say to yourself "Oh, THAT'S why it is perked."

So, compromise. Right now, the price of a XIV seems to be the same as the C-Hog. 13 points when I popped in there just a minute ago. Cut it in half I say. Sound good?

cut what half way? the spit 14 of the C-hog? I say cut the C-hog a half way, because for some reason it has the same perk value as spit 14 just because of the guns.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Motherland on April 19, 2009, 02:35:18 PM
The Spitfire Mk XIV's climb rate is grossly over exaggerated. At no point does it really 'pwn' the Spitfire Mk XVI in climb rate (even above 20k, it doesn't outmatch the deficit it has against the XVI from 14-20). It's turn radius is pretty good, but even then it's only about half way in between the Bf.109K and the XVI with flaps up, and much closer to the Kurfuerst with flaps down. (it's slower than the latter aircraft at most altitudes (below 25k), and has a similar climb rate to it, BTW). On top of all of this, if you actually can get a good angle on someone, once you do fighting against that gargantuan Griffon engine is for the shot is not a pleasant experience. Even takeoff and landing the thing is not simple (not quite as hard as the Ta 152 though).


I have 64 kills on spit 14 right now, have not been killed by a spit 16 a single time. I killed a spit 16 10 times on spit 14.
So the way I see it, spit 14 will beat spit 16 anyday over 1K.
Last tour a third of my Dora kills were against the XVI, and I didn't die to one once either. Can we conclude that the Fw 190D-9 is a superior 1v1 fighter to the Spitfire MkXVI as well? :rofl

IMO the Spitfire MkXIV deserves to be perked about as much as the Ta 152H did/ the Bf 109K does.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: BnZs on April 19, 2009, 02:50:35 PM
Yeah, I mean approximately halve the SpitXIV price. 6-7 points on average sounds fair. I think the XVI should get 3-5.



IMO the Spitfire MkXIV deserves to be perked about as much as the Ta 152H did/ the Bf 109K does.

Ta-152-Has what, the 3rd or 4th worst turn radius in the set? Not a great climber.

109K-Great plane, but lousy views, dangerous to dive, and the 30mm is nowhere near dual Hispanos in effectiveness for most people.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: FYB on April 19, 2009, 02:51:59 PM
Whaddya mean, "fix the wings"? If it wasn't hard to handle I wouldn't even suggest cutting the price, much less eliminating it.

Even now, the SpitXIV is a more perkable plane than the 16. The XVI is as fast and greatly out-turns, out-climbs, and out-accelerates compared to many planes in the MA...the XIV would flat run down most of the MA while being double-superior to a great deal of it, and run with the fastest of the fast, while being greatly superior in turn and climb to them.
Dive with a 14 AND YOUR WINGS ARE GOING TO PLOP AWAY.

-FYB
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: BnZs on April 19, 2009, 02:56:40 PM
Dive with a 14 AND YOUR WINGS ARE GOING TO PLOP AWAY.

-FYB

Really? Because I just went into offline practice and did a full-throttle dive from 30K. The E6B gave me an IAS of 574mph right before it augered. The wings never came off.

Edit: And the thing can also stand a spike of at least 8 Gs on the pullout.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Motherland on April 19, 2009, 03:02:48 PM
The Ta 152 has superb high-altitude performance, great E retention, and an awesome gun package. Kinda like the Spitfire Mk XIV, except it's faster above 29K. It doesn't have as good a turn radius or climb rate though, even at this alt, though, but that doesn't matter because if you have speed you can dominate the fight, right? ;)


On the 109's views-- sure, you can say the Bf 109E, F, and G-2 have bad views. Maybe even the G-6. But by the G-14, with it's Erla Haube, the views are almost as good as a bubble-canopy plane. Better than the 190 at least, IMO, since the two bars it actually has are in a much more convenient place than the 190's one.
It's dive is not great, but far from 'dangerous'! In fact, I usually use the dive against Spitfires. If you can find the 'K' key, or use manual trim (as I do), you have to worry more about blackout than the responsiveness of the elevators. If you're going to call any dive 'dangerous', it would be the Spitfires, whose wings rip off at high speeds and high G-loads!
On top of all of that, though I would agree that the Hispano is a better weapon than the Mk108, it's effectiveness is drastically reduced when you're fighting the Griffon.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: BnZs on April 19, 2009, 03:20:47 PM
The Ta 152 has superb high-altitude performance, great E retention, and an awesome gun package. Kinda like the Spitfire Mk XIV, except it's faster above 29K. It doesn't have as good a turn radius or climb rate though, even at this alt, though, but that doesn't matter because if you have speed you can dominate the fight, right? ;)

If performance above 20K were very important in the MA, I'd wouldn't be saying the SpitXIV perk price needs to be reduced. A relative top speed advantage, in and of itself, lets you choose whether to fight or not, and lets you carry some extra E into the first merge, and not much else, by itself, it really does little to actually win the fight for you.

I've been in the 109K4 enough to compare views to that of the Spit, and I simply can't see what you are talking about. The front view in particular is still more obscured, and the head position in the 109 can't be raised over the nose as far as it can in the Spits. Frames get in the way in the various up-and-angled views to a greater extent.

I repeat: I dive tested the Spit14's wing and it was still there at 574mph IAS, and didn't break under an 8 G spike.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Motherland on April 19, 2009, 03:25:10 PM
I just did the same thing. First off I hit 609 as I hit the ground, and although I never lost wings to speed alone, every time I tried to pull out (even just under stick authority!) I lost my wings.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: BnZs on April 19, 2009, 03:31:58 PM
I just did the same thing. First off I hit 609 as I hit the ground, and although I never lost wings to speed alone, every time I tried to pull out (even just under stick authority!) I lost my wings.

Really? You have to easy around the compression/no compression line if you put in a lot of nose-up trim, but I wasn't having an problems trimming it out of compression dives without spiking the Gs.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: MachFly on April 19, 2009, 03:44:52 PM
The Spitfire Mk XIV's climb rate is grossly over exaggerated. At no point does it really 'pwn' the Spitfire Mk XVI in climb rate (even above 20k, it doesn't outmatch the deficit it has against the XVI from 14-20). It's turn radius is pretty good, but even then it's only about half way in between the Bf.109K and the XVI with flaps up, and much closer to the Kurfuerst with flaps down. (it's slower than the latter aircraft at most altitudes (below 25k), and has a similar climb rate to it, BTW). .
Can you give me an example of any aircraft that you think is significantly better?


Last tour a third of my Dora kills were against the XVI, and I didn't die to one once either. Can we conclude that the Fw 190D-9 is a superior 1v1 fighter to the Spitfire MkXVI as well? :rofl
:huh Yes, if your fast your in control of a fight.

On top of all of this, if you actually can get a good angle on someone, once you do fighting against that gargantuan Griffon engine is for the shot is not a pleasant experience. Even takeoff and landing the thing is not simple
I love that engine, never gives me any trouble.




If performance above 20K were very important in the MA, I'd wouldn't be saying the SpitXIV perk price needs to be reduced. A relative top speed advantage, in and of itself, lets you choose whether to fight or not, and lets you carry some extra E into the first merge, and not much else, by itself, it really does little to actually win the fight for you.

I've been in the 109K4 enough to compare views to that of the Spit, and I simply can't see what you are talking about. The front view in particular is still more obscured, and the head position in the 109 can't be raised over the nose as far as it can in the Spits. Frames get in the way in the various up-and-angled views to a greater extent.

I repeat: I dive tested the Spit14's wing and it was still there at 574mph IAS, and didn't break under an 8 G spike.

:aok
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: MachFly on April 19, 2009, 03:46:48 PM
Oh and just for the record, Spitfire mk XIV was the main air superiority fighter of the 2nd tactical air force.

What other fighter was build for air superiority purposes?
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: BnZs on April 19, 2009, 03:51:46 PM
Can you give me an example of any aircraft that you think is significantly better?

The SpitXVI, SpitVIII and 109K4 climb about as well from the deck to 20K. At some points slightly superior, at some points slightly inferior, but really very close at all points. The two former aircraft are significantly superior in wing-loading and E-retention under Gs. The latter aircraft is inferior in wing-loading but superior in handling, speed, and WEP duration below 20K.

 
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: MachFly on April 19, 2009, 03:58:11 PM
The SpitXVI, SpitVIII and 109K4 climb about as well from the deck to 20K. At some points slightly superior, at some points slightly inferior, but really very close at all points.

 

It can out climb spit 16 and 8 because it has a much more powerful engine. The the only reason the 109K has a comparable climb rate is because It's airframe is made out of wood.

And I said significantly better.
Can you give me an example of any aircraft that you think is significantly better?
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Karnak on April 19, 2009, 04:28:21 PM
The Spit XIV is such an awesome fighter that it has consistantly been the only perk fighter with a lower K/D ratio than some free fighters while also being the least used perk plane.


None of your arguments stand up to that.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: MachFly on April 19, 2009, 04:35:50 PM
The Spit XIV is such an awesome fighter that it has consistantly been the only perk fighter with a lower K/D ratio than some free fighters while also being the least used perk plane.


None of your arguments stand up to that.

because people don't know how to fly it

a few days ago i was on spit 9 and one guy (no names) tried to go into a turn fight with me on a spit 14, on the deck. He died within seconds.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: BnZs on April 19, 2009, 05:13:51 PM
You should really look an overlay of the performance curves before you post with such certainty.

Besides, if this really is your favorite damn plane in the MA, I'm proposing to make flying it cheaper for you.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: MstWntd on April 19, 2009, 05:16:34 PM
I'd have to say that any plane is better than another if someone knows how to fly it, but again it's based on the pilot, of course. i try to bnZ and vert more with the spit14, when I do fly it. You'll very rarely see me in spits anyway.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: BnZs on April 19, 2009, 05:17:17 PM
The Spit XIV is such an awesome fighter that it has consistantly been the only perk fighter with a lower K/D ratio than some free fighters while also being the least used perk plane.


None of your arguments stand up to that.

