Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: THRASH99 on August 08, 2010, 08:21:16 PM
-
As most of you know, I had complained about the spit 16 a while back for being a dweeb/noob machine, over the past year they have gotten relatively easy thanks to the Main Arena. I've been looking at some serious data about the plane itself. Now I am here to say why it shouldn't be in the game. As I remember, a pic that AK-AK had posted on my last forum about the spit 16 had a Canadian soldier standing in front of it with "confirmed kills" spray painted on the side of the cockpit. Those "confirmed kills" everyone keeps thinking were aerial kills, they're not. As I was looking on the web for Spit 16 data, I came across this particular website.
http://www.aviationmuseum.com.au/aircraft/SpitfireMkXVI.cfm
As I read the Spitfire XVI was built late 1944 and saw it's first action March 24,1945. At the time the spit 16 was used, it had been a month before the war had ended, American and Russian forces were closing in on Berlin. A flight of four spit 16s took off for an armed reconnaissance mission to Berlin. Only carring 2 250lb bombs and a long range belly tank. Told to bomb rail targets and strafe german aircraft. The spitfire 16s continued these sorties flying only 12 missions during its only six weeks of operations, an only 23 hours and 55 minutes total combat service. At the time, Germany had lost alot of there experienced pilots that had been replaced with young enlisted pilots with no experience. Germany had hardly any planes due to successful bombing raids by the Americans which had caused very many factories to be in ruins. The video I have set is about the luftwaffe "with" the very little planes they had for the mission to try and create more planes if the bombings were to stop, but the bombings didn't.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmDYdfb02tc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOHRdvxEL3Q
In this video as you watched, it describes basically everything I'm talking about, it all makes sense if you read/listen to it slowly and try to put the pieces together by yourself from this forum. The spitfire 16 in this case was only getting ground kills strafing germans targets on airfields, which is why everyone thought that it saw air to air combat, which it didn't. Now, as I read that the Spitfire XVI only saw 23 hours 55 minutes of total combat service for only six weeks of bombing/attacking armed reconniassance missions and it's in Aces High, it either 1) needs to be taken out of the game for very little combat service or 2) be highly perked. This is what I "HOPE" makes sense for everyone to whom reads it as I was trying to say before, just didn't have the data for it.
THRASH99
BTW: I searched for Spitfire 16 on the aircraft/vehicles and wishlist, couldn't find one single wish and/or comment about putting it in the game. The only thing I saw that had spitfire added, was the XIV model which was added in 2000 or 2001.
-
Corky Jr!!!
(need a "Bat Signal"© with a Spit silhouette)
wrongway
-
Fail.
They only call it a spit16 in-game to differentiate it from the SpitIX we already have.
Calling it a SpitLFIXe gets a bit complicated.
It's identical to a later spit9 with clipped wings.
In fact it's also nearly identical in performance to the Spit8.
And, also in fact the criteria for KILLS isn't so much important for a GROUND attack plane, no? Many (most?) spit16s were tasked to ground attack, hence the rockets.
I'll be the first to decry them for being a UFO, but don't knock the plane's history. Just focus on how it is in this game (it IS just a game, you know) rather than the real war.
-
Well Since you listed RAAF 453 squadron they were in fact tasked with attacking V2 rocket locations.
Important targets as far as the British were concerned & they did suffer some aircraft losses to flack.
You better be careful what you ask for if they did get rid of it. There are plenty of other Spitfire models out there if included to the game they would be far superior to the Spit XVI. Then you would be on the BBS no end as to how dweeby or some other issue.
(http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/af142/barneybolac/Scan11-11.jpg)
(http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/af142/barneybolac/UK2746.jpg)
(http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/af142/barneybolac/andrews404795-2.jpg)
(http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/af142/barneybolac/Scan3-19.jpg)
(http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/af142/barneybolac/Scan-11.jpg)
(http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/af142/barneybolac/Scan1-17.jpg)
(http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/af142/barneybolac/Scan2-26.jpg)
-
If i read that article correctly, the flying time is for that one spit portrayed in the picture, not an accumulation of total hours flown by all spit 16s.
Ive also read somewhere that the spit 16 was not the first to get clipped wings. To my understanding it was to increase the roll rate to make it able to counter the roll rate of the 190. But who knows.
-
Thrash99:
1) The March 24, 1945 date is for the specific Spitfire S/N TB863. Moved from UK to NZ in 1989, then to AU in 2006 and now part of the Temora Aviation collection. You can read more about it here:
http://www.nzfpm.co.nz/article.asp?id=mkxvi
2) Spitfire Mk XVI are Spitfire Mk IX LF's fitted with Packard 266 engine vs. a RR Merlin 66. That's why they changed the designation. Mk IX LF's were in action much sooner than 1945. From wwiiaircraftperformance.org the following flight tests suggest that Mk IX LF's were operational in March 1944.
http://www.spitfireperformance.com/ma648.html
3) If you want to be pedantic about it here's a source that talks about Mk XVI's being in production in Sep 1944, with the bubble canopy version starting production in Feb 1945.
http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/weapons_spitfire_mkXVI.html
Cheers,
Tango
-
If i read that article correctly, the flying time is for that one spit portrayed in the picture, not an accumulation of total hours flown by all spit 16s.
Ive also read somewhere that the spit 16 was not the first to get clipped wings. To my understanding it was to increase the roll rate to make it able to counter the roll rate of the 190. But who knows.
Each thread he keeps using the same plane to make his point about the Spitfire Mk XVI and each time we keep telling him that he's citing the war time record of a single Spitfire Mk XVI (the one that is shown in the first link he posted). For some reason he either completely ignores it or it just doesn't sink in.
ack-ack
-
As most of you know, I had complained about the spit 16 a while back for being a dweeb/noob machine, over the past year they have gotten relatively easy thanks to the Main Arena. I've been looking at some serious data about the plane itself. Now I am here to say why it shouldn't be in the game. As I remember, a pic that AK-AK had posted on my last forum about the spit 16 had a Canadian soldier standing in front of it with "confirmed kills" spray painted on the side of the cockpit. Those "confirmed kills" everyone keeps thinking were aerial kills, they're not. As I was looking on the web for Spit 16 data, I came across this particular website.
http://www.aviationmuseum.com.au/aircraft/SpitfireMkXVI.cfm
As I read the Spitfire XVI was built late 1944 and saw it's first action March 24,1945. At the time the spit 16 was used, it had been a month before the war had ended, American and Russian forces were closing in on Berlin. A flight of four spit 16s took off for an armed reconnaissance mission to Berlin. Only carring 2 250lb bombs and a long range belly tank. Told to bomb rail targets and strafe german aircraft. The spitfire 16s continued these sorties flying only 12 missions during its only six weeks of operations, an only 23 hours and 55 minutes total combat service. At the time, Germany had lost alot of there experienced pilots that had been replaced with young enlisted pilots with no experience. Germany had hardly any planes due to successful bombing raids by the Americans which had caused very many factories to be in ruins. The video I have set is about the luftwaffe "with" the very little planes they had for the mission to try and create more planes if the bombings were to stop, but the bombings didn't.
You misunderstood what was written. The description is for that particular Spitfire Mk XVI and is not a history of the entire production series.
Rego: VH-XVI Military S/N: TB863
History
This Spitfire will be one of only two flying Spitfire's in Australia. Both of them are owned by and based at Temora Aviation Museum.
"This" is in reference to the Spitfire Mk XVI that is pictured on the site you linked to (http://www.aviationmuseum.com.au/aircraft/SpitfireMkXVI.cfm), you keep making this same mistake with each thread you post on this subject. How many times must we explain that you are confusing the service record of a single Spitfire Mk XVI with the entire production series?
(http://spitfiresite.com/uploaded_images/spitfire-sm179_small.jpg)
Supermarine Spitfire Mk. XVI, SM179 9N-T ‘Lady Jane’
F/Lt Peter Hillwood
127 Squadron
The Netherlands, winter 1944-1945
Here is an operational summary of the above Spitfire Mk XVI. I've bolded the dates.
Spitfire Mk. XVI SM179 was built by Vickers Armstrong at Castle Bromwich and was delivered to No. 9 Maintenance Unit on 19 October 1944. It was officially taken on strength by No. 127 Squadron on 9 November 1944. The first time it was used operationally was on 11 November 1944 when it was flown by Flight Lieutenant Howard Truscott on a mission to escort bombers to Oldenzaal, Holland. Unfortunately he had to return early due to radio telephone failure.
Later on, SM179 became the personal aircraft of Flight Lieutenant Peter Hillwood DFC and was named Lady Jane. It continued to be used by the squadron until it was finally damaged in an accident on 11 April 1945. While landing at B.85 Schijndel, SM179 collided with another Spitfire, TD144 flown by Flight Lieutenant Parish. The pilot of SM179, Sergeant Emrys Williams was unhurt in the incident. Following the incident, the aircraft was transferred to 420 Repair and Salvage Unit where it was classified Category E and subsequently scrapped.
CorkyJr will be posting shortly with more examples of Spitfire Mk XVIs in addition to the history of this variant. Hopefully this time it will sink it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmDYdfb02tc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOHRdvxEL3Q
What have already said about using YouTube as a source? Nothing in those videos back up anything you claim in regars to the Spitfire Mk XVI.
In this video as you watched, it describes basically everything I'm talking about, it all makes sense if you read/listen to it slowly and try to put the pieces together by yourself from this forum. The spitfire 16 in this case was only getting ground kills strafing germans targets on airfields, which is why everyone thought that it saw air to air combat, which it didn't. Now, as I read that the Spitfire XVI only saw 23 hours 55 minutes of total combat service for only six weeks of bombing/attacking armed reconniassance missions and it's in Aces High, it either 1) needs to be taken out of the game for very little combat service or 2) be highly perked. This is what I "HOPE" makes sense for everyone to whom reads it as I was trying to say before, just didn't have the data for it.
THRASH99
If you were able to understand what was in those videos and figure out why during the last months of the war planes like the Spitfire Mk XVI were used in ground attack sorties. It was because there was a severe lack of Luftwaffe planes flying for the Spitfire Mk XVIs to engage and this wasn't something only the Spitfire Mk XVI experienced. Mustangs, Jugs, Lightnings, Typhoons, Tempests all had to sling bombs in the last months because there was hardly anything flying to shoot down. However, this doesn't mean the Spitfire Mk XVI never got any air to air kills because that is false, as the Spitfire Mk XVI did engage Luftwaffe fighters and shoot them down.
BTW: I searched for Spitfire 16 on the aircraft/vehicles and wishlist, couldn't find one single wish and/or comment about putting it in the game. The only thing I saw that had spitfire added, was the XIV model which was added in 2000 or 2001.
So? Planes and vehicles aren't added because someone asked for it in the Wishlist forums and hardly any evidence the plane shouldn't have been added.
ack-ack
-
You guys make a Spit history dweeb proud :)
One example. October 18, 1944. 602 Squadron re-equipped with Spitfire XVIs. Their most famous run in XVIs was the low level attack on "Shell" house in the Netherlands that house Gestapo Offices. Maxie Sutherland and the boys made that run. We have a 602 Squadron XVI skin from that run thanks to Kev.
