Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: Zimme83 on June 30, 2015, 06:58:13 PM
-
Isnt it time for us to have the Merlin 66 in the spit IX? Our IX is the earliest version with the Mk 61. It would increase speed at sea level to 340mph and climb rate to 4000+ fpm up to 13k.
Pliiiiiz.
http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit9v109g.html
-
The Spitfire Mk VIII has a Merlin 66 in AH, and while the Spitfire Mk XVI had a Merlin 266 in reality, in AH the Spitfire Mk XVI is actually a Spitfire LF.Mk IXe also powered by a Merlin 66.
So no, the Spitfire Mk IX in AH should not be swtlitched to a Merlin 66 as that whould shrink Spitfire coverage and variety. If you want a Merlin 66 just grab a Spitfire Mk VIII or a Spitfire Mk XVI.
-
Its a valid point. Maybe we should wish for a real XVI then.
-
Its a valid point. Maybe we should wish for a real XVI then.
It makes very little difference. Other than the Merlin 266's full throttle height being 1000ft higher they are identical. It would be more practical to just relabel the Spitfire Mk XVI to Spitfire LF.Mk IXe.
Of course we'd then have people asking for the Spitfire Mk XVI to be added back into the game the way we have people asking for the Bf109G-10 that we never had to be added back into the game.
-
I want my XVI to look like this:
(http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviation-photos/photos/6/0/3/1380306.jpg)
Asking for the HF variant w Merlin 70 meets the same problem (besides noone will use it, like the XIV) so im not gonna ask for that..
-
My best guess for why HTC decided to call it a Spitfire Mk XVI rather than a Spitfire LF.Mk IXe is because while most WWII aviation enthusiasts are used to subvariants of Bf109s, particularly Bf109Gs, being massively different, most people think of a given mark of British aircraft as being all the same and HTC likely wanted to avoid confusing less informed players by having a Spitfire F.Mk IX and a Spitfire LF.Mk IXe.
I even see authors mistaking the clipped wings as being relevant to the LF designation. It really isn't all that complex, not nearly as varied as Bf109Gs, but for whatever reason the Spitfire Mk IX family throws people off.
Spitfire Mk IX family:
Spitfire F.Mk IX = Merlin 61 or Merlin 63, universal wing
Spitfire LF.Mk IX = Merlin 66, universal wing
Spitfire HF.Mk IX = Merlin 70, universal wing
Spitfire LF.Mk IXe = Merlin 66, e wing
Spitfire HF.Mk IXe = Merlin 70, e wing
Spitfire Mk XVI = Merlin 266, e wing
EDIT:
Bubble canopy Mk IXs, Mk XIVs and Mk XVIs missed the war for all practical purposes. It would be kind of like adding the Me163 or Ta152. Well, not quite as bad as the Ta152.
-
Clipped wing was more or less a field mod right?
-
Clipped wing was more or less a field mod right?
Not so much a mod as an optional configuration for the Spitfire's wing. The tips could be changed between clipped, standard and extended in about 30 minutes. I've seen photos of Spitfire HF.Mk IXs (high blown Merlin 70) with clipped wings. It was just a matter of having the desired wing tips available, unbolting the currently mounted tips (pretty much just a wing end cover for clipped) and bolting the new tips on.
-
Ask Hitech to allow you the option to take up the MkVIII with empty wing tanks. If you take up an MkVIII with 75% and burn down the wing tanks, then burn down the bottom tank until 1\4 is left, you just about have the beast you really want.
By that point you also have 3-4 minutes flouncing around on WEP before you have to RTB.
Spits in our game are dogs until just before you have to DD out of Dodge. But, those few minutes of just the right amount of weight are intoxicating.
So up a MkVIII with 50% and a dropper.
All of the spits XI and on, the hand book also says to burn some amount of the bottom tank before entering into combat maneuvering. Have you bothered to read up about that and try to burn the tanks to give you the best weight for performance? Both the VIII and XIV need the wing tanks burned down and just a bit of the bottom for the best combat performance.
-
I even see authors mistaking the clipped wings as being relevant to the LF designation. It really isn't all that complex, not nearly as varied as Bf109Gs, but for whatever reason the Spitfire Mk IX family throws people off.
I remember having to learn the whole Spit/Hurri family; that was a headache. Low flying, High Flying; different wings. I'm curious to why Hitech has never added the C or E Wing? The only difference is having the two 20mms and 50 calibers or two 20mms and 4x 303s or simply 4 20mms.
-
I remember having to learn the whole Spit/Hurri family; that was a headache. Low flying, High Flying; different wings. I'm curious to why Hitech has never added the C or E Wing? The only difference is having the two 20mms and 50 calibers or two 20mms and 4x 303s or simply 4 20mms.
