Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Nashwan on November 17, 2001, 07:56:00 PM
-
Just to approach this from a different angle ;)
I wanted to compare the AH Spitfire IX to the real life Spit IX.
The Spit IX came in three basic variants, the F, LF and HF, and with four different engines, Merlin 51, 63, 66 and 70
The first 350 planes were Fs, fitted with the Merlin 61. Then production switched, initially to Fs with 63 (another 1000 built), then the LF an HF with Merlin 66 and 70 respectiely. Fairly small numbers of the HF were built, but well over 3000 LFs.
The first problem is that AH doesn't state which Spit IX, but we can narrow it down by a process of elimination.
The AH Spit has an engine that delivers 18lb of boost. This rules out the Merlin 61 engined F, as it had a max of 15lb boost. All the others had 18lb boost, however.
Secondly, the AH Spit can carry bombs, tanks and rockets. All the Spit IXs could carry a drop tank, but none of the early F series could carry a bomb. I am almost certain the HF aircraft couldn't carry bombs either.
Thirdly the armament. The AH Spit is equipped with the E wing of 2 20mm and 2 50 cal Brownings. This narrows the aircraft down to a late model aircraft, from 1944 on. None of the aircraft being produce then had Merlin 61s.
The bombs, rockets, boost gauge and armament all show the plane isn't an early F IX. The rockets show it isn't an HF. In short, the options on the AH Spit IX show it can only be an LF IX, from 1944 on.
Now that we hae narrowed it down, we can compare performance of the AH Spit with it's real life counterpart.
Speed (in mph) at alt (in feet)
Alt AH IX RL IX RL HF
0 . 321 . 336 331
4K . 340 . 353 348
10k . 365 . 380 373
18K . 378 . 390 394
20K . 385 . 399 392
Above 20K things are almost correct, with the AH Spit being up to 5 mph too fast at around 25K for an LF, but about 5mph too slow for an HF.
Climb (in feet per min) at Altitude (in feet)
Alt AH IX RL IX RL HF
2K . 3750 4640 4470
6k . 3800 4690 4520
10K . 3850 4280 4570
15K . 3500 3860 4030
20K . 3350 3560 3500
Again above 25K the AH Spit is a bit better than RL LF, but not many combats take place up there. Again the RL HF is better than the AH model.
In summary, the Spit IX in AH is about 15mph too slow, and between 300 - 900 ft/min too slow climbing below 20,000ft. Please fix ASAP
;)
-
Sorry nashwan but...
1st-post chart :p
2nd-the spit is a F.IX. And yes,it is porked.
The weapon options in the Spitfire F.IX require fix ASAP. Please remove the 50 cals and make the weapons fit the 1942 plane it is, currently it does have TOO many options for what it had historically :D
Not only that, but the plane also is faster than what it should be at altitudes over 15k. That should be fixed too.
And finally, please let the fw190A drivers to delete the cowl MGs if they want to. is a not Spit-related issue, but I MUST live up to the LW-hijacking standard so many people think there is in this board :p :D
[ 11-17-2001: Message edited by: R4M ]
-
It can't be a Spit F IX. I can't believe HTC would make that many mistakes in such an important, well documented aircraft, or that they would choose a totaly unrepresentitie early version. After all, they don't do that with Luftwaffe, US, or even Japanese or Russian aircraft.
No, logic dictates that you are wrong, RAM.
;)
-
Originally posted by Nashwan:
It can't be a Spit F IX. I can't believe HTC would make that many mistakes in such an important, well documented aircraft, or that they would choose a totaly unrepresentitie early version. After all, they don't do that with Luftwaffe, US, or even Japanese or Russian aircraft.
No, logic dictates that you are wrong, RAM.
;)
Your logic ;) Pyro has stated several times that the spit in AH is a F.IX
So indeed, it has lots of mistakes. So indeed they need to be fixed. Until then I'll accept your promise that you wont fly it with rockets or 50 cals, and that at high altitude you'll throttle back to keep the speed on wich was historically accurate.
:D
-
Not only that, but the plane also is faster than what it should be at altitudes over 15k. That should be fixed too.
RAM, how can you say that?
-
Originally posted by funkedup:
RAM, how can you say that?
His Luftwhiner Sense was tingling.
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
Hijacking sounds good..
How many tours was it until the 38L got the dive flap option? And guess what, they still dont come anywhere near to what they should do (besides lighting up the little light bulb in cockpit).
WALK THE PLANK MATEY! We got sissyfires to burn! Aye!
-
Nashwan,
Pyro stated specifically that it is a Spitfire F.IX with a Merlin 61 engine.
RAM,
It doesn't seem too fast to me at altitudes above 15,000 ft. Can you post evidence?
I have asked for the Spit IX in AH to be correctly labeled and only allowed the correct options, but I have never gotten a response.
-
Originally posted by Karnak:
Nashwan,
Pyro stated specifically that it is a Spitfire F.IX with a Merlin 61 engine.
When and where did he state this?
Seems to me, if anything, the Spit9 has some issues. If it is going to be a "f" model, then it should be modeled that way. But why did HTC give it the options it has? this is unlike them, they model the AC as accurately as possible. If its going to be the LF, then its performance needs to be upped accordingly. This is what I think should happen. In this Late war arena, a non-perked, accurate, spit9 LF is appropriate. From what I have seen here or read elsewhere, the spit XIII is the spit that was real nice..and would be a terror (more so) in the MA enviroment.
V/R
-
S!
The plane in AH most closely resembles a Spit IXF, but that plane didn't have .50's.
It was also a small run model as far as Spit IX's are concerned.
I would have to go through all the serials to be sure, but the Spit IX LF was close to 65% of the total Spit IX's produced. It would be much more representative of the historical aircraft available, especially since the arena is filled with '44 and '45 planes.
