Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: funked on March 04, 2001, 07:21:00 PM

Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: funked on March 04, 2001, 07:21:00 PM
Mk. I, 1938 - Battle of Britain Classic.

Mk. II, 1940 - Upgraded Mk. I, the Spit that all those mean 190's picked on in 1941.

LF Mk. IX, 1943 - The most common Mk. IX by a wide margin.  Clipped wings for greatly improved roll rate.  Merlin 66 engine gave over 4500 fpm at S/L and speeds up to 20 mph faster than F. Mk. IX (current AH Mk. IX) below 18,000 feet.  With 130/150 grade fuel, the Merlin 66 could produce 2000 hp for even more fantastic performance.

Mk. VIII, 1943 - The plane that the two-stage Merlins were intended for (Mk. IX was V with a two-stage Merlin wedged in there).  Extra internal fuel in the wing roots, fully tropicalised, retractable tail wheel.  According to Jeffrey Quill (chief development test pilot) the Mk. VIII was the best Spitfire "from a pure flying point of view".  Built in F, LF, HF variants with similar engines (Merlins 61, 63, 66, 70) and performance to Spitfire Mk. IX variants.  Used primarily in overseas commands (Asia and Africa).

Mk. XII, 1943 - The first production Griffon Spitfire, a modified Mk. V airframe.  Single-stage engine made it a low altitude specialist.  No match for the Mk. XIV but still a great performer.

Mk. XIV, 1944 - Simply the finest air-to-air fighter to see service in WWII.  A Spitfire redesigned to handle the power of the Griffon.  Two-stage supercharger gave it superlative performance at low and high altitudes.  Despite immense power, it retained much of the carefree handling and responsiveness of the earlier Spitfire Marks.

Performance information available here, courtesy MW of the 4th FG. (http://www.fourthfightergroup.com/eagles/spittest.html)

I want to see at least two of these in the next release, OR ELSE!          (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)

And after that I'll get started on the Seafire!

------------------------------------------

           (http://www.raf303.org/308/308banner.gif)            (http://www.raf303.org/308)
FunkedUp, Officer Commanding, 308 (Polish) Squadron "City of Cracow" RAF (http://www.raf303.org/308)
Northolt Wing (1st Polish Fighter Wing) (http://www.raf303.org/northolt)

"We had been forced to fight.  And now that we are fighting, we thought, we'll teach you rotten Huns how to fight.  We'll shoot your pissy little fighters out of the sky, we'll rip your dirty great bombers to shreds, we'll make you wish to Christ you'd never heard of the aeroplane!"

[This message has been edited by funked (edited 03-05-2001).]
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: Suave1 on March 04, 2001, 09:05:00 PM
Please do as he says, you don't want him to release the marmosets .
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: brady on March 04, 2001, 09:08:00 PM

 I see your spits and raise u a Ki 84...


Brady
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: Hans on March 04, 2001, 10:40:00 PM
I agree with Brady.  More Japanese.

The G4M, Ki-84, Ki-100, J2M, and maybe the Judy and Jill as well.

The Russians could use a IL-2m3.  It was the most produced aircraft...ever.
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: Karnak on March 04, 2001, 11:09:00 PM
I'm with Funked on this one.

The Germans have 4 109s and 4 190s, we have two Spits, and the IX is the worst IX produced.

Give us our Spits!!!!

------------------
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother

Bring the Spitfire F.MkXIVc to Aces High!!!

Sisu
-Karnak
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: Pongo on March 04, 2001, 11:14:00 PM
all good stuff, except the nonsence about a 4 cannon spit VIII.
Maybe if there were thousand plane  He177 raids on england.
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: funked on March 04, 2001, 11:21:00 PM
Perk the extra pair of cannon.    (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
(I copied that line from Jeffrey Quill's book, he meant the plane had the C or E wing with two cannon mounts per side.)

[This message has been edited by funked (edited 03-05-2001).]
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: Jack55 on March 04, 2001, 11:53:00 PM
Ya, some different Spiffies. Natural metal finish please.
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: Tac on March 05, 2001, 12:47:00 AM
early spits yes. Hurricane yes.