In isolation, usage and K/D arguments don't say all that much. The SpitXIV clearly has the *potential* to maintain a higher k/d than the C-Hog because of superior speed and energy performance. Perhaps the difference is the C-Hog is upped off carriers to vulch de-acked fields while the SpitXIV is not?
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Karnak on April 19, 2009, 05:57:14 PM
In isolation, usage and K/D arguments don't say all that much. The SpitXIV clearly has the *potential* to maintain a higher k/d than the C-Hog because of superior speed and energy performance. Perhaps the difference is the C-Hog is upped off carriers to vulch de-acked fields while the SpitXIV is not?
Every fighter has the potential to maintain a higher k/d ratio than the given fighter actually does.  That means nothing at all.  All that has any meaning is the actual effect and results.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: BnZs on April 19, 2009, 06:24:03 PM
Every fighter has the potential to maintain a higher k/d ratio than the given fighter actually does.  That means nothing at all.  All that has any meaning is the actual effect and results.

What I mean is that the SpitfireXIV has more potential to disengage at will, which you surely must realize is the largest factor in high K/D ratios for MA planes. I think it is very valid to point out that the C-Hog gets its score padded alot at vulches.

Is it possible to get statistics for kills/time by model? I think that is a better indicator of what the plane can do when actually *fighting*.

Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Motherland on April 19, 2009, 06:26:35 PM
Any aircraft has more of an ability to disengage at will if the pilot minds his e-state. The point is really moot. You can do the same thing you do in a Spitfire MkXIV in a Spitfire MkXVI. The difference is that you can't do the same thing in the Spitfire MkXIV that you do in a Spitfire MkXVI.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: BnZs on April 19, 2009, 06:28:51 PM
Any aircraft has more of an ability to disengage at will if the pilot minds his e-state. The point is really moot. You can do the same thing you do in a Spitfire MkXIV in a Spitfire MkXVI. The difference is that you can't do the same thing in the Spitfire MkXIV that you do in a Spitfire MkXVI.

An airplane that goes 361mph on the deck isn't just a *little* more likely to separate itself successfully than one that tops out at 344?  :huh
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Motherland on April 19, 2009, 06:30:57 PM
An airplane that goes 361mph on the deck isn't just a *little* more likely to separate itself successfully than one that tops out at 344?  :huh
A little? Sure. However the XVI also has a significantly better ability to fight it out if it hits the fan.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: BnZs on April 19, 2009, 06:33:25 PM
A little? Sure. However the XVI also has a significantly better ability to fight it out if it hits the fan.

That is also true comparing the XVI to the Tempest...The A6M has claim to be being a front-runner amongst fighters if discount entirely the need to either chase or run.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: MachFly on April 19, 2009, 06:44:05 PM
You should really look an overlay of the performance curves before you post with such certainty.

One of the reasons I like that spit 14 is it has a very wide performance envelope

Besides, if this really is your favorite damn plane in the MA, I'm proposing to make flying it cheaper for you.
If they unperk the spit 14 there will be about as many spit 14s in the air as we see 16s. I really do not want to see that happening. Spit 14 is to good of an airplane to allow every noob to fly it on daily bases.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Motherland on April 19, 2009, 06:52:44 PM
If they unperk the spit 14 there will be about as many spit 14s in the air as we see 16s. I really do not want to see that happening. Spit 14 is to good of an airplane to allow every noob to fly it on daily bases.
Why do you think it would be a noob plane? It turns poorly and is difficult to handle. The only significant advantage it has over the XVI is speed.
That is also true comparing the XVI to the Tempest...The A6M has claim to be being a front-runner amongst fighters if discount entirely the need to either chase or run.
There IS certainly a threshold where speed makes a significant difference. Just look at the Me 262. However the Spitfire MkXIV does not cross it. It would have to be... at least 50+ mph.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: MachFly on April 19, 2009, 06:54:28 PM
is difficult to handle.

hmm....maybe your right, not every pilot that fly and succeed in a Spitfire mk XIV
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Noir on April 19, 2009, 06:55:25 PM

I repeat: I dive tested the Spit14's wing and it was still there at 574mph IAS, and didn't break under an 8 G spike.


Level at 500mph, and try a flat turn in any direction.

My Wish is that the spit14 gets the big drop tank so it can use its high alt superiority at least.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: MachFly on April 19, 2009, 07:05:32 PM
My Wish is that the spit14 gets the big drop tank so it can use its high alt superiority at least.

 :aok
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: MstWntd on April 19, 2009, 07:42:08 PM
:aok
:aok :aok
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: BnZs on April 19, 2009, 07:44:51 PM
Why do you think it would be a noob plane? It turns poorly and is difficult to handle. The only significant advantage it has over the XVI is speed.There IS certainly a threshold where speed makes a significant difference. Just look at the Me 262. However the Spitfire MkXIV does not cross it. It would have to be... at least 50+ mph.

? It is 5-6mph slower than a P-51 on the deck and relative performance grows quickly as alts increase.

No, the SpitXIV will not have an unfair advantage over SpitXVIs or other select uber-rides, however, there are many planes besides these flown in the MA.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: BnZs on April 19, 2009, 07:50:31 PM
One of the reasons I like that spit 14 is it has a very wide performance envelope
If they unperk the spit 14 there will be about as many spit 14s in the air as we see 16s. I really do not want to see that happening. Spit 14 is to good of an airplane to allow every noob to fly it on daily bases.

Really, the only performance that matter for MA purposes is that where the fight is. You can fly by yourself all day long at 25K, but I doubt you'll find it very satisfying.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Motherland on April 19, 2009, 07:50:56 PM
? It is 5-6mph slower than a P-51 on the deck and relative performance grows quickly as alts increase.
And are you advocating for the P51 to be perked?
No, the SpitXIV will not have an unfair advantage over SpitXVIs or other select uber-rides, however, there are many planes besides these flown in the MA.
So then why do you still want it to be perked?
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: BnZs on April 19, 2009, 07:59:06 PM
And are you advocating for the P51 to be perked?So then why do you still want it to be perked?

Because it runs with the fastest while out-turning, climbing, and accelerating them. It may not be much of a threat to a SpitXVI with average pilots at the controls, but it is a hell of a fast, double-superior threat to a P-51, 190, P-47, Typh, etc. Since you brought up the P-51, I will tell you that the only planes which are clearly both slower and less maneuverable than the Mustang in AHII are the 190A series, and the A-5 is actually fairly close in maneuverability and has a somewhat better thrust/weight at the low alts where we tend to fight. A D9 is even faster, rolls well, and has an enviable thrust/weight, but ye Gods, is there any plane in AHII that CAN'T beat a Dora by forcing an angles fight, barring the jet and other 190s?
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: SmokinLoon on April 19, 2009, 09:04:17 PM
The Spit 16 is far more capable and is a far more rounded aircraft that then Spit14.  In the meager few mph the Spit 14 has over the Spit 16, the Spit 16 can trump with roll, turn, accel, etc.  Oh, and it can carry 1000lbs of ord (3 bombs = 3 dead gv's), too.

Yeah, the Spit14 may come alive at 25,000 ft, but it can stay up there for oh... maybe... 5 min before it needs to start looking for home.  Hardly worth the effort, really. 

The Spit 14 is faster that the Spit 16, thats it.  And not by much.

This is EXACTLY my issues with how HTC scores aircraft.  If the Spit 14 warranted a 10 pt perk, then the C-Hog which gets used far more warrants a bit higher of a perk score.  Again... a little inconsistant in scoring perks and ENY.  *shrugs*... move on because it isnt going to get changed.   HTC has spoken evidently.

 

Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: MachFly on April 19, 2009, 09:06:15 PM
Really, the only performance that matter for MA purposes is that where the fight is. You can fly by yourself all day long at 25K, but I doubt you'll find it very satisfying.

 :huh
What does 25K has to do with anything? Spit 14 handles great at lower altitudes. And BTW, when I do fly at 25K, i find it very satisfying.


In the meager few mph the Spit 14 has over the Spit 16, the Spit 16 can trump with roll, turn, accel, etc. 


 :huh :huh Are you kidding me?? Since when can a spit 16 out accelerate a spit 14??

Yeah, the Spit14 may come alive at 25,000 ft, but it can stay up there for oh... maybe... 5 min before it needs to start looking for home.  Hardly worth the effort, really. 
When I fly it, it comes alive as soon as it lift off the ground. And I been up at 25K for about 20min of spit 14 with out conserving fuel to much.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: MachFly on April 19, 2009, 09:10:45 PM
Ok if anybody thinks spit 14 should not be perked, meet me in the Dueling Arena.


Here are the rules:
we fight at 6.9 sector (A17 and A18).
each pilot fly's at there preferable altitude.
allowed to go anywhere as long as you are in 6.9 sector.
not allowed to use friendly ack for cover.

I will be on spit 14, you take any other non-perked fighter.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Karnak on April 19, 2009, 10:07:31 PM
My experience in the Mk XIV is that it does well as long as it is a one on one.  As soon as a higher enemy appears I am in trouble as it lacks any ability to escape that, it isn't agile and it can't run, if the enemy is above me that take away my climb....
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: MachFly on April 19, 2009, 10:12:32 PM
My experience in the Mk XIV is that it does well as long as it is a one on one.  As soon as a higher enemy appears I am in trouble as it lacks any ability to escape that, it isn't agile and it can't run, if the enemy is above me that take away my climb....

I think you just did not have much luck in your experience.

oh and BTW, spit 14 can run, it's one of the fastest.

Can you be more specific on what happened?
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Karnak on April 19, 2009, 10:45:55 PM
That would be a great many "what happened"s.

Basically the Spit XIV is fast, but not top end fast, turns well, but not great, rolls poorly, is one of the most fragile fighters and climbs like a bat out of hell.  There are a goodly number of fighters that hold all the cards on it if they start with a bit of an altitude advantage.  Now, if the Spit XIV is embroiled in a fight when they show up with that altitude advantage, well, it becomes hard to survive against enemies that will endlessly press you because you are wearing a perk tag.  At least it isn't a 6000 yard perk tag anymore.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: MachFly on April 19, 2009, 10:53:12 PM
That would be a great many "what happened"s.