The universal wing, sometimes referred to as the c wing, couldn't take rockets or the two 250lb bombs, only the centerline 500lb bomb or drop tank. The guns on the e wing could not be changed. Both the Mk XIV and Mk XVI have the e wing in AH.
-
What is the diff. tween the g10 we had vs the g10 we didn't have?
-
So Karnak, you seem to be an expert in Spits. I get the impression that HTC has chosen the very earliest and worst versions of each mark (certainly for V and IX). Can you convince me I'm wrong? (Here "worst" refers to aspects important to AH combat and yes, this is a whine as I miss having a Spit V that could actually get out of it's own way.)
Example for Spit V:
Source Type init ROC fpm boost
Squadron pub 39 Vb 4750
Sovereign Series Spitfire F.V 3250 16
Sovereign Series Spitfire LF.V 4720 18
AC of WWII by Chant Vb 3950
Spitfire The History, Morgan & Shacklady F.V or LF.V 4740 18
Aces High V (mil pwr) 2750 8.5
Aces High V (WEP) 3200 11.5
-
The universal wing, sometimes referred to as the c wing, couldn't take rockets or the two 250lb bombs, only the centerline 500lb bomb or drop tank. The guns on the e wing could not be changed. Both the Mk XIV and Mk XVI have the e wing in AH.
Correct me if I am wrong, but I remember specifically reading E Wings could have 4x 20mms or 2x 50s and 2x 20mms, it was a production standard as the C-wing wasn't entirely different in production then the E wing?
I only know the Spitfires LF Mk. IX of No. 485 (New Zealand) Squadron had the 50s and 20mms - can't recall any units who had the C/E wing with 20mms only. I do know the Spitfire F 21 were put into production but only 120 or so were made?
-
What is the diff. tween the g10 we had vs the g10 we didn't have?
The "Bf109G-10" we had was actually simply a Bf109K-4's performance data with the option for 20mm cannons, just like the Merlin 61 Spitfire Mk IX had the option for .50 caliber machine guns. It was a hodgepodge to give players more options. The Bf109G-10 was 20-30mph slower than the Bf109K-4, it also entered service a month after the Bf109K-4, which means it isn't a gap filler. We'd need an entirely new flight model to be produced for it, and while having a high alt Bf109 with 20mm cannons would be nice, I think it should be a gap filler, either the Bf109G-6/AS or Bf109G-14/AS.
So Karnak, you seem to be an expert in Spits. I get the impression that HTC has chosen the very earliest and worst versions of each mark (certainly for V and IX). Can you convince me I'm wrong? (Here "worst" refers to aspects important to AH combat and yes, this is a whine as I miss having a Spit V that could actually get out of it's own way.)
Example for Spit V:
Source Type init ROC fpm boost
Squadron pub 39 Vb 4750
Sovereign Series Spitfire F.V 3250 16
Sovereign Series Spitfire LF.V 4720 18
AC of WWII by Chant Vb 3950
Spitfire The History, Morgan & Shacklady F.V or LF.V 4740 18
Aces High V (mil pwr) 2750 8.5
Aces High V (WEP) 3200 11.5
I am not as good on Mk Vs. I don't know their engine progression like I do the Mk IXs. I do know that our Mk V has metal ailerons, so it isn't the worst possible Spitfire Mk V. That would probably be Bader's Spitfire Mk Va with fabric ailerons (think Spitfire Mk I roll rates) and eight .303s (again, like the Spitfire Mk I) as Bader strongly advocated for the continuation of the .303 armament whereas others like Malan and Tuck advocated for cannons. I do know that our Mk V has the earliest engine, but fitted with Miss Tilly's orifice to help with fuel starvation in negative G maneuvering.
Correct me if I am wrong, but I remember specifically reading E Wings could have 4x 20mms or 2x 50s and 2x 20mms, it was a production standard as the C-wing wasn't entirely different in production then the E wing?
I only know the Spitfires LF Mk. IX of No. 485 (New Zealand) Squadron had the 50s and 20mms - can't recall any units who had the C/E wing with 20mms only. I do know the Spitfire F 21 were put into production but only 120 or so were made?
You're mistaken. The e wing was strictly two 20mm cannons and two .50 caliber machine guns, it lost the flexibility of the universal wing, but that flexibility was, in practice, almost never used so it didn't matter much. The universal wing, introduced on Mk Vs in, IIRC, late 1941, had the option of eight .303s or two 20mm and four .303s or four 20mm. The heating on the outer pair of cannons was inadequate and the performance impact was significant so in practice it was almost always equipped with two 20mm and four .303s. On Malta it was flown without the .303s. One or two Mk V squadrons who were tasked with low altitude ground attack did carry the four 20mm and I am aware of some Mk VIIIs in Australian service taking the four 20mm at an individual aircraft level to hunt Ki-46 Dinah's. I know of no other use of quad cannon Spitfires prior to the F.21.
