PDA

View Full Version : An amazing Spitfire Mark XIV!



CraytonRoberts
02-15-2005, 03:09 PM
I recently installed, from RealAir, their new Spitfire XIV. It's available in three or 4 military skins, including a version with contrarotating props (which is really a Mark 22), and a racer. The modelling and flight characteristics are nothing short of near perfect. It has the terrific torque of the actual XIV, so it's a mighty brute of a plane to take off (full rudder and trim left).Can climb almost strait up and GAIN SPEED. Has as scenery detailed West Malling airfield during late WW2.
Unfortunately made only for FS2004. The best model of any aircraft I've seen.simI've ever seen. Superb with Force Feedback.
Why don't we have a Mark XIV in IL2 AEP? The Real Air Spit would be a tough act to follow, though.

CraytonRoberts
02-15-2005, 03:09 PM
I recently installed, from RealAir, their new Spitfire XIV. It's available in three or 4 military skins, including a version with contrarotating props (which is really a Mark 22), and a racer. The modelling and flight characteristics are nothing short of near perfect. It has the terrific torque of the actual XIV, so it's a mighty brute of a plane to take off (full rudder and trim left).Can climb almost strait up and GAIN SPEED. Has as scenery detailed West Malling airfield during late WW2.
Unfortunately made only for FS2004. The best model of any aircraft I've seen.simI've ever seen. Superb with Force Feedback.
Why don't we have a Mark XIV in IL2 AEP? The Real Air Spit would be a tough act to follow, though.

p1ngu666
02-15-2005, 03:14 PM
its being made http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif
saw vid of XIV's at 60th aniversary of spitfires first flight.... really did seem effortless http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

SlickStick
02-15-2005, 04:02 PM
Oh baby!!!! Spitfire Mk XIV will be THE biggest whined about plane since the La7. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Why, you ask? Because it's faster than an La-7, turns better and with clipped wings, be sure it will roll better. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

As a Spitfire pilot in this sim series, the Mk VIII has been most welcome and the Mk. XIV, if it truly comes, will have to be deleted from my PC to get me to NOT fly it.http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

BlackShrike
02-15-2005, 04:09 PM
spit XIV is overmodelled. it should be banned from IL-2

MEGILE
02-15-2005, 04:19 PM
I already tried that one.. got locked after 4 replies.

Bull_dog_
02-15-2005, 04:45 PM
It will be fast, a great turner, great firepower, one of the best...if not best climber in the game, good elevator authority at speed...maybe a little slow on the roll rate but clipped should be great a slower speeds....great acceleration.

This plane has few weak points and is probably outclassed in terms of speed at low alitudes by the La7 Fw190D and 109K...but I suspect that will be marginal and subject to Oleg's modelling.

This plane rocked in real life and should be a real warrior and I think it will be whined about....possibly the new competition champion too! IMHO it was the best mix it up dogfighter of the war...yes the Dora was good, the Mustang was infamous, the Tempest fast, the real life L model lighting was something to behold but the Mk XIV lost little turning ability and gained lots of speed and climb over the already good Mk IX....watch out 109K pilots...you are no longer safe in your helicoptors with wings!

Vladimir_No2
02-15-2005, 05:08 PM
RealAir's Spit trully is an excelent product. I just got done with a review of it, and I found it to be relativly flawless (though there were flaws, and these were especially apparent in the flight dynamics- though I did have to review it on a much more critical level than anything else to find them...). I must say, though, that I wish the effort required to add this aircraft to FB would go into other things- aircraft that do not even have one of there production models in the game/flyable (Pe-2, anyone?).

SlickStick
02-15-2005, 05:59 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Bull_dog_:
Mk XIV lost little turning ability and gained lots of speed and climb over the already good Mk IX....watch out 109K pilots...you are no longer safe in your helicoptors with wings! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

And to think, the Mk. VIII we have is better than the Mk. IX we have. I've been flying the MK. VIII CW for about three weeks now in merged and stand-alone servers and wow, I thought I had it good when I had the Mk. IXe CW.http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

The funny thing about 109K B and Zers, when they try to B and Z a plane that is fast enough, turns better and can climb well enough, piloted by one who is adept at eluding and turning advantage in a B and Z and there are many around who can...no amount of instant zero pitch, zero throttle, flip-floppin', shake, rattle and roll "109ing" is going to ensure victory anymore.

