Aces High Bulletin Board
Help and Support Forums => Help and Training => Topic started by: sandwich on August 24, 2009, 08:28:36 PM
-
I love the spitfire, especially the 14.
I just want to know, Why is it perked?
You'd think the spixteen would be perked but the 14 is.
Why?
-
I think its because the high alt performance of the 14, the 16 in my eyes is just a good alround and deos nothing exceptionly great, I think thats why its not perked. But im not 100% sure
-
It's all about speed.
-
I love the spitfire, especially the 14.
I just want to know, Why is it perked?
You'd think the spixteen would be perked but the 14 is.
Why?
The 14 is a later Griffon engined version of the Spitfire and far more powerful then the 16. This is one of those cases where 16 doesn't mean better then 14.
Think of the 16 as a Spitfire LF9e, which is all it is. The XVI had an American made Packard Merlin 266 while the IX had a Rolls Royce Merlin 66. Exactly the same performance. Exactly the same airframe. Change the engines and the IX becomes an XVI and the XVI becomes an IX.
-
Why is there such a performance difference (aside from roll) between the two in game?
-
Why is there such a performance difference (aside from roll) between the two in game?
The Spitfire Mk IX in AH is the much earlier Spitfire F.Mk IX with a Merlin 61 engine. That engine is less powerful, and supercharged for best altitude at about 25,000ft.
Basically:
Spitfire F.Mk IX, Merlin 61 - mid 1942
Spitfire F.Mk IX, Merlin 63 - early 1943
Spitfire LF.Mk IX, Merlin 66 - mid 1943
Spitfire HF.Mk IX, Merlin 70 - mid 1943
Spitfire Mk XVI, Merlin 266 - mid 1944 (Spitfire LF.Mk IX in all but name)
-
Why is there such a performance difference (aside from roll) between the two in game?
The FIX we have has a Merlin 61 engine with best performance medium to high altitudes.
The LFXVI we have has a Merlin 266 with best performance at lower altitudes.
Historically the clipped LFIXe and XVIe were used for ground support as the targets were just not their for them in air combat. The E wing had wing racks as well as a centerline rack for bombs. So to have them set to perform best at low altitude made sense.
And in the cartoon airwar of Aces High, much of the air war is fought at lower alt where the Spit XVI would perform better then our Spit IX which doesn't find much to fight at 25K
-
I love the spitfire, especially the 14.
I just want to know, Why is it perked?
You'd think the spixteen would be perked but the 14 is.
Why?
I agree with you sandwich. There's no good reason for the XIV to be perked as it's actually a more difficult plane to succeed in than the XVI.
-
There's no good reason for the XIV to be perked as it's actually a more difficult plane to succeed in than the XVI.
I find myself agreeing with you... a weird feeling :noid
-
Its perked because of its speed. It's one of the fastest planes in the game.
-
Its perked because of its speed. It's one of the fastest planes in the game.
It's slower than the Bf 109K-4 until almost 25,000'.
-
Its perked because of its speed. It's one of the fastest planes in the game.
At altitudes where there is no combat.
No, it's not that simple. Why isn't the La-7 perked then? Considerable faster than a XIV up tp ~8k AND a better turner as well. K4 is faster up to 25k...
And the 51D has almost identical speed up to 30k, at some altitudes it's even faster.
-
I find myself agreeing with you... a weird feeling :noid
:lol Well, I'm not crazy you know. When something is so obvious, even those who often disagree find common ground.
-
Compare the 14 to some of the High ALT enemies it might come into contact with, if you really want to see it shine.
Even medium ranges compare it. If theres a weakness its probably fuel load. The guns are adequate but not preemo.
Tho I'm not sure that justifies a perk price. Put it this way. If it wasn't perked you'd see it far more then you do now Perking it puts a psychological weight on an airplane that makes players pass it up even if they have all kinds of perk points. Most of all when another airplane close to its performance, or even better, is available for free. Like the 16 for instance.
All things considered its hard to justify perking the Spit-14.
-
Whatever the reason, very few people are willing to risk their perk points on the spit14. It appears those that do, rarely fly more than a sortie or two. Currently only 18 people have scored 10 or more kills in the spit14 this tour.