However I can understand the reasons why the Spit IX LF is not modelled here:
With the furball style of action we have in AH, it would kick every other planes butt round the MA... :)
It would turn like the current model, (no weight difference to speak of) climb 1000fpm better, and accelerate 25% better.
Probably would have to be perked... Which is sad considering it came off the production line in Summer '43.
J.E. 'Johnnie' Johnson, the Brits #1 Ace, liked it better than the Spitfire XIV.
-
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/Forum1/HTML/001267.html (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/Forum1/HTML/001267.html)
-
S!
Detailed performance figures:
http://www.fourthfightergroup.com/eagles/spittest.html (http://www.fourthfightergroup.com/eagles/spittest.html)
-
Originally posted by Tac:
Hijacking sounds good..
YES!
SPITFIRE XIV to AH !
As it's fashion to put "I want xxx to AH" in your sig.. Heck I'll do it too!
:D
-vector
--------------------
(http://www.kolumbus.fi/cool/sig_1.jpg)
414 RCAF THE BLACK KNIGHTS
"Totis Viribus-With All Our Might"
SPITFIRE XIV TO AH!
"The XIV was without a doubt the Spitfire that commanded the most respect!"
-
thx funked.
could you provide a link to the search feature so I can bookmark it?
-
-ammo-,
Here ya go: http://www.hitechcreations.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=search (http://www.hitechcreations.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=search)
-
SCHEISSEFEUER!!!!!!!
-
How about making the current Spit an early 61 engined F with the B armament package (good for scenarios) but bring in a bubble-top XVI with the packard merlin, LF wing and E-armament package? I'm all for that :) Lets get it right and get a reasonable (non XIV) late war Spit in the MA. It's only fair after all :)
Charon
[ 11-18-2001: Message edited by: Charon ]
-
Actually, that sounds real good. I really think we should introduce whatever the fastest spit was, it will make the dweebs life SO much easier. No longer will they have to choose between the fastest plane OR the best turner, instead they can get it all with just one plane! We can also just remove 95% of the planes we have in the game to have different skins for the 1 plane that will see 95% of all the usage in the game(you know, so all the dweebs don't look alike- that is the only way to introduce a little variety, especially since everyone would be flying the same plane).
-
Urchin,
What are you whining about now?
He said a MkXVI, not a MkXIV.
You freaking Luftwhiners are really getting old.
Your hyperbole in particular is really annoying. If you feel so victimized and descriminated against, go elsewhere.
-
Hey Karnak, how did you do in Intro to Pysch? You must have done really good, you know how to sling around some big words. I got some nice short words for you.
Shut The diddly Up. I'm tired of your psycho-babble toejam.
-
Urchin,
What is your problem with RAF aircraft?
Every single thread that involves them sees you posting some idiotic, whinning drivel about how unfair it is. Why?
You don't see RAF fans dumping garbage in the "Fw190A-5 is too slow" thread, do you?
Yet you come into this thread and make a sarcastic whine that somebody is asking for the fastest Spitfire, which is utter BS. He asked for the MkXVI, which was powered by a Packard Merlin 266, the American version of the Merlin 66 that the Spitfire LF.IX used.
If he were asking for the fastest Spit he would have been asking for a MkXIV, or even an F.21, but he specifically said not the XIV.
Was that good enough for the "defender of the Luftwaffe's honor"? No, of course not.
You'd be tickled pink if we were using Spit Is against free Ta152s I'll bet.
EDIT:
Read your post that I attacked you for. Can you see why that might get somebody pissed? Can you see any slight inaccuracies in it?
Fastest plane my ass. Even the horrible, dreadful MkXIV wouldn't be the fastest plane.
I know you like Luftwaffe planes and no others, but please, go away when you see a thread about US, Russian, Japanese, British or Italian aircraft. We don't want to see your gross exagerations and staggeringly biased posts.
The funny thing is, if you'd posted a polite rejection with a non-biased attitude, I'd have agreed with you.
I don't think we need a faster, non-perk Spitfire.
Its your attitude that gets me.
[ 11-18-2001: Message edited by: Karnak ]
-
I personally think that any faster spit needs to be perked no matter what. I mean the spit already can catch even fast planes due to it's outstanding acceleration. The Spit IX already get's way too much use i'd like to see some variety. You want a faster spit? great, just perk the thing all i need now is a SPIT that can both out-turn AND outrun me.
And no i'm not a luftwaffe fan although i do fly 190s from time to time. I'm a VVS flyer...
-
Soviet,
I agree.
I would like to see the LF options removed from the Spitfire MkIX in AH.
I don't want a faster, free Spitfire added either.
-
I don't have a problem with RAF aircraft. What I DO have a problem with is whiney little squeakes like you that insist that, despite the fact that the SpitIX is the MOST used plane in the arena, it isn't good enough. News flash, Dr. Ruth, I DO have an agenda. MY agenda is ensuring that people who like to fly LUFTWAFFE aircraft at least have a fighting chance for survival. As it stands now, your "1942" spitfire is superior to every German plane in the game, with the possible exception of the 109G10 and the 190D9 (in those two cases the fight would be a draw). Your "slow, poor old inferior SpitIX" is faster than every German plane except the Ta-152, the 109G10, and the 190d9 at 15,000 feet. Your "inferior" SpitIX outclimbs every German fighter but the 109G10. Guess what? I don't give a toejam that your favorite plane can't catch an La-7. Mine can't either. Get over it. The Spitfire we HAVE in the game OBVIOUSLY does the job just fine. We already have at least 2 planes that totally outclass every German fighter in the game, I don't wish to see another. I'm so sorry that you are so stupid and/or narrowminded to see my point of view as being one of a "victim", because it isn't. Just as your "agenda" is to bring a plane into the game that 95% of the people in the MA will fly exclusively (just because it is the 'best' plane in the arena), mine is to at least TRY to maintain some sort of a balance between MY favorite planes and everyone else favorite planes. Again, I'm really sorry that you don't seem to understand that (maybe you should take a few more psychology classes, try to take one that will help you see other people's points of view, you need it), but just because YOU don't like what I'm saying doesn't mean I'm going to stop saying it.