That puts it about the same time as the 109D9. Guess we better lose that too :)
Yeah right :lol
Then there are the full span wing XVIs of 127 Squadron in the Fall of 44. As folks mentioned. Same as a Spitfire LFIXe but with the American made Packard Merlin 266 instead of the Rolls Royce Merlin 66. Same performance, came off the line at the same time in places. And yes the XVI was in action in 44.
(http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s199/guppy35/Spit2-1.jpg)
(http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s199/guppy35/Spit1-2.jpg)
(http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s199/guppy35/Spit30001.jpg)
-
BTW: I searched for Spitfire 16 on the aircraft/vehicles and wishlist, couldn't find one single wish and/or comment about putting it in the game. The only thing I saw that had spitfire added, was the XIV model which was added in 2000 or 2001.
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,153344.0.html
Searching for the term "Spitfire XVI" posted by Karnak in the Aircraft and Vehicles forum produced 4 pages of hits.
-
At the time many of us suggested, for variety to use the XVI instead of an IXe since the performances were identical but it would make for a nice breakdown of 43 IX, 44 VIII and 45 XVI for the Merlin Spits.
We'd like to think our logic might have had some influence on Pyro's thinking in designating it the LFXVI. We've of course apologized many times now because of silly threads like this. Had HTC named it the LFIXe, there would probably never have been this nashing of teeth that goes on with the XVI.
Again we apologize Pyro
-
I just want to know if they flopped like fish in the real world like they do in the game. I'd like to see that in a WW2 gun camera just once.
Sorry for the hijack. Just needed to say that :D
-
I just want to know if they flopped like fish in the real world like they do in the game. I'd like to see that in a WW2 gun camera just once.
Sorry for the hijack. Just needed to say that :D
Hopefully they can also find films of 109s, 190s, and P-51s doing the same thing.
-
That puts it about the same time as the 109D9. Guess we better lose that too :)
Must be a super-secret variant.. I only knew about 109D-1, D-2 and D-3. What' the command to unlock that plane? :noid
-
sure delete the XVI, then replace it with a clipped LF IX.
Imagine a XVI with 4x .303s instead of the 2x .50s. then go fly it in MW ... :devil
Is that what you really want?
-
The Spit16 and 14 really are dweeb planes. Everytime I see <insert name> landed 2 kills in a Spitfire MkXVI in the text buffer I have to LOL.
Not that I don't disagree with you Thrash, but the Ta-152 has less of a combat record and lower production numbers than the Spixteen and it's in the game. Doesn't mean we shouldn't all kick Karnak in the testes either for suggesting it in the first place, and then pointing out the fact 5 years later. :neener:
-
We'd like to think our logic might have had some influence on Pyro's thinking in designating it the LFXVI. We've of course apologized many times now because of silly threads like this. Had HTC named it the LFIXe, there would probably never have been this nashing of teeth that goes on with the XVI.
Again we apologize Pyro
Had HTC named it LFIXe it still wouldn't be the same plane. the LF is part of the prefix that designates its altitude role. The fan blades on the superchargers where cropped (LF) in order to give the engine more horsepower at lower altitudes. I haven't found the FXVI variant of the IX with this feature, yet. There are also HFIX, HFIXe and PRIX variants. The PR was for photo recon to my understanding. All have different performances at different altitudes. The (e) suffix just means that it had 50 cals instead of 303.
In reading the FXVI operators manual, the fuel capacities vary and also there is the addition of aft fuel tanks with a 75 gal capacity. The engine cowlings are different also due to the us. built merlin intercooler which gave it different flight characteristics. More interesting facts are that dogfighting or any non-suttle maneuvers with ordanace or extra fuel tanks would damage the aircraft and is recommended that they be jettisoned prior to any combat (for spit IX,XI,and XVI).
-
Fail.
They only call it a spit16 in-game to differentiate it from the SpitIX we already have.
Calling it a SpitLFIXe gets a bit complicated.
It's identical to a later spit9 with clipped wings.
In fact it's also nearly identical in performance to the Spit8.
And, also in fact the criteria for KILLS isn't so much important for a GROUND attack plane, no? Many (most?) spit16s were tasked to ground attack, hence the rockets.
I'll be the first to decry them for being a UFO, but don't knock the plane's history. Just focus on how it is in this game (it IS just a game, you know) rather than the real war.
the only spits i've flown, have been the 5, 9, 14, 16, and the seafire. i can't for the life of me make the 16 do what i see others doing in it.
-
Fail.
They only call it a spit16 in-game to differentiate it from the SpitIX we already have.
Calling it a SpitLFIXe gets a bit complicated.
It's identical to a later spit9 with clipped wings.
In fact it's also nearly identical in performance to the Spit8.
And, also in fact the criteria for KILLS isn't so much important for a GROUND attack plane, no? Many (most?) spit16s were tasked to ground attack, hence the rockets.
I'll be the first to decry them for being a UFO, but don't knock the plane's history. Just focus on how it is in this game (it IS just a game, you know) rather than the real war.
yikes.....crapcast going wonky.
-
Had HTC named it LFIXe it still wouldn't be the same plane.
same plane, different engine manufacturer. they even came off the exact same line at castle bromwich initially. I havent seen anyone come up with any definitive differences yet between the 66 and 266 apart from the factory they came out of.
-
same plane, different engine manufacturer. they even came off the exact same line at castle bromwich initially. I havent seen anyone come up with any definitive differences yet between the 66 and 266 apart from the factory they came out of.
No, they came from the same factory, they where built on adjacent lines. I also stated the differences in the engines which requiered different engine cowlings.
-
same line initially, like I said. later on 2 separate lines as production increased.
you explained the supercharger difference between a low-alt optimised engine and a med-alt optimised engine. 66 and 266 both low-alt optimised, same design. what specifically are the differences between the 66 and the 266 (apart from manufacturer)? I'm going to need part #s, specifications, dimensions, and references to be convinced theres any real difference here ...
-
The way they mounted the inter-coolers required a different engine cowling. As far as the engine block ive found no difference.
-
sure delete the XVI, then replace it with a clipped LF IX.
Imagine a XVI with 4x .303s instead of the 2x .50s. then go fly it in MW ... :devil
Is that what you really want?
Well....I'm not a spitfire pilot, so I really wouldn't care what happened to it unless it was some super upgrade put in that I've never even heard about, then I'd be curious. What my question is, is why is the XIV perked with the lack of manuverablity that the XVI has? It has the same loadout, about the same speed without WEP, and both climb crazy too. I just want to know, with all the pilots flying spixteens in the MA and it's such a favorite plane taken "everyday" by people who somehow "really need it" just to fight, why isn't the XVI perked? :headscratch:
-
well if its about perking the XVI, sure why not. of course you'd have to perk the D pony as well, and probably the LA7, Niki, M&N jugs and maybe a couple others too. wonder how that would effect business, not allowing new, mostly US players to fly the D pony ...
thats why the XVI isnt perked. so why is the XIV perked? good question ...
-
I just want to know, with all the pilots flying spixteens in the MA and it's such a favorite plane taken "everyday" by people who somehow "really need it" just to fight, why isn't the XVI perked? :headscratch:
The notion that people take a Spitfire (any model) just because they "really need it just to fight" is coming from someone that has had their tulips handed back to them repeatedly by someone in a Spitfire. What makes someone flying a Spitfire any less skilled than you are? Looking at your stats, you're not very good in any plane you fly. How about instead of trying to get planes you can't fight against removed from the game, you instead learn how to fly and fight?
ack-ack
-
The notion that people take a Spitfire (any model) just because they "really need it just to fight" is coming from someone that has had their tulips handed back to them repeatedly by someone in a Spitfire. What makes someone flying a Spitfire any less skilled than you are? Looking at your stats, you're not very good in any plane you fly. How about instead of trying to get planes you can't fight against removed from the game, you instead learn how to fly and fight?
ack-ack
Uh, that's not exactly correct either Ack-Ack. It's not easy to get the upper hand on a single Spixteen when you're flying a 30+ ENY plane, let alone the numbers that one can find in any base attack. I've seen some really hinky stuff from Spixteen dweebs that should not be happening.
-
The notion that people take a Spitfire (any model) just because they "really need it just to fight" is coming from someone that has had their tulips handed back to them repeatedly by someone in a Spitfire. What makes someone flying a Spitfire any less skilled than you are? Looking at your stats, you're not very good in any plane you fly. How about instead of trying to get planes you can't fight against removed from the game, you instead learn how to fly and fight?
ack-ack
1) because I fly pony and don't need to fly spits just to get back at someone, 2) Pony actually takes somewhat skill to fly in a dogfight unlike spixteen where you barely have to pull at all, and 3) I actually fly alot of fighters ack, I'm not a person sitting in a P-38 like you all day. Maybe you should try flying some other fighters for once and see where that gets you. Most of my deaths on the stupid stat list is cause by a load of gang bangers who can't only have 1 or 2 people after me, they have to make it a 10v1. That's obviously saying something that your that big of a threat to everyone and they really need you dead that fast.
-
Maybe you should try flying some other fighters for once and see where that gets you.
Heh. Ack-ack has flown the other fighters, probably all of them. He's quite talented in each. While I'll never understand why he hasn't become bored flying one plane so much, don't mistake his obsession for lack of skill.
- oldman
-
2) Pony actually takes somewhat skill to fly in a dogfight unlike spixteen where you barely have to pull at all, and
The notion that it takes no skill to be successful in the Spit 16 is as wrong as the one that it does take "more skill" in a P-51 to get kills.
-
The notion that it takes no skill to be successful in the Spit 16 is as wrong as the one that it does take "more skill" in a P-51 to get kills.
What does this have to do with research of the spit 16?
-
What does this have to do with research of the spit 16?
Ask the one spreading that kind of stuff.
-
It's not easy to get the upper hand on a single Spixteen when you're flying a 30+ ENY plane ...
:headscratch: no of course it isnt. equal pilots, the guy flying the eg. P40 should get his arse kicked every single time vs a XVI. or a 51D. or a LA7. or a Niki. etc. that just tells me the ENY values are about right.
The notion that it takes no skill to be successful in the Spit 16 is as wrong as the one that it does take "more skill" in a P-51 to get kills.
really. it was about 6 months before I even flew a pony (about half the LWMA seemed to be flying them at the time.) within a coupla days I landed 15, only towered because I was bored stupid. you can BnZ all day in that thing without taking a scratch, any threat appears you just nose down and egress/reset. after spawn camping in a gv its about as easy mode as it gets.
What does this have to do with research of the spit 16?
nothing at all. rather like this topic. its just another pony driver wants to perk the XVI thread in disguise :rolleyes:
-
Had HTC named it LFIXe it still wouldn't be the same plane. the LF is part of the prefix that designates its altitude role. The fan blades on the superchargers where cropped (LF) in order to give the engine more horsepower at lower altitudes. I haven't found the FXVI variant of the IX with this feature, yet. There are also HFIX, HFIXe and PRIX variants. The PR was for photo recon to my understanding. All have different performances at different altitudes. The (e) suffix just means that it had 50 cals instead of 303.