But more powerful spits? Geah, no! Last thing I need to see are more sissyfires turning inside me and spraying hispano !  (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: flakbait on March 05, 2001, 01:19:00 AM
Ernst Udet lives on in Funked?

"Fighters, fighters, fighters! That's what we need!"

 (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)

-----------------------
Flakbait [Delta6]
Delta 6's Flight School (http://www.worldaccessnet.com/~delta6)
Put the P-61B in Aces High
"For yay did the sky darken, and split open and spew forth fire, and
through the smoke rode the Four Wurgers of the Apocalypse.
And on their canopies was tattooed the number of the Beast, and the
number was 190." Jedi, Verse Five, Capter Two, The Book of Dweeb

 (http://www.worldaccessnet.com/~delta6/htbin/delta6.jpg)
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: Jekyll on March 05, 2001, 01:51:00 AM
Definitely agree on the Spitfire VIII funked.  I too had read that the Mk VIII was the nicest Spitfire of all to fly.

I'd love to see just how good the Spitfire was  (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)

------------------
When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.
Chapter 13, verse 11
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: gatt on March 05, 2001, 04:04:00 AM
I fly mostly axis, but I have to agree with Funked. In a virtual war you would see Spitfires LFIX and XIV over Berlin and not Ponies  (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif) ... chased by MW50 190D-9s ...  (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: bike killa on March 05, 2001, 04:21:00 AM
im' with ya funked! we need
moooooooooooooore!!!
moooooooooooooore!!!
moooooooooooooore!!!
 (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: Vermillion on March 05, 2001, 07:29:00 AM
Ok, you guys have broke me down  (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)

Lets get every possible variation of a Spitfire, Hurricane, Me109, Fw190, and the main American Fighters (P-51, P-40, P-47, P-38, F4U, F6F, F4F).

I mean after all... the only meaningful contributors to the war were the American, British, and German Aircraft.  (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/tongue.gif)

And then maybe we can get some Japanese, Russian, and a few more Italian planes added, in say about the year 2004.

------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: Nashwan on March 05, 2001, 07:38:00 AM
The 2 Russian fighters in AH are both later than the best Spit in AH. I don't think people really want more Spits, they want better ones, more representative of what was actually flying at the stage of the war AAH models.
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: juzz on March 05, 2001, 08:31:00 AM
"all good stuff, except the nonsence about a 4 cannon spit VIII."

The RAAF had HF.VIII with 4 cannon, to intercept those pesky Ki-46 Dinah's. I seen the pics.  (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/tongue.gif)
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: Asmodan PL on March 05, 2001, 11:29:00 AM
Funked we`r with U !!
Our old Spity is one of the slowest plaes ! we wont a good spit !!!
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: stegor on March 05, 2001, 12:36:00 PM
Uaaahhhh!!! ....mum a bad knight said me he has a 109 fastest than my spit..uahhhh mum I want a Griffon uahhhh...   (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/mad.gif)

uahhh!!! dad that nasty rook told me his cousin will have a fast Dora , buy me a multi turbolaser pokemon spit!!! I want it!!

Dont worry my little son i'll make them be all perked by the good little fairy  (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)   (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/tongue.gif)

And they lived all  pleased and happy   (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)

Nibbio joking  (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: TheWobble on March 05, 2001, 12:37:00 PM
Ya got the seafire last realease, yer gettin the Tempest very soon, yet ya still cry!  

WHERS MY NEW P-38 VERSION!??
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: Nashwan on March 05, 2001, 03:40:00 PM
Yes bring in the P-38F and perk the P-38L.
In fact, level the playing field and perk all planes released after 1942  (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: funked on March 05, 2001, 04:37:00 PM
Lightnings are nice, but not nearly as historically significant as the Spitfire.  

Lightnings were only in combat for what, two years?  Lightnings were a third-line aircraft behind the P-51, P-47, F6F, F4U, which did most of the killing.

Spitfires were the most numerous and most effective fighter of the RAF and were on the front lines from 1940 until the very end.  In addition they served very successfully with the air forces of several allied nations, in four theaters of operation.

There is no comparison.

