Author Topic: Why the apathy about the 2nd most common aircraft, the Spitfire MkIX?  (Read 3961 times)

Offline AKDejaVu

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5049
      • http://www.dbstaines.com
Why the apathy about the 2nd most common aircraft, the Spitfire MkIX?
« Reply #30 on: August 07, 2001, 02:40:00 PM »
Quote
SOB said the spits were RARELY SEEN?!?!?!?!?!
What does that mean?

It can only mean 1 of 2 things:
[list=1]
  • Spitfires were rarely seen in WW2
  • SOB is full of s#!t[/list=a]

    I know what option I'm going with.  I'm suprised that you haven't quite figured it out yourself ;)

    And Karnak... I don't think you'll get alot of grief in regards to making the spit accurate as long as it means going back in time <relative> as opposed to forward.  If you're bucking for a new improved Spitfire, I'd tend to think "dream on".  If you're simply going for a historically accurate 1943 Spitfire then there should be little resistance.

    I have a tendancy to think its better to be accurate at the technical level.  If the Spit model HTC is modelling had a different loadout than the one we use... it should be fixed.

    BTW... I call most people "SpitDweebs" because almost everyone I know that flies a spit is a dweeb.  It really has nothing to do with the plane. ;)

    AKDejaVu

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23048
Why the apathy about the 2nd most common aircraft, the Spitfire MkIX?
« Reply #31 on: August 07, 2001, 03:24:00 PM »
AKDejaVu,

Actually, I'm requesting an accurate 1942 Spitfire.  We don't have any variety of 1943 Spitfire.

What we have is the FM of a 1942 Spitfire coupled with the gun and ordinance options of a 1944 Spitfire.

A 1943 Spitfire would be considerably deadlier than what we have.

The important thing is to have whichever we end up with accurate.  As it is, it sin't even close to accurate.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline funkedup

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9466
      • http://www.raf303.org/
Why the apathy about the 2nd most common aircraft, the Spitfire MkIX?
« Reply #32 on: August 07, 2001, 04:21:00 PM »
1.  SOB was joking you tards!

2.  Why the Spit is not discussed much on the UBB:  
a.  Experienced/addicted players are overrepresented on this BBS.  They are not only more likely to post to the BBS, they are also more likely to post at a high rate.  
b.  Experienced/addicted players usually want to become "good" at the game.  
c.  Many players think becoming "good" means achieving a high kill:death ratio.
d.  If one wishes to post a high kill:death ratio, one must eventually learn to kill without very much turning.
e.  There are 10-12 better planes than the Spitfire for killing without very much turning.  The keys for getting a high kill:death ratio are speed, guns, and more speed.
f.  As a result of a-e, the majority of experienced/addicted players are more interested in other fighters.  As a result these players and the volume of posts they generate are not focused on the various issues surrounding the greatest fighter in the history of air combat.

[ 08-07-2001: Message edited by: funkedup ]

Offline AKDejaVu

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5049
      • http://www.dbstaines.com
Why the apathy about the 2nd most common aircraft, the Spitfire MkIX?
« Reply #33 on: August 07, 2001, 04:30:00 PM »
1942,1943.. whatever.

Just making it clear that "I want modelling accuracy" does not always equate to "undermodelled!".  This should be one of those cases where that is recognized.

AKDejaVu

Offline MANDOBLE

  • Parolee
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1849
      • http://www.terra.es/personal2/matias.s
Why the apathy about the 2nd most common aircraft, the Spitfire MkIX?
« Reply #34 on: August 07, 2001, 04:56:00 PM »
Karnak, a good Fw190D-9 or Bf109G-10 pilot should almost never lose to a Spitfire and a good Spitfire pilot should never lose to a D9 or G10. About our actual SpitIX, test its climb rate at 15-20k compared to G10 or D9 you'll be really surprised. Test its initial dive speed compared to G10 or D9 and you'll be again surprised. Compare their acceleration at any alt above 10k and you'll be again more surprised.

Remember that this is not a boom&zoom arena, we have always a lot of warnings: icons, radar dots, radar bars, black dots in distance, etc. In this environment the top speed advantage of D9 or G10 means little compared with the Spit characteristics, and obviously, the Spit will be always a much more succesfull aircraft.