In reading the FXVI operators manual, the fuel capacities vary and also there is the addition of aft fuel tanks with a 75 gal capacity. The engine cowlings are different also due to the us. built merlin intercooler which gave it different flight characteristics. More interesting facts are that dogfighting or any non-suttle maneuvers with ordanace or extra fuel tanks would damage the aircraft and is recommended that they be jettisoned prior to any combat (for spit IX,XI,and XVI).
<Face palm>
We have an FIX in the game. We have an LFVIII in game. We have an LFXVI in the game. Had they named it LFIX it would perform the same. Having researched Spits for 30 + years, I'm going to go with what I've learned in that time. Trust me on this one.
Read the following carefully. It's from the official Air Ministry publication on the Spitfire IX and XVI. It can't be any clearer than this.
"The Mk XVI is the designation given to the Mk IX airframe when fitted with the American built Merlin engine" Look at the specs for the LFIXe and the LFXVI. Only difference is Rolls Merlin 66 vs Packard Merlin 266. Same plane, same performance. As for fuel tankage, the mods over time applied to both. We've had this discussion many times. I can post for you photos of a low back IX and a low back XVI that are one serial number apart. The only difference being on the line they put a Rolls Merlin in the first and a Packard Merlin in the second due to availability at the time.
This just can't be this complicated!
(http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s199/guppy35/email0214.jpg)
-
I actually fly alot of fighters ack, I'm not a person sitting in a P-38 like you all day. Maybe you should try flying some other fighters for once and see where that gets you.
I would be just as successful in another fighter as I would be in the P-38. I just choose to fly a plane that takes more skill than most to fly successfully.
ack-ack
-
The fan blades on the superchargers where cropped (LF) in order to give the engine more horsepower at lower altitudes. I haven't found the FXVI variant of the IX with this feature, yet.
btw the cropped impeller mod was done on the earlier 40 and 50 series (early Spits, Seafires etc) which had single speed/stage superchargers. the 60 series had two speed/stage superchargers, the tweaking for different alts was done by just changing a couple of cogs in the gearbox. :)
-
btw the cropped impeller mod was done on the earlier 40 and 50 series (early Spits, Seafires etc) which had single speed/stage superchargers. the 60 series had two speed/stage superchargers, the tweaking for different alts was done by just changing a couple of cogs in the gearbox. :)
I stand corrected... Besides a few differences in the cooling systems, engine shrouds, and canopy, they are almost identicle. The only thing Ive found to be of notice was the stall characteristics due to the cowling and airflow over the bubble canopy. Other than those, I wonder what the performance differences between the LFXVI and FXVI are? How much high alt performance is lost by gearing down the supercharger and vice versa.
-
btw the cropped impeller mod was done on the earlier 40 and 50 series (early Spits, Seafires etc) which had single speed/stage superchargers. the 60 series had two speed/stage superchargers, the tweaking for different alts was done by just changing a couple of cogs in the gearbox. :)
Did not the 40 and 50 series Merlins have 1 stage, 2 speed superchargers?
Did not the 60 and 70 series Merlins have 2 speed, 2 stage superchargers?
-
Due to the nature of the air war, the LF versions of the Merlin, the 66 and the Packard 266 were used for the LFIX and LFXVI. This was because the airwar was much more tactically based and had come down in alt. This occured in late 42-early 43, most likely due to the bombing altitudes of the medium bombers the RAF Spits escorted over France being 18K or so. Once the ground war started things got even lower. There are numerous photos and combat operations where the specialized Spitfire VII had it's extended wings removed and standard wingtips added in the summer of 44 so they too could be used to support the ground war. Imagine flying a pressurized high alt fighter in a low alt war.
The Spitfire IX went through a number of cowling changes. It too had some built with the cut down rear fuselage and bubble canopy but this, like the XVI was very late in the war and not in large numbers. Performance was essentially the same for the LF Spit IX and XVI. Some pilot anecdotes suggest that the Packard was a bit rougher sounding at cruising speeds.
Trying to separate the two birds is just not worth the time as outside of identifying serial numbers, there really isn't a for sure way to tell. Put a Rolls Merlin 66 into a Spitfire XVI and technically it becomes a Spitfire IX. Reverse the engines and the same will make an IX into an XVI. There are restored Spits out there that do this due to restored engine availability.
It's much ado about nothing, and considering ours is a cartoon Spitfire, it's even more of an adventure in silliness trying to make the XVI into something it's not.
Merlin 60 series engines were the first Spit engines to go to two speed two stage superchargers. The Spit VI was the last of the single stage superchargers.
The two stage engines could be adjusted for better performance at different height bands which lead to the HF, F, LF designations on the Spitfire IX for example.
The cropped impeller bit was on the Spitfire Vs that they were trying to improve performance on at lower alt to allow them to compete. "Clipped, Cropped and Clapped" was the pilot's comment on those Spitfire LFVs as they were older airframes with clipped wings and cropped impellers. They were quick down low, but performance really fell off as they got alt.
At lower alts the peformance difference between a modified LFV and a Spitfire LFIX were slight. I believe the previous AH Spitfire Vc that got all the whines by many and is missed by the Spit drivers was based on that performance and not the earlier FV that we have now.
-
:headscratch: no of course it isnt. equal pilots, the guy flying the eg. P40 should get his arse kicked every single time vs a XVI. or a 51D. or a LA7. or a Niki. etc. that just tells me the ENY values are about right.
Then, everyone should be flying Spixteens, to keep it even. I'd rather take my chances with a P-40 vs P-51, La7 and N1k.
The Spits are noob planes, I can get 2 kills in one and I stink in everything I fly.
-
Then, everyone should be flying Spixteens, to keep it even. I'd rather take my chances with a P-40 vs P-51, La7 and N1k.
The Spits are noob planes, I can get 2 kills in one and I stink in everything I fly.
Maybe the Brits made this aircraft user friendly to save the pilots lives & take the enemys? If so so be it.
-
Then, everyone should be flying Spixteens, to keep it even. I'd rather take my chances with a P-40 vs P-51, La7 and N1k.
The Spits are noob planes, I can get 2 kills in one and I stink in everything I fly.
You do understand that the Spitfire was an easy plane to fly in real life correct? What an advantage it was for new pilots being sent off to war to have a bird that was user friendly.
For those of us with a history interest, the chance to hop in a cartoon version of such a fantastic bird, is hardly reason to be condemned.
While I spend 99 percent of my time in my 38G, getting in a Spit just isn't something I think should have to be apologized for. Shoot em down if you don't like em.
Nothing better for me in my 38G to see Spitfires as chances are pretty good they are going to stick around and turn fight with me.
-
I wonder what the performance differences between the LFXVI and FXVI are? How much high alt performance is lost by gearing down the supercharger and vice versa.
its quite a big tradeoff, heres the diff between an F IX (61/63) and an LF VIII (66):
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/newscores/genchart.php?p1=2&p2=85&pw=1>ype=0)
Did not the 40 and 50 series Merlins have 1 stage, 2 speed superchargers?
Did not the 60 and 70 series Merlins have 2 speed, 2 stage superchargers?
I think there may have been a 1 speed 2 stage blower at some point but essentially early merlins had 1/1, later 2/2. you can see the difference the 2-speed gearbox makes here:
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/newscores/genchart.php?p1=17&p2=2&pw=0>ype=0)
-
Maybe the Brits made this aircraft user friendly to save the pilots lives & take the enemys? If so so be it.
Pretty sure all fighter aircraft were designed with the best of intentions.
Guppy, I know all that. The thing is, when you're flying along in your 20 or 30 ENY plane and you see a dogpile of Spixteens coming at you, any attempt to avoid the most obvious outcome get's met with cries of being timid or some other b.s. Hell yeah I'm gonna be timid, I'd rather take on a group of C hogs. And lately, it's as if every single Spixteen is piloted by a HO monkey, as if the speed and bizarre agility isn't enough. Personally, unless I see <squeaker1> landed 2 kills in a Spitfire MkXVI, I laugh when someone gives a "WTG <insert name>". Go land 2 kills in a Spit V and I'll consider giving it a WTG.
-
Other than those, I wonder what the performance differences between the LFXVI and FXVI are? How much high alt performance is lost by gearing down the supercharger and vice versa.
Hmmm, I could be wrong but I think the LF XVI and F XVI are the same aircraft. 1) From what sources I could dig up both had the 266 engine (similar Pilot Manual as guppy/Corky listed except this one instead of listing it as the LF XVI, it just the F XVI instead). 2) From a listing of individual Spitfire Production records from the Air Ministry I haven't found any F XVI's, only LF XVI's.
-
This thread is turning more into a "Spit16 Victim Relief Clinic". There is no need to remove the plane from the game, since it already meets the requirements for inclusion to the game. Just give the plane a light perk (3-4) and be done with it.
-
Just give the plane a light perk (3-4) and be done with it.
There is absolutely no reason to perk any Spit we currently have in game.
-
Please explain.
-
Please explain.
The perk system is a way for HTC to introduce some interesting but otherwise unbalancing planes on a limited basis but the benefits go deeper than that. Perk planes (and vehicles) would be things like Me 262s, Ta 152s, Tempests, B-29s, Ar 234s, Tiger IIs, etc. These are interesting rides but would be very unbalancing if they were available on an unlimited basis. So there won't be unlimited availability but they'll be available as bonuses or perks every so often.
No Spit is unbalancing the LW MA in any way. Notably the 14 is not very successful compared to other perked planes, and is for a good reason rarely used even though it's much cheaper than other perk rides.
There is no reason to limit it's use more than the P-51,La-7 etc...
-
Number one overall performance plane has to be the Spitfire. I say remove the P-51D as it can't do anything except dive and run. P-51 pilots are the dweebs, not the Spitfire. "High Pony" is all I ever hear. Get in the fight already!
-
No such thing as a dweeb ride in the game. The right tool for the right job & what you feel most comfortable in.
-
No such thing as a dweeb ride in the game. The right tool for the right job & what you feel most comfortable in.
:aok
man I so wish this was truth........but yet it IS the truth, I read so often on 200 how people are calling particular planes "dweeb rides" I try to always say there are no "dweeb" planes just "dweeby" pie-lits,
what is more dweeby......to attack a lone con with 10 or more nme....or attacking a horde in a 16, La7,hurri2C,K-4,38, ECT ECT.
the PLANES are just tools, they do nothing on there own, the way some of you guys go on about the 16 is just hilarious, act like you jump into it and it goes out and kills all on its own.
the pilot puts the "dweeb" into effect NOT the plane.
-
Whats sad about this thread is it's an excellent technology thread being used by a digruntled player to poorly disguise a weak whine and his elitist game play atttiudes. You would think he was secretly auditioning for the muppets.
Guppy I for one would like the Vc back. It was a fun base defence ride especially against CV planes when you are capped at 3k.
