PDA

View Full Version : Spitfire vs A4????



269GA-Veltro
03-08-2004, 03:44 AM
I'm waiting for AEP, but i would like know something about this question. I've read "something" about AEP Spit in another post (closed.....why?). So how is Spitfire, and how is A4?

Sorry if you have already seen this:

http://www.odyssey.dircon.co.uk/VBv190.htm

Waiting for AEP also in Europe...damn.

269GA~Veltro
http://ourworld.cs.com/VeltroF/mc202tav4.jpg
www.269ga.it (http://www.269ga.it)

269GA-Veltro
03-08-2004, 03:44 AM
I'm waiting for AEP, but i would like know something about this question. I've read "something" about AEP Spit in another post (closed.....why?). So how is Spitfire, and how is A4?

Sorry if you have already seen this:

http://www.odyssey.dircon.co.uk/VBv190.htm

Waiting for AEP also in Europe...damn.

269GA~Veltro
http://ourworld.cs.com/VeltroF/mc202tav4.jpg
www.269ga.it (http://www.269ga.it)

Flamin_Squirrel
03-08-2004, 03:52 AM
The Spitfire is great (although Ebleed prob isnt high enough). The A4 however, is a dog.

See here --> http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=400102&f=63110913&m=488103462

And thanks very much for that link, because it illustrates how unrealistic the A4 is in its current state.

269GA-Veltro
03-08-2004, 04:16 AM
Thank!

But...so........how is Spitfire MK Vb 1942? Is better than 190 A4? Ok for MK IX...but MK Vb... They have killed my Spitfire making it an UFO? MK Vb was good not great, and poor against FW 190.

I repeat, i don't have AEP again, so i can only suppose, but reading some posts before....it seem we have an arcadish Spitfire. Is true? Is so incredible? If yes, where is plesaure to fly the Spitfire?

269GA~Veltro
http://ourworld.cs.com/VeltroF/mc202tav4.jpg
www.269ga.it (http://www.269ga.it)

Flamin_Squirrel
03-08-2004, 04:52 AM
Nah the Spit isnt a UFO. Its great at turning, has ok speed, reasonable (i think) climb, not so great diving ability and forgiving handling. Im not sure if it bleeds energy enough in turns (and its hard to tell if it holds energy too well, or the 190 doesnt hold it well enough), but other than that i would think its fairly realistic.

The main problem is with the 190. As it says in that link you gave, the 190 outclimbed the Spit V and significantly out accelerated it. In FB it does not.

Since the E bleed is now even worse in the 190 compared to other aircraft, you cant even E fight the spit. If one gets anywhere near you six you cant outfly it (at least i cant, and i used to be able to beat decent vvs aircraft). Your only option is to dive away, and even then because the accelerations no better in the 190 than in the spit (only top speed), there is no garunte that you can get enough seperation in time to save you.

WWMaxGunz
03-08-2004, 05:13 AM
We have Spitfire VB regular and clipped wing and we have Spitfire LF regular and clipped wing. Don't even think the two are close in power or high alt ability although the one with the way better low alt power isn't nearly as good much over 4-5 km.

It pays to know which one you are up against. The LF Spit down low is supposed to have the power of a Spit IX and weigh less. How does that sound like for climbing and accelerating?

Somebody who checked these things out fairly (runs a lot of tests that people trust) says the Spits behave right when checked offline by themselves while the A-4's maybe don't but not by a lot. He says the A4 beats the regular VB in a climb but not by much and is in turn beat by the LF at low alts.


Neal

Edit: Nice precise site... not. FW-190A. Yup, they're all basically the same only they all got better at everything as the line went on. Right? Just loads of detail. Something to base blanket opinions on.

Koohullin
03-08-2004, 05:45 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
We have Spitfire VB regular and clipped wing and we have Spitfire LF regular and clipped wing. Don't even think the two are close in power or high alt ability although the one with the way better low alt power isn't nearly as good much over 4-5 km.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Spitfire Mk.Vb (Merlin 45) 1941
Spitfire Mk.Vb (Merlin 46) 1942 clipped wings
Spitfire LF.Mk.Vb (Merlin 50) 1943
Spitfire LF.Mk.Vb (Merlin 50) 1944 clipped wings

The Merlin 46 engine is rated for 14,000ft/4270m while the Merlin 45 and 50 engines are rated for 9250ft/2800m.


I would like to know why the '44 model does not use the 50M engine. This is the engine with the cropped impellor blades. And why say it is a '44 model when only VCs were coming off the line at that time. The last VB came off the line Dec '42 and that is even questionable since the order was built as VBs and VCs.