[ 11-18-2001: Message edited by: Urchin ]
-
Urchin,
Let me try again:
I don't want a faster Spitfire.
I don't want anything of the sort. How many times do I have to tell you that? As I said, I would have agreed with you if you had posted in a rational fashion.
I even want the Spit IX in AH to have the armament options it shouldn't have, removed, making it weaker. I want the thing to be less powerful than it is now, and I don't want a faster one added to make up for that.
Read through my posts in this thread, not one requests a faster Spit. I would really like to know where you got the idea that I want a faster Spitfire?
It would hurt the MA, badly.
As to me not liking what you are saying, that isn't it at all. I don't like the bald faced lies that you keep posting in pursuit of your agenda. That is why I post against you. Your first post in this thread was a pack of lies and distortions. The fact that it was in support of a position that I agree with is irrelevant to me. I think that it is an argument that not only can be won without using that kind of tactic, but that has already been won.
The post above this one is also a pack of lies and distortions, and some truth.
When you post hyperbole like this nobody will take you seriously. All that we can see is an agenda to have only German aircraft be competitive. You are attacking way to strongly.
[ 11-19-2001: Message edited by: Karnak ]
-
I would like to see a faster spit, I like the spit, it was an amazing design..considering this airframe was a mid 30's design.. The 109 is the only other AC that can cllaim the same distinction. As the AC evolved it's frame stayed basically the same.
The idea that the spit9 we have is on the same level with the planeset here is absurd. If you are an idiot and try to turn with it..then doh. A g10? run circles around it, LA5 will too..yes a LA5, not even considering a LA7.
-
So, why dont we just bring in the Spit XIV and unperk the C-hog....that should solve all of Urchin's problems. :D
-
No, no, no, no, no Sling!
The problem is that the LW doesn't have the superior planes. Don't you see that? If they had a plane that was markedly better than the Spit XIV, then the XIV would be allowed. Sadly, this is not the case.
So, just don't model any planes that are superior to LW rides and things will work out eventually.
;)
-
Hell i'm all in favor of a faster spit. say Spit XIV, but perk it. I'm not talking 60 perks i'm talking a small 8-20 perk you can all afford that right?
In fact this is actually giving credit to the Spit, the fact that a Spit IX can perform so incredibly considering it came out '42. The fact that there are worries of a faster one is actualy a compliment to the Spit it really is one hell of a design.
But the fact that the spit9 is here with the rest of the planeset ISN'T obsurd. Why else is it the most used plane in the arena??
In the end i have confidence that the HiTech team will make the right decisions on game balance.
-
S!
Sorry Urchin and other similar thinking Luftwobbles, I find this funny...
I have pushed for all kinds of additions to the Luftwaffe stable, but when some members of that group turn around and start insisting that a historical plane can't be represented in AH, I start to wonder.
You guys have the Me262, Fw190D9, TA-152H, 109G10, Arado, and you can't stand the thought of there being a Spitfire which actually performs as it should?
Ridiculous.
The current Spitfire is easily beaten by a good pilot in any of those aircraft, (exception Arado, and I guess it wins by just not getting caught) and that's 1 on 1. If you're flying in teams, a pair of those is hugely superior to a pair of the current Spit IX's.
Yeah a Spit IX LF or Spit XVI probably will end up being perked, (British planes can't be the best!) but the Anglophiles deserve to have the historical planes represented, even if they can't fly them in the MA.
The way things are going of course, every post '43 British Fighter will have to be perked to keep the Aryan hordes from having apoplexy on the spot.
As it stands at present, every Spitfire, or Spitfire based plane represented, has been significantly porked, by having the worst possible model selected.
(Spit V, Spit IX, Seafire IIC)
Do the research, and you'll see they are the lame duck versions, and not the most produced.
-
a LF.IX spit would be fine with me. Only if you substract 15mph to its deck speed on the grounds that the speed listed for the plane on the data sources for it, was for another"temperature" than the one present in AH :D
that means a 325mph-fast spit LF.IX on the deck :D
spit XIV perked, spit XVI unperked and ENY of 5, would be fine with me. If its use goes over the top, you can always perk it later :D
-
Hello friends:
As you know, not ingles, I use translator altavista , that is possible that it does not understand well what post says in his, sorry if in something I am mistaken.
Spit IX of AH seems to me entenderque this undermodelled in its benefits, and could be, but I insist on who this overmodelled, not in speed or climb rate (shortly testeare) but in its great retention E and in any type of turn, its great acceleration in any circumstance, and the great tolerance to G's in his flight, for my, this is sufficient to say that the FM of Spitfire IX this badly, already I said in its day that the 3 variants of Spitfire IX deberian correctly to be modeled and to give the opportunity of selection of each variant from the hangar.
(el traductor no sabe poner "su lloron de la LW preferido" :D)
Saludos
Supongo
P.D: that the LW does not have airplane equal or superior to Spitfire XIV? Quizas a well modeled 109K4 can be sufficient
Hola amigos:
Como ustedes saben, no se ingles, uso altavista translator, asi que es posible que no comprenda bien lo que dicen en sus post, perdonen si en algo me equivoco.
Me parece entenderque el Spit IX de AH esta undermodelled en sus prestaciones, y pudiera ser, pero yo insisto en que esta overmodelled, no en velocidad o climb rate (en breve testeare) sino en su gran retencion de E en cualquier tipo de viraje, su gran aceleracion en cualquier circunstancia, y la gran tolerancia a G's en su vuelo, para mi, esto es suficiente para decir que el FM del Spitfire IX esta mal, ya dije en su dia que las 3 variantes del Spitfire IX deberian ser modeladas correctamente y dar la oportunidad de eleccion de cada variante desde el hangar.