-
I took the 14 as my main ride for a tour earlier this year. Got 230 kills in it, but I found it somewhet arduous and more difficult to score (and survive) in it than you would expect from a "perk" ride.
-
I'm flying it a lot myself this tour. I hoped it would see more usage since the fuel bug was fixed, but it's proving not to be the case.
-
I'm flying it a lot myself this tour. I hoped it would see more usage since the fuel bug was fixed, but it's proving not to be the case.
Because there's no improvement whatsoever in its handling. I was flying last night and the nose wobbles all over the place worse than any other plane in the game.
-
I believe that was some improvement to the spit 14's nose oscillations (though this could be a post-patch placebo i'm experiencing).
What has improved is it's ability to hold it's nose high, at low speed, without having to worry about entering a deep stall all the way to the ground. It can still be a handful at low speeds, especially if the throttle is used aggressively or the engine is at idle.
-
Currently only 18 people have scored 10 or more kills in the spit14 this tour.
hello ;)
how did you find this stat?
-
Go to the scores & stats page.
Select "plane" under "individual statistics".
Wait for the list to load. Then klick on the plane name.
For a current tour, you will see only kills, if you check completed tours, you will also see the players deaths & K/D
-
aww lusche beat me to it, i deleted most of my post.
Last tour the tempest and spit14 had a similar number of individuals who flew them (around 650 each). Unsurprisingly the tempest had a much greater number of kills and k/d.
-
I believe that was some improvement to the spit 14's nose oscillations (though this could be a post-patch placebo i'm experiencing).
What has improved is it's ability to hold it's nose high, at low speed, without having to worry about entering a deep stall all the way to the ground. It can still be a handful at low speeds, especially if the throttle is used aggressively or the engine is at idle.
Im keeping my german iron away from your spit 14
-
nice, never seen the plane stats before :aok
looks like less than 10 that fly it regularly, and thrila has >20% of all XIV kills :rock
-
nice, never seen the plane stats before :aok
looks like less than 10 that fly it regularly, and thrila has >20% of all XIV kills :rock
You can see such effect with almost all those non-mainstream rides. Someone flying such a plane can easily manage to get a huge percentage of total kills.
I managed myself to skew several plane's K/D's in the past: 109F-4 & G-2, Hurricane I, Spit XiV, Ta 152
I think there was a tour where m00t & Grizz got something like 40% of all Ta 152H kills
-
Imagine an AH with no spit16, no spit8 (nearly identical, those two). Now look at this late-war spit that climbs almost 5000feet per minute. It zooms like almost no other plane in the game, can climb like a 163 (probably better at certain alts!), and has 2 hizookas and 2 50cals.
Now tell me why it would NOT be perked?!?!?
Then introduce a spit16 that can match this climb rate, this armament, but also surpasses it in turning, handling, and roll rate.
The question isn't "why is the 14 perked" -- but "why isn't the 16?"
EDIT: As a follow-up, the handling alone isn't grounds to unperk something. The potential is there, just don't screw up when you fly it. Same goes for a 262. Same goes for a Tempest. Same goes for a Chog.
-
I think this topic is has gotten a bit beyond the scope of help & training...
-
Well, I thought about it and added my second comment there... It's like flying a 262, a tempest.
You don't fly it like a spitfire, and you'll rack the kills up. Ignore the name of the plane, and pay attention to how it flies, and anybody can do well in it.
-
Sorry that's simplistic and not all that right.
The XiV HAS serious handling issues and is a difficult plane. The Tempest not so.
-
Imagine an AH with no spit16, no spit8 (nearly identical, those two). Now look at this late-war spit that climbs almost 5000feet per minute. It zooms like almost no other plane in the game, can climb like a 163 (probably better at certain alts!), and has 2 hizookas and 2 50cals.
Now tell me why it would NOT be perked?!?!?
Then introduce a spit16 that can match this climb rate, this armament, but also surpasses it in turning, handling, and roll rate.
The question isn't "why is the 14 perked" -- but "why isn't the 16?"