As Vladimir says above, I also want the ones that "should be" there. However, the XIV was done awhile ago and I guess the time putting it in the game at this juncture, should probably be behind some of the obvious flyables needed. Pe-2 being one. And somebody might have mentioned something about a torpedo bomber for a certain country or something. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

SlickStick
02-15-2005, 06:00 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by BlackShrike:
spit XIV is overmodelled. it should be banned from IL-2 <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I actually chuckled when I read that. G1.

p1ngu666
02-15-2005, 06:02 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by SlickStick:
And somebody might have mentioned something about a torpedo bomber for a certain country or something. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

i emailed em about swordfish model, but alas no reply http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

Badsight.
02-15-2005, 10:49 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by SlickStick:
Why, you ask? Because it's faster than an La-7, turns better and with clipped wings, be sure it will roll better. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
not really

SlickStick
02-16-2005, 06:28 AM
With a top speed of about 712km/h, the Mk. XIV is faster, most certainly rolls better and since I can already out turn La-7s with the Mk VIII CW we have, I'm expecting the turn radius of the Mk. XIV will not be too far off of the Mk. VIII. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

DarthBane_
02-16-2005, 06:49 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by SlickStick:
With a top speed of about 712km/h, the Mk. XIV is faster, most certainly rolls better and since I can already out turn La-7s with the Mk VIII CW we have, I'm expecting the turn radius of the Mk. XIV will not be too far off of the Mk. VIII. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Ofcourse, it will turn like zero, fly fast like me262, tough like p47, it will have homing missiles and AA/AG radar in cockpit, what have you done in bed again? Do you want us to cut it off to ya? Dont wet the bed ever again or it will be cut off!

Arm_slinger
02-16-2005, 06:57 AM
I see the 14 has ruffled feathers here then- great stuff http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Anway i typed this lot out for you all to look at

Brief Tactical comparison with Tempest V

Maximum speed
From 0- 10,000 feet the Tempest is 20 mph faster. There is little to choose until 22,000 when the Mk XIV becomes 30- 40 mph faster, the Tempest€s operational ceiling being about 30,000 feet, as opposed to the Spitfires 40,000 feet.

Maximum Climb
The tempest has a considerably better zoom climb, holding a higher speed throughout the manoeuvre. If the climb is prolonged until climbing speed is reached then the Spitfire will begin to catch and pull ahead.

Dive
The Tempest gains on the Spitfire .

Turning circle
The Spitfire easily out turns the Tempest. Its turning circles is identical to the Mk9.

Rate of roll
The Spitfire rolls faster at speeds below 300 mph, but definitely more slowly at speeds greater than 350 mph.



Tactical comparison with Mustang III

Maximum speed
The maximum speeds are practically identical.

Maximum Climb
The Spitfire is much better.

Dive
The Mustang pulls away, but less markedly.

Turning circle
The Spitfire is better

Rate of roll
The advantage tends to be with the spitfire.

Conclusion
With the exception of endurance no conclusions can be drawn, as these aircraft should never be enemies. The choice is a matter of taste.



Combat trial against FW 190 (BMW 801D)

Maximum speed
From 0- 5000 feet and 15- 20000 feet the Spitfire is only 20 mph faster; at all other heights it is up to 60 mph faster than the FW. It is estimated to have the same speed as the FW at all heights.

Maximum climb
The Spitfire has a considerably great rate of climb at all heights.

Dive
After the initial part of the dive, during which the FW gains slightly, the Spitfire has a slight advantage.

Turning circle
The Spitfire can turn easily inside the FW

Rate of roll
The FW is much better.

Conclusions
In defence the Spitfire should use its remarkable maximum climb and turning circle against any enemy aircraft. In the attack it can afford to €˜mix it€ but should be aware of the quick roll and dive. If this manoeuvre is used by an FW and the Spitfire follows, it will probably not be able to close the range until the FW has pulled out of its dive.


Combat Trial against Me109G

Maximum speed
The Spitfire is 40 mph faster at all heights except near the 16000 feet mark, where is only 10 mph faster

Maximum climb
Same results. At 16000 feet identical, otherwise the Spitfire out climbs the Me. The zoom climb is practically identical when the climb is made without opening the throttle. Climbing at full throttle, the Spitfire draws away from the Me quite easily.

Dive
During the initial part of the dive the Me pulls away slightly, but when a speed of 380 mph is reached the Spitfire starts to gain

Turning circle
The Spitfire easily out turns the Me in both directions

Rate of roll
The Spitfire rolls much more quickly

Conclusion
The Spitfire is better in every aspect.

SlickStick
02-16-2005, 06:57 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by DarthBane_:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by SlickStick:
With a top speed of about 712km/h, the Mk. XIV is faster, most certainly rolls better and since I can already out turn La-7s with the Mk VIII CW we have, I'm expecting the turn radius of the Mk. XIV will not be too far off of the Mk. VIII. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Ofcourse, it will turn like zero, fly fast like me262, tough like p47, it will have homing missiles and AA/AG radar in cockpit, what have you done in bed again? Do you want us to cut it off to ya? Dont wet the bed ever again or it will be cut off! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

We already have that plane...the La-7. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

VW-IceFire
02-16-2005, 06:59 AM
Yeah, see what happened with the XIV actually relied on getting the Mark VIII. Long story short, the fellow who we finally got to build the XIV was the guy who built the Seafire III and Spitfire VIII for Pacific Fighters. The new XIV is based on his previous models.

The XIV will be one heck of a plane but keep in mind a few things.

One, its heavier than previous Spitfire variants. It will not be thrown around as easily as say a Mark V is. And two, Its still not as fast on the deck as a FW190D-9, a La-7, or a Tempest V (should be anyways)...its best speeds are achieved at the 5000+ meter mark.

That said, it has awesome climb, a gyro gunsight, its still a good turner, and its an overall impressive machine. But the guys who love their lightweight La-7 and its ability to be thrown about the sky aren't going to be switching anytime soon.

The good news is that it is done, its with Oleg, and he should have the cockpit shortly if not already.

carguy_
02-16-2005, 07:10 AM
Nothing new,experienced LW pilots dealt with La7 and Yak3 for some time now.We will happily wait till `45 and fly our He162 and Me262.Yeah I know,the most advanced fighter in WWII is nowhere to be seen cuz u hopocrites won`t even allow it to appear in `44 but wait until Berlin is under attack.

Whatever plane you put up against LW,Me262 pwnz j00 Spit n00bs!

KRISTORF
02-16-2005, 07:16 AM
Gimme, Gimme, Gimme

Vipez-
02-16-2005, 07:16 AM
well i bet some of you is going to be disappointed, after all it was made for high alts.. Kinda like TA-152.. its really not competetive against late war ruskies (LA7- Yak-9U) Russian planes still own down low (until Tempest V arrives http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif ).. but fortunalety for Spit jockeys ruskies fights on same side

Poor LW http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

p1ngu666
02-16-2005, 07:22 AM
i think XIV will be a tough nut to crack.
anyways, theres lots of 190 vs spit vb coops

so, who is up for XIV vs 109g6? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

KGr.HH-Sunburst
02-16-2005, 09:58 AM
i always laugh when i see people talking about the allmighty spit XIV
sure its good sure its fast ....yadayadayada
like carguy said 262 will pwns it...oh no no you will vulch us lol

spit is about the most shotdown aircraft onwhine
and if spitty jocks keep on flying like they do now they die even harder .fact.

MEGILE
02-16-2005, 10:55 AM
What is with the aggressive lufties? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/354.gif

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> so, who is up for XIV vs 109g6? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

If I ever see a Spitfire XIV vs. BF-109G6 server, I will eat my hat.
Infact, if I see a Spitfire IX vs. BF-109G6 server, I'll do the same.
They don't exist because Blue-only pilots wouldn't dare fly it http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Monty_Thrud
02-16-2005, 11:02 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gifYadaYada...you've got your overmodelled turning Bf109's and if that isnt enough you now want to use a Me262 against a Spitfire XIV, talk about taking a sledgehammer to crack a nut http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif


http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/heart.gifShe is a Beauty http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/heart.gif

http://premium1.uploadit.org/bsamania//xiv4.bmp
http://premium1.uploadit.org/bsamania//xiv6.bmp

stathem
02-16-2005, 11:07 AM
First Me-262 to be lost to enemy action, claimed by a? ... anyone?