Erbriac
03-08-2004, 06:28 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Koohullin:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
We have Spitfire VB regular and clipped wing and we have Spitfire LF regular and clipped wing. Don't even think the two are close in power or high alt ability although the one with the way better low alt power isn't nearly as good much over 4-5 km.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Spitfire Mk.Vb (Merlin 45) 1941
Spitfire Mk.Vb (Merlin 46) 1942 clipped wings
Spitfire LF.Mk.Vb (Merlin 50) 1943
Spitfire LF.Mk.Vb (Merlin 50) 1944 clipped wings

The Merlin 46 engine is rated for 14,000ft/4270m while the Merlin 45 and 50 engines are rated for 9250ft/2800m.


I would like to know why the '44 model does not use the 50M engine. This is the engine with the cropped impellor blades. And why say it is a '44 model when only VCs were coming off the line at that time. The last VB came off the line Dec '42 and that is even questionable since the order was built as VBs and VCs.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Spitfire Mk.Vb 1941
Spitfire Mk.Vb 1943 CW
Spitfire LF.Mk.Vb 1942
Spitfire LF.Mk.Vb 1942 CW

This is how I have it in game.

****************************
312_Wraith
312. (Czechoslovak) Fighter Sq. RAF
****************************

Koohullin
03-08-2004, 06:58 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Erbriac:
Spitfire Mk.Vb 1941
Spitfire Mk.Vb 1943 CW
Spitfire LF.Mk.Vb 1942
Spitfire LF.Mk.Vb 1942 CW

This is how I have it in game.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That is not what is said in Oleg's post listing the the flyable planes.(where I got the list) http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=400102&f=63110913&m=765106062

That to prevent any speeches what there are and becasue seems that in manual is present a bit other list (in print much early then product was finised went old version of list).

Flyable:

P-51B,
P-51C,
P-51D-20 (K-14 gunsight),
P-63C,
P-38L,
P-38J,
YP-80 Shooting Star,
Me-163B,
He-162A-2,
Ta-152H-1,
Mistel (Including special version of FW-190A-8),
Bf-109Z,
Ju-87D-5,
Ho-229,
Bf-110G-2
SPB (flyable special type TB-3 with two special type flyable I-16s under wings),
IAR-80A,
IAR-81C,
Fiat CR.42
Fiat G.50,
Ki-84-1b,
Ki-84-1c
A6M2,
J8A - (Sweden Gloster Gladiator)
Spitfire Mk.Vb (Merlin 45) 1941
Spitfire Mk.Vb (Merlin 46) 1942 clipped wings
Spitfire LF.Mk.Vb (Merlin 50) 1943
Spitfire LF.Mk.Vb (Merlin 50) 1944 clipped wings


AI-only Aircraft:

Hawk 75A-3,
Hawk 75A-4,
Fi-103(V-1) with launcher,
Gloster Gladiator MK.I,
Gloster Gladiator MK.II,
FW-200

Gunner_361st
03-08-2004, 07:17 AM
I guess I will chime in on this matter, since I own AEP.

Fw190 A4 vs. Spitfire Mk-VB 1941.

Quick mission, 50% fuel and default weapons for both planes. Ace AI.

Fw190 A4 and Spitfire MkVB climb was nearly identical, starting at 1,000 meters climbing to 4,000 meters. Flown as the Spitfire, the FW190 stayed with me in the climb, as the FW190, the Spitfire stayed with me as well.

As for the effectiveness of the MG-151/20 AND the durability of the spitfire... After doing a steep dive in the A4, gathering 750 km/h IAS, I pulled up slowly to a zoom climb, gaining a few hundred more meters of separation, doing a hammerhead at the top, came down, and blew off the Spitfire's left wing with a two second salvo from all guns.

MG-151/20 seems just fine to me. Have you gents tried out the Hispano or other 20mm cannon? I don't think the problem is with any of the guns, but the changes that were made in damage modeling in general of all aircraft. Planes are not as likely to suffer structural failure now it seems, fuel tank fires, engine failure/fires, control surfaces cut, gun jams, pilot kills seem much more frequent.

Seems much more realistic, as well. I was certainly able to outrun, outdive, and outroll the Spitfire. But not slowly out-climb. Although, the Spitfire Mk-VB 1941 version we have may have a more powerful engine modeled into it, a later version of that type? It does have a boost system.

I'll check the object viewer. Also, paragraphs 8 and 9 of the Spitfire descripition in the object viewer document well the Fw190's initial successes against the Spitfire V's.

S~

Captain Gunner of the 361st vFG

http://home.comcast.net/~smconlon/wsb/media/245357/site1039.jpg

269GA-Veltro
03-08-2004, 08:03 AM
Thank to all!

A week again.....