Su lloron de la LW preferido
P.D: que la LW no tiene avion igual o superior al Spitfire XIV? Quizas un 109K4 bien modelado pueda ser suficiente.
R.P.D.: para mi que el altavista translator a traducido lo que le ha dado la gana, asi que, si hay algun alma caritativa que lo haga mejor, pues ya sabe...... Graciaaaaaaaasssss.
:D :D :D
-
Well, I usually fly axis ... however, I have not read one valid reason to perk a LFIX or XIV. Because the actual FIX has wrong drop tank or armament options? Becouse the LFIX or XIV could be too good? C'mon. I cant believe it ... with all those free N1K2, La7, P51D (just to name some outstanding fighters) ... around in the Main.
I cannot even understand why we have not a "late" war Spitfire yet. Should a Ki-67 enter the arena before a MkXIV? I dont think so. But its just MHO. Could be interesting to hear something from HTC about it.
[ 11-19-2001: Message edited by: gatt ]
-
I agree with you Gatt ,I can't understand Supongo ...
Perhaps it's just a joke ?
I think so as he is asking for a K4 stating that the spit is good as she is.
ps : if it's not a joke we have now the proof that flying LW Iron is really bad for your mental health ...
-
Hello friends:
Damn translator online.
I do not say that Spitfire IX must be perked, NO, I badly say that this modeled in his FM (retention of E, turns without lost of speed, impressive acceleration).
If the horizontal speed or the Climb Rate of the SPitfire IX is not the correct one (undermodelled) that makes it correct.
This good explained now?
understand you to me?
Greetings
Supongo
Hola amigos:
Maldito traductor on-line.
Yo no digo que el Spitfire IX deba ser perked, no, digo que esta mal modelado en su FM (retencion de E, virajes sin perdida de velocidad, impresionante aceleracion). Si la velocidad horizontal o el Climb Rate del SPitfire IX no es el correcto (undermodelled) que lo hagan correcto.
Esta bien explicado ahora? me entienden ustedes?
Saludos
Supongo
-
Garrido says Luftwaffe actually had better fighters than Spit XIV, a well modelled 109K-4 would be superior (he says)
He is not kidding. I suppouse he is talking for 1vs1 at least.
Greetings
Garrido dice que la luft realmente tenía mejores cazas que el spitXIV, un 109K-4 sería superior (él dice)
No está bromeando. Supongo que habla respecto a un 1vs1 por lo menos.
Saludos ;)
-
"Garrido says Luftwaffe actually had better fighters than Spit XIV, a well modelled 109K-4 would be superior (he says)"
My God, now they're whining in the future perfect tense!
"Well modeled"! the obvious inference is that when the Spit hands him his arse he'll blame it on the faulty model.
Keep it up, boys, Goebels would be so proud of your logic and reasoning.
-
How would the performance of K-4 differ from G-10?
// fats
-
"This is the observer. Please remain in your seats. This thread is being RE-hijacked from the "LW 109K4 Liberation Group". With no further posts, no one will be harmed. Keep you hands AWAY from your KEYBOARDS!"
The F8F Bearcat was deployed operationally aboard the USS Langley. The ship and squadron had orders to join the Pacific war off the home islands of Japan. The Langley, with Bearcats aboard, was in Pearl Harbor provisioning for the last leg of the trip to the combat zone when the Japanese surrendered.
BEARCAT TO ACES HIGH!!!
:D :D :D
-
Originally posted by fats:
How would the performance of K-4 differ from G-10?
// fats
Paint job perhaps ?
-
Originally posted by Toad:
BEARCAT TO ACES HIGH!!!
// LW mode ON
PERK IT !!!
// LW mode OFF
What about a true BeerCat (french speeling at work ;) )?
-
Originally posted by fats:
How would the performance of K-4 differ from G-10?
// fats
Hmm, the K-4 was better aerodinamically than G-10 (main wheel doors and retractable tail wheel), also had Flettner-type tabs in ailerons which should improve efficiency at high IAS.
But I doubt this would make the K-4 better than Mk XIV.
-
Originally posted by Urchin:
Your "slow, poor old inferior SpitIX" is faster than every German plane except the Ta-152, the 109G10, and the 190d9 at 15,000 feet. Your "inferior" SpitIX outclimbs every German fighter but the 109G10.
100% fuel, fuelburnratemult=0.00, after 15kft level wait 2min-> record speed, hit wep wait 1.5 min -> record speed. Here are the results:
(http://www.kolumbus.fi/cool/109f4.jpg)
(http://www.kolumbus.fi/cool/109g2.jpg)
(http://www.kolumbus.fi/cool/109g6.jpg)
(http://www.kolumbus.fi/cool/spitix.jpg)
What comes to climbing, I made some tests earlier, however they aren't very accurate as at that point I didn't know that there is this "fuelburnratemult". I took 25% fuel and here are times to 20kft:
109F-4: 5'53, WEP: 5'05
109G-2: 5'41, WEP: 5'01
109G-6: 5'53, WEP: 5,11
109G-10: 5'36, WEP: 4'27
Spit V: 6'13, WEP: 5'42 (wep runs out after 5 min)
Spit IX: 5'53, WEP: 5'18 (wep runs out after 5 min)
-vector
--------------------
(http://www.kolumbus.fi/cool/sig_1.jpg)
414 RCAF THE BLACK KNIGHTS
"Totis Viribus-With All Our Might"
[ 11-19-2001: Message edited by: vector ]
-
Originally posted by fats:
How would the performance of K-4 differ from G-10?