HeinzBar
02-16-2005, 11:57 AM
S!,
Well, according to what has been posted here in the past, the XIV is 30mph faster than the IX HF at all altitudes. This comes at a price. An increase in weight is also associated w/ the XIV's increase in performance. The additional weight should decrease the crisp handling characteristic now found in all the IXs. With the increase in weight, one should expect the stall characteristic to be more prominent (weight) if it follows the example of the fw190 found in the latest patch.

http://fourthfightergroup.com/eagles/spittest.html

Everyday online, Spits fall victim to smart and lucky pilots. Contrary to what some spit fans are hoping for, the XIV should be an improvement over the current IX HF, but not by much (historically). The generous floating ability combined with the questionable hispanos, is what makes the Spit series dangerous. Unfortunately, these same two qualities are also the reasons the Spit is regarded by many to be a beginner's plane and not worthy of a salute.

HB http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

KGr.HH-Sunburst
02-16-2005, 12:10 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Megile:
What is with the aggressive lufties? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/354.gif

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> so, who is up for XIV vs 109g6? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

If I ever see a Spitfire XIV vs. BF-109G6 server, I will eat my hat.
Infact, if I see a Spitfire IX vs. BF-109G6 server, I'll do the same.
They don't exist because Blue-only pilots wouldn't dare fly it http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

kewl if ill ever see a DF server with 262s vs spit MkIX P51D and without the YP-80 ill eat my shoe AND my hat

ill be glad to have a server with 109G6 vs mkXIV
just include a few 262 and Dora's

Fish6891
02-16-2005, 12:20 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by KGr.HH-Sunburst:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Megile:
What is with the aggressive lufties? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/354.gif

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> so, who is up for XIV vs 109g6? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

If I ever see a Spitfire XIV vs. BF-109G6 server, I will eat my hat.
Infact, if I see a Spitfire IX vs. BF-109G6 server, I'll do the same.
They don't exist because Blue-only pilots wouldn't dare fly it http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

kewl if ill ever see a DF server with 262s vs spit MkIX P51D and without the YP-80 ill eat my shoe AND my hat

ill be glad to have a server with 109G6 vs mkXIV
just include a few 262 and Dora's <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Pfff, not even necessary, just give us one Dora with which to fight all your XIV's.

stathem
02-16-2005, 12:22 PM
You'll probably have to wait till we get flyable B-17's then..

KGr.HH-Sunburst
02-16-2005, 12:29 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Fish6891:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by KGr.HH-Sunburst:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Megile:
What is with the aggressive lufties? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/354.gif

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> so, who is up for XIV vs 109g6? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

If I ever see a Spitfire XIV vs. BF-109G6 server, I will eat my hat.
Infact, if I see a Spitfire IX vs. BF-109G6 server, I'll do the same.
They don't exist because Blue-only pilots wouldn't dare fly it http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

kewl if ill ever see a DF server with 262s vs spit MkIX P51D and without the YP-80 ill eat my shoe AND my hat

ill be glad to have a server with 109G6 vs mkXIV
just include a few 262 and Dora's <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Pfff, not even necessary, just give us one Dora with which to fight all your XIV's. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

ok agreed, but they gotto fix them MG151/20s first http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

HeinzBar
02-16-2005, 12:49 PM
S! Gentlemen,
Correct me if I'm wrong, but what was the total number of XIVs produced? Wasn't it less than 800 while over 1800 Doras were produced? IIRC, there were even more FW190a9s produced than XIVs?

HB

MEGILE
02-16-2005, 01:31 PM
Heinz is right...

ok, stop work on the Spitfire XIV, we don't need it. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

lo fish http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

p1ngu666
02-16-2005, 02:41 PM
weeeeellll
spitfire always compaired to 109. later, heavy, worse areodynamics, weight balence (f4 vs k4)
guess which stalls better?

yep its that helicopter with wings, the k4 http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

that, is aprently fine(luftfliers repeatidly stated), so if XIV handles like IX or VIII, one of those legs of the argument is kinda shaky http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

even kurfy said it should stall worse.... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

190 ofcourse, gets bad with weight... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

BaldieJr
02-16-2005, 03:03 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Vladimir_No2:
RealAir's Spit trully is an excelent product. I just got done with a review of it, and I found it to be relativly flawless (though there were flaws, and these were especially apparent in the flight dynamics- though I did have to review it on a much more critical level than anything else to find them...). I must say, though, that I wish the effort required to add this aircraft to FB would go into other things- aircraft that do not even have one of there production models in the game/flyable (Pe-2, anyone?). <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Please share a link, or your thoughts on the FM flaws.

I love the plane. The engine drone is tedious during long flights, but I still like it a lot.

Abbuzze
02-16-2005, 03:24 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by p1ngu666:

spitfire always compaired to 109. later, heavy, worse areodynamics, weight balence (f4 vs k4)
guess which stalls better?

yep its that helicopter with wings, the k4 http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

that, is aprently _fine_(luftfliers repeatidly stated), so if XIV handles like IX or VIII, one of those legs of the argument is kinda shaky http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You mean this worthless no power stalls?? Take a look at the limitation of the gameengine.
Thats the cause for this I think.
And for the helicopter... HP/kg - that´s the key. Spit was less heavier as a 109 at the beginning of the war, now take a look at the late war monsters http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif also the Spit got more and more bulges... new engines didn´t fit under the cowling... 109 and Spit they are sisters! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Jasko76
02-16-2005, 04:04 PM
Temper temper! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

No point arguing now, we'll see how they perform when (if) we get Spit Mk XIV, Tempest and others. Untill then, no point in getting emotional. Keep your enegry for the fence!

p1ngu666
02-16-2005, 04:45 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Abbuzze:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by p1ngu666:

spitfire always compaired to 109. later, heavy, worse areodynamics, weight balence (f4 vs k4)
guess which stalls better?

yep its that helicopter with wings, the k4 http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

that, is aprently _fine_(luftfliers repeatidly stated), so if XIV handles like IX or VIII, one of those legs of the argument is kinda shaky http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You mean this worthless no power stalls?? Take a look at the limitation of the gameengine.
Thats the cause for this I think.
And for the helicopter... HP/kg - that´s the key. Spit was less heavier as a 109 at the beginning of the war, now take a look at the late war monsters http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif also the Spit got more and more bulges... new engines didn´t fit under the cowling... 109 and Spit they are sisters! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

power on stalls are better too.
please go fly 190's and check there stall, and other planes http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif
oooh its not a game limitation http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

and yeah, spit and 109 are pretty similer. but only spitfire is pretty http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

jasko, nice to see u back http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

CraytonRoberts
02-16-2005, 04:52 PM
Boy, I really started something with the original post! Just buy it and try it, then make a judgement. Ask the pilots who'd started on V's if the XIV was easy to fly.
Too bad it can't get hacked into AEP but, then, the RealAir isn't armed. It'd be fun to see it go at a V-1 (a specialty of the XIV). Can you imagine that for a rush?

Jasko76
02-16-2005, 05:15 PM
Thanks P1ngu! It's good to be back!

I like your new sig, it took me a while to realize it was you. I kinda liked the old wrecked P-51 you used to have. But "Achtung Spitfire" is right on the mark!

OldMan____
02-16-2005, 05:16 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by p1ngu666:
weeeeellll
spitfire always compaired to 109. later, heavy, worse areodynamics, weight balence (f4 vs k4)
guess which stalls better?

yep its that helicopter with wings, the k4 http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

that, is aprently _fine_(luftfliers repeatidly stated), so if XIV handles like IX or VIII, one of those legs of the argument is kinda shaky http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

even kurfy said it should stall worse.... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

190 ofcourse, gets bad with weight... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

If our 190A9 handled as the A4 does.. no one would be even bothering to write in a Spitfire thread http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif I am a LW pilot and agree late 109 should handle little bit worse... but MK XIV too!! If a plane with much higher power , much heavier and same wings have same turn radius.. than it must bleed more E (compensated by larger engine)

Jasko76
02-16-2005, 05:27 PM
Basically Mk XIV suffered from excessive torque, just like Bf 109 did. I don't think we'll ever see that correctly modeled in this game. Any one remember what happened if you firewalled the throttle in Jane's WWII fighters? No? You entered a spinn. That's realism!

Mk XIV should be a bit less responsive when maneuvering, be a bit less forgiving, but climb and accelerate like a rocket.

p1ngu666
02-16-2005, 07:26 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jasko76:
Basically Mk XIV suffered from excessive torque, just like Bf 109 did. I don't think we'll ever see that correctly modeled in this game. Any one remember what happened if you firewalled the throttle in Jane's WWII fighters? No? You entered a spinn. That's realism!