269GA~Veltro
http://ourworld.cs.com/VeltroF/mc202tav4.jpg
www.269ga.it (http://www.269ga.it)

VW-IceFire
03-08-2004, 08:22 AM
Compair the FB Spitfire V and FW190 to the A-5 which is a more realistic matchup in terms of what actually happened on the Western Front.

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/temp_sig1.jpg
RCAF 412 Falcon Squadron - "Swift to Avenge"

TgD Thunderbolt56
03-08-2004, 08:42 AM
My wingman (=TgD= Lunix) flew an A4 against spits yesterday online and shot down 9 without a loss to himself (4 in one sortie I think!).

The A4 isn't a dog, but like ANY plane can be successful if flown properly.



http://home.earthlink.net/~aclzkim1/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/il2sig2.jpg

zugfuhrer
03-08-2004, 08:53 AM
When the FW was introduced in France they achieved air superiority over France and RAF didnt fly over France until they get the Spit xv according to jonny jonsson.
LW used the FW over the raid of dieppe and it was a most unpleasent surprise for RAF.
Dont expect that what you reed about WWII should be the same in IL2/FB. The game is what it is and accept it as a simulator.

269GA-Veltro
03-08-2004, 09:14 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by zugfuhrer:
Dont expect that what you reed about WWII should be the same in IL2/FB. The game is what it is and accept it as a simulator.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes you are right but there is a limit. FW has been a very bad surprise for RAF, and first of all for Spitfire: this was and this has to be; this MUST be if the sim is a Maddox sim, the best ever.

269GA~Veltro
http://ourworld.cs.com/VeltroF/mc202tav4.jpg
www.269ga.it (http://www.269ga.it)

lbhskier37
03-08-2004, 09:32 AM
Was flying last night on that same server as Thunderbolt56 and Lunix. I was on the phone for half the time, so just flew circles at 5khttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif But when I was flying, I think I got 3 or 4 solid spit kills. The only time I went down was getting vulched a few times, and once got shot down by friendly fire. A4 owns the Spit V right now. Not sure about the LF version, I havent had much experience with it, but if I know they are around I will stay hi and let them come to me.

http://lbhskier37.freeservers.com/pics/Killasig2.jpg (http://www.il2skins.com/?action=list&whereauthorid=lbhkilla&comefrom=display&ts=1049772896)
Official "uber190n00b"
"Only the spirit of attack, born in a brave heart, will bring success to any fighter aircraft, no matter how highly developed it may be." Adolf Galland

Snoop_Baron
03-08-2004, 10:10 AM
We don't fight historically so even with planes performing 100% historically don't exepect the outcomes to be the same. A dramatic example of this would be the Finish Winter War. The Fins did very well with their planes (10 to 1) but given the same planes online there is no way it would turn out that way. In fact the russion planes have a slight edge for that time period.

:FI:Snoop Baron
http://www.endlager.net/fis/pix/banners/fis_banner_01.jpg

LEXX_Luthor
03-08-2004, 06:45 PM
Early Spit~5 I am getting 450km/hr at sea level. LF version 500km/hr. Clipped wing or not, no difference in either versions. For Fw-190-A4 I am getting 530km/hr at sea level. Overheat OFF in all cases (rad auto which now means "closed" according to Oleg).

Up at 8km....A4 390km/hr, early Spit 360km/hr.

__________________
"You will still have FB , you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"I don't have the V2 or B25s, so I'm going to reinstall" ~Bearcat99
:
"Damn.....Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

Januss
03-08-2004, 07:37 PM
let's hope Oleg will fix the FW 190 A4 when the Spitfire Mk IX will be available (in a forthcoming fre patch ?) because it is true that all the sources and testimony of RAF and Luftwaffe pilots agree on the fact that the Focke wulf was superior ( climb rate , accel etc..) to the Spit Mk Vb , it is too sad that it is not obvious in FB 2.0.

LEXX_Luthor
03-08-2004, 07:48 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>fix A4<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Careful what we ask for, they may "fix" the Early Spit too and give it the 120 cannon rounds per cannon instead of the 60 now. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Check Object Viewer about A4 and early Spit power/mass ratio.

__________________
"You will still have FB , you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"I don't have the V2 or B25s, so I'm going to reinstall" ~Bearcat99
:
"Damn.....Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

Koohullin
03-08-2004, 08:10 PM
Can't if has the 'B' suffix. It was the 'C' that had the extra ammo. Remember the suffix was for designating the armement loadout.