[This message has been edited by funked (edited 03-05-2001).]
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: R4M on March 05, 2001, 04:47:00 PM
 
Quote
Originally posted by funked:
Lightnings are nice, but not nearly as historically significant as the Spitfire.

<cracks a cold one and sits down...thunder is hear far away, but is approaching fast>

Ohhh sad that Citabria is not here any longer  (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)


Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: Thud on March 05, 2001, 05:40:00 PM
I know that the VVS and Japanese are the first to deserve some new planes, and then the first priority in my not so hidden agenda is the Hurricane. The Spits mentioned above all are nice rides but first things first

------------------
Thud/Bies

Bring the Hurricane (MKIIC) to AH! (together with the Invader)

(http://www.geocities.com/drewbikscube/hurricane.jpg)
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: funked on March 05, 2001, 06:27:00 PM
Hey if you guys want to ask for your silly little planes go start your own threads!  I guess it's easier to destroy than to create.   (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: SKurj on March 05, 2001, 10:01:00 PM
I thought the E wing was the 2 20's and 2 .50's.... which we already have

SKurj
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: Tac on March 05, 2001, 10:20:00 PM
"Spitfires were the most numerous and most effective fighter of the RAF and were on the front lines from 1940 until the very end"

Really? I thought there was a boatload more of Hurricanes than spitfires throught the whole war... and Hurricanes even had higher K/D than spits I believe.

Another case of "pretty sissy" plane turned over to the media.  (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: funked on March 05, 2001, 10:32:00 PM
 
Quote
I thought there was a boatload more of Hurricanes than spitfires throught the whole war... and Hurricanes even had higher K/D than spits I believe.

No and No.
Go Away.

More Spits!!!

------------------
  (http://www.raf303.org/308/308banner.gif)   (http://www.raf303.org/308)
FunkedUp, Officer Commanding, 308 (Polish) Squadron "City of Cracow" RAF (http://www.raf303.org/308)
Northolt Wing (1st Polish Fighter Wing) (http://www.raf303.org/northolt)

"We had been forced to fight.  And now that we are fighting, we thought, we'll teach you rotten Huns how to fight.  We'll shoot your pissy little fighters out of the sky, we'll rip your dirty great bombers to shreds, we'll make you wish to Christ you'd never heard of the aeroplane!"

[This message has been edited by funked (edited 03-05-2001).]
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: TheWobble on March 05, 2001, 11:15:00 PM
there is 1 type of typhoon in AH
there is 1 type of P-38 in AH
there is 1 type of lanc in AH
there is 1 type of Ju-88 in AH
there is 1 type of B-17 in AH
there is NO japanese bomber in AH
there are 3 types of spitfire in AH


and AH needs more spitfires......
...yea Ok.
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: funked on March 05, 2001, 11:27:00 PM
Wobble, if you want those planes, ask for them.  This is the ask for Spitfires thread.  More Spits!!!
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: juzz on March 06, 2001, 01:44:00 AM
There are no Japanese Army a/c - show me the Shoki!  (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: Jigster on March 06, 2001, 07:19:00 AM
 
Quote
Originally posted by funked:
Lightnings are nice, but not nearly as historically significant as the Spitfire.  

Lightnings were only in combat for what, two years?  Lightnings were a third-line aircraft behind the P-51, P-47, F6F, F4U, which did most of the killing.


Very funny  (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)

Things would be so much simpler if the US had stayed with one evolving type like most other countries instead of inventing a new one every time they needed an improvment.  (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)

Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: Loyalist on March 06, 2001, 07:39:00 AM
I could go for a Hurricane or two before more spits..
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: mx22 on March 06, 2001, 09:01:00 AM
 
Quote
Originally posted by Loyalist:
I could go for a Hurricane or two before more spits..

Let me ask you a question (no offence intended). Are you suicidal (masohist) and do you really plan to fly Hurricane on regular basis in AH MA? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)

mx22
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: SKurj on March 06, 2001, 10:05:00 PM
The hurri would be a wonderful AC in the MA.  All the cannon dweebs would be scratchin their heads when the cannon rounds don't detonate on fuselage hits  (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/eek.gif)

+)  
SKurj
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: Buzzbait on March 06, 2001, 10:59:00 PM
S!