Mk XIV should be a bit less responsive when maneuvering, be a bit less forgiving, but climb and accelerate like a rocket. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

yep http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

in vid i got of them at a air show, vertical stuff seemed effortless, steep climbs, climbing turns etc

sound sweet too http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Badsight.
02-16-2005, 09:01 PM
if you think the Mk14 is going to turn fight as nice as the Mk9 , your in for a shock

& it shouldnt either , its wings are lifting 300 more Kg than the Mk9 , but if it does handel like a Mk9 then it will only be fair considering the MW50 bf-109's & the F model 109's

all in all it will be interesting to finally get it

& slick i dont think your out-turning La-7s that are being piloted as well as your flying the Spit , & under 3K the La-7 will still be better

way Way WAY different at 6K tho

VW-IceFire
02-16-2005, 09:15 PM
I'm betting the XIV will have a nastier stall than the previous Spitfires and surely Oleg will max our the torque on this plane.

There is some debate between accomplished Spitfire pilots over which Spitfire handles the best. You get some guys who like the Mark V, others thing the VIII was the nicest, a few for the IX, and a half decent number for the XIV. So obviously they all have their vices and their strengths. Its playing one off the other.

I'm going to like the XIV...I fly the VIII in a BNZ capacity and the XIV lets me do that, only better.

I think it'll be a good fight with the FW190D-9 and the Bf-109K-4 (which really doesn't suffer THAT much from the extra weight).

There was 527 built of the F.XIV model that we have in the works...and 430 of the FR.XIV. Still, these were all essentially frontline Spitfires showing up around D-Day and fighting till the end of the war. Frontline usage was high, much like the Tempest V (which had similar numbers), even when the numbers appear low.

hunhunter-texas
02-17-2005, 05:52 AM
The Real Air Spit XIV is peachy, but have you seen the new offering from Just Flight for FS2004?? Biggest pile of steaming horse s*** you will ever see. Makes you wonder if they have ever seen a real Spitfire! All the colours are wrong, the Mk22 has a small tail, the MkIX has a short MkV type nose,transparent cockpit walls, warped wings.....etc...etc.. Poorly researched and vastly over priced at 30!!! Advertised as the "Definitive Spitfire add on" If you know nothing about Spitfires, you'll probably agree, otherwise...Avoid!!

Kurfurst__
02-17-2005, 08:53 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
I think it'll be a good fight with the FW190D-9 and the Bf-109K-4 (which really doesn't suffer THAT much from the extra weight). <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

K-4 got a lot less weight.. ie. G-6 was between 3150-3200 kg depending on version, the K-4 3362kg, only 6% weight increase. But power rocketed from 1475 to 1850-2000HP...
The IX weighted 3359kg, the XIV 3859kg, that a 15% increase. Powerincrease was also relatively smaller less, going from 1680 to 1840 measured at SL.

Nevertheless, it will be interesting, the MK XIV will be very good, but not the best at low/medium levels... but above 8000m, it really shines (two staged Griffons were very good altitude engines).

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
Frontline usage was high, much like the Tempest V (which had similar numbers), even when the numbers appear low. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

IIRC the RAF`s 2nd TAF had some 35 MkIX/XVI squads in the end of 1944, and 5 of the MkXIVs squadrons (all XIVs were with the 2nd TAF at that time to my knowladge. So it`s saw some concentrated use, but it never become really widespread. Maybe accounts concentrate a lot on it, being the 'ultimate' Spit of the war, and thus more of an interest than the workhorse Mark IXs.

Arm_slinger
02-17-2005, 08:58 AM
According to Jeffery Quill, the MkXIV handeling was pretty close to the MkIX, even with all its extra weight. I see the spit haters are really rattled by this http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Kurfurst__
02-17-2005, 09:13 AM
Physics work the same for all planes. There are no priviliged ones. More weight - worser handling.

Not to say the XIVs manual states 10-15mph higher stall speeds iirc than the MkIXs. I expect it to handle worse, not awfully worse, but it can be felt. Like with the MkV vs. MkIX. Just dont expect the surreal to happen, a 8500 lbs plane handle like a 7400 lbs one, with the same airframe.

