Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: CombatWombat on November 13, 1999, 10:49:00 AM
-
Does anyone know what particular model/engine combination HTC is trying to model in our current spit? I know the spit had tons of different engines in it, but which is in AH?
We were given the A8 and G10 because they were amoung the most numerous of the Fw/109's despite them being average performers compared to other models available at the time. It feels like we are given the best possible engine for the spit however! Why give us the average aircraft for fockwulfs, then give us the best spit Britian had to offer?
Well what's the problem with our current spit? Speed, and too much of it. The plane has both huge sustained turn rate and a top speed barely slower than an FW/51. If you can have speed AND turn rate, why fly a dedicated B&Z plane? In theory it isnt even possible to have both, unless u have alot more horsepower than the competition, right?
Sustained turn rate is somewhat based on wingloading, correct? Wingloading comes from wingarea, and wing cord. The more wingarea, the more induced drag, bigger wing cord, more drag as well. The spit must have LOTS of this in order to get that nice sustained turn, yet it can still pull itself through all the drag and be nearly as fast as Fw's/51's.
I dunno, maybe Spits WERE that fast in real life, after all, they did have UFO power. But perhaps it's not a matter of realism but more of playbalancing? The current aircraft and all too similar in speed, while turn rate differs ALOT, making T&B reign suprmeme. IT just seems that if other aircraft that fit inbetween the speed envelope we currently have, like the F4U, P47, etc, will be useful, is if the T&nberners are slowed down a bit, or the fast guys go faster.
Heres some stuff i dug up for the heck of it...
SPIT IX:
empty wieght: 7300lbs
wing area: 242 sq ft
wing loading: 30.2 lb/sq ft.
Horse power: 1,650hp Rolls Royce Merlin 70 Inline
Fw190 A8
empty wieght: 7600lbs
wing area: 197 sq ft
wingloading: 38.8 lb/sq ft
Horse power: 1,700hp BMW 801 D Radial
My ideas are confirmed by the data I found. Not all data will be the same, but weather the spit is 7300, or 7301 pounds doesnt matter = )
-
Not to dispute any of your figures (I'm not), is your argument that the Spit is too good? It is indeed good, but I have to say I feel the plane set is very balanced as it is. I only have 13 kills this tour, but the bulk of them are in the 190 against the Spit. I have yet to be officially "killed". I have outrun Spits, out rolled them, out gunned them... and I fly Spits too, and find the German birds very hard to kill. AAMOF, about the only planes that seem relatively easy to kill in a Spit are the Nikki and La5. IMHO of course!
Then again (and not saying you don't) I start all my flights with a long climb to at least 20K... (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif) When the odds turn against me, I split. I'm flying to live!
-
>>I start all my flights with a long climb >>to at least 20K...
Me too, but then I just get jumped by 25k spits.... Nomatter how high I climb it always seems theres someone higher, figures.
-
Our Spit should be something between a merlin 61 and a Merlin 66 LF model. In other words a monster.
Time to 20,000ft of the 1944 Merlin 66 Spitfire (with 150 octane fuel) was 4'30". Can you imagine it?
I hate the Spitfire IX. I never fly it. But if you fly it like an energy fighter, it is simply the best. Take a 109 pilot, give him a Spit IX and you'll have the most lethal combo you have ever seen ... (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Greets,
Gatt
-
First the 109g10 and FW190 a8 were choosen because of the time they came into service around '44 not the models with the best performance. Remember the spit 14 was available in the first half '44 so there would be an argument for that instead of a a 9. The 9 made an appearence in '42 but had different engines and mods so '44 spit should be superior to a '42 spit and also fits in with the time frame for this game.I believe the spit had Merlin 61,63,66,70 or 266 engines. The spit fits in well with this plane set and was not choosen because it was the best spit 9 but because it was the right time period.
P.S. IN BnZ speed and HIGH SPEED HANDLING are important in the both respects 190/51 are superior
On the other hand mabye your right and the brits made better planes than you americans.
-
Except Wombat is arguing we have the best Spit IX vs. the mediocre 109/190, unless I'm reading wrong. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
-kier-
Read my post what i said was the 1944 spit 9 should be modelled because we are doing a 1944 planes set and the 109/190 modelled are also from 1944.