// fats
<swallows the hook>
Dunno if there actually was any major difference of the G-10. Here's what "BF109F-K " -book says:
K-series was result of major rationalization of G-series(16 variants, 82 different models)
It was made to "..equal or surpass the performance of Allied aircraft, such as Spitfire XIV and P-51D..".
- improved aerodynamics (broadened engine cowling by about 70mm in the area of the belt feeds for the MG131's, retactable tail wheel and wheel well doors)
- New DB605D with larger supercharger of the DB603.
- thin steel sheet from aluminium for the leading edge slats.
- tail section was made of the wood -> better aerodynamics, 2-10kg heavier.
"The Bf109K was undoubtedly the most capable version of the 109 and the most demanding to fly"
Performance figures for Bf 109 K-4/R2 reconnaissance aircraft were as follows:
- Rate of climb at ground level: 13.5m/sec
- Economical cruising speed was 645kph at 8.4km
- Time to climb to 6000 meters was 8 minutes
- Maximum speed at emergency power was 580kph (~362mph) at ground level and 710kph(~443mph) at maximum boost at 7500 meters.
Hmm, I'm not quite sure about those converts, shoud 1 mph equals to 1.6 kph?
-vector
--------------------
(http://www.kolumbus.fi/cool/sig_1.jpg)
414 RCAF THE BLACK KNIGHTS
"Totis Viribus-With All Our Might"
[ 11-19-2001: Message edited by: vector ]
-
Any well flown energy plane including the D9 and G10 can hand the spit its bellybutton or disengage with ease. A poorly flown energy plane trying to furball, or using unimaginative tactics will either be easily killed or avoided (dancing out of the way of the 1v1 long, drawn out single pass, no angles sky jousts). And as for the Spit's great acceleration, that only comes into play if the energy fighter managed to get slow. You can't accelerate fast enought to get a kill on an evading energy fighter that is still going fast.
That's why I've been moving away from the spit into the P-51, Yak (can't hit crap with those short clipped guns) or perhaps the F4U since I actually like to land kills instead of just getting a few in a furball and dying from some Zero/P-51 combo. As for the Spit XVI (16), I would accept a light 5 point perk with no problem.
Charon
PS: As Toad said, BEARCAT to ACES HIGH!!! :)
[ 11-19-2001: Message edited by: Charon ]
-
Hello friends:
He does not matter to me if in AH appears a Spitfire IX F, LF or HF or a Spitfire XIV, I like to even see them, single I to me request that they model his flight characteristics correctly, the fatigue of the pilot and other things that seem not to matter in this community.
I cannot be thought that the real Spitfire is able to make the things that Spitfire IX does of AH, to raise in ZOOM with little lost one of E, wild acceleration, too much closed and continuous turns if lost appreciable of E, etc etc.
The Spitfire could not be this way, because otherwise the RAF had won the war in 1942 without North American aid.
To pilot fatigue of and engine model.¡¡¡¡¡¡
A greeting
Supongo
Hola amigos:
No me importa si en AH aparece un Spitfire IX F, LF o HF o incluso un Spitfire XIV, me gustaria verlos, yo solo pido que modelen correctamente sus caracteristicas de vuelo, la fatiga del piloto y otras cosas que parecen no importar en esta comunidad.
No me puedo creer que el Spitfire real sea capaz de hacer las cosas que hace el Spitfire IX de AH, subir en ZOOM con poca perdida de E, aceleracion salvaje, virajes demasiado cerrados y continuos si perdida apreciable de E, etc etc. El Spitfire no pudo ser asi, pues de otro modo la RAF hubiese ganado la guerra en 1942 sin ayuda Norteamericana.
Modelen fatiga de piloto y motor.¡¡¡¡¡¡
Un saludo
-
double post
[ 11-19-2001: Message edited by: Seeker ]
-
I agree with the pilot fatigue, and the call for more fidelity.
Please disable rudder trim on 109's and model the 109 "left leg syndrome", and relabel the guages in the correct languages and units.
I find it incredible the Lw squeakes squeak about intangibles such as E loss, while obvious and blatant inaccuracies such as Imperial guages and rudder trim stare them in the face every time they step into their plane *and they never say a word* (A question, did the G6 have German gauges, or were they labelled in Finnish?).
They couldn't (and don't) give a monkey's toss about realism or immersion, or they'd be as vocal about these glaring modeling faults with their own rides as they are about picking apart a 1942/43 plane.
Whiners.
-
Originally posted by Seeker:
Please disable rudder trim on 109's and model the 109 "left leg syndrome
Whiners.
:D
Now that was good one!
Garrido, anyone can claim anything according to "it can't be", "it must be", "i think it should be", but please show some figures to support spit magic-E. Do some tests like lvl then directly to up, record alt when stalling. Do loops with different speeds.. do just something. IMO it's quite pointless to whine something when you haven't any numbers or evidences to prove it.
Not any harm.
-vector
-
Seeker AH's G-2 is Finnish model, Not G-6.
And quit your squeaking whiner.
-
What Supongo/Garrido is saying is that the problem with the AH spitfire is its amazing E-retention, even in the tightest of turns.
Something I agree with. Ive dived at 420 mph on a Spit that was lower than me, gained REALLY fast on him, spit does a very hard turn to evade the bounce, I zoom back up, look behind me and I see the spit reverse his turn, Turn BACK into me real hard, and ZOOM UP and GAIN on my P-38 and get to within d700'ish of me before nosing back down (at which point my speed is about 90 mph as I dangle the nose skyward waiting for spit to nose down).
Now, I dont know WTF is up with that, since when can spits retain SO much E that when they start with slower speed they can turn TWICE at high G's and still have speed to zoom up with a plane that has a significant advantage in zoom and climbing/accel over it?
And the 50 cal loadout..what a joke.
F7F Tigercat and the 12X .303 Hurricane to AH!!! :D :D
-
Ah, thanks, knew I'd get that wrong.....
So, was it in German huh? or Finnish? Huh?
This outrageous affront to realism cannot be allowed to stand!
And if it's not fixed by ver. 1.09 I will resort to personal insults AND WRITING IN CAPS111111
<you have been warned>
-
btw maybe HTC should model throttle/mixture control-levers too.
Hint:kommandogerät
-
Finnish 109s Cockpit (http://www.byterapers.com/~grendel/photos/virtuaalilentajat/blenheim2001/mt018.jpg). Gauges were metric with original german texts. Only some warning texts were in Finnish.
Over the cannon pod between pilots feet is text "Be carefull when test-flying new Engines".
I would like to see metric gauges in planes which had them historically but HT has stated several times he's not interested to code those.
-
shhhhhhhhhhhh staga..............they want realism in what its interesting FOR THEM ;).
(P.S. And ammo counters need to be removed from ALL planes...xcept German, of course)
:D
-
109G10, 190D9 and 190A8 all out run the Spitfire MkIX currently modelled in AH.
The 109G10 outclimbs the SpitIX easily. The 190D9 easily extends away and zooms up to make another attack.
The 190A8 can run away and re-engage when the Spitfire gives up.
On the deck with an co-e SpitfireMkIX, a 190A5, 109G6 and 109G2 will easily extend away to re-engage later.
The only plane that is slower would be the 109F4, and then it is still faster on the deck.
Atleast one things consistent with the LostWaffles, you guys don't know what the hell you want or what the hell you are complaining about.
-SW
-
"Please disable rudder trim on 109's and model the 109 "left leg syndrome", and relabel the guages in the correct languages and units."
Seeker friend:
That suggestion or I have put it in others post (search if it has time) and also the one of good Vista to 6 that it always has the 109 (and the Spitfire also)
My complaints is for independently improving AH, saying bad and the good thing of any airplane, if it is RAF, LW, USAF or the one that are
Supongo
-
Originally posted by 38:
Something I agree with. Ive dived at 420 mph on a Spit that was lower than me, gained REALLY fast on him, spit does a very hard turn to evade the bounce, I zoom back up, look behind me and I see the spit reverse his turn, Turn BACK into me real hard, and ZOOM UP and GAIN on my P-38 and get to within d700'ish of me before nosing back down (at which point my speed is about 90 mph as I dangle the nose skyward waiting for spit to nose down).
Now, I dont know WTF is up with that, since when can spits retain SO much E that when they start with slower speed they can turn TWICE at high G's and still have speed to zoom up with a plane that has a significant advantage in zoom and climbing/accel over it?
Well, I've flown a short TOD with the Spitfire IX. I ended with a K/D ratio equal to 66/6 and I can say this: a fast Spitfire IX flying straight level can do a 45-60deg left break turn, build up watch the attacker zooming up, turn (less hard) 45-60deg right and chase the attacker. *But*, IMHO, only if:
- the speed difference berween the two is not enuff,
- the attacker zoom up in a *high* "g" pull up, blowing off too much E,
- the attacker gets below the pray's horyzontal plane (sp?), then blowing off too much E ...
In any other case I've always extended safely from Spitfires even with my C.205. And my stats say it. Try to learn how to extend with a low "g" maneuver.
This is not only a Spitfire issue, this is an FM issue. Actually, it was not possible prior to 1.03 Flight Model. But looks like the prior 1.03 FM was wrong. And this is probably very difficult to judge or fix from our POV's. So, learn to live with it and enjoy :)
-
In all honesty, RAM, I would like to see all and any plane issues fixed, including metric instrumentation, the komando thingy I can't spell and the ammo counters.
However, you'll admit yourself that the LW whining in general is a marked phenomenon in AH (maybe it was in WB too?), even if you probably won't agree that it's wearing in the extreme.
Add to that some salamander calling an icon of my culture and heritage "shitfire" and yes, it goes too far for me.I think you're Spanish, but I'm sure the Yanks would get hot under the collar if I constantly called VN vets baby-killers, or all LW pilots Nazi's. It's an unsessesary offense. I'd use a Spanish example if I could think of one. Does it never occur to any of you guys that some people would fly the Spit if it was the worst dog on the block? Why not? You guys like the A8.....
It'd be so much more believable if you guys could just occasionaly help with pointing out errors or omissions in planes other than Lw, or if you (rightly, in my opinion) asked for inaccuracies such as rudder trim to be removed where inapplicable. But to start whining about a plane which has yet to even be confirmed as to be a future addition - well it's hard to believe the objections are done in the interest of the game.
<How off topic/hidden agenda can one man be? :)>
-
Now don't turn this topic to "we want more realism" when we should have more speed to spit! :)
SWulfe is right.
All 109's out run spit ix at the deck!
And proves as follows:
(http://www.kolumbus.fi/cool/109f-4.jpg)
(http://www.kolumbus.fi/cool/109g-2.jpg)
(http://www.kolumbus.fi/cool/109g-6.jpg)
(http://www.kolumbus.fi/cool/spit-ix.jpg)
Hmmm I have sort of deja-vu here as I'm the only one to post any proves!
And where the h*ll all those ppl went who cried that spit ix is too fast?
Back to topic: AH Spit IX is too slow!
-
I'll reply to Supongo's claim about E-retention:
Some of you may know Wells. He makes the flight models for Targetware and is very knowledgable in aircraft physics. A while ago he made an independent calculation of energy retention for several Aces High planes in high-g turns. He then did flight testing to compare the physics predictions with what happens in AH.
Sure enough, AH came out very close to his theoretical predictions. The Spitfires should, and do, retain energy better than almost any plane in a high-g turn. This is proven by physics and proven by many combat experiences and comments from veterans who flew the plane. That settles the issue for me.
http://www.hitechcreations.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=9&t=000906 (http://www.hitechcreations.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=9&t=000906)
[ 11-19-2001: Message edited by: funkedup ]
-
90% of the posts you see on this board crying out for realism are for "selective realism".