I totally agree.  The Spit IXF modelled here is completely unrepresentative of the Spitfires used late war.  75% of the Spitfire IX's built were LF models.  It had the Merlin 66 instead of 61, far better climb and higher speed at S.L.  By the way, the Spit IXLF did not generally have clipped wings.  Most had the normal wing layout.  RAF pilots did not like the clipped wing version for the fact that although it improved rollrate, it also removed any of the stall warning and gentle approach to stall of the standard Spitfire.  Plus it increased wingloading.

The Hurricane would also be a good plane to have.  The Hurricane I was slow, and lacked acceleration and climb, but it actually turned better than the Spitfire I.  It was also a better gun platform, very stable and was a bear for punishment, much more durable than either the Spit I or Me109E.  It also had better aileron and elevator response than the 109E in high speed maneuvers.  In the Battle of Britain, there was a certain snobbery on the part of the German pilots who always insisted they were shot down by "Spitfires".  Bob Tuck once shot down a 109 in his Hurri I, then landed and drove over to where the German had crashlanded.  When he stuck out his hand and announced he was the victor, and flew a Hurricane, the German refused to shake his hand, insisting only a Spitfire could have shot him down.

The Hurricanes were outclassed when the 109F arrived however.  Too much difference in speed and climb.  Despite the fact the Hurri IIC had 4 Hispanos, it was tough to bring them to bear on an F which was using the vertical well.  Typical tactics in the desert where the Hurri II's and 109F's were matched up were for the 109's to gain altitude advantage, then attacks to be made by the two rotte's (pairs) of a Schwarm (flight of 4) 109F's.  They would take turns diving and zooming from opposite directions on the same target flight of British aircraft.  This would be a continuous process of 2 aircraft coming down from either side simultaneously.  Very tough to avoid.  Hans Joachim Marseille and the crew from JG27 wreaked much havoc on Hurris and P-40's (British Tomahawks and Kittyhawks) this way.  The 109F was really the best in 1941.
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: funked on March 07, 2001, 10:25:00 AM
Yeah!!!
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: juzz on March 07, 2001, 10:48:00 AM
PS: Seems that the AH F.IX climbs at +18lbs what the real one did at only +15lbs... dare I say "pork"?! See here (http://www.fourthfightergroup.com/eagles/bf274.html).
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: Glunz on March 07, 2001, 11:57:00 AM
Give them Spits !

XIV, VIII, they deserved them
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: rosco- on March 07, 2001, 01:24:00 PM
 Say, is this like a thread to vote for HTC to add more spitfires to AH?

 I vote More spits in AH.

 Besides, funked says we need em and hes always right

Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: Gorf on March 07, 2001, 03:19:00 PM
I got a spit version for you!.. I have to find a working scanner.. There was ONE version made that had 6 20mms... funnest looking thing you ever saw..

Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: Karnak on March 07, 2001, 05:18:00 PM
Gorf,
Wow, you've got pictures of it?

I'd heard of it and know that it was ordered into production in 1941 as the MkXX, but some ignoramus in procurment looked at the number, and seeing how much it differed from the then standard MkV, switched the order to MkVbs.  (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif)

It was Griffon powered IIRC.

------------------
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother

Bring the Spitfire F.MkXIVc to Aces High!!!

Sisu
-Karnak
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: funked on March 07, 2001, 05:55:00 PM
Hey Rosco you are learning fast!  WTG!  At this rate you will earn another Monkey in no time!
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: funked on March 16, 2001, 07:00:00 AM
Shameless PUNT!
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: Vermillion on March 16, 2001, 08:43:00 AM
We need more spitfires in the next version like we need more holes in the head.  (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/tongue.gif)

------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: Ash on March 16, 2001, 08:59:00 AM
<< Rolls left, then sprints right.............PUNT >>

Agree with Funked, time for the Spit XIV!


Ash
3./JG2
Swager's Angels
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: Seeker on March 16, 2001, 05:37:00 PM
Um, so, like, what size hole d'ya want, Verm?, ya commie??