Besides there is no best spit 9 there were two main basic set-ups for the spit high altitude and low altitude (i think the low alt plane had clipped wings)
Although i am sure they improved on the 1942 models in some ways the performance difference between the same variant in 1942 and 1944 would be minmal at best. If you model the low alt spit it would be quicker but climb slower than a high alt one, which is best is very subjective.
P.S. what is the spit 9 and the 190/109 you would suggest explaining why you have choosen them
-
-kier- was reading right, let me try to rephrase.
The 109G10 and 190A8 were mediocre versions of the me109 and 190A series. Both the Franze, and FW-A4 were better dogfighters than the planes we recieved in most respects, yet we got the G/A8 since they were the most abundant at the time.(thats what I was told)
Meanwhile, our Spit IX, seems to have the best engine available in 44. It seems we have an "Elite" spit, rather than the average run-of-the-mill RAF fighter. I'm sure some Spits WERE this good, but not all, and definitely not most.
You have to figure a little, that in wartime, where a good portion of Britian was destroyed a few years earlier, they could not afford to upgrade ALL spits with the newest greatest equipment. Just look at the USAF. Not all of our F-16's are block 50/52. Or our F15E's. Not all have the newest best engine availible to them, the 229.
PS: a spit can make 20k in 4:30!? Is that the turbine powered varient?! Or perhaps JADO assist?
-
In 1942 the spit 9 would not have reached many opertional units. In 1944, the time AH has choosen to use, the spit 9 would have been the most common spit as it was the most produced variant.
I believe the only advantage the Franze has over the G-10 is it is a better turner and it still won't out turn a spit 9, the G-10 will eat the franze for breakfast in terms of speed,climb, acceleration etc. Against the spit 9 i don't think the franze has a single significant advantage (am i wrong?)
The 190 A4 on the other hand is again more manouverable than the A8.It is still not a patch on the spit (or most other planes)in terms of turning circles but the A8 is a evolution on the A4 and therefore should be considered better. This though is much more debatable.
P.S. Franze entered service 1941 and A4 entered in 1942 (a few months before the spit.
[This message has been edited by jmccaul (edited 11-13-1999).]
[This message has been edited by jmccaul (edited 11-13-1999).]
-
Hose me if I am wrong.
Was the Spit, and for that matter the 109, such enduring air frames because they were superior at any one thing?
Could they pretty well compete at the big three, E fighting, BnZ and TnB? Or is that just a sim idea that I have?
Both Spit and 109 climb and accelerate well, big three plus one.
Mino
-
While I am a general "anti-Spit" person myself, I'm not exactly sure which German aircraft are a superior alternative.
In the 190 Series, I would probably have to agreed with you, and would go with the Fw190D-9. It would have been more competitive, and fit in better with the planeset.
However I don't know of a better performing Me-109 Model. The 109G10 is actually the same basic plane as the 109K4. Yes the G series came before the K series, but the G10 was a standardization of the refits of older G airframes to meet the newer K4 series performance specifications. There should be a minimal performance difference.
And when it comes to Spitfires, my tag line says it all.
Real Men fly Radials... Only Nancy Boys fly Spitfires (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
------------------
Vermillion
WB's: (verm--), **MOL**, Men of Leisure,
"Real men fly Radials, Nancy Boys fly Spitfires ;) "
-
If WB's modeling can be used as any kind of indicative evidence, I say Bf 109F-4 can very well dogfight with Spitfire IX.
Flat turns Spitfire IX probably wins, but general dogfight it is quite fun match up. To me the G-10 ( or WB's K-4 ) are too heavy. If I want to BnZ I'll grab a Fw 190 then. When I fly Bf 109 I would rather have G-2 or G-6 in against Spitfire IX and other '44 planes.
All, G-2, G-6 and G-10, climb better than most of their opposition. G-10 going a bit faster I would think. G-2/6's better turning ability makes it IMO a better plane.
Same deal with Fw 190, against planes of '44 I would much rather have Fw 190A-4 than A-8 or D-9. A-4 and A-8 both have about the same ammount of 'running' ability but the first one turns bit better as to not make it such a target for P-51 which the first two can't out run in the long run.