EDIT: As a follow-up, the handling alone isn't grounds to unperk something. The potential is there, just don't screw up when you fly it. Same goes for a 262. Same goes for a Tempest. Same goes for a Chog.
You're being ridiculous. The Spitfire Mk XVI's stats make it extremely obvious to all but the fanatically anti-Spitfire posters why it isn't perked. Your comment above equates much, much more accurately to the conclusion "Why is the Spitfire F.Mk XIVe perked?"
-
Imagine an AH with no spit16, no spit8 (nearly identical, those two). Now look at this late-war spit that climbs almost 5000feet per minute. It zooms like almost no other plane in the game, can climb like a 163 (probably better at certain alts!), and has 2 hizookas and 2 50cals.
Now tell me why it would NOT be perked?!?!?
Then introduce a spit16 that can match this climb rate, this armament, but also surpasses it in turning, handling, and roll rate.
The question isn't "why is the 14 perked" -- but "why isn't the 16?"
EDIT: As a follow-up, the handling alone isn't grounds to unperk something. The potential is there, just don't screw up when you fly it. Same goes for a 262. Same goes for a Tempest. Same goes for a Chog.
Krusty, there is no way in heaven or hell that any prop plane ever built can climb like a 163. You have abit of a point about the unperked nature of the 16, why do you make yourself look stupid with baseless hyperbole?
The SpitXIV is a plane that is double-superior to too many types to be unperked. The reason there are calls to unperk is because its handling is so inexplicably quirky that few can fly it well. Best solution IMO, rather than having scads of unperked SpitXIVs running down and eating for lunch most of the other high-speed E fighters in the MA, is to fix the handling, and leave it perked.
-
inexplicably
The handling is not inexplicably quirky.
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/11/Rolls_Royce_Griffon.jpg)
Furthermore the Spitfire Mk XIV isn't a significantly better energy fighter than the Bf 109K-4, an aircraft that is not only unperked, yet has an ENY of 20, and it's (the XIV) got much larger handling vices.
-
aww lusche beat me to it, i deleted most of my post.
Last tour the tempest and spit14 had a similar number of individuals who flew them (around 650 each). Unsurprisingly the tempest had a much greater number of kills and k/d.
I would suggest it's because Tempest guys fly that bird fast BnZ, while Spit 14 drivers think it's going to be just like a 9 or 16 and try and fly it that way when in fact they should fly it much more like flying a Tempest then a Merlin Spit.
-
But even when flying the 14 strictly BnZ like a Tempest, it has still some drawbacks compared to the latter one that result in getting less kills, (and ultimately less sorties)
- less firepower
- much less stable gun platform
- bad high speed handling (now that can really cripple a BnZ plane for the average player)
- short range
- lower top speed where it matters. The Temp can outrun almost everything. The 14 not so much.
I often take the Tempest when there's a base under heavy attack, and the sector dar is all red and no green to decimate the horde, working top down. In a 14 I would have less time, more difficulties killing with a quick D400 snapshot vs a crossing target, and I would know that unlike the Tempest I most probably won't make it back alive...
-
But even when flying the 14 strictly BnZ like a Tempest, it has still some drawbacks compared to the latter one that result in getting less kills, (and ultimately less sorties)
- less firepower
- much less stable gun platform
- bad high speed handling (now that can really cripple a BnZ plane for the average player)
- short range
- lower top speed where it matters. The Temp can outrun almost everything. The 14 not so much.
Not disagreeing with any of that. The point is the same however. The Spit XIV isn't a turn and burn Merlin Spit so much as a boom and zoom Griffon Spit. I don't think folks fly it to it's strengths is all.
-
Not disagreeing with any of that. The point is the same however. The Spit XIV isn't a turn and burn Merlin Spit so much as a boom and zoom Griffon Spit. I don't think folks fly it to it's strengths is all.
But even if you fly it to its strengths, it's near impossible to hold the nose in one spot.
-
Now this is going to be very subjective, but let me say anyway:
I do fly the 14 in BnZ mode, similar to how I fly a 109K-4.
But even when I was flying the 14 a lot and could say "I'm used to it", I had much less success than in a K-4.
-
The handling is not inexplicably quirky.
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/11/Rolls_Royce_Griffon.jpg)
Furthermore the Spitfire Mk XIV isn't a significantly better energy fighter than the Bf 109K-4, an aircraft that is not only unperked, yet has an ENY of 20, and it's (the XIV) got much larger handling vices.
You'll get no argument from me that an ENY of 20 for the Kurt is out-of-whack.
The torque from a high power/weight ratio doesn't quite cut it as an explanation though Motherland. If so, the La7 and the 109K4 should be just about as squirrely. (SpitXIV It is STILL squirrely with the throttle pulled back.) The one bad mark I've read in pilot reports about the XIV concerned ground handling...otherwise it was felt pilots used to previous Mks. of Spit would handle it just fine. The SpitXIV handles almost as squirrely as the Ta-152, a plane whose handling deficiencies are well documented in the record, so why haven't we heard British test pilots saying "You couldn't hold the bloody thing's nose steady"?
-
What recorded deficiencies are you refering to? Just curious.
The 152 is easier to handle than the XIV, IMO, and definitely not as squirrely. You just need to keep the tail in check.. Past departure you've got very gradual behavior 95% of the time. Whereas the XIV is much less easy to control and quicker to depart.
-
I'm pretty much getting this from one of your posts Moot...wasn't the 152 almost ruled unfit for service because it lacked steadieness as a gun platform?
What recorded deficiencies are you refering to? Just curious.
The 152 is easier to handle than the XIV, IMO, and definitely not as squirrely. You just need to keep the tail in check.. Past departure you've got very gradual behavior 95% of the time. Whereas the XIV is much less easy to control and quicker to depart.
-
Not disagreeing with any of that. The point is the same however. The Spit XIV isn't a turn and burn Merlin Spit so much as a boom and zoom Griffon Spit. I don't think folks fly it to it's strengths is all.
Dan, I am not so sure that is accurate anymore. Yes, when it was new I'd agree, but now with so few using it to any degree, I would have to think those that do know it isn't a turner.
I also wonder how many take it up by accident, having intended to take a Mk XVI.
-
I'm still trying to work out the best way to use it, it has issues as a pure BnZer compared to others - mostly high speed rollrate, although mixed guns and shortish firing time dont help either. although less stable than other spits it can still turn well and its very useful in a med-speed angles fight, and the acceleration gives a useful edge. Ive been surprised by how good it actually is TnBing on the deck.
people always say its the high-alt spit, but the flat spot at 21-23k is a nightmare if you're out of WEP (max boost is 6ish?) I reckon its just as capable low down, its still 20mph faster than all the other spits.
-
BnZ that was the evaluation luftwaffles at Rechlin's nastygram.. Anecdotic (meaning qualitative only) and not like what you heard from the pilots. In any case, in the game the 152 isn't as difficult to manage as the XIV.
-
Krusty, there is no way in heaven or hell that any prop plane ever built can climb like a 163.
How often do you fly a 163?
Do you ever pay attention when you do?
Because the E6B and the climb meter say two wildly different numbers. Most times it'll do 5000fpm or less. The only difference is in the 163 it keeps doing that rate where other engines (props) lose power the higher you go.
So yes, prop planes CAN outclimb the Komet. It all depends. And the Spit14 is probably the best climbing prop in the game.
-
BnZ that was the evaluation luftwaffles at Rechlin's nastygram.. Anecdotic (meaning qualitative only) and not like what you heard from the pilots. In any case, in the game the 152 isn't as difficult to manage as the XIV.
I disagree... You may simply be more comfortable in it.
The 152 has nose bounce like the spit14 does. It's got a squirrelly tail, long wingtips, and can flip/stall/dip itself out of the sky in a heartbeat. The spit14 is a lot more squirrely in some areas, much less so in others. Pure flying difficulty, I think they are equal. Killing power, the spitty is easier to kill with. My 2c.