-
Whats sad about this thread is it's an excellent technology thread being used by a digruntled player to poorly disguise a weak whine and his elitist game play atttiudes. You would think he was secretly auditioning for the muppets.
....
trying to figure out what you are saying???? sounds an awful lot like an insult to all Muppets.
-
Doesn't mean we shouldn't all kick Karnak in the testes either for suggesting it in the first place, and then pointing out the fact 5 years later. :neener:
I'll defend myself from that accusation. I knew HTC's preference to have a simple Mk # for British aircraft and thus the only way I could get both the 1942 F.Mk IX and the 1944 LF.Mk IXe in the game, as logical Spitfire progression demanded, was to suggest the Mk XVI as it is the same bloody Spitfire as the LF.Mk IXe flying under a different name!
Just imagine if HTC had put the Mk XVI in at +25lbs boost as I'd suggested......
I still think the Mk F.XIVe should be remodeled at +21lbs boost on 150 octane to justify its being perked.
-
I still think the Mk F.XIVe should be remodeled at +21lbs boost on 150 octane to justify its being perked.
Now that would be interesting. Did any of the clipped wing XIV's see much use?
-
Now that would be interesting. Did any of the clipped wing XIV's see much use?
Guppy says they weren't used during the war, but I really recall reading about bubble canopy Spitfire FR.Mk XIVes that had clipped wings to address skin buckling that was being caused by the weight of the cameras.
-
Guppy says they weren't used during the war, but I really recall reading about bubble canopy Spitfire FR.Mk XIVes that had clipped wings to address skin buckling that was being caused by the weight of the cameras.
The book I have about RAAF 453 squadron has profiles & pictures of those but arrived on the end of ETO or a few days after I forget now.
-
the muppets are excellent
you said it dude :aok
-
At least the muppets don't hide a whine in a good technology thread. But, alas they do dork with the text editor unabashedly and often............This is the dweeb ride of thier textual perfidy they often hijack threads with. Still, at least they only dweeb ride the boards.
-
Number one overall performance plane has to be the Spitfire. I say remove the P-51D as it can't do anything except dive and run. P-51 pilots are the dweebs, not the Spitfire. "High Pony" is all I ever hear. Get in the fight already!
:furious i'll be looking for you pal. :furious
-
Number one overall performance plane has to be the Spitfire. I say remove the P-51D as it can't do anything except dive and run. P-51 pilots are the dweebs, not the Spitfire. "High Pony" is all I ever hear. Get in the fight already!
I take issue with that comment. I'll be looking for you in the MA sir. :t
:rofl a good pony driver is a dangerous thing no matter if he is above you or below you.
-
No such thing as a dweeb ride in the game. The right tool for the right job & what you feel most comfortable in.
Not true, my wife says we are all dweebs.... Therefore by default they're all dweeb rides. :D
-
Not true, my wife says we are all dweebs.... Therefore by default they're all dweeb rides. :D
Simple solution I found was I got rid of mine. :aok But I do see your point. :D
-
There is absolutely no reason to perk any Spit we currently have in game.
That, kind Sir, is an opinion.
The Spit 16 is the most capable plane in the game. What else can turn like it, roll like it, climbs as well, accelerates as good, goes as fast as it does, has the firepower it does, and carry the ordnance it does? Sure, some can out dive it, some are faster, very few can out climb it, many carry more ordnance, but the total package the Spit 16 has to offer is tops. If you give all the fighters a score of 1 to 10 for each and every category there is, the Spit 16 would be near the top in all but 2: over-all speed and dive ability. Even then, the Spit 16 is not to be looked over in those 2 categories either.
I wont vouch for a perk on the Spit 16, but I would not flinch it once was placed on it. I'm not sure what HTC just doesn't stretch out the ENY scoring a bit and give planes like the Spit 16, Tempest, 262, or other such uber planes score of LOWER than 5 ENY. Why start at 5???
-
I remember threads like this because of the La7. You guys whined long and lound enough and HiTech castrated it for you. It was the ubiquitous newbie easy mode CrochRocket HOing HOARD ride. Now it's the spit16. Every newbie and no skill weenie drives one and doesn't have to have any experience or time in the saddel to kill the whiners here. Yeah, aint it a shame.
You show up over a feild and start having a good time in your personal peccodillo and all the weenies up spit16's to counter your hot streek. Instead of paying some fantasy dues you beleive you personaly paid to become an arbitor of Aces High moral worthiness. They just hop in a spit16 and easy mode wax your stupendous arse. It Ain't Fair you whine.
So much like modern politics. You think something is unfair to you personaly. Then you campaign and agitate for a law or ruling to castrate it in your personal favor. Your sales pitch hides your biased motivations under a pile of sanctamonius drivel to cover your shortcomings by punishing everyone in the community in your favor.
Like I said. An excellent technology thread acting as cover for a whine.........
-
That, kind Sir, is an opinion.
The Spit 16 is the most capable plane in the game. What else can turn like it, roll like it, climbs as well, accelerates as good, goes as fast as it does, has the firepower it does, and carry the ordnance it does? Sure, some can out dive it, some are faster, very few can out climb it, many carry more ordnance, but the total package the Spit 16 has to offer is tops. If you give all the fighters a score of 1 to 10 for each and every category there is, the Spit 16 would be near the top in all but 2: over-all speed and dive ability. Even then, the Spit 16 is not to be looked over in those 2 categories either.
I wont vouch for a perk on the Spit 16, but I would not flinch it once was placed on it. I'm not sure what HTC just doesn't stretch out the ENY scoring a bit and give planes like the Spit 16, Tempest, 262, or other such uber planes score of LOWER than 5 ENY. Why start at 5???
Lusche is absolutely correct. No one has been able to prove that the Spitfire Mk XVI causes any unbalance in the game play and saying a plane "climbs well, accelerates good and goes as fast as it does" is hardly proof. Oh, a Zeke can out turn it, as can a Brewster and a few others and the 190s roll just as good, if not better and again, some other planes as well.
ack-ack
-
That, kind Sir, is an opinion.
The Spit 16 is the most capable plane in the game. What else can turn like it, roll like it, climbs as well, accelerates as good, goes as fast as it does, has the firepower it does, and carry the ordnance it does? Sure, some can out dive it, some are faster, very few can out climb it, many carry more ordnance, but the total package the Spit 16 has to offer is tops. If you give all the fighters a score of 1 to 10 for each and every category there is, the Spit 16 would be near the top in all but 2: over-all speed and dive ability. Even then, the Spit 16 is not to be looked over in those 2 categories either.
I wont vouch for a perk on the Spit 16, but I would not flinch it once was placed on it. I'm not sure what HTC just doesn't stretch out the ENY scoring a bit and give planes like the Spit 16, Tempest, 262, or other such uber planes score of LOWER than 5 ENY. Why start at 5???
don't know which 16 you are referring to but the one in AH is only dangerous when a pissed off vet takes one up to kill the lemmings, and you happen to run into him 1vs1, even then there are plenty of planes that will smoke a 16 quit easily :aok
far from "most capable plane in game" yes it is a very well rounded plane, but it is far far from most capable.
-
Guppy says they weren't used during the war, but I really recall reading about bubble canopy Spitfire FR.Mk XIVes that had clipped wings to address skin buckling that was being caused by the weight of the cameras.
Bubble canopy XIVs showed up before it was over, but the clipped birds didn't from everything I've ever found. Some of the XIVs that were sent to the CBI at the end went with full span and had them clipped once they moved to Japan.
-
Pretty sure all fighter aircraft were designed with the best of intentions.
Guppy, I know all that. The thing is, when you're flying along in your 20 or 30 ENY plane and you see a dogpile of Spixteens coming at you, any attempt to avoid the most obvious outcome get's met with cries of being timid or some other b.s. Hell yeah I'm gonna be timid, I'd rather take on a group of C hogs. And lately, it's as if every single Spixteen is piloted by a HO monkey, as if the speed and bizarre agility isn't enough. Personally, unless I see <squeaker1> landed 2 kills in a Spitfire MkXVI, I laugh when someone gives a "WTG <insert name>". Go land 2 kills in a Spit V and I'll consider giving it a WTG.
Nothing I enjoy more then seeing a bunch of Spits coming at me in my 38G. Makes for a great fight. As for folks landing kills and getting attaboys. Who cares. No one dies, planes are free. I'd rather fight and get clobbered in a mob then worry about landing in the MA. I don't have enough flying time to ever think that matters.
-
Hmmm, I could be wrong but I think the LF XVI and F XVI are the same aircraft. 1) From what sources I could dig up both had the 266 engine (similar Pilot Manual as guppy/Corky listed except this one instead of listing it as the LF XVI, it just the F XVI instead). 2) From a listing of individual Spitfire Production records from the Air Ministry I haven't found any F XVI's, only LF XVI's.
There were only Merlin 266s in XVIs which means they were all geared for lower alt like the Merlin 66. With Spitfire identification it gets a bit hard to follow. For example. There was no Spitfire IXc or XIVc. As they were initially produced with the Universal wing and were only intended to have that wing, there was no letter ID. When the E wing was designed and they started putting that on the IX and XIV it became IXe and XIVe. As the XVI only ever had the E wing, it was just XVI. As it was only produced with the one engine they didn't need to designate it LF as they did with the VIII and IX that had different engine models used in the production run depending on the alt band they were designed for. You won't see a VIIIc either and there was no E wing added to the VIII so it never had a letter designating the armament package.
-
There were only Merlin 266s in XVIs which means they were all geared for lower alt like the Merlin 66. With Spitfire identification it gets a bit hard to follow. For example. There was no Spitfire IXc or XIVc. As they were initially produced with the Universal wing and were only intended to have that wing, there was no letter ID. When the E wing was designed and they started putting that on the IX and XIV it became IXe and XIVe. As the XVI only ever had the E wing, it was just XVI. As it was only produced with the one engine they didn't need to designate it LF as they did with the VIII and IX that had different engine models used in the production run depending on the alt band they were designed for. You won't see a VIIIc either and there was no E wing added to the VIII so it never had a letter designating the armament package.
Thanks for the confirmation. :aok
Brits just confuse me anyhow :P - centre/center, colour/color, labour/labor, chips/fries :D.
-
:rofl a good pony driver is a dangerous thing no matter if he is above you or below you.
P51s are great support style planes at low alt furballs. having just enough E and speed to keep the right distance and flaps for turning on other enemies. if done right you will still keep the enemy away enough so you can pack a punch on the deck
-
Clipped XIV - Usually only FRXIV, full span with the extra camera weight caused wing root 'rippling'.
XVI - No wing designation suffix, all with 'e' wings so wasn't needed (ditto IX)
LF.IXe v XVI - Same animal, only difference is that the Merlin 66 in the LF.IX was substituted with an American built Merlin 66 (called 266 - 2 suffix designates manufactured abroad).
Externally only a serial number check will tell you for definate which one it is.
As for the original posters 'premise' - Not going to comment, still laughing.
-
From what I've read so far it would seem that just about everyone, with the exception of the OP did their research on not only the spit xvi, but every other spit type and variant ever produced.