As for uber Spitfire. IMO it's the best plane in the game right now, but dunno if it's wrongly modeled. As long as it, and its opposition, are correctly modeled I have no issues with it. Guess that wasn't the original point of the thread though.
//fats
-
Real Men fly Radials... Only Nancy Boys fly Spitfires
Hahahahahaha. Right on, Verm. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) I mean, the Spit is one helluva plane, but EVERYBODY flies it. In "Brand W", I would often take up a clearly inferior ride just to see how I could manage myself up there. I'm often prone to dive right in, guns blazing... but sometimes it's best to sit back and pick your fights. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
"However I don't know of a better performing Me-109 Model. The 109G10 is actually the same basic plane as the 109K4. Yes the G series came before the K series, but the G10 was a standardization of the refits of older G airframes to meet the newer K4 series performance specifications. There should be a minimal performance difference."
--12mph (TAS) difference at 24k 'ish ft according to Janes
--Vermillion where did you get that? And yes Ive seen it posted before, but I have read that the opposite way. K series based on G-10 with slightly improved aerodynamics and engine.
--------------------------------------.
From: Messerschmitt Bf109
Robert Grisnell
"The Bf109k was the product of a standardization policy instituted by the RLM to reduce the number of variants and sub-types in the various basic airframes in use by the Luftwaffe. The plan was to select a basic varient,incorporating all the improvements that had evolved through the earlier sub-types,and establish a standard aircraft which would be manufactured by each of the aircraft plants involved in that paticular design."
" The 109k was such an aircraft, and was based on the Bf109G-10 variant,incorporating a number of Umruest-Bausatz as well as several minor aerodynamic external features to improve streamlining"
---------------
The G-10 was in use in April 44 the K series in Oct 44. How could the G-10 be based on the K when it came out first?
Jagr/Kats?
------------------
Jumpin Jesus on a pogo stick! Everybody knows a burrow owl... lives... in a hole... in the ground!
[This message has been edited by chisel (edited 11-14-1999).]
-
Chisel, I am definitely not a 109 expert, so take what I say on that subject with a grain of salt.
I had thought that what I had posted was what I had read at some point, but admittedly, I may have been parroting back something I had read over in AGW.
But regardless, I think the point that the K4 and the G10 are very similar in performance is still valid.
------------------
Vermillion
WB's: (verm--), **MOL**, Men of Leisure,
"Real men fly Radials, Nancy Boys fly Spitfires ;) "
-
Fats :
quote
If WB's modeling can be used as any kind of indicative evidence, I say Bf 109F-4 can very well dogfight with Spitfire IX.
end quote
It is very hard to talk about unquantiable aspects of fighting but on a pure stats basis i'm pretty sure the G10 in most of the important things better than the F4 due to it being a later model(they are hardly going to make it worse)The f4 may turn better but in a 109 this sin't going to be the most important factor.
You are probably right there is not much difference between the F4 and the spit 9 but I still think the G10 is more of a match.
-
--- jmccaul: ---
It is very hard to talk about unquantiable aspects of fighting but on a pure stats basis i'm pretty sure the G10 in most of the important things better than the F4 due to it being a later model(they are hardly going to make it worse)The f4 may turn better but in a 109 this sin't going to be the most important factor.
--- end ---
It all depends what kind of fight you are looking for and enjoy. With Bf 109F-4 you can enter a stall fight against Spitfire Mk.IX in WB, in Bf 109K-4 ( AH G-10 ) it would be suicide. F-4 and K-4 are totally different planes.
If I was to fly F-4 in AH for a month and then G-10 for a month, trying to get as high K/D as possible in both planes, there wouldn't be much of a difference probably in the end. But while trying to get it, I think I would enjoy more getting the K/D in a plane flying like F-4 than G-10 cause the fights could/would be totally different.
//fats
-
"G10 in most of the important things better than the F4 due to it being a later model(they are hardly going to make it worse)"
You're wrong, they actually did it worse as their goal was a bomber interceptor (but here on dogfight, they sux).
"The f4 may turn better but in a 109 this sin't going to be the most important factor."