Posted by BerkshireHunt in another thread

"Yikes!- the dreaded Spitfire 'wing bulges' question.
Hmmm... well the answer is, yes- but 95% of the people who fly this sim wouldn't notice the difference. Allow me to explain:

The 60 round ammunition drums of the 'B' wing were larger in diameter than the thickness of the wing- in other words they protruded through the top surface of the wing and the lower surface by an equal amount. Over each protruding section was a streamlined blister fairing. Bear in mind that the cannons themselves were mounted in the bays closest to the wheel wells with the drum- feed blisters just outboard.
Now it gets complicated:
With the 'C' wing, as we discussed above, the drum- feeds were eliminated- but it so happened that the new belt- feed mechanisms had to be mounted on top of the cannons themselves.
This meant that if two cannon were to be mounted side by side in each wing (which the 'C' wing was designed to allow) a larger, broader blister fairing had to be devised for the wing top surface- which would, in effect, cover both of their belt- feed mechanisms.
Early Spitfire Vcs (and early IXs) are recognisable by the broad, flat blister fairings on their wing top surfaces. This is a prominent ID feature which shouldn't be omitted.
The underwing blister of the 'B' wing was, of course, not required on the 'C' wing because the new belt- feed mechanism did not protrude underneath each cannon. So 'C' wings were flat underneath.
It was soon realised, however, that most pilots did not like having 4 Hispanos fitted because of the performance penalty- therefore, fitting every 'C' wing with the broad blisters was unnecessary and undesirable (the broad blisters reduced speed by approx 5 mph). Consequently, it was decided to fit to the 'C' wing- as standard- a much smaller blister fairing which would only cover the belt feed mechanism of the innermost Hispano (nearest the wheel well); it being assumed that the other cannon bay would always be used to accommodate only ammunition boxes (which gives us the increased ammo load of 120 rpg).

What this means as far as the 3D models are concerned is this:

i) For an early Spitfire Vc the underwing blister fairings must be removed and the top blister made rather wider and longer (to cover two cannon)

i) For a later Spitfire Vc the underwing blister fairings must be removed and a narrow blister fairing created for the top of the wing- one bay further inboard compared to that of the Spitfire Vb (ie over the inboard cannons themselves rather than over a side- mounted drum feed).


Like I say, its subtle, and the vast majority of people wouldn't notice. Oleg, however, probably would... I haven't got AEP so I don't know if the wings are correctly modelled for a Vb in any case.

Now with the 'E' wing fitted to later IXs and XVIs things are different again- but I think we'd better leave it there for the moment."

Hunde_3.JG51
03-08-2004, 08:11 PM
Lexx, I think only "C" wing Spit V's had 120 rounds per gun, we have a "b" wing Spit. Early Mk.V's had 60rpg. I may be wrong but this is what I have read.

http://www.brooksart.com/Icewarriors.jpg

Formerly Kyrule2
http://www.jg51.com/

LEXX_Luthor
03-08-2004, 09:16 PM
Ah, understood. I was thinking these Spits were sent to Russia or something. They say our A4's are the same way. The problem I am having is I don't see any Spit superiority here. The A4 is 80km/hr faster at sea level. As for climb, I dunno. But a faster climb speed may help. About the stick thing, I just found that if you jerk the Spit stick at high speeds, it does the Fw thing and stalls and rolls out. But if you go easy in pulling it all the way back it does not.


__________________
"You will still have FB , you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"I don't have the V2 or B25s, so I'm going to reinstall" ~Bearcat99
:
"Damn.....Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

Hunde_3.JG51
03-08-2004, 10:05 PM
Yes Lexx but the '42 version of the Spit is only about 25km/h slower than the A-4 with much better climb, and with the vast difference in overheat times and energy bleed your speed advantage disappears rather quickly. However, it may be that the Spitfire LF.V should be a '43 Spit as some have suggested whereas the Spitfire F.V CW should be '42 instead of '43.

Like I said in another thread, Spitifres don't really scare me (yet), the LF. versions just need to be dragged high and the F versions taken low. A mix of the two would make things more difficult. The Mk.IX and XIV will be trouble.

http://www.brooksart.com/Icewarriors.jpg

Formerly Kyrule2
http://www.jg51.com/

LEXX_Luthor
03-08-2004, 10:46 PM
Got it. That slow Spit is a "1941" Spit. I have got the "1942" LF to 500km/hr sea level (exact same speed for both versions). And even the early Spit seems to outclimb A4 but I have not timed anything yet. The Object Viewer seems to give the Spit roughly the same time to altitude as A4. Sea level climb I have no idea. If that Spit is a 43 Spit then the proper opponent is the A5. I am off to re~read that thread on Spit years again. Totally confusing.

__________________
"You will still have FB , you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"I don't have the V2 or B25s, so I'm going to reinstall" ~Bearcat99
:
"Damn.....Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif