PDA

View Full Version : Spit X1v



blairgowrie
08-03-2008, 05:47 PM
Rumour has it, AAA is working on a X1V. Anybody know anything about it?

snafu73
08-03-2008, 06:09 PM
... Yes, it's got a long nose and a short temper!

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif

blairgowrie
08-03-2008, 06:15 PM
Really helpful. Thanks. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

ElAurens
08-03-2008, 06:40 PM
I'd be happier if they could figure out a proper installer.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/compsmash.gif

Low_Flyer_MkIX
08-03-2008, 06:42 PM
I wish I could post a link... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Seriously, it's in the beta mods discussion board at AAA. You can't miss it.

96th_Nightshifter
08-03-2008, 06:48 PM
It's going to be cooler than a Huskie's nuts http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Rjel
08-03-2008, 07:27 PM
Originally posted by ElAurens:
I'd be happier if they could figure out a proper installer.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/compsmash.gif

The installer works just fine for me. I had an issue a couple of times but since have re-read the tutorial and haven't had a problem since. What issues are you having?

skarden
08-03-2008, 08:18 PM
+1
Me too,as long as you follow the instructions and install what you need too before the plane there should be no problem.

the new spit does look every part a killer,Cant wait http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/metal.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/partyhat.gif

skarden
08-03-2008, 08:33 PM
these are only wip's rememeber

http://img211.imageshack.us/img211/1802/spitfirexivwip3qf7.jpg

http://img375.imageshack.us/img375/1656/spitxivwip4ao9.jpg

ElAurens
08-03-2008, 09:18 PM
A tutorial for an installer?

What's wrong with this picture?

I'm mostly concerned with maps here currently, but I can see how aircraft will be just as problematic.

An installer by definition installs. That means you don't have to chase down texture files and their install issues, and paste lines of type into files that may or may not be there in the first place, and have to install another map just to get some objects from it for the map you want.

Come on guys, get your act together. If you are going to release something, then put everything you need to install it in one package, and set it up to do the job. Don't make your "customers" do the work for you.

One click, done.

Rjel
08-03-2008, 09:27 PM
Originally posted by ElAurens:
A tutorial for an installer?

What's wrong with this picture?

I'm mostly concerned with maps here currently, but I can see how aircraft will be just as problematic.

An installer by definition installs.

In your original post you mentioned installers that don't work. I pointed out a way to make sure they work for you. Let's be honest, you have been at the forefront where it comes to not liking the entire mod issue. That's fair enough, to each his own. But let's not try to scare off others from trying them with half truths.

rockgardenlove
08-03-2008, 11:32 PM
A unified installer is impossible unless somebody would gather a pack of mods together and bundle it. Now, that has kind of been done actually. There are like 3 installers to get the most basic modset running:
Mod enabler / sound mod if you want it
Wrapper.exe
Default mod install pack

Now, there you go. Your game is modded. How many installations did it take to get up to 1946? Two. 4.09b if you have it? Three. So it's not really that far behind.

However, the nature of it is that they're personal modifications everybody likes something different. That's the simple matter of it. The mod community isn't going to close it up. Unlike Oleg, decisions they make aren't going to have any pre-existing credibility due to their unofficial standing. Say Oleg porks the bullet trails. Alright, Oleg made the sim, at least he has the right to set one type of bullet trails. But if it comes to the point where you can only install one mod pack with one installer, and you don't like the outcome bullet trails, people won't be happy. Once the availability to have a truly individually tweaked game, people will want it.

Not to mention the difficulties of providing one up-to-date mod installer that includes all the updates from various people working on mods...

Anyways, the system right now is really good. All the mods go in a MODS folder. You just copy and paste the mod in there. If you want to disable a mod, just put a - in front of the mod name. Say you have gunsmoke_mod. -gunsmoke_mod turns it off. Pretty sleek. Delete the folder entirely, and it's gone. It's pretty well done. The mods are applied in a unharmful, temporary manner.

Also, for somethings, like adding maps, you have to edit a text file with the list of the maps. That's impossible with an installer because it doesn't know what's been added to that file before. It's one thing for Oleg to just replace a text file with something new, because he knows nothing will be lost if he updates it. That's impossible with the mods setup, at least, again, if everybody wants all the maps and stuff.

Anyways, give the guys a break. They've done a great job, and your requests kind of go against the whole stream of the thing. Just enjoy them.

LEXX_Luthor
08-04-2008, 01:32 AM
There are uses for mod installers, for specific mod packs like Yankee Air Pirate in the SF sim for example, but then, its mission Pay-To-Play, so they have "customers." A common mod package even if overly "lite" for online squads might be useful, making sure all the installs are the same, with no user mistakes.

When things get figured out, a basic "intro to mods" mod installer for Newbies like El would be useful...including an option for stock sounds...but if they later want to get the full potential of modding, they will have to do much of it manually. I don't allow mod installers in my sims, and if I run across one, I "install" in a blank folder and take out what I need. I don't like modders running around installing things for me. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/disagree.gif


ElAurens::
Don't make your "customers" do the work for you.

One click, done.
Only Oleg has customers who pay for a One Click experience. http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d178/Lexx_Luthor/Smileys/thumbs.gif

stathem
08-04-2008, 04:57 AM
Bugger. I may actually have to get into mods when and if this does come to pass.

SpitfireType369
08-04-2008, 05:07 AM
Originally posted by blairgowrie:
Rumour has it, AAA is working on a X1V. Anybody know anything about it?

What is a Spit X<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">ONE</span>V? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Kurfurst__
08-04-2008, 06:40 AM
Originally posted by SpitfireType369:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by blairgowrie:
Rumour has it, AAA is working on a X1V. Anybody know anything about it?

What is a Spit X<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">ONE</span>V? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

A Mk XIV Spit without those characteristic Griffon cowl top bulges..? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

skarden
08-04-2008, 06:51 AM
Like the pics say "wip's".The bulges WILL be there,their still working on it all,hence the wip comment at the top of the pics.

sometimes ppl only read what they want to http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

mortoma
08-04-2008, 03:35 PM
Did the Spit 14 really participate in war very much? Seems like more of a '46 plane to me. I'd much rather have a Typhoon or a P-38F, something more relevant to the war. Aircraft that flew in numbers that are missing from the sim.

JG53Frankyboy
08-04-2008, 03:42 PM
i belive it fits very well, espaciyll with all these late war LW fighters in game -> "From September 1944 the Mk XIV was used with the 2nd Tactical Air Force. It equipped all twenty Spitfire squadrons on the continent between D-Day and VE-Day. Its role in Europe was normally armed reconnaissance, searching for any enemy targets behind the German lines. It could carry up to 1000 lbs of bombs, or in a FR role 500 lbs of bombs and a camera"


but it is in the time of the hacks the same as in the time of the official updates/AdOns - the opinions about what is "realy" needed differ a lot from player to player http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif - very understandable.

Xiolablu3
08-04-2008, 04:34 PM
Originally posted by mortoma:
Did the Spit 14 really participate in war very much? Seems like more of a '46 plane to me. I'd much rather have a Typhoon or a P-38F, something more relevant to the war. Aircraft that flew in numbers that are missing from the sim.

For sorties/war contribution, its about the same relevance as the Fw190D/Bf109K. The 2nd TAF had over 100 Spitfire XIV's in squadrons for cover on the frontline in France after D-day, and they had very few loses. The Germans built more Doras and Kurfursts than SPitfire XIV's, but they entered service later, had very high loses, shortages of fuel and many never even got off the ground.

The Spitfire XIV was the premier RAF fighter/interceptor while most of the MkIX's were used as fighter bombers by late '44-45.

Metatron_123
08-04-2008, 06:10 PM
There were incidents were they fought against Jg27's Bf-109 Ks too.

There is an excellent book by mushroom publications called "An orinary day in 1945" that describes all the major air actions of one day in March, 1945, including Spit XIVs:

http://mmpbooks.biz/books/8389450224/8389450224p.htm

Buzzsaw-
08-04-2008, 11:25 PM
Originally posted by Xiolablu3:

The Spitfire XIV was the premier RAF fighter/interceptor while most of the MkIX's were used as fighter bombers by late '44-45.


Some corrections:

Make that '45.

Plus: The Spitfire XIV AND the Tempest V were the premier fighter/interceptors. The Spit XIV patrolled the higher altitudes from 30,000 down, while the Tempest operated between 20,000 ft and ground level. The Tempest was the only RAF aircraft which had carte blanche to 'frei Jagd' as the Germans called it, ie. range freely anywhere over the front lines and attack whatever it saw. Its speed was such that it could outrun any German piston engine aircraft below 20,000 ft, and outmaneuver any Jets. The Spit XIV was fast up high, but comparatively slow down low. (slower than the 190D or even the 190A9)

And the Spit IX's and XVI's, (XVI was the bubble-top Packard-Merlin engined version of the Spit IX) were not primarily used as fighter-bombers. The lack of German aircraft in the air meant that quite often they would load bombs or go on strafing missions, but they were still the bulk of the interceptor fleet for the RAF. But they were more tied to protecting the airspace where the Typhoon ground attack Squadrons were operating than actively going out and hunting Germans.

chunkydora
08-05-2008, 12:29 AM
I don't want to upset the moderators, but could anyone give me some info as to where I could find these mods? What is AAA? Yes, this forum is my only connection to the outside world besides my email...

skarden
08-05-2008, 12:51 AM
Originally posted by chunkydora:
I don't want to upset the moderators, but could anyone give me some info as to where I could find these mods? What is AAA? Yes, this forum is my only connection to the outside world besides my email...

just google "all aircraft arcade" chunky,enjoy

Kurfurst__
08-05-2008, 01:44 AM
Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mortoma:
Did the Spit 14 really participate in war very much? Seems like more of a '46 plane to me. I'd much rather have a Typhoon or a P-38F, something more relevant to the war. Aircraft that flew in numbers that are missing from the sim.

For sorties/war contribution, its about the same relevance as the Fw190D/Bf109K. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Do you have any information how many sorties the Spitfire XIV has flown, or how many victories it claimed, apart from the V-1 campaign during which they obviously flew a great many patrols?

Buzzsaw-
08-05-2008, 11:16 AM
Originally posted by Kurfurst__:
Do you have any information how many sorties the Spitfire XIV has flown, or how many victories it claimed, apart from the V-1 campaign during which they obviously flew a great many patrols?

Although Kurfurst will only use the information to try to prove the Spit XIV never flew in combat... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif here it is...

Seven Squadrons of Spitfire XIV's were operational at wars end in May '45. A Squadron had a nominal strength of 18 aircraft and 24 pilots. That is only 126 aircraft operational, not a huge number, the Spit XIV was a relatively small part of the overall RAF fighter strength, which stood at around 1200 aircraft operational at war's end. All the Spit XIV Squadrons were based in Europe by war's end, they were moved to Europe beginning around Sept. '44 after all the V1 sites on the Channel coast were overrun.

Of course, there were not many 190D's operational either.

For example if you look at the records for JG26, the first unit to convert to the 190D, they had only 78 D9's operational in December of '44.

http://www.ww2.dk/oob/bestand/jagd/bijg26.html

http://www.ww2.dk/oob/bestand/jagd/biijg26.html

http://www.ww2.dk/oob/bestand/jagd/biiijg26.html

If memory serves me, (you can go through the entire records from the above source) in total, there were just over 200 D9's operational in Dec. '44.

Back to the subject of the Spit XIV... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

341 Mk XIV's were built by the end of '44, 957 in total.

The premier source on the Spitfire is SPITFIRE, A History, by Eric B Morgan and Edward Shacklady. It includes all the details on how many XIV's were produced what Squadrons they flew with, etc.

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51BREW1N42L._SS500_.jpg

For a personal account of one Spitfire XIV wing, read WING LEADER by Johnnie Johnson, who led a wing of Spit XIV's in the last months of the war.

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51QW0MF4Z7L._SS500_.jpg

Xiolablu3
08-05-2008, 11:24 AM
Originally posted by Buzzsaw-:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Xiolablu3:

The Spitfire XIV was the premier RAF fighter/interceptor while most of the MkIX's were used as fighter bombers by late '44-45.


Some corrections:

Make that '45.

Plus: The Spitfire XIV AND the Tempest V were the premier fighter/interceptors. The Spit XIV patrolled the higher altitudes from 30,000 down, while the Tempest operated between 20,000 ft and ground level. The Tempest was the only RAF aircraft which had carte blanche to 'frei Jagd' as the Germans called it, ie. range freely anywhere over the front lines and attack whatever it saw. Its speed was such that it could outrun any German piston engine aircraft below 20,000 ft, and outmaneuver any Jets. The Spit XIV was fast up high, but comparatively slow down low. (slower than the 190D or even the 190A9)

And the Spit IX's and XVI's, (XVI was the bubble-top Packard-Merlin engined version of the Spit IX) were not primarily used as fighter-bombers. The lack of German aircraft in the air meant that quite often they would load bombs or go on strafing missions, but they were still the bulk of the interceptor fleet for the RAF. But they were more tied to protecting the airspace where the Typhoon ground attack Squadrons were operating than actively going out and hunting Germans. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thanks for the corrections, what I wrote before came from Wikipedia.

BTW Kurfy, I dont have any exact numbers, no.

However I think its correct to assume that with the high losses, low amount of fuel, and general chaos occuring in the Luftwaffe at the end of 1944-45, that even tho there were a lot of aircraft built of the types 109K and Fw190D, they are comparable in significance to the SPitfire XIV.

I realise its just my opnion, as I have no hard evidence, but remember the SPitfire XIV was operating in small numbers (two squadrons) from the beginning of 1944, and flying meaningful sorties whether doing the all important work of defending Britain from the only real risk direct at that time the V1, or flying sweeps over the channel hunting for German fighters.

I think its more than fair, to assume that the Spitfire XIV suffered far far less losses than the Fw190D's and 109K's and that one SPitfire XIV generally survived many months longer than any 109K or Dora. In this way one single SPitfire XIV would have performed as many sorties as many Doras or Kurfursts.

Also, although many German squadrons are stated as using the 109K4 or Dora, that many never even got off the ground, having been destroyed in transit, or not having enough fuel, or destroyed after a few days of arriving at the airfield. Heinz Knockes 'squadron' for example in late 1944 was operating 4 battered 109's which were dangerous to fly in his own words. Whereas SPitfire XIV squadrons at this time would generally always be at full strength.

ALso remember that many were in storage, as the Allies didnt destroy 1800 Doras and 1800 109K's in the air, in the last months of the war.

I realise its a lot of assumptions, but reasonable assumptions I think.

BTW Kurfy, I pmed you a link to some books, particularly Hunagrian aces of WW2, dunno if you have seen it or are just ignoring me? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Bremspropeller
08-05-2008, 11:52 AM
It's funny how you compare the XIV with BOTH, K-4 and D-9.

You'd better compare Tempest V and Spit XIV with K-4 and D-9 in terms of numbers and signifigance or compare it with one of them, K-4 OR D-9, but not both of them. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

There were also a COUPLE of G-10s that were only a bit short of the K-4 in terms of performance.

Buzzsaw-
08-05-2008, 11:57 AM
Originally posted by Xiolablu3:

...even tho there were a lot of aircraft built of the types 109K and Fw190D, they are comparable in significance to the SPitfire XIV.

Salute Xiolablu3

Sorry to correct you again... Nothing personal... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

There were actually more 109K4's and 190D9's operational than Spit XIV's. The K4 was quite common at the end of the war, although not the bulk of the 109's, the G14 was the most numerous.

Even when you combine the Tempests and Spit XIV's operational, you still don't get a match to the numbers of K4's and D9's.

Of course, there were a lot of other Allied plane types, like the Mustang IV +25 boost, the P-51D's operating at 75 inches MAP, and the P-47M's, which were a match for the D9 and K4. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif When you total these planes, then you get a lot more advanced Allied types than German. (there were over a 1000 P-51's with the 8th AAF at the end of the war)

You are correct that a lot of D9's and K4's were destroyed on the ground or captured. (any Warbird lover would cry if they knew how many 109's and 190's were bulldozed into the ground to use as filler for runways by the Allies in '45... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif ) The big problem for the German side in '45 was number of pilots available, not numbers of aircraft. More planes were manufactured than pilots could be found for.

Manufacturing quality was also an issue. The use of slave labour in the factories meant there was a lot of sabotage of the parts, and often engine life was half what it should have been.

Franz Stigler, who commanded a Gruppe of 109's detailed how only one use of WEP power in a K4 meant the engine had to be replaced.

You are correct that the Spit XIV Squadron's on average would fly more sorties than a comparable K4 or D9 Staffel. Maintenance for the German's was an issue at this stage in the war, and fuel shortages meant that very often units were grounded when they should have been flying sorties.

A good book which details the problems the Germans had in the closing days of WWII is "JG26, Top Guns of the Luftwaffe" by Donald Caldwell.

http://www.amazon.com/JG-26-Top-Guns-Luftwaffe/dp/0804110506

Xiolablu3
08-05-2008, 12:16 PM
No probs mate, I absolutely agree that there were more 109K's and Doras produced than SPitfire XIV's.

However what I mean is when you add up all the other factors such as , SPit XIV in service longer, luftwaffe's fuel shortage, luftwaffes losses, the general chaos in the LW in late 44-45, and the fact that the RAF squadron strength would be at mostly full strength and these squadrons would be performing sorties almost every day.

When compared to the level of activity the LW had at this time, that these late war planes (109K/Dora/Spit XIV) were comparable in significance for level of activity and sorties.

Aaron_GT
08-05-2008, 12:37 PM
XVI was the bubble-top Packard-Merlin engined version of the Spit IX

Not all XVIs were bubbletops.

SlickStick
08-06-2008, 09:42 AM
Originally posted by Aaron_GT:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">XVI was the bubble-top Packard-Merlin engined version of the Spit IX

Not all XVIs were bubbletops. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Correct. The first Mk. XIVs were converted Mk. VIIIs (possibly later IXs, not the V airframe ones, as well) with Griffons. The cut back fuselage and tear-drop canopies, along with other modifications, were added later.

http://img396.imageshack.us/img396/5420/jsjpcsupermarinespitfirpb2.jpg

http://img227.imageshack.us/img227/6698/xivbubbleor9.jpg

So, out of morbid curiosity, who determines what the FM and DM will be for this new plane?

hop2002
08-06-2008, 10:14 AM
However what I mean is when you add up all the other factors such as , SPit XIV in service longer, luftwaffe's fuel shortage, luftwaffes losses, the general chaos in the LW in late 44-45, and the fact that the RAF squadron strength would be at mostly full strength and these squadrons would be performing sorties almost every day.

When compared to the level of activity the LW had at this time, that these late war planes (109K/Dora/Spit XIV) were comparable in significance for level of activity and sorties.

Reading Caldwell's account of JG 26, between 2nd Jan and and 14th Feb they flew approx 210 sorties. According to Price in The Last Year of the Luftwaffe, on 10th January they had 183 fighters on strength.

In the same time period 302 squadron equipped with Spitfire IXs, operating from forward airfields on the continent, flew 219 sorties. That's with a force of about 20 fighters.

That's an RAF sortie rate per fighter 10 times higher than the Luftwaffe's.

That's just one example, of course. We'd need a lot more information to get a full picture.

leitmotiv
08-06-2008, 10:35 AM
There are problems with installation. Feathered_IV guided me for hours last weekend as I tried to install the Mosquito XVI and Spitfire I. There is something causing difficulty, but he thinks he found the problem, so I'll try again. Prior to those two items everything installed perfectly. I've used the mods since the sound mod was released last fall.