-
I for one would like the Vc back.
:pray :pray :pray .....That would mean I would get my Gondies back on the F-4 and an egg. :x :cheers:
Mayhem,
-
From what I've read so far it would seem that just about everyone, with the exception of the OP did their research on not only the spit xvi, but every other spit type and variant ever produced.
Not so much that.
Some don't realise that if you replaced the 2x50cals on the XVI with 4x.303's you have a mid 1943 LF.IX
Unless HT has fixed the FTH on the XVI ours is a LF.IXe anyway. The XVI had a FTH 1000ft higher than an LF.IX, last time it was checked ours was definately an LF.IXe, and NOT a XVI.
-
Not so much that.
Some don't realise that if you replaced the 2x50cals on the XVI with 4x.303's you have a mid 1943 LF.IX
Unless HT has fixed the FTH on the XVI ours is a LF.IXe anyway. The XVI had a FTH 1000ft higher than an LF.IX, last time it was checked ours was definately an LF.IXe, and NOT a XVI.
See.. :D
-
1) because I fly pony and don't need to fly spits just to get back at someone, 2) Pony actually takes somewhat skill to fly in a dogfight unlike spixteen where you barely have to pull at all, and 3) I actually fly alot of fighters ack, I'm not a person sitting in a P-38 like you all day. Maybe you should try flying some other fighters for once and see where that gets you. Most of my deaths on the stupid stat list is cause by a load of gang bangers who can't only have 1 or 2 people after me, they have to make it a 10v1. That's obviously saying something that your that big of a threat to everyone and they really need you dead that fast.
BS it does. Make sure you're above loitering and either bounce ad nauseum or "cherry pick". Skill my arse.
The only one that WILL turn in a Pony that I've seen in 8.5 years, is 0lDemon. You are nowhere near his skill.
-
How to Turn in a Poni.
1. Contact your local St. OlDemon's of America Charity and AH Orphans Centers. 1-HTC-EATSPIT
2. Ask about the Poni turn in policy and local area turn in centers.
3. Take your poni to your local desiganted turn in center and receive a free spitfire in lieu of perk points.
4. St. OlDemon will be by later to collect your perk points because he knows you want to make a charitable donation to the St. OlDemon Orphaned Sqweekers fund.
This has been a completely unafilliated with HTC service message. The opinions of customers and their experiences may vary with their degree of bullshine tollerence.
-
The SPit XVI was a very fine aircraft in real life, had combat and was loved by its pilots as well.
The IX LF was around before, as well as the Seafire III would better our Seafire. THe Spit 21 saw action as well and would better our XIV in some areas (range, torque)
Typical whine from somebody who does not know too much.
HT: Please upgrade our Seafire, add a Spit V CCC (1942?) as well as a Mk IX LF (1943?) with the + 25 boost, then the Mk 21 (1945), sit back, take a beer (or your favorite whisky) and open up the BB forum. Enjoy the whines, muhahahaha :devil
-
BS it does. Make sure you're above loitering and either bounce ad nauseum or "cherry pick". Skill my arse.
The only one that WILL turn in a Pony that I've seen in 8.5 years, is 0lDemon. You are nowhere near his skill.
I never said I was "on top" of fighting. OlDemon isn't the only one who can turn in pony and fight well in it. There are only a few good pony pilots who quote "dogfight" in it, you should know out of your 8 yrs playing that most of the pony pilots are noobs who pick/cherry pick. I said that pony takes skill "IN A DOGFIGHT" if you could not read as it was there, I never said it took any skill flying around itself. Basically when in a pony, you still have to think of your advantages and disadvantages as to all any other planes when up against any enemy fighter. Whether it's a 109, 38, 190, etc. There's only oldemon you been looking at my friend, plenty more out there if you look harder.
-
I never said I was "on top" of fighting. OlDemon isn't the only one who can turn in pony and fight well in it. There are only a few good pony pilots who quote "dogfight" in it, you should know out of your 8 yrs playing that most of the pony pilots are noobs who pick/cherry pick. I said that pony takes skill "IN A DOGFIGHT" if you could not read as it was there, I never said it took any skill flying around itself. Basically when in a pony, you still have to think of your advantages and disadvantages as to all any other planes when up against any enemy fighter. Whether it's a 109, 38, 190, etc. There's only oldemon you been looking at my friend, plenty more out there if you look harder.
I think it is safe to say that we cannot include you in the small number of Mustang drivers like that like to get down and dirty and fight with it.
ack-ack
-
Lusche is absolutely correct. No one has been able to prove that the Spitfire Mk XVI causes any unbalance in the game play and saying a plane "climbs well, accelerates good and goes as fast as it does" is hardly proof. Oh, a Zeke can out turn it, as can a Brewster and a few others and the 190s roll just as good, if not better and again, some other planes as well.
ack-ack
With the drag that the pony had on its wings, why is it that it can't stay in a turn w/ flaps with spixteen? The spixteen out corners it like nothing. Why is that spixteen out accelerates the pony even though they have the same engine? Last but not least, why is it that the spixteen out climbs the pony like nothing too? Even due to the less weight that the spixteen has, talk to any historians about the planes and they'll tell you that the pony was way better than spitfires, talk to any pilot who flew spitfires and 51s during the war and they will tell that pony was a dominate fighter over the spits. So my question is for this, why are the later spitfires, 14 and 16, better than the pony? :headscratch:
-
I think it is safe to say that we cannot include you in the small number of Mustang drivers like that like to get down and dirty and fight with it.
ack-ack
Here goes ack again with his smack talk to people who actually fly something "OTHER" than 38 all day. You wouldn't even be in the list of pony fliers, in fact, you probably never even try to set foot in one either. As you have said "I'd be successful in any other fighter" why don't you even fly them? That to me is instantly telling me that all you know how to fly is 38 :lol
-
With the drag that the pony had on its wings, why is it that it can't stay in a turn w/ flaps with spixteen?
Maybe in "THRASH99 World" the P-51D (or any other Mustang) could out turn a Spitfire Mk XVI (or any other Spitfire) but in reality, even with flaps the Mustang could not out turn or turn with a Spitfire Mk XVI. Hell, the Mustang couldn't out turn a P-38, why would you think it could against a Spitfire?
I would really like to see what sources you have that claim the Mustang could, if anything it would be a very funny read.
The spixteen out corners it like nothing.
See my above comment
Why is that spixteen out accelerates the pony even though they have the same engine?
The Spitfire Mk XVI was a lighter plane, so I believe it has a higher power to weight ratio than the Mustang did and the acceleration bit also depends on the altitude both planes are at. The Spitfire Mk XVI was primarily designed as a medium to low altitude fighter and its engine is tuned as such. The Mustang on the other hand was a high altitude fighter and it's best performance figures reflect that. At altitudes where the Mustang was designed to fly at, you will not see the Spitfire Mk XVI out accelerate or out climb the Mustang.
Last but not least, why is it that the spixteen out climbs the pony like nothing too?
See the above answer.
Even due to the less weight that the spixteen has, talk to any historians about the planes and they'll tell you that the pony was way better than spitfires,
Any historian that will go on record and say the Mustang was far superior to the Spitfire or vice versa is not a historian worth a damn.
One famous USAAF fighter ace said of the only difference between the Mustang and the Spitfire was that the Mustang could do them over Berlin whereas the Spitfire couldn't.
talk to any pilot who flew spitfires and 51s during the war and they will tell that pony was a dominate fighter over the spits. So my question is for this, why are the later spitfires, 14 and 16, better than the pony? :headscratch:
You should do yourself a favor and read the history of the USAAF 4th Fighter Group and of the RAF "Eagle Squadrons" and then come back and post your claim of former US Spitfire pilots saying that. A lot of hearts were broken in the 4th when those that flew Spitfires had them taken away.
ack-ack
-
Here goes ack again with his smack talk to people who actually fly something "OTHER" than 38 all day.
I only fly the Lightning in the main arenas. In the dueling arena, I hardly fly the P-38 as usually most that duel me won't let me fly it as a prerequisite to a duel and when the H2H arenas were around, I would also hardly fly the P-38. Though I do proudly admit that no current player probably has more hours in the MA flying the Lightning like I do.
If you're trying to imply that because someone decides to devote themselves to one plane is somehow less capable of a pilot (such as your self) that flies multiple planes, well, that's just laughable.
You wouldn't even be in the list of pony fliers, in fact, you probably never even try to set foot in one either. As you have said "I'd be successful in any other fighter" why don't you even fly them? That to me is instantly telling me that all you know how to fly is 38 :lol
I'm sure I wouldn't be in the list of the good P-51 drivers since I don't fly that plane. So it stands to reason why one wouldn't think of AKAK as one of the top Mustang drivers in the game.
Let's put it to the test...you and me in a best out of five duel in the Mustang and watch how I beat you in all five. Then we can switch to a best of five of you in a Spitfire Mk XVI and me in a P-51D and we'll see how badly you get beat again. Then for chits and giggles, we can put me in a P-38J and you in a Spitfire Mk XVI and see how badly you get beat in the third round of duels. If you're still willing to be my punching bag, we can do a 4th round of duels (again best out of 5) with you in a P-51D and me in a P-38J and we'll see this time how quickly I can beat you 5 times. Deal?
What your mind doesn't understand that ACM in one plane is the same as in another plane, in short...it's the pilot not the plane. That's your entire problem, you expect the plane to beat the other plane without realizing that the plane only does what the pilot tells it to do. If the pilot is clueless then any 2 week wonder will be able to beat your bellybutton into the ground.
ack-ack
-
talk to any historians about the planes and they'll tell you that the pony was way better than spitfires, talk to any pilot who flew spitfires and 51s during the war and they will tell that pony was a dominate fighter over the spits.
You have no sources for this, and I don't think you'll find any.
- oldman
-
With the drag that the pony had on its wings, why is it that it can't stay in a turn w/ flaps with spixteen? The spixteen out corners it like nothing. Why is that spixteen out accelerates the pony even though they have the same engine? Last but not least, why is it that the spixteen out climbs the pony like nothing too? Even due to the less weight that the spixteen has, talk to any historians about the planes and they'll tell you that the pony was way better than spitfires, talk to any pilot who flew spitfires and 51s during the war and they will tell that pony was a dominate fighter over the spits. So my question is for this, why are the later spitfires, 14 and 16, better than the pony? :headscratch:
The fact that you consider the 16 later then the 14, speaks volumes. The only advantage the Mustang had was range. As a close in knife fighter, the Spit was better and the Mustang drivers who flew Spits would tell you this. Had the Spitfire the range, there would have been no Merlin Mustang.
-
The fact that you consider the 16 later then the 14, speaks volumes. The only advantage the Mustang had was range. As a close in knife fighter, the Spit was better and the Mustang drivers who flew Spits would tell you this. Had the Spitfire the range, there would have been no Merlin Mustang.
And I will note that both the USAAF and RAF had long range Spitfire projects. Had the Merlin Mustang not panned out it is possible that the problems, such as fully compressed suspensions on the ground, would have been addressed and Berlin capable Spitfires thrown into action.