What I wonder though is how the ultra-long griffon nose will effect sight forward. afaik the griffon was mounted lower, though.

SlickStick
02-17-2005, 12:22 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Badsight.:
& slick i dont think your out-turning La-7s that are being piloted as well as your flying the Spit , & under 3K the La-7 will still be better <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually, I feel my success in the Spit over the La-7 is for the same reason that I'm successful in the Ki-84 series over La-7s. The increased roll rate of the CW Spits and the Ki-84 make for much faster and more precise scissors action.

This is where most of the La-7 pilots of pretty good caliber lose the battle because the La-7 rolls nowhere near these two series. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Fighterduck
02-17-2005, 12:30 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> The best model of any aircraft I've seen.simI've ever seen <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

just installe it...AMAZING!!!never seen a sim-plane like this one! It's simply PERFECT! If anyone has fs2004...buy the RA Spitfire!

p1ngu666
02-17-2005, 01:40 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Kurfurst__:
Physics work the same for all planes. There are no priviliged ones. More weight - worser handling.

Not to say the XIVs manual states 10-15mph higher stall speeds iirc than the MkIXs. I expect it to handle worse, not awfully worse, but it can be felt. Like with the MkV vs. MkIX. Just dont expect the surreal to happen, a 8500 lbs plane handle like a 7400 lbs one, with the same airframe.

What I wonder though is how the ultra-long griffon nose will effect sight forward. afaik the griffon was mounted lower, though. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

yeah the engine was mounted lower, and the view over nose was abit better http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif
cant remmber how much tho http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif
plus theres the gyro gunsite http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

also remmbered k4 climbs too well at medium to low alts to a varying amount, so if thats unchanged, k4 will be the better plane i guess. itll be close tho http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

VW-IceFire
02-17-2005, 02:54 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Kurfurst__:
Physics work the same for all planes. There are no priviliged ones. More weight - worser handling.

Not to say the XIVs manual states 10-15mph higher stall speeds iirc than the MkIXs. I expect it to handle worse, not awfully worse, but it can be felt. Like with the MkV vs. MkIX. Just dont expect the surreal to happen, a 8500 lbs plane handle like a 7400 lbs one, with the same airframe.

What I wonder though is how the ultra-long griffon nose will effect sight forward. afaik the griffon was mounted lower, though. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
View over the nose was reported to be marginally better because the Griffon sat a bit lower and wider (thus the slight bulging around the exhausts) than the Merlin. Its not going to make up for much but just a little bit better.

You are right, doesn't matter, its a heavier plane and we should feel the weight. But I think it'd also be a mistake to think its going to seriously impact performance. It'll be like Mark V to IX.

BlackShrike
02-17-2005, 04:54 PM
"quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by BlackShrike:
spit XIV is overmodelled. it should be banned from IL-2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



I actually chuckled when I read that. G1." ,,,

what?

SlickStick
02-17-2005, 05:17 PM
blackshrike wrote: What?

Good 1?

If I have to explain why it made me laugh, then it will lose it's uniqueness.

However, to ensure your question is answered, the XIV is obviously not in IL2 yet, and you saying it is overmodelled and should be banned, I thought was a play on the theme of many threads here on the forums and thought you were making a funny.

D*am*n*, see, now it's not funny anymore. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

Kurfurst__
02-18-2005, 07:56 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
You are right, doesn't matter, its a heavier plane and we should feel the weight. But I think it'd also be a mistake to think its going to seriously impact performance. It'll be like Mark V to IX. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Yeah, I am thinking about these lines as well.

BlackShrike
02-18-2005, 09:50 AM
blackshrike wrote: What?

Good 1?

If I have to explain why it made me laugh, then it will lose it's uniqueness.

However, to ensure your question is answered, the XIV is obviously not in IL2 yet, and you saying it is overmodelled and should be banned, I thought was a play on the theme of many threads here on the forums and thought you were making a funny.

D*am*n*, see, now it's not funny anymore.


if you want funny watch this. ive found RBJ after retiring from hip hop. he sings ballads now.

http://www.funpic.hu/swf/numanuma.html

Badsight.
02-18-2005, 12:32 PM
what is that song ?

there is other short movies with goofballs acting up with it playing as well on the net