Rjel
08-06-2008, 10:46 AM
Originally posted by leitmotiv:
There are problems with installation. Feathered_IV guided me for hours last weekend as I tried to install the Mosquito XVI and Spitfire I. There is something causing difficulty, but he thinks he found the problem, so I'll try again. Prior to those two items everything installed perfectly. I've used the mods since the sound mod was released last fall.

It must be a problem with Vista. Under XP I've installed numerous versions of each plane without problems using the un-installers. Have you tried to create a temporary Mods folder and installing these two A/C into it see if they'll run for you?

Bewolf
08-06-2008, 10:58 AM
Originally posted by Rjel:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by leitmotiv:
There are problems with installation. Feathered_IV guided me for hours last weekend as I tried to install the Mosquito XVI and Spitfire I. There is something causing difficulty, but he thinks he found the problem, so I'll try again. Prior to those two items everything installed perfectly. I've used the mods since the sound mod was released last fall.

It must be a problem with Vista. Under XP I've installed numerous versions of each plane without problems using the un-installers. Have you tried to create a temporary Mods folder and installing these two A/C into it see if they'll run for you? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Nope, no Vista Problem. I use Vista myself and so far had only one problem with mods. The one problem I ever encountered was a loading stop of the main program at 60 percent, but a removal of the STD folder within the mod folder solved that.

JG53Frankyboy
08-06-2008, 11:38 AM
Originally posted by SlickStick:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Aaron_GT:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">XVI was the bubble-top Packard-Merlin engined version of the Spit IX

Not all XVIs were bubbletops. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Correct. The first Mk. XIVs were converted Mk. VIIIs (possibly later IXs, not the V airframe ones, as well) with Griffons. The cut back fuselage and tear-drop canopies, along with other modifications, were added later.

.............. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

indeed, both, the XVI AND the XIV were build with "normal" canopies and bubble canopies http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Buzzsaw-
08-06-2008, 12:08 PM
Originally posted by SlickStick:

http://img227.imageshack.us/img227/6698/xivbubbleor9.jpg

So, out of morbid curiosity, who determines what the FM and DM will be for this new plane?

AAA has a policy of not changing the FMs or DMs of any of the existing aircraft, including AI versions, although there has been an exception in the case for of the TBM and TBF, which in their AI version, rolled like FW-190s.

All new planes have their FMs and DMs created by the team who does the graphics.

Most of the time, the FM and DM are based on original documents, and are not nessesarily the best possible performance. The new Mosquito XVI is modelled with +18 boost, not +25. The Spit I was modelled with +6 boost, when in fact all of the Spit I's were flying with +12 boost during the BoB.

Obviously there is room for error here, none of the modders has the inside knowledge of Oleg or the 1C team.

For aircraft like the 110G4 'Schrage Musik', with the upward firing 20mm's, there is no way to determine exactly what the drag effects of the two protruding barrels of the 20mm cannon would be, or what the drag effects of the radar attenna. It has to be estimated.

There is a great deal of documentation re. the performance of the Spit XIV, and there is nothing as far as I know, which is planned to be non-standard on the modelled aircraft, so I think we can expect a reasonable level of accuracy.

blairgowrie
08-06-2008, 12:29 PM
My alltime favourite pic. Thanks for posting again Slick.

http://img227.imageshack.us/img227/6698/xivbubbleor9.jpg

SlickStick
08-06-2008, 12:46 PM
Originally posted by Buzzsaw-:
AAA has a policy of not changing the FMs or DMs of any of the existing aircraft, including AI versions, although there has been an exception in the case for of the TBM and TBF, which in their AI version, rolled like FW-190s.

All new planes have their FMs and DMs created by the team who does the graphics.

Most of the time, the FM and DM are based on original documents, and are not nessesarily the best possible performance. The new Mosquito XVI is modelled with +18 boost, not +25. The Spit I was modelled with +6 boost, when in fact all of the Spit I's were flying with +12 boost during the BoB.