-
Personally I think the XVI designation has caused as much if not more confusion...folks get it and the XIV mixed up and then all the stuff about it being a LF IXE doesn't help. If we can have the BF 109G-6 and the Bf 109G-14 without mass confusion I guess we could have the Spit F. Mk IX and the Spit LF. Mk IX
-
Personally I think the XVI designation has caused as much if not more confusion...folks get it and the XIV mixed up and then all the stuff about it being a LF IXE doesn't help. If we can have the BF 109G-6 and the Bf 109G-14 without mass confusion I guess we could have the Spit F. Mk IX and the Spit LF. Mk IX
It has certainly led to some "interesting" threads about how that one Spitfire Mk XVI airframe with ~32 hours of combat time was actually the total combat time of all Spitfire Mk XVI airframes.
-
As to the variant choice for our V mark - way back the spits line was rearranged to give a better representation of spits at any given time frame of the war. Because many spit model served in parallel, our old super-spit V was a later model that our spit IX, and we were missing spits between the mark I and mark IX.
It was then that the models VIII and XVI were added and covered the late Merlin models, spit V was derated to a 1941 model and our spit IX represent the 1942-1943 "stop gap" mark IXs before the introduction of the mark VIII. As said by Karnak above, our spit XVI represents the late IX models.
-
Karnak likes gap fillers.
-
Funny thing is Pyro asked us at the time what was the best way to go and the spit history guys suggested they do it this way to cover the various time frames and allow for the best variety for scenario use etc.
If you are desperate for a Merlin 66 take the VIII or the XVI. Having recently finished a scenario where the altitude of the fights was higher, having the FIX made a big difference.
In the MA the 8 or 16 works better down low.
In the end HTC gave us our biggest bang for the buck with the Spit lineup without having to model every variant.
-
The OP seems to have fallen for bigger is better in the advertised ingredients. Maybe some day Hitech will tell Waffle to cut one loose. It's interesting he didn't jump to the head of the line and simply ask for 150 Oct fuel which would liven things up slightly across the spits 9-14.
For many players, getting a spit up to 350 and faster turns it into a ride they don't know what or how to do with. At MA alt, it still won't turn a spit into a runstang to have an IX with wing tips and a 66. Or other than a 14 with 150 Oct.
There might be something to having slightly longer ailerons and wing tips on the spit16. How much of a something would probably be only useful to a talented vet. But, then you can simply take 50% and a dropper to furball with an 8 while flying it like an 8 and not a merlin 61 9.
-
As to the variant choice for our V mark - way back the spits line was rearranged to give a better representation of spits at any given time frame of the war. Because many spit model served in parallel, our old super-spit V was a later model that our spit IX, and we were missing spits between the mark I and mark IX.
It was then that the models VIII and XVI were added and covered the late Merlin models, spit V was derated to a 1941 model and our spit IX represent the 1942-1943 "stop gap" mark IXs before the introduction of the mark VIII. As said by Karnak above, our spit XVI represents the late IX models.
OK. I guess it makes sense (although it does kinda match my "worst of each mark" thought). Of course it means no one ever flys the Spit V in the MA because, well, it's useless.
-
OK. I guess it makes sense (although it does kinda match my "worst of each mark" thought). Of course it means no one ever flys the Spit V in the MA because, well, it's useless.
Depending on your desires the Mk VIII is the best version as it has the Merlin 66 rather than a Merlin 61, 63 or 70.
Merlin 70 could be interesting in some ways though.
See my earlier response for how the Mk V could be worse.
-
I would still like a full wing span Spit XVI or a clipped Spit XIV option. Not possible in this version but perhaps in later game versions where its a hanger option on applicable types who knows...
-
Having Mk IX in HF (merlin 70) variant along with mk XIV for high altitude and Mk VIII and XVI for low level/attack could be an option. Guess it would be somewhat closest to how they were used in WW2.
-
Having Mk IX in HF (merlin 70) variant along with mk XIV for high altitude and Mk VIII and XVI for low level/attack could be an option. Guess it would be somewhat closest to how they were used in WW2.
There is a reason the Merlin 66/ 266 birds were the most numerous by far. It would be a waste of resources to do an HF IX. Understand I've been a Spit junkie long before flight sims. The Spit XII has been a long time passion. That being said in terms of AH we have a decent representative Spit line up. As much as I'd love an XII or a Seafire III, I strongly believe there are other planes that should be added first