109F is light (light armor, 1x20 / 2x7.9mm), and very good vertical / TnB fighter.
Turns almost as good as spit (in WB)
When comparing 109F4 to any G or K series, it'll beat'em anytime.
In WB if You flew 109K, Your only way to somewhat manage it was a BnZ and with 109's compression character, oh well...
I agree with Fats, Franz should be next 109, ASAP !
------------------
janneh down and out !
-
Granted the f4 is a better turn and burn plane but it is still not as good as the spit 9 in this respect so i maintain the belife that the G10 is a better match against the spit in the arena it is just you have to fly it different like fats said.
Frankly most 41 era planes will turn better and are genarally more nimble than the current plane set more competitive than the current G10? The spit 5 is lighter and nimbler than the spit 9 is it better, o way the spit 9 was basically to counter the fact that the heavy, cumbersome 190A4 which completly outcalssed the spit 5
-
In a base defense situation, I think I would opt for the Spit V over the Spit IX... quicker lift off, better turn, same guns.
-
I don't know where you are getting your info about the F4 having 'light armor', the F4 was incredibily armored, the pilot having increased seat protection by the addition of a 6mm armor plate at a 45° angle to protect the pilot's head and an external armored windscreen compared to the F3 which lacked those.
(http://www.qt.org/worldwar/luftwaffe/decal.gif)
------------------
1./Jagdgeshwader 51 "Mölders"
-
-kier-
In quick base defense the hurri 2 is also a good choice - turns well has big guns but it does not make it competitive in an arena of spit 9's
-
Once again, the same old debate...
Check this one out, it actually uses numbers not stories...
Make sure to chekc out all pages - it starts a a flame and turns constructive..
http://lists.imagiconline.com/ubb/Forum19/HTML/000238.html (http://lists.imagiconline.com/ubb/Forum19/HTML/000238.html)
Bottom line is, Spitfire 9 can outrun outturn and barely but still outclimb G2.
Which means it can do the same against G6 - which overall is somewhat heavier then G2.
With GM1 - both G2 and G6 can probably outclimb spitfire by a bit, but it should be remembered that GM1 was designed for use over 20k !!! Where second stage supercharger of Merlin kicked in and spitfire's climb rate didn't drop off nearly as much as that of other planes.
G10 can outclimb spitfire if equiped wiht GM1 - bit don't fool yourself into thinking that you can get low and slow with spitfire and then point your nose up when you get in trouble and be saved.....
Let's make an example:
Let's say for example that 109G10 wiht GM1 climbs at 5k/minute
and spit9 at 4k/minute. ( this is far larger gap then in reality, but use that for argument's sake )
Therefore after a MINUTE of vertical maneuvering after starting from the same position, 109G10 will be D3.3 above spitfire. Now we all know that it's possible to shoot someone's bellybutton off from D3 , right ?
Also we should remember that most fights don't last as long as a minute..
Therefore quit thinking that 109's climb will save your bellybutton everytime - it won't.
------------------
(http://www.raf303.org/banner.gif)
Bartlomiej Rajewski
S/L fd-ski Sq. 303 (Polish) "Kosciuszko" RAF
www.raf303.org (http://www.raf303.org)
-
Bottom line is, Spitfire 9 can outrun outturn and barely but still outclimb G2.
I'm still not quite sure about the climb department but otherwise that assumption seems correct.
Which means it can do the same against G6 - which overall is somewhat heavier then G2.
Heavier and also poorer on aerodynamic properties due the MG 131 spend ammo chute bumps.
With GM1 - both G2 and G6 can probably outclimb spitfire by a bit, but it should be remembered that GM1 was designed for use over 20k !!!
But many G-6's had MW 50 that will help the climb quite a much in low alts.
Now this might make 109G look like bad plane. It really wasn't.
Spit IX was pretty rare bird when G-2 came to service. G-2 could do very well against Spit V being faster and better climber. The G-6 was, however not so good match for Spit IX.
In brand W the RPS slightly advances the appearance of Spit IX in numbers and it makes G-6 a definite underdog. In real life Luftwaffe encoutered Spit V LF (low level, clipped wings and low alt optimized Merlin) planes troughout the war which weren't a good match for 109's and 190's. But of course this is not the case in any online sim.