Offline Nashwan

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1864
Why the apathy about the 2nd most common aircraft, the Spitfire MkIX?
« Reply #35 on: August 07, 2001, 07:43:00 PM »
Quote
About our actual SpitIX, test its climb rate at 15-20k compared to G10 or D9 you'll be really surprised. Test its initial dive speed compared to G10 or D9 and you'll be again surprised. Compare their acceleration at any alt above 10k and you'll be again more surprised.
Too much testing for me, but Hammer has already done it. http://www.netaces.org/home.html#title

Climb rate between 15 and 20k. The G10 beats the Spit by a large margin, the D9 by a narrower one.
Dive acceleration, the G10 and D9 both beat the Spit IX at all but the lowest speeds.
Level speed acceleration, the G10 and D9 both beat the Spitfire comprehensively. Only at 25k does the Spit overtake the Dora, and only at 30k does it pass the G10.

The current Spit IX is modelled after one of the first 300 or so Spit IXs to be built. The next 5000 or so all had improved performance. They were produced and used from early 1943 on.
The possible options for a late war RAF fighter are:
Tempest (already perked, and very high priced too)
Spit XIV (not here, unlike most of it's contemporaries from other nations. High priced perk when it arrives)
Meteor (High priced perk if it ever gets modelled)
Those are the aircraft that were actually introduced in 1944, comparable to the mainstream unperked rides in the MA, like the Dora, G10, La7, P51 etc
The main RAF fighter at that time was the Spit LF IX. Very few, if any, of the basic Spit F IXs were still in use then.
The only realistic option (also the worst option, for an RAF fan) that will introduce a post 1942 unperked British fighter, is the Spit IX LF, HF, or F with Merlin 63. All will be faster than the current AH SPit, by up to 20mph at low level, slightly more if clipped wing. All will be much slower than the La7, P51, Dora, G10 etc.
If the perk system classifies an early 43 prop fighter, that was produced and used in huge numbers, with the likes of the Ta152, F4U-1c, Me262, P-51H, and F8F, then there is something very wrong with the perk system.

 
Quote
Remember that this is not a boom&zoom arena, we have always a lot of warnings: icons, radar dots, radar bars, black dots in distance, etc. In this environment the top speed advantage of D9 or G10 means little compared with the Spit characteristics, and obviously, the Spit will be always a much more succesfull aircraft.
Much more successfull? Last full tour, the Dora had a kill death against the Spit of 1.56 to 1.
Speed means more in such an enviroment, where you can tell an opponents identity immediately, you can engage or disengage at will. Spot a high Spit and just run, he will never catch you. Blow you e advantage, or get caught by a Spit, and again just run, he will never catch you. Against a good pilot, the Spit driver has less chance. Perhaps that is why your kill death ratio against the Spit IX is better than your (very good) kill/death ratio as a whole, Mandoble.

[ 08-07-2001: Message edited by: Nashwan ]

Offline Urchin

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5517
Why the apathy about the 2nd most common aircraft, the Spitfire MkIX?
« Reply #36 on: August 08, 2001, 12:25:00 AM »
I tend to agree with those who say the spitfire is not a formidble opponent in the MA.  It has never had a 1 to 1 K/D as a whole, in the 4 tours I've played.  One on One I have VERY little to fear from the plane, in any of the 190s, and all the 109s but the F4.  However, in a huge "furball" it does get significantly better because furballs are more turning and opportunity snapshots, rather than tracking shots.  On the whole, I've got to agree with those who are A. Asking for the Spit IX we have to be correctly modelled, and B. asking ford a 1943 or 1944 spit to use.  (Even if it means another 20 mph on the deck- it would still only bring the spit to the level of the 109G2-the G10 would outrun it handily.)  However, those historical enthusiasts of the plane must realize that if we got a better version of the Spitfire (i.e. faster)- it WOULD become the most used plane in the arena.  If it were faster than the N1k2, many of those who fly that plane would switch over.  I'm not sure exactly what my point is, except maybe to inform people that if a 1944 spit is added, 95% of the spit drivers would fly it instead of the Spit IX and the Spit V, sort of rendering them pointless in the MA.

Offline Buzzbait

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1141
Why the apathy about the 2nd most common aircraft, the Spitfire MkIX?
« Reply #37 on: August 08, 2001, 01:24:00 AM »
S! Karnak

The reason the Spit IXLF or Spit VIII is not modelled is that if it were, it would soon become the most popular plane in AH.

The current Spit IX climbs at nearly 1000ft slower than the Spit IXLF or VIII.  And the acceleration of the Spit IXLF or VIII would put the current version to shame as well.  Speeds would be nearly identical.

The highest scoring living RAF Ace, Johnnie Johnson, (38 kills) said he preferred the Spit IXLF to the Spit XIV.  He thought of the Spit XIV as not a true Spit, because it had a different feel, not the same lightness, plus the prop rotated in the opposite direction.  The Spit XIV may have been a better aircraft tactically, but as far as a pure dogfighter, the Spit IXLF was superior.

A properly modelled Spit IXLF, in the furball enviroment of AH, would be incredibly successful.  We are talking a plane with the climb better than a FW190D, with similar acceleration, and with the turn rate of the current Spit IX.  (There was no weight gain to speak of with the upgrade to the LF model, all the gains were accomplished with supercharger tuning and higher compression)

All of these arguments are still not enough of a reason for this aircraft not to be modelled.  It should be.  Whether that happens, is another question.

Offline Buzzbait

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1141
Why the apathy about the 2nd most common aircraft, the Spitfire MkIX?
« Reply #38 on: August 08, 2001, 01:26:00 AM »
S!

Forgot about the speed on the deck.  That would be increased by about 15mph.  Speed at best altitude would stay in the 405mph range.

Offline SOB

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10138
Why the apathy about the 2nd most common aircraft, the Spitfire MkIX?
« Reply #39 on: August 08, 2001, 01:50:00 AM »
So, Spits were widely used in WWII???  Damn, ya learn something new every day!   :D

Seriously tho', I think Karnak makes a good point, and it'd be nice to see specific models like other planes instead of generic ones.

As a side note, thanks for the thread Karnak.  I've never been all that interested in Spitfires and never payed any thought to thier model designations.  As far as I knew, V, IX, etc were the most specific designations they had.  I've probably read otherwise before, but since it wasn't a major issue it just kind of slipped by me.  I just got Poles in Defence of Britain, so I guess I'll crack it open tomorrow and start readin'!   :)


SOB
Three Times One Minus One.  Dayum!

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23048
Why the apathy about the 2nd most common aircraft, the Spitfire MkIX?
« Reply #40 on: August 08, 2001, 02:34:00 AM »
Buzzbait,

I know how Jonnie Johnson felt about the two, and that is a valid position.

I have read that other pilots, admittedly not as high scoring, loved the MkXIV.  It is a matter of taste I think.

Unfortunately I have to inform you that Johnnie Johnson died earlier this year, in the UK.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline GRUNHERZ

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 13413
Why the apathy about the 2nd most common aircraft, the Spitfire MkIX?
« Reply #41 on: August 08, 2001, 02:44:00 AM »
Ive heard and read the same about the Mk.XIV.

Basically they said it handled like crap compared to the mkIX. That it was hell on take-off, and that it wasnt really a spit anymore.

So it seems to be fast and all but more like the USAAF and LW fighters than previous spits in behavior.

Offline Pongo

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6701
Why the apathy about the 2nd most common aircraft, the Spitfire MkIX?
« Reply #42 on: August 08, 2001, 10:45:00 AM »

Offline DingHao2

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 227
Why the apathy about the 2nd most common aircraft, the Spitfire MkIX?
« Reply #43 on: August 08, 2001, 03:46:00 PM »
the spit looks like a racer, not a murdurous killer like the 109's...anyway, I do agree that the spit has to be moddelled historically.

Offline hazed-

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2467
      • http://combatarena.users.btopenworld.com
Why the apathy about the 2nd most common aircraft, the Spitfire MkIX?
« Reply #44 on: August 08, 2001, 04:41:00 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by AKDejaVu:


It can only mean 1 of 2 things:
[list=1]
  • Spitfires were rarely seen in WW2
  • SOB is full of s#!t[/list=a]

    I know what option I'm going with.  I'm suprised that you haven't quite figured it out yourself  ;)

    And Karnak... I don't think you'll get alot of grief in regards to making the spit accurate as long as it means going back in time <relative> as opposed to forward.  If you're bucking for a new improved Spitfire, I'd tend to think "dream on".  If you're simply going for a historically accurate 1943 Spitfire then there should be little resistance.

    I have a tendancy to think its better to be accurate at the technical level.  If the Spit model HTC is modelling had a different loadout than the one we use... it should be fixed.

    AKDejaVu
jeez something HAS changed since i left.i agree with what you say AKDeja and my answer to the options you give is no.2  :)

'hardly any spits in WW2' ROFLWLAL (wildly like a lunitic)  :)

shame to see another stab at LW in here though.tends to piss me off.