-
Krusty,
The Me163 has a sustained climb rate of about 17,000ft/min as I recall. No prop plane ever has come remotely near that. The Spitfires XIV and XVI and the 109K-4 hit about 5,000ft/min at their best climb altitude, which they quickly pass through and rapidly lose climb rate above.
-
How often do you fly a 163?
Do you ever pay attention when you do?
Because the E6B and the climb meter say two wildly different numbers. Most times it'll do 5000fpm or less. The only difference is in the 163 it keeps doing that rate where other engines (props) lose power the higher you go.
So yes, prop planes CAN outclimb the Komet. It all depends. And the Spit14 is probably the best climbing prop in the game.
Krusty, I don't have to test the 163 for specific numbers. The pocket rocket has a greater ratio of thrust/weight than any prop fighter ever had, ever *could* have.
-
Krusty,
The Me163 has a sustained climb rate of about 17,000ft/min as I recall.
Not in this game. Especially not on autoclimb.
Check the E6B, not the climb meter in the cockpit.
-
Under 20k i would say the 109 g14 and k4 are more than competitive-
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/newscores/genchart.php?p1=64&p2=84&pw=2>ype=2)
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/newscores/genchart.php?p1=64&p2=1&pw=2>ype=2)
these are the HTC charts. I hope i need not remind you that the 109's have twice as much WEP as the spitfire, and under 7k the g14's speed is very similar.
-
The Spitfire's E-retention under maneuvering Gs tends to trump climb-rates that seem competitive on paper.
Under 20k i would say the 109 g14 and k4 are more than competitive-
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/newscores/genchart.php?p1=64&p2=84&pw=2>ype=2)
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/newscores/genchart.php?p1=64&p2=1&pw=2>ype=2)
these are the HTC charts. I hope i need not remind you that the 109's have twice as much WEP as the spitfire, and under 7k the g14's speed is very similar.
-
How so?
I had nothing better to do so i tested auto-climbs to 20k, timing commenced via film viewer when the wheels left the tarmac. All with 100% fuel and 2.0 fuel burn.
A/C 5k 10k 15k 20k
me163 0:51 1:29 2:04 2:30
Spit14 1:25 2:38 3:57 5:35 (WEP runs out ~18k, with WEP reaches 20k in 5:25)
Bf 109K 1:15 2:24 3:38 4:59
Bf 109G14 1:16 2:26 3:42 5:11
*me163 0:47 1:14 1:44 2:11
*achieved by levelling out to 300, pointing the nose up and hitting shift C. This maintained a steady climb at ~250 IAS. It also reached 25k in 2:35.
I think it's a safe to say the spit14 doesn't outclimb the me163 at any altitude. Stating that nothing climbs like a spit 14 is simply not true.
-
Krusty, I just rolled a 163, and on the first go I made 15k in 60 seconds from sea level. No way is this accurate:
Because the E6B and the climb meter say two wildly different numbers. Most times it'll do 5000fpm or less. The only difference is in the 163 it keeps doing that rate where other engines (props) lose power the higher you go.
So yes, prop planes CAN outclimb the Komet. It all depends. And the Spit14 is probably the best climbing prop in the game.
The XIV is definitely more of a handful than the 152. Whereas the 152 is well mannered up till departure, and while the XIV's quirks are centered around its torque (i.e. throttle control), I can't see how you would say the 152 is worse overall.
-
A/C 5k 10k 15k 20k
me163 0:51 1:29 2:04 2:30
Wich means 163 climbed @ 7900 ft/min between 5k and 10k. And not only that - it's still accelerating while doing it.
For comparison, the XiV climbed @ 4100 ft/min only...
-
At this point it's up to Krusty to show film of a 163 being outclimbed by a prop.
-
You have to remember though, that Krusty wildly exaggerates late mark Spitfire performance. This is the guy who claims that the Mk XVI accelerates past 500mph straight up.
-
How so?
Thrila:
Oh, I wasn't talking about the silly 163 vs. Spit comparison. I'm just saying that in actual dogfights (with prop fighters! :devil) the fact that a Spit tends to hold E better under Gs will tend to eclipse any slight on-paper climb rate advantage or parity higher-wingloaded fighters may possess.