If there could be plane availability modeled in brand W or in AH, talk about Uber Spit would be almost nonexistent because every Spit you see wouldn't be a Spit IX.
The fuel burn rate modifier used in AH beta arena makes Spit not so uber, it has quite short legs when compared against some other planes. Which is good and historical and in long run will limit number of Spitfires in air to more historical numbers.
In pure dogfight Spit is good (maybe the best) plane but it's range shortcoming are apparent only in well designed arena or scenario.
See fd ski, whole post about Spit and not a single slam, pretty good eh (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
------------------
jochen
Geschwaderkommodore
Jagdgeschwader 2 'Richthofen' (http://personal.inet.fi/cool/jan.nousiainen/JG2) (Warbirds)
If you ever get across the sea to England,
Then maybe at the closing of the day
The bars will all be serving German lager
Which means we won the war - hip hip hooray!
-
So, what's the point in 109G-10 vs Spit 9 ?
IMHO, 109G-10 is such an awesome Spit killer that I really wonder how they did not come up with "Give us Spit XIV" complaints (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Of course, I would like to have K-4, but G-10 is nice bird too.
As for 190, I think it suffers from being put up against P-51D. Spits are not that dangerous. Dora(tm) is the answer (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
[This message has been edited by Hristo (edited 11-15-1999).]
-
Screw the Griffon Spitfire, give us the 24-cylinder Napier Sabre engined Tempest V (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
Screw the Griffon Spitfire, give us the 24-cylinder Napier Sabre engined Tempest V
Listen my son,
Tempest is not the uber dogfighter of the WWII.
It is fast and it has good guns, yes, but it does not roll too well and it's turning radius ain't much smaller than of Bf 109 and Fw 190. And last but not least, Tempest suffered from compressions on high speeds! Spitfire XIV is far better dogfighter than Tempest which is more like Fw 190.
If we ever get Tempest, it will be funny to read this BBS when Tempest pilots cry out their dissapointment for their ride.
(http://personal.inet.fi/cool/jan.nousiainen/JG2/images/picture_profile.gif)
------------------
jochen
Geschwaderkommodore
Jagdgeschwader 2 'Richthofen' (http://personal.inet.fi/cool/jan.nousiainen/JG2) (Warbirds)
If you ever get across the sea to England,
Then maybe at the closing of the day
The bars will all be serving German lager
Which means we won the war - hip hip hooray!
-
I have to agree with Hristo on this one. I initially flew the spit most of the time when AH first came out but I recently started taking up the G-10. Wow, the spit has little chance unless it can get a good bounce from altitude. Also I used to have a hard time killing P51's flying the spit but not in this bird. In fact while most pony drivers will run away from spit they show no hesitation to mix it up with the G-10! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
fd ski wrote:
"Therefore after a MINUTE of vertical maneuvering after starting from the same position, 109G10 will be D3.3 above spitfire. Now we all know that it's possible to shoot someone's bellybutton off from D3 , right ?
Also we should remember that most fights don't last as long as a minute..
Therefore quit thinking that 109's climb will save your bellybutton everytime - it won't."
hmmm... I've seen this sorta thing mentioned before and dont get it.. if you are in gun range and on someone's six he should be a dead man what ever the planes are. (most of the time)
That "D3" a minute is for after you make a kill and find you have "his" wingman on your six at D10 ...To be able to climb away now is what the "D3" is all about. To do that in a "event" with a couple of spits behind you slowly getting left behind is sweet (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
laika-
8./JG5
-
Let's make an example:
Let's say for example that 109G10 wiht GM1 climbs at 5k/minute
and spit9 at 4k/minute. ( this is far larger gap then in reality, but use that for argument's sake )
Therefore after a MINUTE of vertical maneuvering after starting from the same position, 109G10 will be D3.3 above spitfire. Now we all know that it's possible to shoot someone's bellybutton off from D3 ,
a more likly version is you start out at D3 and after a minute of vertical manuver you are at D6...