Basically the Spit XIV is fast, but not top end fast, turns well, but not great, rolls poorly, is one of the most fragile fighters and climbs like a bat out of hell.  There are a goodly number of fighters that hold all the cards on it if they start with a bit of an altitude advantage.  Now, if the Spit XIV is embroiled in a fight when they show up with that altitude advantage, well, it becomes hard to survive against enemies that will endlessly press you because you are wearing a perk tag.  At least it isn't a 6000 yard perk tag anymore.

If you do you right stuff you can turn the table just like that. Because spitfire has the ability of regaining energy very quickly and maintaining much better that all other fighters.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: BnZs on April 20, 2009, 01:03:32 AM
embroiled in a fight when they show up with that altitude advantage, well, it becomes hard to survive

Hard to survive...yup, that is how I think the MA would be for someone who wanted to take up a P47* or Fw-190* if there were free and unlimited SpitXIVs.

Cut the price, look at the handling.

EDIT: My friend, you find it hard to survive when more maneuverable fighters or just a gang with  alt to convert to catching shows up? Welcome to the experience of AHII, unless you are flying a 262! 361mph on the deck IS elite speed...what non-perk ride exceeds that speed...P-51, P-47N, D9, Typhoon, La7...all of them with one glaring exception inferior in maneuverability and climb rate to the SpitXIV...and that lone exception is another plane which should be lightly perked!
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Kazaa on April 20, 2009, 01:09:12 AM
The Spitfire Mk.XIV shouldn't be perked in it's current state, give it 21lbs of boost and then I might change my mind. :aok
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: BnZs on April 20, 2009, 01:10:49 AM
The Spitfire Mk.XIV shouldn't be perked in it's current state, give it 21lbs of boost and then I might change my mind. :aok

Improved handling would mean more than pouring some more power to it.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Kazaa on April 20, 2009, 01:17:01 AM
Improved handling would mean more than pouring some more power to it.

How do you know the Spitfire Mk. XIV doesn't handle exactly the way it did in WW2? Do you have any proof of the XIV being any better? If so please share.

I bring up the subject of 21lbs of boost because it’s a true fact that the XIV could operated at that boost with the right fuel.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Karnak on April 20, 2009, 01:17:12 AM
Hard to survive...yup, that is how I think the MA would be for someone who wanted to take up a P47* or Fw-190* if there were free and unlimited SpitXIVs.
Irrelevant.  That is how the arena is with free Ki-84s to Bf110s.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: BnZs on April 20, 2009, 01:30:12 AM
Irrelevant.  That is how the arena is with free Ki-84s to Bf110s.

You are speaking of one plane that is significantly slower than a SpitXIV (below 350mph on the deck) and which cannot follow a target in a high-speed dive due to structural failure issues. The other plane you speak of is incredibly well armed but rather slow indeed, only moderate turner, and a poor climber. Not at all comparable to the problems a SpitXIV could pose for many other planes.

If how a plane's all-around performance stacks up against other planes, thus effecting their viability, is not relevant to perkage, then I don't know what the heck is. There would be no need to perk the Tempest if every plane went 390mph at sea level.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: BnZs on April 20, 2009, 01:35:15 AM
How do you know the Spitfire Mk. XIV doesn't handle exactly the way it did in WW2? Do you have any proof of the XIV being any better? If so please share.

I bring up the subject of 21lbs of boost because it’s a true fact that the XIV could operated at that boost with the right fuel.

All I can say about handling issues is that from the reports I've read from folks like Eric Brown don't mention highly unusual flying difficulties of the SpitXIV relative other aircraft. The knew it could not turn as well as more lightly-loaded earlier Spits of course, and it was said to be more of a handful on the ground, but nothing about any special instability as a gun platform and the like.

P-51Ds were being operated at 75" MAP by the end of the war, but we don't have that either, so I guess we'll just have to do without. :)

EDIT: You do realize that my wish would make the SpitXIV the lowest priced perk fighter? Throw me a bone here.  :D
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: chewiex on April 20, 2009, 07:48:27 AM
Here's some numbers if anyone cares.


Taking some info from Spatula's AHII Aircraft Performance charts...here's some info for the Spit 16 vs. Spit 14.

Spit 16 speed @ sea-level = 316 mil/ 342 wep
Spit 14 speed @ sea-level = 334 mil/ 361 wep

Spit 16 speed @ 5k =336 mil/ 362 wep
Spit 14 speed @ 5k = 358 mil/ 386 wep

Spit 16 speed @ 10k = 358 mil/ 385 wep
Spit 14 speed @ 10k = 385 mil/ 410 wep

Speeds increase and decrease with Alt. Point being the Spit 14 is superior to the 16 at all alts as far as speed goes.
The Spit 16 has better acceleration through 5k and the 14 begins to accelerate better around 10k and up.

Climb rates:
At sea level the Spit 14 and 16 climb at the same rate with full military power. 3,684 ft/min The 16 holds this CR up to 11k. The 14's CR increases with Alt from 3,684 ft/min at sea-level steadily increasing to 3,845 ft/min by 11k. Climb rates for both A/C start to drop off from there. Where the Spit 16's CR actually increases and surpasses the 14's substantially from 16k to 24k whereas the 16 will out-climb the 14. Below 14k, with wep, the 14 has wicked CR from 4,920 ft/min at sea-level, 5,025 ft/min at 5k and 5,70 ft/min at 8k dropping off from there.

So, from this info, it can be determined that the Spit 14 is far superior to the Spit 16 in both speed and climb rate Superior climb rates up to 14k and then climb rate 21k to 30k. Between 14k and 21k, the 16 is better. The 14's speed however is superior through all alt's.

The Spit 16 on the other hand has better turn rate, sustained turn rate and tighter turn radius over all than the 14.

Clearly, the 16 is a formidable opponent for the 14 in a mid/low alt turn fight. The 14 has better flat out speed,climb and acceleration and should take the fight vertical and high. BnZ would be the way to go with a 14 vs 16. The 16 should keep it TnB style. Hope this may clear up the Spit 14 vs 16 questions. Please feel free to add any further inf if you have it.

SALUTE A8Chewey
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Karnak on April 20, 2009, 09:32:15 AM
It seems the Mk XIV is in a hard place, too good to be free and not good enough to be perked.

Personally, I think that if it were unperked there would be a brief explosion of them as people used the former perk plane, and then it would see low usage due to the quirks it has.

If that is not an option, then the boost should be raised to +21lbs and maybe then it would be good enough to be a perk plane in its own right.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Kazaa on April 20, 2009, 02:27:22 PM
It seems the Mk XIV is in a hard place, too good to be free and not good enough to be perked.

Personally, I think that if it were unperked there would be a brief explosion of them as people used the former perk plane, and then it would see low usage due to the quirks it has.

If that is not an option, then the boost should be raised to +21lbs and maybe then it would be good enough to be a perk plane in its own right.

Either that or just lower the perks like BnZ said.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Karnak on April 20, 2009, 02:48:48 PM
Either that or just lower the perks like BnZ said.
That will have no effect.  It is already so cheap as to just be a token perk price and its usage and k/d still suck.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: MstWntd on April 20, 2009, 02:52:55 PM
That will have no effect.  It is already so cheap as to just be a token perk price and its usage and k/d still suck.
Personally, I kind of feel "special" in it per say. Or maybe it's just that purdy engine sound and 5 bladed prop.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Kazaa on April 20, 2009, 02:54:59 PM
That will have no effect.  It is already so cheap as to just be a token perk price and its usage and k/d still suck.

Is true, I have over 3,000 perks and I don't even fly the XIV. :rofl
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: BnZs on April 20, 2009, 03:33:03 PM
20 perks is not "cheap" to me, and I have over 3000. Okay, objectively I know I have enough perks to lose lots and lots of rides, but somehow the price is a psychological barrier.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: SmokinLoon on April 20, 2009, 03:47:30 PM
I'm just amazed at how much the 16 can do performance wise and ability wise and not be slightly perked, and how narrow the Spit 14 performance envelope is so narrow but yet it is perked.  Speed must be the key.   ;)
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: MachFly on April 20, 2009, 04:16:26 PM
EDIT: My friend, you find it hard to survive when more maneuverable fighters or just a gang with  alt to convert to catching shows up? Welcome to the experience of AHII, unless you are flying a 262! 361mph on the deck IS elite speed...what non-perk ride exceeds that speed...P-51, P-47N, D9, Typhoon, La7...all of them with one glaring exception inferior in maneuverability and climb rate to the SpitXIV...and that lone exception is another plane which should be lightly perked!

Who says you have to be on the deck?
I think if you would be cough on the deck by a higher opponent (especially if there are alot of them) you would have hard time surviving in any aircraft, and most likely get shot down. Even if your in that 262 you talk about so much. I killed 262s while flying a spit 14, they could not run away from me.


as I said
Ok if anybody thinks spit 14 should not be perked, meet me in the Dueling Arena.


Here are the rules:
we fight at 6.9 sector (A17 and A18).
each pilot fly's at there preferable altitude.
allowed to go anywhere as long as you are in 6.9 sector.
not allowed to use friendly ack for cover.

I will be on spit 14, you take any other non-perked fighter.
and then prove me how much of a POS plane that is.




If you unperk it way to many people will be flying it. Your comparing the spit 14 to 16, by saying that 14 should be unperked, maybe it's the 16 that should be perked?
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Kev367th on April 21, 2009, 01:15:51 PM
XIV - Never has been, never will be worth any perk cost. Not suited at all for the low alt fights of the MA. If the 'hard deck' was 25k then sure, perk it.

Never been anywhere close to the 2.0 K/D ratio that EVERY other perked plane exceeds. Usually struggles to get within a country mile of 1.5 K/D.

If it's to remain perked, then at least give us a free XII :)
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: waystin2 on April 21, 2009, 01:24:00 PM


If it's to remain perked, then at least give us a free XII :)


Now we are talking! :aok
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Kazaa on April 21, 2009, 01:27:20 PM
Kev, what's up with this Spitfire MkXII you keep harping on about?

Last time I checked it has similar performance as the Spitfire Mk.9 we have ? I know I'm missing something, please point me in the right direction mate!
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Kev367th on April 21, 2009, 03:05:30 PM
Kev, what's up with this Spitfire MkXII you keep harping on about?

Last time I checked it has similar performance as the Spitfire Mk.9 we have ? I know I'm missing something, please point me in the right direction mate!

First Griffon engined production Spit.
Produced specifically to catch the 190 low level hit and run raids.

Much much better performance low down compared to the IX!

Griffon III @ 1,720hp,  speeds approx 394mph @ 18k, 372mph at 5k.

Dan will hopefully (bet on it :) ) chime in with further details.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Kazaa on April 21, 2009, 03:31:02 PM
What sort of turning performance did it have, being a Spit5 air frame and all?
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: MachFly on April 21, 2009, 04:26:08 PM
give us a free XII :)

 :aok

time to make a new thread in the wishlist section  :)
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Kev367th on April 21, 2009, 04:26:57 PM
What sort of turning performance did it have, being a Spit5 air frame and all?

Dan probably has all that data.

Just going from the test pilot comments -

a) Dives well, pulls away from IX.
b) Manoeuvrability is excellent particularly in its rate of roll.
c) Stability better, especially longitudinally.

Over to Dan :)

Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: MachFly on April 21, 2009, 04:28:03 PM
What sort of turning performance did it have, being a Spit5 air frame and all?

it was a spitfire XIII airframe, not V
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Kev367th on April 21, 2009, 04:30:03 PM
it was a spitfire XIII airframe, not V

Early ones were based on Vc airframes.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: MachFly on April 21, 2009, 05:54:14 PM
What sort of turning performance did it have, being a Spit5 air frame and all?
it was a spitfire XIII airframe, not V
Early ones were based on Vc airframes.

your partially right

Only the first batch of Spitfire VIIs was based on V

"this general arrangement diagram shows the version of the Spitfire XII that was based n the Spitfire Mk.Vc. ... The second batch of the type was based on the Mk.VIII airframe and had retractable tail wheels."
From WarbirdTech Series, Griffon-Powered Spitfires
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Noir on April 21, 2009, 07:24:54 PM
SpitV airframe is fine with me...less weight...someone said helicopter ?

There is at least 3 threads about the spit14 running...lets keep up the good job !
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Motherland on April 21, 2009, 07:35:05 PM
Machfly, is that your in-game name?
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Kazaa on April 21, 2009, 08:33:30 PM
Early ones were based on Vc airframes.

I must have read the performance charts on the Early Spitfire Mk.XII.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: MachFly on April 21, 2009, 08:57:53 PM
Machfly, is that your in-game name?

that's affirmative


There is at least 3 threads about the spit14 running...lets keep up the good job !

I think I am responsible for 1 of them  :D


I must have read the performance charts on the Early Spitfire Mk.XII.

can you tell me where to find them, might get some more useful information.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Motherland on April 21, 2009, 09:00:44 PM
that's affirmative
Rgr I'll look for you tomorrow then. Should be fun :)
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Karnak on April 21, 2009, 09:53:41 PM
can you tell me where to find them, might get some more useful information.
This is a great site for historical performance data:

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Cajunn on April 23, 2009, 01:02:00 AM
Spit 14.........well I can say this about it, I don't fly it anymore but I use to take it out every now and then and I have never been killed in one. The only Spit 14 that I have died in was one that I popped the wings off of, I have schooled F4u's in it and smoked La 7's in  vertical fight's(it will out climb just about any prop plane in the game). I think the guys wishing it to be un-perked or thinking you fight it like other Spitfires and that's wrong. The spit 14 is probably top's in the game in vertical fights and you get it up to altitude and it will give Pony's fit's because of its climb rate and acceleration, so though I agree that the 16 should have a small perk, I don't think that the 14 should be un-perked. 
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: MachFly on April 23, 2009, 01:05:17 AM
Spit 14.........well I can say this about it, I don't fly it anymore but I use to take it out every now and then and I have never been killed in one. The only Spit 14 that I have died in was one that I popped the wings off of, I have schooled F4u's in it and smoked La 7's in  vertical fight's(it will out climb just about any prop plane in the game). I think the guys wishing it to be un-perked or thinking you fight it like other Spitfires and that's wrong. The spit 14 is probably top's in the game in vertical fights and you get it up to altitude and it will give Pony's fit's because of its climb rate and acceleration, so though I agree that the 16 should have a small perk, I don't think that the 14 should be un-perked. 

 :aok :aok :aok :aok :aok :aok :aok :aok :aok :aok :aok :aok :aok :aok :aok :aok ect.....


This is a great site for historical performance data:

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/
thanks
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Guppy35 on April 23, 2009, 03:12:59 AM
it was a spitfire XIII airframe, not V

Sorry I'm late :)

EN serial Spit XIIs had fixed tail wheels, while MB serial Spit XIIs had retractable, outside of MB974 and 975 which had fixed, based on photo evidence. 

Griffon III and Griffon IV engines.  If you want which had IIIs and which had IVs I could tell ya but that would just take more time :)

The XII had a single stage Griffon, meaning it was optimized for low to medium alt work.  It was put into service in February of 43 because of a need to counter tip and run FW190 raids on the south coast of England.  This it did, when 91 Squadron and their XIIs bounced a 190 raid on Hastings and shot down 5 for no loss May 25, 1943.

What the XII was in 1943 is essentially what the AH XVI is but is a 1945 Spit.  It could outperform anything it came across at the low to medium altitudes it flew at.  In the Fall of 43 the Tangmere Spit XII Wing was the high scoring unit in Fighter Command.  Their tactics were to essentially troll below the 109s and 190s baiting them to come down where the XII could turn into them and turn the tables.  The XIIs best day being October 20, 1943 when they shot down 9 109s and 190s for no losses

What folks seem to forget all the time in these discussions is that performance changed depending on the altitude.  The XII was a better bird then the IX until about 18K when the 2 stage supercharged Merlin 60 series engines did their thing.  The XVI with clipped wings and a low alt rated Packard Merlin 266 is best suited to low alt, which is where it shines in AH.  The XVI was used historically for ground support with a strengthened wing to carry bombs or rockets.  This is also true of the LFIXe of that time.

The XIV was a rocket with wings that had an incredible climb rate.  It was an interceptor and meant to fight the best the other guy had to offer while the XVI was meant to help support the air to ground war.

A Spitfire XIV flown to its strengths will out perform a Spitfire XVI and can control and dictate the fight

But lets not worry too much about that.   Lets just get a Spitfire XII and I;ll be happy :)
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Karnak on April 23, 2009, 03:21:52 AM
Spit 14.........well I can say this about it, I don't fly it anymore but I use to take it out every now and then and I have never been killed in one. The only Spit 14 that I have died in was one that I popped the wings off of, I have schooled F4u's in it and smoked La 7's in  vertical fight's(it will out climb just about any prop plane in the game). I think the guys wishing it to be un-perked or thinking you fight it like other Spitfires and that's wrong. The spit 14 is probably top's in the game in vertical fights and you get it up to altitude and it will give Pony's fit's because of its climb rate and acceleration, so though I agree that the 16 should have a small perk, I don't think that the 14 should be un-perked. 
Of course you don't use it like an A6M.  You use it like a Bf109K-4.

If you haven't lost one, you are way to timid to be giving useful feedback or you are one of the top 10 AH pilots.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Lusche on April 23, 2009, 04:06:04 AM
Spit 14.........well I can say this about it, I don't fly it anymore but I use to take it out every now and then and I have never been killed in one. The only Spit 14 that I have died in was one that I popped the wings off of, I have schooled F4u's in it and smoked La 7's in  vertical fight's(it will out climb just about any prop plane in the game).

Your ingame name is Cajunn as well?

EDIT: Nevermind, it is.
Since Tour 90 you have 14 kills in Spit XIV... and 7 deaths.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Kev367th on April 23, 2009, 06:57:28 AM
What the XII was in 1943 is essentially what the AH XVI is but is a 1945 Spit.  It could outperform anything it came across at the low to medium altitudes it flew at.  In the Fall of 43 the Tangmere Spit XII Wing was the high scoring unit in Fighter Command.  Their tactics were to essentially troll below the 109s and 190s baiting them to come down where the XII could turn into them and turn the tables.  The XIIs best day being October 20, 1943 when they shot down 9 109s and 190s for no losses

I assume you mean 1944 for the XVI, not 1945?

Also unless the XVI FTH has been fixed it is still an LF IXe, circa May 1944, not an Oct/Nov 1944 XVI.

Only way the XVI could be classed as a 1945 bird would be to give it 25lbs boost.

Wish they had just called it an LF IXe!
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Kazaa on April 23, 2009, 07:10:09 AM
Did someone say 25lbs boost! :cool:
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Cajunn on April 23, 2009, 11:22:49 AM
Your ingame name is Cajunn as well?

EDIT: Nevermind, it is.
Since Tour 90 you have 14 kills in Spit XIV... and 7 deaths.



that is correct and I can say no deaths have come from being shot down as I said, my deaths have come from pulling extreme G's where I lost a wing or I seem to black out extremely fast not realizing how fast it would gather speed and then pulling what in a normal plane would seem OK but in the 14 it was either a blackout or tear a wing off. And of coarse in essence it was my fault and someone got the kill but I never had anything on my tail long enough to actually shoot me down.   


And what was your point?
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: MachFly on April 23, 2009, 08:43:24 PM

that is correct and I can say no deaths have come from being shot down as I said, my deaths have come from pulling extreme G's where I lost a wing or I seem to black out extremely fast not realizing how fast it would gather speed and then pulling what in a normal plane would seem OK but in the 14 it was either a blackout or tear a wing off. And of coarse in essence it was my fault and someone got the kill but I never had anything on my tail long enough to actually shoot me down.   

Perhaps no one got a chance to shot you down because you were riping you wings of to soon...


Tell me this, do you at least have 10 hours in a spit 14?
I have never been shot down in a P-40B, does not make me the best pilot, because I have like 2 sotis in it. (maybe 30min of total time)
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: MachFly on April 23, 2009, 11:30:22 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3e-Ra0dH-Lg (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3e-Ra0dH-Lg)
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Cajunn on April 24, 2009, 07:06:13 PM
Perhaps no one got a chance to shot you down because you were riping you wings of to soon...


Tell me this, do you at least have 10 hours in a spit 14?
I have never been shot down in a P-40B, does not make me the best pilot, because I have like 2 sotis in it. (maybe 30min of total time)


No I doubt I have 3 hours in one, I'm not saying I'm by any means the best or even close to the best I actually stopped flying it because I was having trouble at the time controlling the excessive energy that It was producing, and in turn snapping wings off and blacking out. Actually I found that when I was successful, it was due to its massive climb rate in a vertical fight, my problems were on the downhill of that fight where a plane like the 190's or mustangs could pull the G's to start back up the Spit 14 would usually lose a wing or both, and induce a black out because of what I think is the load on the wings because of its better turning ability. And I still think it should stay perked, maybe not as much as some of the other planes but some sort of perk should stay IMO. 
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Kazaa on April 24, 2009, 07:25:21 PM
I found out today that the XIV had clipped wings... :O
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Karnak on April 24, 2009, 07:41:27 PM
I found out today that the XIV had clipped wings... :O
As with most Spitfire marks, some did and some did not.  They were normal on the FR.Mk XIVe, whereas full span wings were more common on the F.Mk XIVe like we have.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Guppy35 on April 24, 2009, 11:13:19 PM
The wartime XIVs did not use clipped wings that I've ever seen. Photos of 41, 91, 350, 17 squadrons etc show them with full span wings.  There was much more use of clipped wing XIVs postwar.  It was an easy thing to switch and with the advent of jets the XIVs  were going to be much more used in the low alt, ground attack role as the IXs and XVI's were when the XIV and Tempests essentially took over the pure fighter job from them.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Anaxogoras on April 25, 2009, 12:27:11 AM
In complete ignorance of what has transpired on pages 2-6, I say unperk the XIV, for the sake of consistency.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Larry on April 25, 2009, 02:40:39 AM
Those that say the spit14s wings are weak are usually the ones you manhandle the plane and expect it to do anything. I just went to the TA and pulled out of a 30k dive in less then 5k at over 600MPH without doing any damage. I then pulled back my stick as far as I can and only after pulling more then 9Gs at 394MPH did my wingtips snap off. But no worries I just made a SAPP style landing and towered out. The spit14 is a great plane worthy of perking as soon as you realize that its not meant to be flown like the other spits and more like an E fighter. 
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: moot on April 25, 2009, 02:45:03 AM
Or give it its historical boost and keep it perked.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Noir on April 25, 2009, 02:58:38 AM
Or give it its historical boost and keep it perked.

and a big DT.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Kev367th on April 25, 2009, 03:43:38 AM
The wartime XIVs did not use clipped wings that I've ever seen. Photos of 41, 91, 350, 17 squadrons etc show them with full span wings.  There was much more use of clipped wing XIVs postwar.  It was an easy thing to switch and with the advent of jets the XIVs  were going to be much more used in the low alt, ground attack role as the IXs and XVI's were when the XIV and Tempests essentially took over the pure fighter job from them.

I have a bitg of a fuzzy memory, but -

Weren't FR XIV's mostly all clipped?
Something to do with full span wings coupled with the extra weight of the camera installations causing wing root 'rippling'?

Really wish I could find the passage again :(
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: MachFly on April 25, 2009, 12:59:02 PM
and a big DT.


that would just be great
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: jolly22 on April 25, 2009, 02:30:15 PM
the 16 is very popular ride if your going to perk perk i like a t34
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Kazaa on April 25, 2009, 06:18:33 PM
Open question: Would clipping the XIV warrant the/a perk price?

HTC need to add an option for the Spitfire’s wing layout, elliptical, clipped and extended for their respected marks.

Someone please give me a +1 before I go nuts. :furious
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: MachFly on April 25, 2009, 06:31:32 PM
Someone please give me a +1 before I go nuts. :furious

there you go (http://img527.imageshack.us/img527/1603/plusone.gif)
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Motherland on April 25, 2009, 06:32:33 PM
HTC need to add an option for the Spitfire’s wing layout, elliptical, clipped and extended for their respected marks.
Someone suggested this a while ago, I think the consensus was that it would not be possible.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: MachFly on April 25, 2009, 06:34:47 PM
Someone suggested this a while ago, I think the consensus was that it would not be possible.

It's possible to switch the type of nose on B-25, why not the wing tips?
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Motherland on April 25, 2009, 06:35:05 PM
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,226478.0.html (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,226478.0.html)
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Anaxogoras on April 25, 2009, 08:16:21 PM
I don't see any post from HTC in that thread bubi.  It's a matter of will, not possibility.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Kev367th on April 26, 2009, 12:05:57 PM
I don't see any post from HTC in that thread bubi.  It's a matter of will, not possibility.

I spoke to HT about it about 2 years ago.

It wasn't possible to do under the system in place at the time. Something to do with requiring multiple FMs if I remember correctly.

Maybe now, I don't know.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Cajunn on April 27, 2009, 01:25:24 AM
Nice web site on the Wings of the spitfires look at part 1 & 2 under "Concise Guide To Spitfire Wing Types" . It states that the clipped wings started with the Mk V. And I think in the C wing it was designed with room for 2 hispanos in each wing.

http://www.spitfiresite.com/reference/variants-technology/
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: JETBLST on April 27, 2009, 10:29:19 AM
Getting er back um on topic here.  I say no to perking the Spit 16.  For only one reason.  It lets those new to fighters have one good fighter to learn in when they have minimal or no fighter perks.  AS fighter perks are very hard to come by.  If you perk it how would a new fighter pilot get the perks to fly said ride?  Unless there is some perk pharming method I don't know about to get fighter perkies.

IF THERE IS

please do tell?  Huh?   :lol

I think that for starting off learning in fighters the Spixteen is the best out there period.  After getting a feel for fighter tactics with it, then go fly something very hard for a month.  FWA8 for example.  The 109 series.   Then come back to Spxteen and see your improvements.  It's pretty cool.



Thanks.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: moot on April 27, 2009, 10:44:18 AM
The spit16 is a 5 ENY fighter and so not really what new players (except the literally brand new ones maybe) ought to farm with.  The next worse fighters (ENY 10) mean twice the perks per kill, and not exactly twice as hard to kill with.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Cajunn on April 27, 2009, 01:05:48 PM
Getting er back um on topic here.  I say no to perking the Spit 16.  For only one reason.  It lets those new to fighters have one good fighter to learn in when they have minimal or no fighter perks.  AS fighter perks are very hard to come by.  If you perk it how would a new fighter pilot get the perks to fly said ride?  Unless there is some perk pharming method I don't know about to get fighter perkies.

IF THERE IS

please do tell?  Huh?   :lol

I think that for starting off learning in fighters the Spixteen is the best out there period.  After getting a feel for fighter tactics with it, then go fly something very hard for a month.  FWA8 for example.  The 109 series.   Then come back to Spxteen and see your improvements.  It's pretty cool.



Thanks.


I really don't think the spit 16 is the best to be learning in, I would think that the Spit 5,8 or 9 would be a little better suited in this role. And if Learning Air combat is the point your trying to make then I'm positive that the 5,8 and 9 or better because they can be a little more forgiving and have higher ENY's (except for maybe the spit 8) if your interested in building up perk points, with the spit 5 being the better choice for this.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: MachFly on April 27, 2009, 04:55:27 PM

I really don't think the spit 16 is the best to be learning in, I would think that the Spit 5,8 or 9 would be a little better suited in this role. And if Learning Air combat is the point your trying to make then I'm positive that the 5,8 and 9 or better because they can be a little more forgiving and have higher ENY's (except for maybe the spit 8) if your interested in building up perk points, with the spit 5 being the better choice for this.

I would say spit 9 is the best at perk farming. It's very good fighter which is easy to fly and has an ENY of 20. So for new pilots who wish to learn ACM and get perks I think spit 9 is the best idea.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: BnZs on April 27, 2009, 10:31:33 PM
Jet, this thread actually started off as a request to lower the perk price on the SpitXIV, but, since you brought the issue up:

One of the best, if not THE best rides to give new guys a chance would be the F4U-4. It can turn with almost everything, can run with or out-run almost everything, rolls well, handles gently for the most part, has 30 seconds of .50 cals to learn aiming with, and can take a hit or three if the noob doesn't have his defense down pat...lets unperk it right now to flatten the learning. On second thought, let's not. Thus is demonstrated the utter absurdity debating the perkability of a fighter in terms of how much flying it would benefit new guys. Anyway, the noobs will just be hunted by vets in these same fighters, so no net advantage is gained.



Getting er back um on topic here.  I say no to perking the Spit 16.  For only one reason.  It lets those new to fighters have one good fighter to learn in when they have minimal or no fighter perks.  AS fighter perks are very hard to come by.  If you perk it how would a new fighter pilot get the perks to fly said ride?  Unless there is some perk pharming method I don't know about to get fighter perkies.

IF THERE IS

please do tell?  Huh?   :lol

I think that for starting off learning in fighters the Spixteen is the best out there period.  After getting a feel for fighter tactics with it, then go fly something very hard for a month.  FWA8 for example.  The 109 series.   Then come back to Spxteen and see your improvements.  It's pretty cool.



Thanks.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: moot on April 27, 2009, 11:14:57 PM
Check the context here... The 16 is worth having unperked in part because it's a good noob ride, and because it's a good noob ride in the context of the rest of the planeset.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: JETBLST on April 27, 2009, 11:56:00 PM
Ya what moot said!  hehehe :)
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Noir on April 28, 2009, 04:13:40 AM
and the spit14 is definitely NOT the noob ride. One more reason to unperk it...hell unperk it for 2 weeks see how it goes !
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Lusche on April 28, 2009, 06:49:25 AM
WHen the TA-152H was still perked, it had very similar kill numbers, but a substantial higher K/D than the Spitfire XIV. But both planes were far away from all the other perk planes, both in usage & success (K/D). Both suffered (and still do) from similar stability problems, though the Spit is even far more difficult to handle
.
When the 152 was finally unperked, I was amazed they didn't do the same with the XIV.
Since then, the TA has indeed become more popular, but unperking it didn't result in flooding the arena with 152's either.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: BnZs on April 28, 2009, 08:33:29 AM
WHen the TA-152H was still perked, it had very similar kill numbers, but a substantial higher K/D than the Spitfire XIV. But both planes were far away from all the other perk planes, both in usage & success (K/D). Both suffered (and still do) from similar stability problems, though the Spit is even far more difficult to handle
.
When the 152 was finally unperked, I was amazed they didn't do the same with the XIV.
Since then, the TA has indeed become more popular, but unperking it didn't result in flooding the arena with 152's either.

The Ta-152 at typical MA alts can be beaten in at least one area of turn performance by everything slower than it, and by several things *not* slower than it, is not a superb climber or accelerator, and carries the mixed blessing of German cannon.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Lusche on April 28, 2009, 08:45:41 AM
Yes, and?
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: BnZs on April 28, 2009, 08:47:53 AM
Check the context here... The 16 is worth having unperked in part because it's a good noob ride, and because it's a good noob ride in the context of the rest of the planeset.

?
Moot, I'm sorry, I see a bunch of words strung together, but I fail to see ANY meaning to them. The 16 is advantaged as a dogfighter over conservatively 75% of the plane set, so sure, it will be easier for the noob to survive in the MA with, vs. say a Fw-190 A-5. But the F4U-4 turns as well as the Spixteen and can also catch darn near everything, is tougher, and gives a longer firing time with easy-to-aim guns, so it would be an even better as far as advantageous rides for the inexperienced go. So sorry, the "need advantaged planes for noobs" argument falls flat on its face, especially considering that there is no mechanism to limit the use of these planes to *only* noobs.

I tell you what the problem is. Most people are used to running into amazingly unskilled pilots in Spit16s. And half of even the usually well-informed forum population appears to be ignorant of its qualities relative other aircraft in the set at typical MA alts. We have individuals devoted to status quo-ism for whatever reason. Perhaps there are other individuals who from either ignorance or obstinancy refuse to admit that the SpitXVI out-classes their ride pilot for pilot at typical MA alts. So you end up with a situation where people formulate arguments against the perking of the SpitXVI without even knowing its top speed relative other aircraft (!!!), and when proven ignorant of such basic knowledge of what makes a fighter formidable, such as thrust/weight and turn-rate, they then give you hogwash about noobs "needing" whatever plane they don't want perked.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: BnZs on April 28, 2009, 08:53:35 AM
Yes, and?

The Ta-152 does not present an insurmountable problem for virtually any ride in the set except perhaps a 190-A8. Nearly everything has an advantage in turn rate/radius, speed, thrust/weight, or a combo of these to play against the 152. This is clearly not the case with the SpitXIV, which is as fast or faster than many "elite" rides in speed while being enormously superior in the turn, climb and accel.

 This is true to a lesser extent for the SpitXVI, although in the case of the XVI the real speed burners are not effected. Instead, the "middle-of-the-road" rides that would offer a nice balance of speed and maneuvering potential if they weren't in an arena chock-full of SpitXVIs find their viability greatly reduced.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: moot on April 28, 2009, 09:34:53 AM
You isolate the spit16 from the context here.  You say the F4U4 isn't worth unperking for the reason that it'd give noobs a crutch.  Then apply the same reasoning to the spit16 (that it's no good reason to keep it unperked "because it's a good noob crutch"). But the spit16 isn't an F4U4. They're both at different spots on the performance spectrum. "Context"

The noob crutch argument doesnt fall flat on its face because the spit16 is both much more forgiving to a noob's flying (stick yanking), and because the spit16 lacks some qualities to really make it perk worthy.. The first one prolly being that it's too slow.
Quote
The Ta-152 does not present an insurmountable problem for virtually any ride in the set except perhaps a 190-A8.
I think that's exagerated.. It sounds like the 152 can't consistently be competitive against anything but the A8.  The 152 isn't the only plane that isn't insurmountable for anything but the A8.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Karnak on April 28, 2009, 09:54:54 AM
BnZ,

None of your arguments are getting any traction for the simple reason that it isn't imbalancing.  Anybody reviewing the kill and death totals each tour can see that.  No matter anything you say that remains true as it was not for the F4U-1C and very likely would not be for the F4U-4.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: BnZs on April 28, 2009, 04:20:51 PM
BnZ,

None of your arguments are getting any traction for the simple reason that it isn't imbalancing.  Anybody reviewing the kill and death totals each tour can see that.  No matter anything you say that remains true as it was not for the F4U-1C and very likely would not be for the F4U-4.

Karnak, by reviewing the k/d totals we can learn that the P-38J is vastly more deadly than most planes in the arena, including the almost identical P-38L! If you do not understand why this neatly demonstrates that k/d numbers do NOT tell the tale, then I despair of you.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Lusche on April 28, 2009, 04:27:18 PM
*sigh*

And that's why you shouldn't take K/D as a sole, isolated argument.
Again I can only say: It's the whole picture that's counting.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: BnZs on April 28, 2009, 04:34:42 PM
And that's why you shouldn't take K/D as a sole, isolated argument.
Again I can only say: It's the whole picture that's counting.

No, what the airplane can do is what counts. Usage can be skewed by all manner of irrelevancies. For instance, do you realize that a large measure of the popularity the P-51D enjoys  and the Ta-152's lack of popularity can be traced to Soda's write-up on each, both of which contain debatable and out-of-date information? Yet they are airplanes that can be flown with similar effectiveness in a similar style. K/D can be skewed by in similar ways; For instance, the P-38J anomaly, or the fact that a large portion of the C-Hog's success is due to it being used as a vulch machine.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Lusche on April 28, 2009, 04:39:21 PM
No, what the airplane can do is what counts. Usage can be skewed by all manner of irrelevancies. For instance, do you realize that a large measure of the popularity the P-51D enjoys  and the Ta-152's lack of popularity can be traced to Soda's write-up on each, both of which contain debatable and out-of-date information? Yet they are airplanes that can be flown with similar effectiveness in a similar style. K/D can be skewed by in similar ways; For instance, the P-38J anomaly, or the fact that a large portion of the C-Hog's success is due to it being used as a vulch machine.

Ok.. then tell me what factor os consistantly skewing the Spit 14's K/D AND usage numbers over all these years?

There could be two reasons:
- Either it overall performance has some issues that make it a difficult plane to employ
- Or it's simply skewed by a huge number of less gifted (=n00b) pilots that simply wreck it's stats




Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: BnZs on April 28, 2009, 04:49:23 PM
Ok.. then tell me what factor os consistantly skewing the Spit 14's K/D AND usage numbers over all these years?

There could be two reasons:
- Either it overall performance has some issues that make it a difficult plane to employ
- Or it's simply skewed by a huge number of less gifted (=n00b) pilots that simply wreck it's stats



First, I'm the one who said the XIV's perk price is too high in relation to the other perk rides, although the reason I say this is the inexplicably quirky handling which does *not* resemble anything I've read in pilot reports about the SpitXIV.

That said, I'm quite sure your latter reason is in fact part of the Spit14's problem. I'm sure the "Spit" label attracts a great deal of people who are going for their very first ride in a perk plane. And k/d is heavily influenced by the *style* an airplane is flown in. You can rack up huge k/d numbers in practically anything fast using the very tentative style common to Tempests say...I suspect more XIV pilots are looking to fight, whether or not this is a good idea  in the ride they've chosen. The fact that the SpitXIV is faster by a good margin than the C-Hog yet has a lower k/d ratio is interesting to me. I think it strongly indicates that C-Hog is frequently used in a "safer" style, including vulching off a CV.

That is why I would like to see k/t for various models. Kills/time ratio is often a better measure effectiveness in both pilots and planes, although it can also still be skewed by vulching.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Karnak on April 28, 2009, 05:49:43 PM
Karnak, by reviewing the k/d totals we can learn that the P-38J is vastly more deadly than most planes in the arena, including the almost identical P-38L! If you do not understand why this neatly demonstrates that k/d numbers do NOT tell the tale, then I despair of you.
I said totals, not ratios.  The Spit XVI is not overused.

Further, your ongoing excuse that the P-51's fame explains its high usage applies just as much to the Spitfire.  It isn't overused and it doesn't break the arenas.

Heck, I'd be better off if it was perked as it is the bane of the Mossie VI, but I still don't think it is perk worthy.


Nor is the Mk XIV, for what its worth.  That one has consistently trailed free units in K/D ratios, the only perked unit to manage that.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: BnZs on April 28, 2009, 09:26:43 PM
I said totals, not ratios.  The Spit XVI is not overused.

Further, your ongoing excuse that the P-51's fame explains its high usage applies just as much to the Spitfire.  It isn't overused and it doesn't break the arenas.

Heck, I'd be better off if it was perked as it is the bane of the Mossie VI, but I still don't think it is perk worthy.


Nor is the Mk XIV, for what its worth.  That one has consistently trailed free units in K/D ratios, the only perked unit to manage that.

There is no "over-used" or "under-used". If for instance, 75% of the LW MA chose to fly the 190 A-5, that would be if anything to the advantage of the other players who chose something else, and I would see no need to do anything about the situation. Well, I might formulate a theory that AHII was causing mass insanity, but I digress... Conversely, there are good planes that are under-used...like the Ta-152. Should we raise its ENY to 40 just because most people are unfamiliar with the fact that it is a pretty good ride?

The same method of ranking a plane's attributes, developed by a squaddy of mine who is a trained statistician, that revealed just how much better the SpitXVI is than everyone gives it credit for also revealed that the P-51D is more mediocre than I thought. I was a little dumbfounded by how low the P-51 ranked, but the side by side comparison does not lie. I also think its telling that the P-51D is the one plane I feel I can tackle with an A-5 or D9 and walk away with a victory most of the time against the typical MA opposition. The same cannot be said of a Spit16. This says something profound about how much or how little each plane will do for the pilot.

Then there is the fact that a write-up on the most popular AHII information site called the P-51D (I kid you not) the "best non-perked plane"  :huh I respect the time and effort that went into Soda's evaluations and generally they are are gold mine, but I think calling the P-51D the best non-perker was a gaff on the order of the Kiss disco album ;), and has surely given hundreds of noobs the idea that the P-51D is more plane than it really is.

Good point about the Mossie. The Mossie is one of many planes whose viability is effected by SpitXVI ubiquity. Want to give non-masochists a fighting chance to fly something in the LW besides 1. A Spit16, 2. An Uber-runner, or 3.An Uber-turner? Then regulate the number of Spit16s.

Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Karnak on April 28, 2009, 11:00:33 PM
re: Spit XVI vs Mossie VI.

There are multiple other aircraft that, skill being equal, mean death to a Mossie.  Perking the XVI would only slightly change that as most of them would go to the Spit VIII, which is only slightly less deadly to the Mossie.

Assuming the other player knows what they are doing, the following free aircraft mean a quick death for me, in rough order of difficulty, harderst at top:

La-7
Typhoon Mk Ib
F4U-1A
F4U-1D
F4U-1
Bf109K-4
Spitfire Mk XVI
Bf109G-14
Ki-84-Ia
Spitfire Mk VIII
La-5FN
Yak-9U
Bf109G-2
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: BnZs on April 29, 2009, 07:15:30 AM
re: Spit XVI vs Mossie VI.

There are multiple other aircraft that, skill being equal, mean death to a Mossie.  Perking the XVI would only slightly change that as most of them would go to the Spit VIII, which is only slightly less deadly to the Mossie.

Assuming the other player knows what they are doing, the following free aircraft mean a quick death for me, in rough order of difficulty, harderst at top:

La-7
Typhoon Mk Ib
F4U-1A
F4U-1D
F4U-1
Bf109K-4
Spitfire Mk XVI
Bf109G-14
Ki-84-Ia
Spitfire Mk VIII
La-5FN
Yak-9U
Bf109G-2

La7? I destroy or drive them off with a Jug more often than they destroy me. I'm no Mossie pilot, but from flying against Bat I was under the impression it was at least as nimble as the P-47. The Kurt and Yak are not actually superior to the Lala, although they are typically manned by better pilots. In any case, fighting them is nothing like what you run into when you have to force a knife-fight with the Spits...who may make horrendous mistakes angles-wise but still retain the turn rate to swap ends and come on  with Hispanos blazing at your face.

It is interesting, but every single plane you ticked off here is inferior/inferior or similar/inferior to the SpitXVI and or SpitVIII*, according to the standard definition of that term. Only the late model 109s and perhaps the Ki seem to be similar (again, using the standard definition of that term) in energy performance at typical MA alts. Note here that the Spit series retains E amazingly well under Gs, which makes the E performance relative aircraft that do not retain E this well better in actual dogfights than the on-paper figures would lead one to believe. And of course, these late-model 109s are decidedly inferior in wing-loading/turn performance.

The F4Us you name arguably the most formidable of the lot vs. the Spit, the Hog can turn an extremely small radius, while being decidedly inferior in thrust/weight. But the caveat must be added that the sustained turn rate of the Spixteen is decidedly superior to that of the F4U, and the full-flaps radius is only a few feet larger. So even giving the F4U the nod for superior angles performance is debatable.

IMO, the F4U, 109 G-2, or Ki-84 are the best bets for taking on the Spit. The latter two are still seem to be double-inferior, albeit not terribly so. Obviously piloting decides a lot, and Spits are often horribly flown. Still, I think given equal pilots and an equal footing, the Spit can drive off or destroy all three of these contenders a majority of the time.

Karnak, I do not argue from a position of ignorance. I think I know the potential of these planes pretty well. I have tangled with them all, in the MA and in practice fights. If I am grossly in error regarding performance facts somewhere, please point me to to the appropriate data.


*Say what you will, the SpitVIII's glacial roll rate is a decided disadvantage stacked up against the SpitXVI's top-of-the-line roll under most MA conditions. The potential for insane and hard/impossible to follow guns defenses in particular are so much higher for the XVI than the VIII
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Saurdaukar on April 29, 2009, 10:22:15 AM
So... would now be a good time to start talking about the A5's sea-level speed handicap?

...or should I wait?
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Kazaa on April 29, 2009, 10:45:54 AM
Some people on this forum have way to much time on their hands, you've just got to pick apart each others posts!

Make love, not quote wars!

But on a serious note, the XIV, in it's current state shouldn't be perked. HTC should just try it for a week or two, I'm sure it would make a lot of people happy! :aok

Now if the XIV was clipped and had 21lbs boost... that's another story. (also give the P51-D 75 MAP, Spitfire XVI 25lbs boost or add a VIII with clipped wings and 25lbs boost)

I know, I'm a cheeky bugger! :aok
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Karnak on April 29, 2009, 10:55:04 AM
Well, which aircraft I would be wary of in a Spit XVI is a much shorter list.

As to your La-7 experience, I said equal pilot skill.  Skill being equal, the La-7 should dominate the P-47 or Mosquito, but in practice skill is usually not equal.

Also, I don't follow how those aircraft are all double inferior to the Spit XVI.  The La-7 is, for example, much faster and has a similar climb rate and acceleration.  Certainly the F4Us don't accelerate well, but they are fast and very responsive.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Kazaa on April 29, 2009, 10:58:45 AM
A good F4U pilot can use those wonder flaps to out turn/hover around the XVI.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: moot on April 29, 2009, 11:19:06 AM
The F4U weighs a ton. It's not completely one-sided.

A XIV with 21lbs boost would probably be the best change.. It'd make things more interesting than just unperking the one we have.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: BnZs on April 29, 2009, 11:50:27 AM
Well, which aircraft I would be wary of in a Spit XVI is a much shorter list.

As to your La-7 experience, I said equal pilot skill.  Skill being equal, the La-7 should dominate the P-47 or Mosquito, but in practice skill is usually not equal.

My point is that between the Spit and La7, a poorly managed La7 attacking a Jug tends to end up in front of 8 .50s, while a poorly managed Spit...still tends to turn well enough at low enough speeds that it gets the shot in before it goes sailing or just swaps ends and shoots you in the face if it does go sailing by. And can seemingly also bounce around like a squirrel on crystal meth during the guns defense phase without loosing all its maneuvering speed. The La7 is a monster ride in the right hands, don't get me wrong, but only the Spit seems to do so much to negate skill differences and allow many victories to be obtained despite gross mistakes.

Also, I don't follow how those aircraft are all double inferior to the Spit XVI.  The La-7 is, for example, much faster and has a similar climb rate and acceleration.  Certainly the F4Us don't accelerate well, but they are fast and very responsive.

Actually, I checked at Dokgonzo's site and the La7's climb rate is notably less at all altitudes than that of the SpitXVI. La7 does run away from fights much better than SpitXVIs though :-) Technically double superior/inferior refers to thrust weight/and wing loading (more properly: lift loading), not speed. These are apparently the traits considered most crucial to ACM by people who have studied it scientifically. You will note, modern fighters are actually *not* designed for the highest possible top speed at the expense of maneuverability anymore, and thrust/weight is considered *vital*.

The SpitXVI is similar to the unperked Hogs in speed, much superior in climb, accel, and turn rate. The Hog's clear one area of clear advantage is turn radius w/flaps. There is great deal of debate among skilled sticks about how these planes stack up. In a duel, I think a good XVI pilot who understands the Hog and his own ride will be able to out-angles the Hog until it begins using flaps to even out the angles fight, at which point the Spit should to use its power to switch to the vertical and gain the first shot opportunity.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Saurdaukar on April 29, 2009, 12:25:49 PM
Well, which aircraft I would be wary of in a Spit XVI is a much shorter list.

In all honesty, I disagree.  Maybe its just the way I fly, but I feel far more confident in a 14 than a 16. 

The 14 can the ability to enter and exit most engagements at will and its vertical performance is awesome.

The 16, by contrast, can not.  Once the 16 is committed to the fight, its two options are (1) win or (2) lose.

I agree with some in this thread suggesting that instead of unperking the 14, we give it the proper amount of boost thereby clearly necessitating perk status.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Cajunn on April 29, 2009, 12:30:17 PM
In all honesty, I disagree.  Maybe its just the way I fly, but I feel far more confident in a 14 than a 16. 

The 14 can the ability to enter and exit most engagements at will and its vertical performance is awesome.

The 16, by contrast, can not.  Once the 16 is committed to the fight, its two options are (1) win or (2) lose.

I agree with some in this thread suggesting that instead of unperking the 14, we give it the proper amount of boost thereby clearly necessitating perk status.

You know I was reading and there were different variants of the supermarine Spitfire mk 14, some that could actually make 400 MPH at SL.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Kazaa on April 29, 2009, 12:54:23 PM
I'm sure 390MPH at SL is with 25lbs of boost, with 21lbs it would do about 370MPH at sea level?
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Kazaa on April 29, 2009, 12:55:37 PM
Double post.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Karnak on April 29, 2009, 02:39:40 PM
In all honesty, I disagree.  Maybe its just the way I fly, but I feel far more confident in a 14 than a 16. 
I was speaking of the Mosquito VI compared to the Spitfire XVI.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Saurdaukar on April 30, 2009, 08:20:33 AM
I was speaking of the Mosquito VI compared to the Spitfire XVI.

Doh!  In which case I agree wholeheartedly.   :D
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Karnak on April 30, 2009, 09:45:58 AM
I'm sure 390MPH at SL is with 25lbs of boost, with 21lbs it would do about 370MPH at sea level?
Probably more than that. I'd guess 375-380.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Kazaa on April 30, 2009, 11:03:57 AM
At sea level, the XIV could do around 380-389 with 21lbs of boost.

