Author Topic: If I Like RAF Aircraft (Read 2770 times)

Pongo · « **Reply #90 on:** June 14, 2000, 03:28:00 PM »

You have to ignore alot of what I have said to make those statments. Good luck with your spit XIV guys. Like I said, Ill be there with ya when you get it.
You want a plane to balance against planes that dont exist in the game. You left out the 262 for some reason

mx22 · « **Reply #91 on:** June 14, 2000, 03:51:00 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Pongo:
You have to ignore alot of what I have said to make those statments. Good luck with your spit XIV guys. Like I said, Ill be there with ya when you get it.
You want a plane to balance against planes that dont exist in the game. You left out the 262 for some reason

Pongo,

If it was upto me, I would have handled you your 262 and then see how much you can kill with it. Uber or no, it just too fast for it's own good, plus poor climb and long approaches for landing and takeoff mean you'll be an easy meat for me. Of course given I have some late war plane, not puny slow SpitIX in which flying alone into enemy terretory is like an invetation for others to kill me.

mx22

juzz · « **Reply #92 on:** June 14, 2000, 03:59:00 PM »

Pongo - look at my 4th post. See the climbrate figure for the Mk VIII. That superiority over the Mk XIV would last up to 14,000ft at least. Hmmm, looks like you get more than just 25mph extra doesn't it?

Pongo · « **Reply #93 on:** June 14, 2000, 04:16:00 PM »

Sorry Juzz. So the VIII outclimbs the XIV?

MX.Its all about you I guess.

DrSoya · « **Reply #94 on:** June 14, 2000, 05:32:00 PM »

I can't believe some people here claim the Spit XIV would unbalance the arena.

(Well, now that I think of it, at the time the dedicated LW pilots of WB also claimed the XIV would be an uberplane.)

Well this is not what happened in WB.

The WB Spit XIV has so much torque that it's really difficult to handle in turns. In truth, it's my opinion that very few people fly the Spit XIV when it becomes available. They keep on flying the Spit XIX because it's easier to fly.

It may be supposed to turn as well as the Spit XIX, but I can tell you I have always had a hell of a time keeping up with Spit XIXs in turns. In fact, when I fly it (I try to fly it often), I don't turn. Ever. I use it as a pure energy fighter. The beast has always a tendancy to go into spin when in tight turns.

Even pilots from dedicated RAF squads will more often fly the Spit XIX than the Spit XIV when it becomes available.

Pilots who want speed fly the P51D, the F4U or the FW190 instead.

And talking about speed, I've never been able to gain much on a P51D when flying the Spit XIV (same initial E-state). (But then, I'm not a real expert.)

If you think the Spit XIV is going to be the next uberplane, you're dead wrong. I rather think it will be, as in WB, an expert's plane flown by a minority.

Of course it will depend on how HTC models the plane, but if I'm not mistaken they're the same guys that modeled the WB variant...

BTW, I'm happy to join the AH community. I just began my 2-weeks trial, but from what I've seen, I think I'm here to stay.

------------------
DrSoya
315 (Polish) Squadron "City of Deblin" RAF
Part of Northolt Wing

funked · « **Reply #95 on:** June 14, 2000, 06:04:00 PM »

Pongo, the problem is that we have a 450 mph Me 109.

juzz · « **Reply #96 on:** June 15, 2000, 12:12:00 AM »

Pongo - The 1944 Spitfire with "25mph extra" is either a LF.IX, LF.VIII or XVI running on 150 octane fuel, which gives it a better climbrate(~5500fpm initial) and equal or slightly better speed than a XIV below 14,000ft. Might as well have the Mk XIV anyway.

Pongo · « **Reply #97 on:** June 15, 2000, 12:39:00 AM »

DR .
welcome. I dont know.. I was just going by what was posted earlier.
Funked. The 109 must not get that speed very often cause it usually cant catch a 51 which is arround 425 isnt it?
Juzz. There seems to be very little aggreement about the effect of the later war engines and fuel and etc on the spit IX. I thought it was a great idea to improve the Spit some what. From the totaly ignorant reactions I recieved you would think I asked to remove the thing. Now you say, might as well take the spit XIV as the XVI is better...
or as good. Well we have gone full circle then.
This has turned into a real Ron Jeramy debating society.
OUT.

funked · « **Reply #98 on:** June 15, 2000, 12:48:00 AM »

LOL Pongo I guess we must be bored, we're getting into re-runs on these debates.

Once 1.03 hits the ftp site I'm sure we'll have some new things to talk about.

10 points for mentioning Ron Jeremy!!!

juzz · « **Reply #99 on:** June 15, 2000, 01:36:00 AM »

It's all funked's fault, he started this mess!

Nashwan · « **Reply #100 on:** June 15, 2000, 04:06:00 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by juzz:
Pongo - The 1944 Spitfire with "25mph extra" is either a LF.IX, LF.VIII or XVI running on 150 octane fuel, which gives it a better climbrate(~5500fpm initial) and equal or slightly better speed than a XIV below 14,000ft. Might as well have the Mk XIV anyway.

The figures from the ADFU:
.........4000ft..10000ft...14 000ft..20000ft
Spit9....364mph...370mph...39 0mph...388mph

Spit14...385mph...389mph...39 6mph...423mph

The 14 is clearly a lot faster than a IX/XVI at all alts. Whilst a 150 octane IX or XVI would be an improvement, it wouldn't be a genuine 1944 aircraft.

Pongo, imagine if the LW planeset consisted of the 109G6 and the 190A4 at the moment. Then someone comes along and says you can have a 1944 plane, as long as it's the 190A8. Oh and only 2 cannons, because 4 would be too uber.

juzz · « **Reply #101 on:** June 15, 2000, 06:45:00 AM »

Nashwan; look at the Mk VIII numbers, they are more representative of how a 150 octane Merlin 66 Spitfire would really perform. Eg: 409mph at 14,000ft.

mx22 · « **Reply #102 on:** June 15, 2000, 08:44:00 AM »

Pongo,

Imagen this situation. AH has SpitV, SpitIX and SpitXIV, while LW has only BF109F4, BF109G2, BF109G6 and FW190A8. Now LW guys start to bargain for a late war model and I come along and say BF109G10/K4 is too uber. How about HTC simply model BF109G6, which uses better fuel. I bet there would have been quiet a lot of LW people on the board here screaming at me.
Back to reality, LW has full line of BF109s, while RAF stuck in 1942. Here comes along Pongo and says all RAF deserves is SpitIX with better fuel mix...
bla bla bla, I wish you no bad, but I think you should be more open minded to other people's needs.

mx22

SKurj · « **Reply #103 on:** June 15, 2000, 09:29:00 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Nashwan:
4x20mm was an option on any Spit fitted with the C or E wing, i.e. about half the Vs, nearly all the IXs and all the XIVs and XVIs.
It was esy to convert to 4x20mm, much like the field kits the Luftwaffe used. Just take the old guns out and put the 20mm in it's place. It was something they could do in squadron service, not a factory mod.

Currently reading a Diary of a ww2 spit pilot..

He started in MKIX in early 43, he never flew a 9 fitted with 4 cannon, the impression I get from reading it is that with the reliability issues of the Hispano's that loading 2 20's and 4 303's was the safer choice so that at least you would have something to shoot back with once your cannon's failed..

SKurj

mx22 · « **Reply #104 on:** June 15, 2000, 09:35:00 AM »

SKurj,

Don't know what was the problem, if there was one, with the 4 Hispono cannons in SpitIX, but fact stay a fact - there were only a few such equiped SpitIXs. Agian, books are home, so I can't give a total number of SpitIXs with this configuration, but trust me it was an extremely small number. And that is why I would be against this version coming in AH any time soon.

mx22