-
Um, Jochen, the Tempest V's wing loading is 38lb/sq ft, A8's 49lb/sq ft, and 109G 40lb/sq ft, also it has a roc of 4,700ft/min (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
------------------
1./Jagdgeschwader 51 "Mölders"
-
The K model is quite different compared to the G-10:
1. Top speed: 729 km/h to 690 km/h
2. Ceiling: 12500 m to 11600 m
3. Climbrate was 24,5 m/s
4. The K model got 2 x MG 151 instead of MG 131 and could carry a MK 103 instead of the MK 108 (firing through spinner)
Werewo
JG 301 "Heimatverteidigung"
-
Jochen - as for the climb assumption - look at the link i provided. Someone posted test data for Finish 109G2 without MW50 or GM1.
It should be beaten by almost all spitfires mark 9.
Also, spitfire 9 we have in WB is the worst spit 9 we could have (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif) It's an early F model as opposed to LF or HF models - both of which would outperform it...
Look at that post - good info there.
As for SPitfire Mk. V LF - it is not the same spitfire we have in WB. Down low in the weeds it was pretty darn fast. It's performance dropped off with weight by overall it wasn't so easily outflown by 109's and 190's..
from http://www.fourthfightergroup.com/eagles/spitv.html (http://www.fourthfightergroup.com/eagles/spitv.html)
Spit 5 LF
performance at 2k: 333.5 mph !!! ( same as 109G 6 with no boost !! ) and climb of 4720 ft/m !!!
How is that for an arena killer ?
That thing ever gets modeled in WB nobody would fly anything else.. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
---------------------------------------
As for rest of you guys writing about the example i used for climb comparison - you missed my point.
I'm trying to disspell the myth in sims, that 109 can point it's nose up and get out of any tight spot it ever gets into.
I can't tell you how many time i seen novice 109 pilot stand his plane on the tail, get shot and complain about overmodeled spitfire...
There is an assumption that spitfires climb like crap and 109's have rocket in it's ass. Well, sorry. It doesn't work that way.
Simple 50mph on the merge will negate any climb adventage 109 can have in a dogfight.
IT's no longer Hurri vs 109e - it doesn't work that way.
------------------
(http://www.raf303.org/banner.gif)
Bartlomiej Rajewski
S/L fd-ski Sq. 303 (Polish) "Kosciuszko" RAF
www.raf303.org (http://www.raf303.org)
-
--- werewolf: ---
4. The K model got 2 x MG 151 instead of MG 131 and could carry a MK 103 instead of the MK 108 (firing through spinner)
--- end ---
The K-4 MG 151* are a myth AFAIK.
//fats
*) note to anyone not similar with LW guns, MG 151 is actually 15mm and MG 151/20 is the 20mm cannon found on Fw 190 and Bf 109F-4 and later.
-
Fats, that is the info I got:
There have been two variants of the 109K
1. K-4: 2 x MG 151 above engine, Mk 108 or Mk 103 firing through spinner.
2. K-6: 2 x MG 131 above engine, Mk 108 or Mk 103 firing through spinner, 2 x Mk 108 in gondolas below wings.
My source of information is "Die Luftwaffe" by Tony Wood and Bill Gunston.
The information they give has been proven to be correct very often and unless it is no printing fault I am quite sure the info is correct. Nevertheless I will try to double check the info.
Werewo
JG 301 "Heimatverteidigung"
P.S. They give some info on F variants with 2 x MG 151 too (F-2: MG-FF through spinner, 2 x MG 151)
-
While it seems my origional points were mostly ignored in favor of 109 gun config aurguments, that thread fdski posted had some useful information and confirmed some things I thought.
If we're gonna get a Spit Mk9, we need a specific type. HF, F, or LF. This would definitely help clarrify much info.
Since we have the 109G and 190A because they were numerous, I would think the Spit IX LF would be a good choice since it was also produced in the greatest numbers. Nomatter what spit is selected, it would help if it was a specific model. Our current spit seems like the HF F and LF wrapped in one = )
Kinda a Spit P82 if you will, just with 3 fuesalages.....
-
While it seems my origional points were mostly ignored in favor of 109 gun config aurguments, that thread fdski posted had some useful information and confirmed some things I thought.
If we're gonna get a Spit Mk9, we need a specific type. HF, F, or LF. This would definitely help clarrify much info.
Since we have the 109G and 190A because they were numerous, I would think the Spit IX LF would be a good choice since it was also produced in the greatest numbers. Nomatter what spit is selected, it would help if it was a specific model. Our current spit seems like the HF F and LF wrapped in one = )
Kinda a Spit P82 if you will, just with 3 fuesalages.....
-
For purposes of Vulching the Spit V LF would be an even worse nightmare.
Might be cool to let the Spit pilots choose though just like the 109/190 pilots can flip their weapons around.
cowl 151s? in a 109.. That was a proposed mod for the ta152 I think but not for any version of the 109.
[This message has been edited by Pongo (edited 11-15-1999).]
-
Jochen
I know about the Tempest's performance, thats WHY I want it, instead of the Spit 14. The Tempest is very fast below 10k, and has better roll rate than the Spit 14 at high(350mph+) speed.
Of course if you want a real UberSpit the F.21 is the one to go for, no more high speed aileron problems, 4x20mm Hispanos (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
About guns - Gustin's WWII Fighter Gun Debate page:
it was not possible to install the MG 151 in the engine cowling of small fighters such as the Bf 109 or Fw 190; only the Do 335 and Ta 152C had the MG 151 as cowl gun. The MG 151 was a much heavier, much more powerful weapon, and it replaced the 20mm MG-FF as centreline armament on the Bf 109F. During the war a copy of the MG 151 was designed in the USA, modified to fire a very powerful .60 (15.2 x 114, 76.5g) round. But this T17 gun never reached service, and only about 350 were made.
(gun,round(weight),rof,m.vel,weight)
MG131 13x64B(34.6g) 900rpm 730m/s 17kg
MG151 15x96(57g) 700rpm 960m/s 42kg
and:
It was an excellent, powerful weapon, but again it could not be carried by a fighter without considerable loss of performance. Only at the very end of the war did some fighters carry the MK103 gun. Installations in the wings tended to be inaccurate, because the enormous recoil twisted the wing; centreline installations as engine cannon were designed for the Ta 152C, Do 335 and Bf 109K, but evidence that this was turned into hardware exists only for the Do 335 and the prototypes of the Ta 152C. The fighter designs that were on German drawing boards in 1945 sometimes made provision for the MK 103, but the favorite weapon was the MK 108.
MK103 30x184B(330g) 420rpm 860m/s 146kg
MK108 30x90RB(312g) 600rpm 505m/s 64kg
How about this for a WW2 cannon though:
The MG 213C was designed in 1944, and it was a revolver gun with a five-chamber cylinder. By dividing the loading of a cartridge in three steps, a high rate of fire could be achieved while keeping the forces within the gun limited. There were 20mm and 30mm versions. The MG 213C made linear action guns obsolete for fighters, and was copied widely.
MG 213C/20 20x135(112g) 1400rpm 1050m/s 75kg
MG 213C/30 30x85B(330g) 1200rpm 530m/s 75kg
[This message has been edited by juzz (edited 11-15-1999).]
-
Jochen - as for the climb assumption - look at the link i provided. Someone posted test data for Finish 109G2 without MW50 or GM1.
It should be beaten by almost all spitfires mark 9.
We are now talking about different generation of fighter planes.
I'm quite sure that G-2 went to action before Spit IX was used operationally in large scale. That means that G-2 faced mostly Spit V's which it could handily outclimb and outrun.
Spit IX and G-6 are the match we are looking for. Since almost all G-6's had either MW 50 or GM 1 I would imagine that despite it's little bigger weight is more than compensated on climb. And on climb the bumps of G-6 are not creating that much drag since air speed is pretty low.
In general, of course Spit IX was bigger step ahead than moving from F series to G series, no doubt about that.
Look at that post - good info there.
Yep, I have been (s)trolling there lately lobbying for G-2 (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
[/quote]As for SPitfire Mk. V LF - it is not the same spitfire we have in WB. Down low in the weeds it was pretty darn fast. It's performance dropped off with weight by overall it wasn't so easily outflown by 109's and 190's.[/quote]
Hmm, the Ospreys book about Spit V aces says that clipped wing gave little better top speed (I think it was 10-15 mph), little better roll rate and little worser turn rate. Maybe the top speed was better with later model of Merlin?
As arena plane, low level performance is useful and Spit V LF would be great in that role. But in 1 vs 1 co alt, if the 109 has bit of distance if could start shallow climb and maybe get to alt where LF would start to sweat.
Spit 5 LF performance at 2k: 333.5 mph !!! ( same as 109G 6 with no boost !! ) and climb of 4720 ft/m !!!
I would think that same generation G-2 would be bit faster than G-6 without boost meaning it's bit faster than Spit V LF in low, the difference of course increases with alt. Climb on the other hand sounds pretty damn good but it will also decline when alt increases.
How is that for an arena killer ?
That thing ever gets modeled in WB nobody would fly anything else...
Now, who would like to see even more Spits? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
If some WWII sim manages to produce system for limiting plane availability or usability (range?), modeling very high performance planes is not an problem. In WB where everybody can fly whatever they like it is a problem for my opinion.
I don't mind modeling best models of Spit, I just want to see them in historic proportions on arenas. And that is what really counts if you think money because diversity is not a bad thing.
------------------
jochen
Geschwaderkommodore
Jagdgeschwader 2 'Richthofen' (http://personal.inet.fi/cool/jan.nousiainen/JG2) (Warbirds)
If you ever get across the sea to England,
Then maybe at the closing of the day
The bars will all be serving German lager
Which means we won the war - hip hip hooray!
-
Um, Jochen, the Tempest V's wing loading is 38lb/sq ft, A8's 49lb/sq ft, and 109G 40lb/sq ft, also it has a roc of 4,700ft/min
Odd, Ospreys recent Typhoon/Tempest book says that Tempest was not that good in turning stating that Fw 190A was close to it?
Maybe it was high speed turning ability or something, it also mentioned that Tempest had handling troubles in high speeds.
------------------
jochen
Geschwaderkommodore
Jagdgeschwader 2 'Richthofen' (http://personal.inet.fi/cool/jan.nousiainen/JG2) (Warbirds)
If you ever get across the sea to England,
Then maybe at the closing of the day
The bars will all be serving German lager
Which means we won the war - hip hip hooray!
-
--- werewolf: ---
1. K-4: 2 x MG 151 above engine, Mk 108 or Mk 103 firing through spinner.
2. K-6: 2 x MG 131 above engine, Mk 108 or Mk 103 firing through spinner, 2 x Mk 108 in gondolas below wings.
--- end ---
Grabbed the first four books about the 109 from my shelves:
1) Messerchmitt Bf 109 F, G & K series
2) The Luftwaffe Profile Series No.2 Messershmitt Bf 109G/K
3) Monogram Close-Up 9 Bf 109F
4) Messerschmitt Bf 109 In Action part 2.
The 1) says:
"Bf 109K-4
...Armament of the K-4 consisted of an engine mounted MK 108, which by now was installed on the production line, as well as two MG 131 machine-guns above the engine. There were aircraft, however, which were delivered with an MG151/20 engine mounted cannon."
"Bf 109K-6
...The K-6 was to be largely similar to the K-4; the only difference was to be the installation of two MK 108 in the wings, which is why the K-6 was designated 'heavy fighter'"
The 2) confirms the above and has an illustration of the wing MK 108 being inside the new wing of the K-6, not in gondolas. The 4) also agree's on K-4's armament to have been MK 108 and MG 131s
--- werewolf: ---
P.S. They give some info on F variants with 2 x MG 151 too (F-2: MG-FF through spinner, 2 x MG 151)
--- end ---
According to the 3) the F-2 was the only F model to have MG 151, and it was installed as the engine cannon and two cowl MG 17s.
I can found no reference to MG 151 being fitted to any other Bf 109, except BF 109F-2. I do recall one of my books discussing especially the myth of the cowl MG 151s on K-4, but couldn't find it right now.
//fats
-
Grat info fats. Ireg will visit an archive here in Germany soon and I asked him to check original documents for the MG 151 variants too.
Werewo
JG 301 "Heimatverteidigung"