That is, the poster wants what HE personally _feels_ is realistic and important.
For example, see how many of these guys want the autopilot totally removed from the large majority of fighters that didn't have them.
Argue about metric instrumentation all you want... it's not nearly as far off from realism as a three-axis programmable autopilot in an airplane that didn't have an autopilot at all. (Programmable: how many WW2 autopilots from any nation allowed you to input a particular climb or descent speed and then have it actually fly that speed?)
OK, start the cry for removing the autopilot... then I'll give you another example.
It's NOT a simulator... it's a game. Get over it.
Oh, yes. Like Karnak has often wondered, I'd like to know when the Brit fans are going to be able to have a thread discussing THEIR aircraft that doesn't instantly turn into a "heart-rending, tear-jerking tail of injustice to the LW in game modeling".
Sheesh. Give these guys the same courtesy they extend to you. Yeah, they butt into your threads but not NEARLY to the extent that you totally take over theirs!
[ 11-19-2001: Message edited by: Toad ]
-
"-the speed difference berween the two is not enuff,
- the attacker zoom up in a *high* "g" pull up, blowing off too much E,
- the attacker gets below the pray's horyzontal plane (sp?), then blowing off too much E"
Speed difference: Im diving on it (45 degree dive) and getting from d3.0 to d300'ish less than a second. Im very near compression. That itself tells me the Spit is NOT going anywhere near as fast compared to me. Spit notice me (or sees tracers) and does a turn that puts his planform facing ME before it dissapears to one side of my gunsight view(and I dont turn at all). That is a very high-g turn. I blast past it, start with a 20 degree climb (not pulling more than a 2g's) to gain some alt and a little separation, then slowly pull nose to 90 degrees up, not using C-Trim, the plane is kept nicely trimmed the whole way. I look at my 6 constantly and the spit, which had turned hard and put itself on my 3 oc or 9 oc when I flew past it (and its nose pointing away from my plane) turns AGAIN back into my vector quite quickly, noses up and gets inside d1.0 from me.
In a P-38, you dont "dive below" the target unless you dont enough speed to catch it or secure that you can zoom back up, doing so when you at high speed only invites compression lock up and a very humiliating death by the "prey" as your plane flies into its guns :p
So im left with a few option on how the spit does that. Either its zoom ability is waaaay over what it should be (being a crappy climber vs 38) or its E-retention is too high (doing 2 high g turns and zooming up and closing on a plane that was nearly twice as fast and has much better zoom rate). There is no way to "misjudge" E state of a spit when you are closing on it reeeal fast on its 6.
-
"-the speed difference berween the two is not enuff,
- the attacker zoom up in a *high* "g" pull up, blowing off too much E,
- the attacker gets below the pray's horyzontal plane (sp?), then blowing off too much E"
Speed difference: Im diving on it (45 degree dive) and getting from d3.0 to d300'ish less than a second. Im very near compression. That itself tells me the Spit is NOT going anywhere near as fast compared to me. Spit notice me (or sees tracers) and does a turn that puts his planform facing ME before it dissapears to one side of my gunsight view(and I dont turn at all). That is a very high-g turn. I blast past it, start with a 20 degree climb (not pulling more than a 2g's) to gain some alt and a little separation, then slowly pull nose to 90 degrees up, not using C-Trim, the plane is kept nicely trimmed the whole way. I look at my 6 constantly and the spit, which had turned hard and put itself on my 3 oc or 9 oc when I flew past it (and its nose pointing away from my plane) turns AGAIN back into my vector quite quickly, noses up and gets inside d1.0 from me.
In a P-38, you dont "dive below" the target unless you dont enough speed to catch it or secure that you can zoom back up, doing so when you at high speed only invites compression lock up and a very humiliating death by the "prey" as your plane flies into its guns
So im left with a few option on how the spit does that. Either its zoom ability is waaaay over what it should be (being a crappy climber vs 38) or its E-retention is too high (doing 2 high g turns and zooming up and closing on a plane that was nearly twice as fast and has much better zoom rate). There is no way to "misjudge" E state of a spit when you are closing on it reeeal fast on its 6.
That is certainly not the spitfire I've flown. If it was, I wouldn't be trying to get a handle on the P-51 right now. Some film would be nice, without that, well...
Argue about metric instrumentation all you want... it's not nearly as far off from realism as a three-axis programmable autopilot in an airplane that didn't have an autopilot at all. (Programmable: how many WW2 autopilots from any nation allowed you to input a particular climb or descent speed and then have it actually fly that speed?)
Toad
You mean that in RL they couldn't get up, grab a beer, take a leak, and indulge the wife in a few minutes of meaningless conversation while grabbing alt? No wonder war is hell :)
Charon
[ 11-19-2001: Message edited by: Charon ]
-
Originally posted by Toad:
For example, see how many of these guys want the autopilot totally removed from the large majority of fighters that didn't have them.
Argue about metric instrumentation all you want... it's not nearly as far off from realism as a three-axis programmable autopilot in an airplane that didn't have an autopilot at all. (Programmable: how many WW2 autopilots from any nation allowed you to input a particular climb or descent speed and then have it actually fly that speed?)
HELL THAT would rock!. I mean it!.
OK, start the cry for removing the autopilot... then I'll give you another example.
Prolly I'd agree with it, too. :).
It's NOT a simulator... it's a game. Get over it.
It's a game wich intends to closely re-create WWII air combats. Read the www.hitechcreations.com (http://www.hitechcreations.com) main page advertisement, if you dont believe me;
Aces High takes the art and science of vintage WWII air combat
and sets it in an online high intensity environment where
hundreds of players can battle it out with and against
each other. High fidelity air combat is the heart of
Aces High, but it doesn't end there.
To do that, to simulate "HIGH FIDELITY AIR COMBAT", you NEED to re-create the WWII planes as closely to reality as possible. That means the most real FMs possible, and for me that means that certain items wich were not present historically in some planes need to be removed. And certain items present in other planes need to be placed there.
Its a game, yes. One wich tries to be realistic (or at least that is what they sell in the advertisement, huh?). So, well, realism is what some of us want, Toad.
So stop the "its a game" thing, because, while it is, is a game wich sells historical FIDELITY in its advertisement. So if we ask for such fidelity, I'd say we're much in our right to do it. Right?.
Get over it ;)
[ 11-19-2001: Message edited by: R4M ]
-
RAM check private messages.
-
Ram, any rational analysis of the changes implemented to AH by HTC since the beta would conclude that they are NOT building a high-fidelity aircraft simulator for the PC.
They have crafted an absolutely excellent air combat game that has a very, very good flight model with a reasonable amount accurate elements and a reasonable amount of gameplay concessions.
You seem to be searching for "total realism" as YOU define it. Sit back, review the progress of the game and realize that:
1) You have input but no control. Beyond that, HTC itslef defines the "realism"... and none of us get a vote. Input far more than most other games, but no vote.
2) HTC has obviously shaded this more towards a great game than an absolutely correct high-fidelity simulation.. and they aren't going to change that.
Metric gauges? A very minor concession to gameplay in _almost_ every player's eyes.
Like the CA, there just aren't that many that really care.
So, you and all those millions :rolleyes: of other "selective realist" players that just LOVE the improvement that the Combat Arena made to the game might as well relax a bit.
Remember the guys crying about the fights being too far apart there? There ya go; SR rears it's ugly head yet again.
I'd like to see how many folks would dive into the CA if you got your wish for no autopilots and accurately scaled maps.
Sure, some would sit at their computer to recreate the BOB as LW. Takeoff, form up, fly to England, head home low on gas.
An hour and a half or so of flying with about 20 minutes of that actually in the combat area where you MIGHT find a fight.
Try to get them to set that up and lets see how heavily populated that arena would be.
... and that's why the wise folks at HTC have made the game what it is. Because their way it's TONS OF FUN!
-
yea --give me my paddle blade prop and 3500 FPM climb in my D11 too. And give us the Spit Mk XIV, perked to about ohhh 8 points, that would be about right.
-
Originally posted by Buzzbait:
As it stands at present, every Spitfire, or Spitfire based plane represented, has been significantly porked, by having the worst possible model selected.
(Spit V, Spit IX, Seafire IIC)
That isn't quite true.
The Spitfire MkV could be armed with 8 .303s, have cloth ailerons and a float carberator. Fortunately it doesn't have any of that.
The Spitfire MkIX has the option for 50 cals, rockets and perhaps some bombs that it shouldn't and also lacks a float carberator. I personally think that the option for the 50 cals, rockets and incorrect bombs should be removed.
The Seafire MkIIc is, indeed, the worst possible Seafire. It is not nuemerically representative in any way. There were two version of the Seafire MkIIc, ours is the first that was rapidly and completely replaced by the second, superior Seafire MkIIc. A Seafire MkIII would have been much more representative. Such is life though, at least we have a Seafire.
-
Ohh, hate to dig this up, but was gonna ask some stuff about our Spit V so I figured I'd see what was talked about in this thread.
Guess what? The F. Mk IX Spitfire DID see production with the E wing, meaning our guns package in AH is correct for the type of Spitfire that we have. The E wing on the IX's was not restricted to the low and high alt versions. Found an obscure reference for a F Mk IXe not only existing, but actually still was flying until it crashed in August of 2000. It was owned by the South African Air Force Museum.
Reference for it. It's down about halfway, highlighted in black (http://www.fleetairarmarchive.net/Aircraft/Preserved/Spitfire.html)
Now granted, most F Mk IX references I found seemed to have the traditional B wing configuration.
Also, since it can be an E model wing in Aces High, I thought that E wings (and definitely C model wings) could go with 4 Hispanos...
Just food for thought on the Spit IX armament issue...
-
Niffty,
IIIVs, IXs and XIVs all had the "e" "universal" wing, but I cannot recal ever finding evidence of 4 20mm cannon armed Spits.
The MkVc had 4 20mm cannon and the next mark that I can think of with 4 20mm cannon is the F.21.
Many in between had the capability, but never used it operationally.
-
Thx Karnak. So it's kinda like when R4M talks about the LW planes in that they could be fitted a certain way, but they never were in reality, so we don't see it modelled here... :)
-
Guess what? The F. Mk IX Spitfire DID see production with the E wing, meaning our guns package in AH is correct for the type of Spitfire that we have.
Almost certainly some F IXs had the E wing, though judging by the dates of production it can't have been many.
However, the current AH Spit IX has a Merlin 61 (so we are told) limited to 15lbs boost (though the gauge clearly shows 18lb). Only the first 350 or so Spit F IXs had a Merlin 61, all the later F IXs had a Merlin 63 with 18lb boost, and the speed increases I referred to at the start of the thread.
The E wing was late production only, whilst the last Spit F IX with a Merlin 61 was built in late 42 / early 43. As far as I can make out, very few if any of the Merlin 61 engined planes were flying after the summer of 43, almost all either crashed, shot down, transfered to training establishments, or re-engined with the Merlin 63.
A Merlin 61 engined Spit, with the performance of the AH Spit, probably only ever carried the E armament in prototype form.
-
Nifty: Someone made a typo somewhere or was sloppy. Morgan & Shacklady list TE.213 as a late build HF IX with a Merlin 70.
The South African Air Force Museum (http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Lab/2789/saaf/musac.htm) lists it as a LF IXE.
There might have been some Merlin 63 engined F IXs made with .50s, but I have not come across any yet.