Also note that a Berlin capable Spitfire would perform more like a Merlin Mustang than a Spitfire.
-
With the drag that the pony had on its wings, why is it that it can't stay in a turn w/ flaps with spixteen? The spixteen out corners it like nothing. Why is that spixteen out accelerates the pony even though they have the same engine? Last but not least, why is it that the spixteen out climbs the pony like nothing too? Even due to the less weight that the spixteen has, talk to any historians about the planes and they'll tell you that the pony was way better than spitfires, talk to any pilot who flew spitfires and 51s during the war and they will tell that pony was a dominate fighter over the spits. So my question is for this, why are the later spitfires, 14 and 16, better than the pony? :headscratch:
List the "said Historians" please. This is nothing but a shot in the dark from your end. This is a grossly inaccurate statement.
-
Didn't recon Spits photograph Berlin?
-
Didn't recon Spits photograph Berlin?
Yep, but minus guns and armor. Larger oil tanks and wings filled with fuel. Not at their best for dogfighting :)
-
THRASH99,
12,000lbs vs 8,000lbs on the same power is not a slight difference. The Spitfire Mk XIV raises it up to about 8,500lbs, but on significantly more power.
Why would you expect the 12,000lb fighter to climb, accelerate or turn as well? Don't get your history from "The History Channel" if you care about accuracy. The Spitfire was a significantly better fighter in a duel than the P-51 was, but that doesn't help when the fighting is out of range of the Spitfire. There were many American Spitfire pilots who much preferred the Spitfire over the Mustang and about the best you get from them is that at least the P-51 could get them to the fight.
-
P-51D
Empty weight: 7,635 lb (3,465 kg)
Loaded weight: 9,200 lb (4,175 kg)
Max takeoff weight: 12,100 lb (5,490 kg)
-
THRASH99:
With the similar engine why does the Spitfire Mk XVI turn better and climb faster than the P-51?
Because of fundamental aerodynamics and the impact of weight (as others have mentioned). Increasing weight reduces both turn capability and rate of climb. Turn capability is impacted because there is less lift available to be used for turning. Rate of climb is reduced because increasing weight decreases the amount of specific excess power available to climb with. Convince yourself by understanding the aerodynamics or looking at actual rate of climb charts.
What about the impact of laminar flow wings?
The laminar flow wings like the ones on the P-51 have lower parasite drag compared to others. It’s one of the reasons for the higher top speed of the Mustang. However induced drag increases with g-load and weight. In maneuver the lower parasite drag of a laminar wing is dwarfed by the increase in induced drag. Between a P-51 and a Spitfire turning at the same g-load the P-51 will have greater induced drag assuming it has greater weight.
Why was the P-51 an OUTSTANDING plane in real life compared to how it performs in Aces High?
In Aces High the value of a plane that has great top speed at altitude and long range is greatly diminished because of the type of air combat we have, primarily prolonged medium to low altitude twisting and turning. 80% of kills in real life happened without the other guy knowing what hit them. 2ndly typically combat lasted for mere seconds and then the sky was clear. In real life the P-51’s strengths gave it the range to find the enemy and then the speed to bounce them, dictate the fight and get away. The Mustang excelled in an air war of attrition in the ETO and came in at just the right time especially between Mar – Jun of 1944.
Aces High is a game with high fidelity flight modeling. Don’t make the mistake however to think that the type of virtual air combat we typically have is anything like it was in the ETO. There’s a difference in terms of what was decisive to the air war in the ETO compared to what is decisive in Aces High air combat and they are not the same.
-
As we all know the Spit XVI is just a Spit VIII With The wings clipped and uprated engine performance. Now i believe that the Spit XVI was Meant to be Mainly used as a replacement for the Spit VIII out in Burma ( the Pacific Theatre ) To allow them the use of High altitude for Escorting B-29's To defend them from the KI84's. And also the fact that if the European war lasted another year the B17's Where to be replaced by the B29's ( But that never happened )
Try looking up the Spit XVI in Burma and you will find it saw more combat over Burma against the Japanese air force. As even the B29's didnt need them as the P38 filled the escort role for the B29's. But even these Spits where actually hybrids as they where Spit 8' upgraded with Grippen engines and Clipped wings. As we never really just scraped our old variants. We if possible upgraded them.
Like most MkV's where new MkII's And MkIV's with conversion Kits.
But hey i may be wrong :)
-
there's no maybe about it- your first sentence is fail. :)
-
you're just making this stuff up arent you bullet.
-
you're just making this stuff up arent you bullet.
He can't be making this stuff up.
It has to be correct.
I mean, he did serve in the RAF and was an aircraft engineer.
-
you're just making this stuff up arent you bullet.
:rofl
-
you're just making this stuff up arent you bullet.
Nope my ways of thinking to some degree of logic lol :lol as we all know the mk16 is a high alt version of the spit and would have been capable of escort duty to the b29s in the pacific and if the European theatre was to drag on for another year b29s would have been flying from Britain and that is a fact as several base that b17's where flying from the runways where extened to accomidate the b29 :) And the info i have just read says the mk 16 spit with a pessurised cockpit system was expected to reach 42000 feet :) but was limited to 38000 sorry cant link you to it its from a book ihve that i read the service ceiling at :)
-
almost right. as we all know the spit 16Mk was a navalised version of the macchi C666 which the germans developed in 1951 for their attack on pearl mountain.
let that be an end to it.
-
gobble gobble bawk bawk!!!! :)
My IQ dropped 5 points. I should not have read that.
-
Here we go from the book im reading is a list of spitfire variants there is a MkXVI listed and here's what it says. just gives you engine model and armament and wing type :)
Spitfire XVI : MkIX with a Packard Merlin 266; F or LF span; usually 'C' or 'E' guns; many with teardrop canopy ( total 1,054 )
And there is a picture of the Spitfire FR.MK 18E it has the same wing type and armament as the MkXVI and its a post war version serving with No 28 Squadron Far East Air Force Royal Air Force Kai Tak, Hong Kong, 1950
So it seems that the Mk XVI did have a very short combat career in Europe But not in the Far East :)
-
BulletVI,
Please tell us what this book is that you are reading. List the information in the following order:
1. Title of the book
2. Author
3. Publisher
4. Year it was published
5. ISBN number
6. Number of pages
7. Please state the author's credentials (ie: is he/she an ex spitfire pilot, aircraft engineer, journalist, etc.) and other related information in regards to the author and/or publisher
-
OK its Called
Airplane The Complete Aviation Encyclopaedia
publisher ORBIS
Its over 20 folders of Civilian And Milatery Aircraft Collected from 1989 -1999 and has every civy aircraft from 1920 -1999 and militery aircraft from 1914 or 1916 - 1999
It was something i collected out of pure intrest
-
As we all know the Spit XVI is just a Spit VIII With The wings clipped and uprated engine performance. Now i believe that the Spit XVI was Meant to be Mainly used as a replacement for the Spit VIII out in Burma ( the Pacific Theatre ) To allow them the use of High altitude for Escorting B-29's To defend them from the KI84's. And also the fact that if the European war lasted another year the B17's Where to be replaced by the B29's ( But that never happened )
Try looking up the Spit XVI in Burma and you will find it saw more combat over Burma against the Japanese air force. As even the B29's didnt need them as the P38 filled the escort role for the B29's. But even these Spits where actually hybrids as they where Spit 8' upgraded with Grippen engines and Clipped wings. As we never really just scraped our old variants. We if possible upgraded them.
Like most MkV's where new MkII's And MkIV's with conversion Kits.
But hey i may be wrong :)
Your being wrong is being kind. Whatever you read was a disaster of wrong. I'm not even sure where to start to correct how wrong that is.
-
Guppy thats my explenation from a book now it may not be exactly worded as it was from the book thats why it may sound bad or completly wrong and thats why i put i may be wrong in on it :)
-
Guppy thats my explenation from a book now it may not be exactly worded as it was from the book thats why it may sound bad or completly wrong and thats why i put i may be wrong in on it :)
Buy a scanner. Can't get it quoted wrong then. :aok
-
Here we go from the book im reading is a list of spitfire variants there is a MkXVI listed and here's what it says. just gives you engine model and armament and wing type :)
Spitfire XVI : MkIX with a Packard Merlin 266; F or LF span; usually 'C' or 'E' guns; many with teardrop canopy ( total 1,054 )
And there is a picture of the Spitfire FR.MK 18E it has the same wing type and armament as the MkXVI and its a post war version serving with No 28 Squadron Far East Air Force Royal Air Force Kai Tak, Hong Kong, 1950
So it seems that the Mk XVI did have a very short combat career in Europe But not in the Far East :)
Oh geez.
Spit XVI - Merlin 266
Spit XVIII - Griffon
Two completely different animals!
Service date (all 3 are basically the same aircraft)-
XVI - Oct 1944
LFIX - Mar 1943
LFIXe - Apr/May 1944
-
I only fly the Lightning in the main arenas. In the dueling arena, I hardly fly the P-38 as usually most that duel me won't let me fly it as a prerequisite to a duel and when the H2H arenas were around, I would also hardly fly the P-38. Though I do proudly admit that no current player probably has more hours in the MA flying the Lightning like I do.
If you're trying to imply that because someone decides to devote themselves to one plane is somehow less capable of a pilot (such as your self) that flies multiple planes, well, that's just laughable.
I'm sure I wouldn't be in the list of the good P-51 drivers since I don't fly that plane. So it stands to reason why one wouldn't think of AKAK as one of the top Mustang drivers in the game.
Let's put it to the test...you and me in a best out of five duel in the Mustang and watch how I beat you in all five. Then we can switch to a best of five of you in a Spitfire Mk XVI and me in a P-51D and we'll see how badly you get beat again. Then for chits and giggles, we can put me in a P-38J and you in a Spitfire Mk XVI and see how badly you get beat in the third round of duels. If you're still willing to be my punching bag, we can do a 4th round of duels (again best out of 5) with you in a P-51D and me in a P-38J and we'll see this time how quickly I can beat you 5 times. Deal?
What your mind doesn't understand that ACM in one plane is the same as in another plane, in short...it's the pilot not the plane. That's your entire problem, you expect the plane to beat the other plane without realizing that the plane only does what the pilot tells it to do. If the pilot is clueless then any 2 week wonder will be able to beat your bellybutton into the ground.
ack-ack
No, I know what you fly, this whole tour you haven't taken one lightning model, all J models, basically 38 this whole time. Why do you fly other planes in DA for? :huh If you say your so damn good as you are, why can't you fly them in MA, need F3 mode so you don't die fast? How is it laughable that I fly different planes in MA? I'm actually challenging myself in MA unlike you who just flys 38 everytime. So if you were able to beat me in 1v1s, who cares, there are way better pilots than can make you look bad in about a minute ak, maybe even 30 seconds, and that's in the KOTH tournament (where there's actually better pilots than you if you haven't noticed). I don't care if you don't like how it's set up in there. If your so good, why don't you ever go in there and compete?