Spitdweebs ignite!
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: Kratzer on March 16, 2001, 05:47:00 PM
I want that Spit Mk.I and the Hurc, Emil and Me-110 to go with it!  Maybe even a Dewoitine 520!

But I don't see it happenin' for a good long while.
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: Jack55 on March 18, 2001, 11:25:00 PM
FXXII or F22.  Why not?
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: Mitsu on March 19, 2001, 12:00:00 AM
Is there Johnnie Johnson's Spitfire with Invasion Stripes?
I want it...

Mitsu

[This message has been edited by Mitsu (edited 03-20-2001).]
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: prz on March 20, 2001, 05:23:00 PM
Hey, funked seems to be slightly unhappy since there are not enough spitfires in this simulation. And given the temperament that funked can exhibit and the wrath of the gods he can hurl onto Texas if he doesn't get what he wants, I would strongly suggest, HT, get your a..s down and get those spities out. Or ELSE ... (308 will rotate countries AGAIN ;-)
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: Nath-BDP on March 20, 2001, 05:27:00 PM
My Johnson spits fire...
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: juzz on March 27, 2001, 02:13:00 AM
You should probably see a doctor about that.
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: rosco- on April 04, 2001, 12:22:00 AM
 Yet another shamless punt.

Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: funked on April 13, 2001, 03:12:00 PM
And here's the snap.  Ray Guy takes it and it's a booming punt.  That one's stuck in the scoreboard folks!
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: Jekyll on April 14, 2001, 07:38:00 AM
I can see a bit of a problem with introducing a clipped wing Spitfire.  At present, it seems that most AH aircraft roll far more quickly than NACA data would suggest.  The exception, of course, is the 190 series of aircraft.

So if you introduce a fast rolling clipped wing Spitfire, just how would you model its roll performance at present?

 (http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/phoenix/images/rollrates.jpg)
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: funked on April 14, 2001, 08:06:00 AM
Well that's pretty far off topic, but what the heck.    (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)

I think what's missing on the current Spitfires is the wing twist, which could actually cause aileron reversal at high speeds.  This probably affects all the planes.  Note that the AH Fw 190 roll rate curve is higher than the NACA one at high speeds too.

Unless I'm looking at the charts wrong, the biggest gaps are only about 20-30 deg/sec for most of the planes.  It should be examined, and the numbers should be changed if HTC doesn't have some information showing otherwise.  But it shouldn't stop HTC from modelling one of the most common variants of the best air-to-air fighter in the history of mankind.    (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)

[This message has been edited by funked (edited 04-14-2001).]
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: funked on April 14, 2001, 08:30:00 AM
More Spits Now!!!
Fight the Power!!!
 (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: funkedup on June 05, 2001, 03:11:00 AM
Amen brother!

------------------
Squadron Leader FunkedUp
308 (Polish) Squadron "City of Cracow" RAF (http://www.raf303.org/308)
Northolt Wing (1st Polish Fighter Wing), Royal Air Force (http://www.raf303.org/indexn.htm)
    (http://www.raf303.org/308/308banner.gif)    
Turning 109s and 190s into scrap metal since 1998


[This message has been edited by funkedup (edited 06-05-2001).]
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: GRUNHERZ on June 05, 2001, 11:56:00 AM
We shall overcome.....?
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: Seeker on June 06, 2001, 07:13:00 AM
<Punt>
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: funkedup on June 06, 2001, 12:33:00 PM
Grunherz has got the spirit!
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: Hobodog on June 07, 2001, 07:36:00 PM
AUSSIE boomerang
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: Pei on June 07, 2001, 10:26:00 PM
More Spits:

US has late war unperked fighters
Japan has a late war unperked fighter
Germany has late war unperked fighters
Russia has a late war unperked fighter
RAF has a 1943 Mk.IX and a 70-point monster I can't afford to fly.
(I won't mention the poor Italians though  ;))

Mo' better Spits!
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: Toad on June 07, 2001, 10:55:00 PM
XIV.. unperked!
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: Yeager on June 07, 2001, 11:21:00 PM
I want a tri-colored beanie cap with the little prop on top, that way I can make funked my PAL.  You know what PAL stands for, right?

xoxoxo

  :eek:

Y
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: funkedup on June 08, 2001, 12:38:00 AM
I don't wanna know!!!!  :D
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: NHMadmax on June 08, 2001, 10:22:00 AM
Quote
Originally posted by Loyalist:
I could go for a Hurricane or two before more spits..

yes we want more spits we want Hurricane's and want then now not tomorrow but today.