(http://www.spitfireperformance.com/merlin66_18_25.jpg)

(http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit14at21.jpg)
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Kazaa on April 30, 2009, 11:05:04 AM
Double post.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Cajunn on April 30, 2009, 11:16:25 AM
The XIV with 21lbs of boost could achieve 390 on deck with WEP :t

(http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit14at21.jpg)


The red line, is that the P-51B with 25lbs of thrust doing nearly 400 SL now that's a runstang.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Kazaa on April 30, 2009, 11:23:16 AM
That's a Pony B !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ?
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Cajunn on April 30, 2009, 11:44:13 AM
Then by the charts here the Spit 9 is the under achiever, because the version we have will only make around 318 MPH at SL with boost.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Kazaa on April 30, 2009, 12:02:27 PM
Then by the charts here the Spit 9 is the under achiever, because the version we have will only make around 318 MPH at SL with boost.

I'm not 100% sure about your comment, I will have to test it out non the less.
Title: 190 D-11
Post by: PJ_Godzilla on April 30, 2009, 12:09:28 PM
since we're talking wish list, I'd like to see a perked version of the 190D. The D-11 was very similar to the D-9 - with the notable addition of two 30mm cannon in the wings, outboard of the existing 20's.

Also, what about Night Ops? I'd call it a new frontier for AHII. Think of the possible add'l a/c: HE219, P-61, JU 388, etc.

Also, why no Me 210/410? Historical accounts show them to be numerous and reasonably successful bomber hunters, if kill-pads for the Allied fighter jocks.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Kazaa on April 30, 2009, 12:14:20 PM
Erm, 190 thread that way. >
Title: Re: 190 D-11
Post by: Lusche on April 30, 2009, 12:16:51 PM
since we're talking wish list, I'd like to see a perked version of the 190D. The D-11 was very similar to the D-9 - with the notable addition of two 30mm cannon in the wings, outboard of the existing 20's.

D-11 wasn't in serial production, only 5 protoypes were build out of old A-8's


Sorry Kaz ;)
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: moot on April 30, 2009, 12:18:14 PM
There's a 410 thread too, and one weighing the pros and cons of a 219, etc. Contribute in those if you have to :)   As far as a perked 190D, it'd best be one optimized for low alt.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: PJ_Godzilla on April 30, 2009, 12:31:38 PM
Re: the D-11 - at least one served in JV-44... and, as with the 219, there is always the possibility of assembled ac w/o werknummeren (so called "phantom" builds - typically done on site). Otherwise, my bad. I see no way to start a new topic.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: moot on April 30, 2009, 12:48:03 PM
Start a new thread... Don't derail this one.
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php?action=post;board=287.0
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Kazaa on April 30, 2009, 01:15:22 PM
Wtb 150 octane fuel in AH2! :aok No one has a problem with that, right ? :uhoh
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Karnak on April 30, 2009, 01:18:00 PM
Then by the charts here the Spit 9 is the under achiever, because the version we have will only make around 318 MPH at SL with boost.
Our Spit IX is a 1942 F.Mk IX with a Merlin 61 at +15lbs boost, not a 1943 LF.Mk IX with a Merlin 66 as on that chart.  Ours performs correctly.  The Mk VIII and Mk XVI in AH both have a Merlin 66, so compare them to the chart.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Motherland on April 30, 2009, 06:01:32 PM
Finally got to duel Machfly today, a couple times before time was up. I've never dueled the way he suggested before, and it was interesting. Instead of a set merge we just stayed in the sector, climbed 'til we found each other and went at it.

Only got 2 duels in, both with him in the Spitfire MkXIV, first with me in Spitfire Mk XVI and then me in the Bf.109K-4.

14vs16 was about a co-e merge and 14vsK he had a bit of alt on me.
'bout 2.5 megs for each film

http://www.mediafire.com/file/iggzdigdmzj/Machfly16.ahf (http://www.mediafire.com/file/iggzdigdmzj/Machfly16.ahf)

http://www.mediafire.com/file/mlzgq51tyzm/Machfly109K.ahf (http://www.mediafire.com/file/mlzgq51tyzm/Machfly109K.ahf)
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: MachFly on April 30, 2009, 06:07:36 PM
Did not have much luck  :cry lol

good fight  :salute
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Motherland on April 30, 2009, 06:08:58 PM
:salute
Better than trying to find a fight in the MA was treating me :) Good fun
I would like to try with standard merge rules as well at least once or twice :)
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: moot on April 30, 2009, 06:10:15 PM
K4 link looks broken.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Motherland on April 30, 2009, 06:11:55 PM
Works for me...
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: moot on April 30, 2009, 06:15:58 PM
"The key you provided for file download was invalid. This is usually caused because the file is no longer stored on Mediafire. This occurs when the file is removed by the originating user or Mediafire."
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Motherland on April 30, 2009, 06:18:04 PM
http://www.mediafire.com/?mlzgq51tyzm (http://www.mediafire.com/?mlzgq51tyzm)
Maybe that one will work...
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: moot on April 30, 2009, 06:25:31 PM
Same error...
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Motherland on April 30, 2009, 06:29:13 PM
Hmm. Well, this is the part that matters :)
(http://i156.photobucket.com/albums/t5/AK_Comrade/109KvSpit14.jpg)
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: moot on April 30, 2009, 06:38:15 PM
Looks like a well earned angle..
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Karnak on April 30, 2009, 08:21:21 PM
Well, acording to what people say here, the Spit XIV should eat a 109K-4 for lunch.....
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: MachFly on April 30, 2009, 10:32:03 PM
Hmm. Well, this is the part that matters :)
(http://i156.photobucket.com/albums/t5/AK_Comrade/109KvSpit14.jpg)

pilot error
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Guppy35 on May 01, 2009, 01:27:27 AM
At sea level, the XIV could do around 380-389 with 21lbs of boost.

(http://www.spitfireperformance.com/merlin66_18_25.jpg)


Gotta give me that XII.  +12 boost and out performing the LFIX with +18 boost :)
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Kazaa on May 01, 2009, 06:43:16 AM
Gotta give me that XII.  +12 boost and out performing the LFIX with +18 boost :)

OK Guppy, here's the deal.

You get your Mk. XII +12 boost.
I get my Mk. VIII + 25lbs boost and clipped wings.
Mk. XIV + 21lbs of boost.

Would I be a cheeky little monkey if I threw the Mk. 21 in there also?  :rofl

 :aok
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Kev367th on May 01, 2009, 07:00:39 AM
OK Guppy, here's the deal.

You get your Mk. XII +12 boost.
I get my Mk. VIII + 25lbs boost and clipped wings.
Mk. XIV + 21lbs of boost.

Would I be a cheeky little monkey if I threw the Mk. 21 in there also?  :rofl

 :aok

You get your Mk. XII +12 boost - OK
I get my Mk. VIII + 25lbs boost and clipped wings. - Were some clipped, 25lbs not so sure about.
Mk. XIV + 21lbs of boost. - OK

Sub the XVI at 25lbs in place of the VIII.

F.21 - A worthwhile and only Spit worth perking IMO.
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Kazaa on May 01, 2009, 07:48:07 AM
I get my Mk. VIII + 25lbs boost and clipped wings. - Were some clipped, 25lbs not so sure about.

The Mk. VIII was clipped and could operate at +25 boost, I'm still looking if it was cleared for sqn service. It has a bigger gas tank then most Spitfire’s but "The ailerons were reduced in size, having about 8 1/2 inches less span than on the standard universal Mark VC wing. There was little discernable performance difference between a Spitfire VIII and IX similarly configured." :uhoh

Never the less, a Spitfire Mk. IX, XVI and/or VIII with +25lbs would climb like a rocket ship and go like the clappers! They would be way to OP not to be perked!

http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spitfire-VIII.htm

Has anyone here sent information to HTC about the gaps Spitfire plane set?
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: moot on May 01, 2009, 09:17:47 AM
F.21 - A worthwhile and only Spit worth perking IMO.
Huh?  A 21lbs XIV isn't worth perking in your opinion?
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Saurdaukar on May 01, 2009, 09:37:49 AM
Hmm. Well, this is the part that matters :)

Now thats a thing of beauty, right there.  ;)
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Guppy35 on May 01, 2009, 03:13:19 PM
The Mk. VIII was clipped and could operate at +25 boost, I'm still looking if it was cleared for sqn service. It has a bigger gas tank then most Spitfire’s but "The ailerons were reduced in size, having about 8 1/2 inches less span than on the standard universal Mark VC wing. There was little discernable performance difference between a Spitfire VIII and IX similarly configured." :uhoh

Never the less, a Spitfire Mk. IX, XVI and/or VIII with +25lbs would climb like a rocket ship and go like the clappers! They would be way to OP not to be perked!

http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spitfire-VIII.htm

Has anyone here sent information to HTC about the gaps Spitfire plane set?

I've only found photos of a couple of clipped VIIIs.  It would make more sense on the IX and having it be a clipped LFIX with a Universal Wing from 43-44
Title: Re: The SpitXIV conundrum
Post by: Kev367th on May 01, 2009, 04:14:58 PM
The Mk. VIII was clipped and could operate at +25 boost, I'm still looking if it was cleared for sqn service. It has a bigger gas tank then most Spitfire’s but "The ailerons were reduced in size, having about 8 1/2 inches less span than on the standard universal Mark VC wing. There was little discernable performance difference between a Spitfire VIII and IX similarly configured." :uhoh

Never the less, a Spitfire Mk. IX, XVI and/or VIII with +25lbs would climb like a rocket ship and go like the clappers! They would be way to OP not to be perked!

http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spitfire-VIII.htm

Has anyone here sent information to HTC about the gaps Spitfire plane set?

Should clear up -
By IX I assume you mean the LF IX?

If so a clipped LF IX, clipped VIII and XVI should be very close in performance.

Only gaps I see are -

LF Vc
XII
F.21

At a real push you could include an LF IX, but seeing as the only difference between that and a XVI are the .50cals, not much point.
Has the XVI's FTH been fixed yet? If not just rename it as what it is - LF IXe (Covers May/June 44 thru to end)