I'd really like to see how you would perform in a 38 in real life against someone, no plastic joystick will be in that ride my friend. You will see what it was really like to fly a 38 with the skill you say you have. I've heard some stories from a few 38 pilots that served in WWII that said the 38L had some problems with some control surfaces in some "dogfights". Don't question my ability for flying more fighters than you in the MA just because you say your a good pilot when all you fly is the 38 in MA.
-
No, I know what you fly, this whole tour you haven't taken one lightning model, all J models, basically 38 this whole time. Why do you fly other planes in DA for? :huh If you say your so damn good as you are, why can't you fly them in MA, need F3 mode so you don't die fast? How is it laughable that I fly different planes in MA? I'm actually challenging myself in MA unlike you who just flys 38 everytime. So if you were able to beat me in 1v1s, who cares, there are way better pilots than can make you look bad in about a minute ak, maybe even 30 seconds, and that's in the KOTH tournament (where there's actually better pilots than you if you haven't noticed). I don't care if you don't like how it's set up in there. If your so good, why don't you ever go in there and compete?
I'd really like to see how you would perform in a 38 in real life against someone, no plastic joystick will be in that ride my friend. You will see what it was really like to fly a 38 with the skill you say you have. I've heard some stories from a few 38 pilots that served in WWII that said the 38L had some problems with some control surfaces in some "dogfights". Don't question my ability for flying more fighters than you in the MA just because you say your a good pilot when all you fly is the 38 in MA.
:O oh brother, here we go again. :cheers:
-
No, I know what you fly, this whole tour you haven't taken one lightning model, all J models, basically 38 this whole time.
I don't know whether to laugh or shake my head in disbelief. You do realize that the P-38J is one of the various Lightning models, correct? So by virtue of me flying the P-38J, I've taken at least one Lightning model up. On a side note, if ENY gets to the point where I can't fly the J, I'll take off in a G instead.
Also, the P-38 is the only fighter I fly in the MA. You'll see quite a few B-25H sorties under my belt for each tour as well.
Why do you fly other planes in DA for? :huh If you say your so damn good as you are, why can't you fly them in MA, need F3 mode so you don't die fast?
I think I already stated why but here is a recap. 1) most won't duel me if I fly the P-38 2) it gives me a chance to learn the strengths and weaknesses of other planes 3) The other person usually doesn't select the P-38 for the duel.
How is it laughable that I fly different planes in MA? I'm actually challenging myself in MA unlike you who just flys 38 everytime.
I said it was laughable that you think someone that flies one plane in the MA is somehow less "skilled" then someone like you that flies multiple planes.
I'd like to see you fly a P-38 for a tour and see how well you do in it. Since the Lightning is above your skill level in terms of flying, I will venture to say that you won't be very successful in it. The P-38 is one of the more challenging planes to fly in the game, unlike the P-51D.
So if you were able to beat me in 1v1s, who cares, there are way better pilots than can make you look bad in about a minute ak, maybe even 30 seconds, and that's in the KOTH tournament (where there's actually better pilots than you if you haven't noticed). I don't care if you don't like how it's set up in there. If your so good, why don't you ever go in there and compete?
Sadly, if I had the time I would still fly in the KoTH but I don't and have had to give it up, along with scenarios. I never had a complaint with how KoTH is or used to be set up, don't know why you mention that.
I'd really like to see how you would perform in a 38 in real life against someone, no plastic joystick will be in that ride my friend. You will see what it was really like to fly a 38 with the skill you say you have. I've heard some stories from a few 38 pilots that served in WWII that said the 38L had some problems with some control surfaces in some "dogfights".
The above comment is priceless due to it's complete idiocy.
Don't question my ability for flying more fighters than you in the MA just because you say your a good pilot when all you fly is the 38 in MA.
I never questioned you choosing to fly more than one plane...you're the one that has a hang up about it. All I said is that you suck really bad in any plane you fly. Again, just because I fly the Lightning in the MA doesn't mean I don't have experience in flying the other planes, I just choose not to fly them in the MA.
I've offered you the chance to see for yourself but you keep tap dancing to avoid having to accept and lose. Too bad, was really looking forward to beating you soundly in your "plane of expertise".
ack-ack
-
BulletVI, for your Spitfire education I would suggest you get hold of 'Spitfire: The History'.
This book will help with your cluelessness about the different Marks of the Spitfire.
-
Bullet, please provide me with a list of tail numbers of aircraft you have been involved with so I dont fly one and spin to my death.
-
Bullet, please provide me with a list of tail numbers of aircraft you have been involved with so I dont fly one and spin to my death.
:)
-
Spitfire XVI : MkIX with a Packard Merlin 266; F or LF span; usually 'C' or 'E' guns; many with teardrop canopy ( total 1,054 )
And there is a picture of the Spitfire FR.MK 18E it has the same wing type and armament as the MkXVI and its a post war version serving with No 28 Squadron Far East Air Force Royal Air Force Kai Tak, Hong Kong, 1950
Ok tomorrow i shall scan this info to my PC and prove that that is what is written in the book OK but for now night its now 2:30 am :)
-
Ok tomorrow i shall scan this info to my PC and prove that that is what is written in the book OK but for now night its now 2:30 am :)
28 Squadron flew Spitfire 18s after the war. This was basically a strengthened late model Spitfire 14. Save your time quoting your book. Trust those of us who've been Spit history fanatics for the last 30 years on this one.
All Spitfires from about June-July 1944 were produced with the E wing so the IX, XVI, XIV and XVIII all had that wing. As an example. I have the logbook of a Canadian Spitfire pilot who was with 91 squadron in the summer of 44. He specifically notes the E wing XIVs arrival in July of 44 with 91. They'd transitioned from XIIs to XIVs with Universal wings in March of 44.
-
But hey i may be wrong :)
That is a given and a constant.
-
That is a given and a constant.
Amen.
-
Some more stuff on RAAF 453 squadron & their Spit XVI'S.
(http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/af142/barneybolac/spit16a.jpg)
(http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/af142/barneybolac/spit16b.jpg)
:headscratch: You know what? I think the default skin for the Spit XVI should be this plane second from the left.
Since I am sure the starter of this thread & others like him says it as they are shot down by the XVI each & every time. May as well have it done by the plane that is as close to the word as possible. :D
(http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/af142/barneybolac/spit16c-1.jpg)
-
I like the FU squadron code. :devil
-
:lol me wants :aok
-
I'd like to see you fly a P-38 for a tour and see how well you do in it.
Sadly, if I had the time I would still fly in the KoTH but I don't and have had to give it up, along with scenarios. I never had a complaint with how KoTH is or used to be set up, don't know why you mention that.
All I said is that you suck really bad in any plane you fly.
ack-ack
I have flown 38 J and L in the past in some tours and got about 60 kills in the tour, it wasn't really hard. Mostly it was a bunch of noobs that had no tracers on and try to ho you from 1K out, got on there 6, then shot them up or roped them and shot them up coming down. Now if I go in a 38 anyday, nothing but a bunch of big fat hotards go for me since none of them know any ACM what so ever, just hoing. Like the other day I was flying a pony, came across an F4U1-D, he wouldn't go into one single merge, just tried to ho me in every pass. I brought KOTH up since you were saying you were the "best pilot" in the game but don't go in to see some other better sticks and compete, but before in a post long ago you said you didn't like how it was set up or the people who go in there? :headscratch:
How do I actually suck if I have a load of kills, especially in pony and in different planes. Since you count score, I really don't see how I'm bad in fighting if I have a lot of kills, wouldn't you agree with yourself with the amount you have in the 38?
-
Thrash99,
Not every great stick in AH plays in KOTH. There are lots of great cartoon pilots out there that simply just dont have the time to participate in it, or even care to be in it. And if youre out to prove how good you are, why dont you take AKAK's challenge and let the flying do the talking.
-
but before in a post long ago you said you didn't like how it was set up or the people who go in there? :headscratch:
Please show me any post where I was critical in anyway of how the KoTH was (and currently being run) or about the people that took part. I know it's waste asking you to find such a post when none exist since I never made a post like you describe. I think you have me confused with someone else.
How do I actually suck if I have a load of kills, especially in pony and in different planes. Since you count score, I really don't see how I'm bad in fighting if I have a lot of kills, wouldn't you agree with yourself with the amount you have in the 38?
Actually, you don't have a butt load of kills by looking at your current tour stats. You have 52 deaths for 47 victories in fighters and the plane you did the worst in was the P-51D.
ack-ack
-
Please show me any post where I was critical in anyway of how the KoTH was (and currently being run) or about the people that took part. I know it's waste asking you to find such a post when none exist since I never made a post like you describe. I think you have me confused with someone else.
Actually, you don't have a butt load of kills by looking at your current tour stats. You have 52 deaths for 47 victories in fighters and the plane you did the worst in was the P-51D.
ack-ack
Who are you looking at :headscratch: :huh, you looking at the right person, cause there is more than one thrash. As I just took a look at the total kills on the stats/scores, I typed in thrash99 in the late war tour 127, says I have 211 kills 174 deaths. I'm talking about how many so far that I have, not just in fighters.
-
Thrash99,
Not every great stick in AH plays in KOTH. There are lots of great cartoon pilots out there that simply just dont have the time to participate in it, or even care to be in it. And if youre out to prove how good you are, why dont you take AKAK's challenge and let the flying do the talking.
Trust me, ack has the time to go into the KOTH event, he just doesn't want to because he's on this forum all day trying to prove his part and make people wrong.
-
Who are you looking at :headscratch: :huh, you looking at the right person, cause there is more than one thrash. As I just took a look at the total kills on the stats/scores, I typed in thrash99 in the late war tour 127, says I have 211 kills 174 deaths. I'm talking about how many so far that I have, not just in fighters.
Just did a score search on the AH website. For Tour 127 in the Late War arena numbers are as follows:
Fighter Mode
Kills: 48 Deaths: 54 Your Kill to death ratio is 0.63
Attack Mode
Kills: 5 Deaths: 5
Vehicle/Boat
Kills: 115 Deaths: 83
Totals
Kills: 174 Deaths: 158
Nowhere in here do I see you have 211 kills like you claim to have.
Trust me, ack has the time to go into the KOTH event, he just doesn't want to because he's on this forum all day trying to prove his part and make people wrong.
Well then go prove him wrong. Show the community just how terribly wrong he is.
-
Who are you looking at :headscratch: :huh, you looking at the right person, cause there is more than one thrash. As I just took a look at the total kills on the stats/scores, I typed in thrash99 in the late war tour 127, says I have 211 kills 174 deaths. I'm talking about how many so far that I have, not just in fighters.
I don't think GV kills are relevant when you say yourself
How do I actually suck if I have a load of kills, especially in pony and in different planes. Since you count score, I really don't see how I'm bad in fighting if I have a lot of kills, wouldn't you agree with yourself with the amount you have in the 38?
And your lttile "argument" with AKAK is all about fighters. ;)
-
Well then go prove him wrong. Show the community just how terribly wrong he is.
I once did. A memorable and satisfying moment. Still waiting for a second opportunity though. :lol :neener: :bolt:
-
I once did. A memorable and satisfying moment. Still waiting for a second opportunity though. :lol :neener: :bolt:
Yeah, you got me pretty good the other night. I saw you above me in a P-51D but figured I could kill the Spitfire before you dove on me and of course I was wrong and got a severe pilot wound. Still can't believe a snail could move that fast. Guess I'll have to start carrying some salt with me for that troublesome gastropod.
ack-ack
-
Yeah, you got me pretty good the other night. I saw you above me in a P-51D but figured I could kill the Spitfire before you dove on me and of course I was wrong and got a severe pilot wound. Still can't believe a snail could move that fast. Guess I'll have to start carrying some salt with me for that troublesome gastropod.
ack-ack
Oh that one... I was rather thinking of the BBS. :D
In that particular scenario on Mindanao we just horded you. A little gastropod has to use all advantages he can get.Alt, speed, a EZ mode plane and lots of bait :t
-
Who are you looking at :headscratch: :huh, you looking at the right person, cause there is more than one thrash. As I just took a look at the total kills on the stats/scores, I typed in thrash99 in the late war tour 127, says I have 211 kills 174 deaths. I'm talking about how many so far that I have, not just in fighters.
well hell, I have 296 kills and 27 deaths. (174 kills are from field guns, and another 60 from ostwind)
ILL OWN ANYONE IN ANY FIGHTERS!!! !
you see? stupid point.
-
Who are you looking at :headscratch: :huh, you looking at the right person, cause there is more than one thrash. As I just took a look at the total kills on the stats/scores, I typed in thrash99 in the late war tour 127, says I have 211 kills 174 deaths. I'm talking about how many so far that I have, not just in fighters.
In fighters ...
K/D = 0.71
K/hour of flight = 3.67
35 kills in the P-51 with 39 deaths in the P-51.
Yup ... your rippin' up the skys of AH.
-
In fighters ...
K/D = 0.71
K/hour of flight = 3.67
35 kills in the P-51 with 39 deaths in the P-51.
Yup ... your rippin' up the skys of AH.
:rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl
-
Subscribed... This guy thrash is entertaining...
-
I still want to see what sources he has to back up his claim the Spitfire Mk XVI should be removed from the game.
ack-ack
-
I still want to see what sources he has to back up his claim the Spitfire Mk XVI should be removed from the game.
ack-ack
Please don't hold your breath waiting ... we will miss you if you do.
-
I still want to see what sources he has to back up his claim the Spitfire Mk XVI should be removed from the game.
ack-ack
I'm guessing he flushed them down the toilet after his last deuce.
-
don't take the spixteens out of the game. I'd only have 51s to shoot at if ya did that! (http://i279.photobucket.com/albums/kk121/TheAmish/aFu_ArsenioYell.gif)
-
don't take the spixteens out of the game. I'd only have 51s to shoot at if ya did that! (http://i279.photobucket.com/albums/kk121/TheAmish/aFu_ArsenioYell.gif)
Spit XVI shouldnt go but we need other axis aircraft especially Japanese plane's more KI versions And More versions of the Zero :)
-
This thread is a compendium of all you need to know about the Rainbow XVI:
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,272404.msg3407616.html#msg3407616
-
I remember threads like this because of the La7. You guys whined long and lound enough and HiTech castrated it for you. It was the ubiquitous newbie easy mode CrochRocket HOing HOARD ride. Now it's the spit16. Every newbie and no skill weenie drives one and doesn't have to have any experience or time in the saddel to kill the whiners here. Yeah, aint it a shame.
You show up over a feild and start having a good time in your personal peccodillo and all the weenies up spit16's to counter your hot streek. Instead of paying some fantasy dues you beleive you personaly paid to become an arbitor of Aces High moral worthiness. They just hop in a spit16 and easy mode wax your stupendous arse. It Ain't Fair you whine.
So much like modern politics. You think something is unfair to you personaly. Then you campaign and agitate for a law or ruling to castrate it in your personal favor. Your sales pitch hides your biased motivations under a pile of sanctamonius drivel to cover your shortcomings by punishing everyone in the community in your favor.
Like I said. An excellent technology thread acting as cover for a whine.........
Best comment of this thread.. :salute :salute And right on the mark!!
-
I don't know whether to laugh or shake my head in disbelief. You do realize that the P-38J is one of the various Lightning models, correct? So by virtue of me flying the P-38J, I've taken at least one Lightning model up. On a side note, if ENY gets to the point where I can't fly the J, I'll take off in a G instead.
Also, the P-38 is the only fighter I fly in the MA. You'll see quite a few B-25H sorties under my belt for each tour as well.
I think I already stated why but here is a recap. 1) most won't duel me if I fly the P-38 2) it gives me a chance to learn the strengths and weaknesses of other planes 3) The other person usually doesn't select the P-38 for the duel.
I said it was laughable that you think someone that flies one plane in the MA is somehow less "skilled" then someone like you that flies multiple planes.
I'd like to see you fly a P-38 for a tour and see how well you do in it. Since the Lightning is above your skill level in terms of flying, I will venture to say that you won't be very successful in it. The P-38 is one of the more challenging planes to fly in the game, unlike the P-51D.
Sadly, if I had the time I would still fly in the KoTH but I don't and have had to give it up, along with scenarios. I never had a complaint with how KoTH is or used to be set up, don't know why you mention that.
The above comment is priceless due to it's complete idiocy.
I never questioned you choosing to fly more than one plane...you're the one that has a hang up about it. All I said is that you suck really bad in any plane you fly. Again, just because I fly the Lightning in the MA doesn't mean I don't have experience in flying the other planes, I just choose not to fly them in the MA.
I've offered you the chance to see for yourself but you keep tap dancing to avoid having to accept and lose. Too bad, was really looking forward to beating you soundly in your "plane of expertise".
ack-ack
One Name comes to mind when I think about P38 pilots.
Major Richard Bong 40 kills WWII in his trusty P38 named Marge ...
Salute to that guy. :salute :salute
-
This still going?
So people fly the spit xvi, and others get killed by em - newbies need something they can get kills in, its quite simple - this game has a steep learning curve, if you kill the newbies in a ride they cant get kills in, it'll drive them away from the game and we all lose.
Who cares what plane they fly, it gives you someone to fight. If you get caught out by them, try again, get with a trainer to learn more acm etc etc etc.
As for vets in the 16 - meh, really cant see a problem - any plane can be beat.
Wurzel
-
This still going?
So people fly the spit xvi, and others get killed by em - newbies need something they can get kills in, its quite simple - this game has a steep learning curve, if you kill the newbies in a ride they cant get kills in, it'll drive them away from the game and we all lose.
Who cares what plane they fly, it gives you someone to fight. If you get caught out by them, try again, get with a trainer to learn more acm etc etc etc.
As for vets in the 16 - meh, really cant see a problem - any plane can be beat.
Wurzel
noobs in 16= easy kill
-
This still going?
So people fly the spit xvi, and others get killed by em - newbies need something they can get kills in, its quite simple - this game has a steep learning curve, if you kill the newbies in a ride they cant get kills in, it'll drive them away from the game and we all lose.
Who cares what plane they fly, it gives you someone to fight. If you get caught out by them, try again, get with a trainer to learn more acm etc etc etc.
As for vets in the 16 - meh, really cant see a problem - any plane can be beat.
Wurzel
Well said. On the mark.. :salute
-
You guys ever name it the "LFIXe" . I will start a new thread insisting the XVI be added to the game .
-
Personally I think HTC should redesignate the Spit XVI as the Spit LF IX in the next version of AH. I suggested it back when they re did the Spits, and since. It would not be a big deal to do? My reasons are as follows:
#1 the designation XVI (16) causes too much confusion with the XIV (14), in terms of which is which, time added to the OOB, performance, ect. Too many roman numerals as well.
#2 most people do not realise that an LF IXe and a XVIe are all but identical despite the many posts pointing that out.
#3 It would end threads like this?
We would have:
Spitfire I
Spitfire V
Spitfire IX
Spitfire VIII
Spitfire LF IX (old XVI)
Spitfire XIV (Griffon engine version)
Seafire
Much easier on the eyes.
-
More pics of the very rare & almost non existent Spit XVI of WWII. :D
(http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/af142/barneybolac/spit16-1.png)
-
The basic difference between the LF IX and the XVI is the engine as many has noted in this thread;
LF IX => Merlin 66
XVI => Merlin 266
The main performance related difference between these is the supercharger gear ratios (quoted from RR specs) and corresponding ratings without RAM at +18 lbs:
Merlin 66:
1st gear 1:5.79 (1705hp @ 5750')
2nd gear 1:7.06 (1580hp @ 16000')
Merlin 266:
1st gear 1:5.80 (1710hp @ 6400')
2nd gear 1:7.35 (1490hp @ 19400')
In practice the difference at 1st gear is negligible, but the difference at 2nd gear is significant and the XVI should have higher FTH at 2nd gear than the LF IX.
I think I posted the documentation to Pyro over four years ago, that time the Merlin 66 powered VIII had about the same FTH as the XVI. This means that the XVI engine is (was?) modeled as the Merlin 66 ie the XVI is in practice the LF IX. I don't know what is the current situation but at least according to the AH II comparison tool this has not changed.
-
looks like our VIII and XVI both use the same model of 66/266:
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/newscores/genchart.php?p1=85&p2=86&pw=1>ype=0)
your numbers do look like a significant difference between 66 and 266, but look at this:
(http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit9v109gspeed.jpg)
... and note the 3k variation in MS FTH between the 3 different 66s.
-
FTH in 2nd gear for this Merlin 66 Spitfire LF IX is 21,000 ft not 16,000 ft which corresponds to AHs Merlin 66/266 Spitfires:
http://www.spitfireperformance.com/ma648.html
You can also see that there are 4 different Merlin 66s compared and each one has a different MS and FS gear indicating that they could be altered and were not absolutely uniform from engine to engine. One would assume that in service the 266s were rigged very closely to the 66s in terms of what the gears were set to.
-
The claimed 2nd gear FTH 16000' is naturally without RAM and 21000' given in the aircraft data sheet is with RAM (404mph). Corresponding value with RAM at 2nd gear for the XVI is 22500' at speed 406mph (XVI data sheet showing these values has been posted to Pyro). Notable thing is that 1st gear FTH with RAM is 10500' at 384mph for both planes.
-
looks like our VIII and XVI both use the same model of 66/266:
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/newscores/genchart.php?p1=85&p2=86&pw=1>ype=0)
your numbers do look like a significant difference between 66 and 266, but look at this:
(http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit9v109gspeed.jpg)
... and note the 3k variation in MS FTH between the 3 different 66s.
AHha i always wondered why when i took a mk8 spit up against the spit 16 i survived longer and killed the Spit 16 occasionally :) thanks RTHolmes :) :salute
-
A paragraph from this book
(http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/af142/barneybolac/SPIT16-2.jpg)
& how Spit XVI's didn't fight the Germans best or for that matter have any air to air encounters. :neener:
(http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/af142/barneybolac/spit162.jpg)