Also can you Make them right hand drive as i am from the UK  
 (http://cwm.ragesofsanity.com/otn/mfinger/thefinger_red.gif)  
And die to all that shoot me down

[ 06-08-2001: Message edited by: NHMadmax ]
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: Hristo on June 09, 2001, 11:15:00 AM
How about these classic gems ?

 (http://www.experten.fsnet.co.uk/capspit-02.jpg)

 (http://www.experten.fsnet.co.uk/db-f02.jpg)

 (http://www.experten.fsnet.co.uk/db-f01.jpg)

I guess someone noticed Spit lacked proper markings and decent engine.
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: Staga on June 09, 2001, 12:18:00 PM
First Me-109's had a RR Kestrel so its only logical some Spits have a Daimler-Benz under their hood  :D
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: funkedup on July 09, 2001, 12:23:00 PM
Ray Guy takes the snap.  Here's the kick.  It's a big one.  Whoa Nellie!  Folks that punt is lodged in the scoreboard!
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: batdog on July 09, 2001, 12:44:00 PM
Ray Guy should be in the HOF.

xBAT
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: DingHao2 on July 09, 2001, 01:51:00 PM
Lets concentrate on the essentials.  Every country needs a few basic typed of planes.  Thats means a fighter, a heavy bomber, a jabo, an anti-tank/attack plane.  The british have all but the anti-tank plane.  May i suggest a hurrican Mk. IID or IV?  Or a heavy german bomber--a Ju-388 or He-177?  Or a japanese bomber--u pick, im no expert here?  Or an american attack platform--an a-26?  Or SOMETHING for the Italians to work with?  Not to mention the Russians.  Lets concentrate on what the current lower end countries NEED, not what the higher end countries don't need.  A spit IX or Seafire IIC or Tiffie is fine.  Other countries need more planes DESPERATELY.
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: raven 8 on July 09, 2001, 09:44:00 PM
AUSSIE boomerang......yeah!!!!!!!

but wasnt that made like after the war:-)

but i hear it was better then the p-51. it looked alot like the p-51 too.


rav


bring in the p-40 and hurricane
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: Toad on July 09, 2001, 10:12:00 PM
Commonwealth Boomerang?

 (http://users.interact.net.au/~pwia/photo/boomer-02.jpg)

You must be thinking of something else. The Boomerang was an early war stop-gap derived frome the Whirraway trainer, itself a derivative of the early North American T-6 predecessors.
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: raven 8 on July 10, 2001, 03:14:00 AM
the one i saw was a one of experimental plane. had a top speed of 450 miles an hr, it looked like the p-51 except skinnier and was made in 1946 mainly to show australia had the expertise to buld a frontline fighter.

i cant find a pic of it, but it had a bubble cannopy and the air intake was underneath the fuselage and it had a skinny profile like the spit.


rav
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: Nashwan on July 10, 2001, 03:47:00 AM
Commonwealth CA-15 Kangaroo
 (http://www.ctie.monash.edu.au/hargrave/images/bxtai0507_a.jpg)
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: funkedup on August 07, 2001, 04:35:00 PM
Reggie Roby
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: kreighund on August 07, 2001, 09:47:00 PM
I think Raven 8 is refering to the Martin Baker MB-5....460 at 20000ft..looks like a P-51 but with RENO wings...when I get a scanner I send the film at eleven....
Title: We Need More Spitfires
Post by: raven 8 on August 13, 2001, 04:58:00 AM
yeah thats the one....the kangaroo :)

i dont think bringing the spit 14 to AH would be a smart move..........that thing would out perform every other plane in the plane set.

itll even outclimb my beloved 109 g2!

noooooooo

rav(messiah1):-)