Obviously there is room for error here, none of the modders has the inside knowledge of Oleg or the 1C team.

For aircraft like the 110G4 'Schrage Musik', with the upward firing 20mm's, there is no way to determine exactly what the drag effects of the two protruding barrels of the 20mm cannon would be, or what the drag effects of the radar attenna. It has to be estimated.

There is a great deal of documentation re. the performance of the Spit XIV, and there is nothing as far as I know, which is planned to be non-standard on the modelled aircraft, so I think we can expect a reasonable level of accuracy.

OK, thanks for that reply.


Originally posted by blairgowrie:
My alltime favourite pic. Thanks for posting again Slick.

My pleasure. Any Spitfire friend is a friend of mine. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

SlickStick
08-06-2008, 12:49 PM
This one is my current favorite and desktop. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/heart.gif

http://img216.imageshack.us/img216/5218/spit1vu6.jpg

Kurfurst__
08-06-2008, 01:10 PM
Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
BTW Kurfy, I pmed you a link to some books, particularly Hunagrian aces of WW2, dunno if you have seen it or are just ignoring me? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Nope, its just that I am terrible at answering emails and PMs, and the two last weekends I was away on vacation. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

blairgowrie
08-06-2008, 01:21 PM
That one works for me as well.

Xiolablu3
08-06-2008, 01:37 PM
Was that XIV really Johnnie Johnsons plane? Or was it just painted into a replica?

I noticed the ID letters of JEJ, Johnsons tag.

I can see the planes serial of MV2** cannot see the last 2/3 numbers,


THats a beatiful plane, the panelling and flush riveting on that VIII/XIV airframe looks far superior to the V/IX versions.

luftluuver
08-06-2008, 01:53 PM
It is MV293. Never assigned to a RAF Squadron. Spent some time in the Indian AF.

SlickStick
08-06-2008, 04:01 PM
Actually, the number might be MV268. From Wiki on Johnnie Johnson:

"He ended the war flying a Mk XIVe, MV268, JE-J."

I did a search and he did indeed fly the XIVe noted above. While searching, I found this schweet shot of it. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

http://img528.imageshack.us/img528/7470/spitxivjejpq6.jpg

Kurfurst__
08-07-2008, 02:26 AM
Wonderful photo. In Switzerland...?

MV 268's brief history via Shacklady/Morgan:

33MU 4-1-45
130S 29-3-45
401S 10-5-45
411S 28-6-45
Engine cut force-landed Celle 4-3-46

Xiolablu3
08-07-2008, 05:35 AM
One question, if I may?

Does anyone know why when they updated/improved the Spitfire airframe with the MkVIII, they made the ailerons smaller?

Did it stop the ailerons from becoming as heavy at higher speeds?

Xiolablu3
08-07-2008, 05:41 AM
While we are showing gorgeous pictures, heres a couple of my fav's :-

http://www.error-net.com/webhost/sts/ftp/privtommy/109g6.jpg

http://www.error-net.com/webhost/sts/ftp/privtommy/me262.jpg

stathem
08-07-2008, 02:16 PM
Originally posted by SlickStick:
Actually, the number might be MV268. From Wiki on Johnnie Johnson:

"He ended the war flying a Mk XIVe, MV268, JE-J."

I did a search and he did indeed fly the XIVe noted above. While searching, I found this schweet shot of it. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

http://img528.imageshack.us/img528/7470/spitxivjejpq6.jpg


Oooh I've got a picture of it in wartime service with JEJ. I'll scan it and post it tomorrow, albeit it's not very big and you can't quite make out the codes.

Nice pic btw SlickStick

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/griffnav/FL2007/FL2007m.jpg

stathem
08-07-2008, 02:18 PM
Oh yeah, caption this pic

"Mien Gott, zie engine iz in upside down"

stathem
08-07-2008, 02:42 PM
Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
One question, if I may?

Does anyone know why when they updated/improved the Spitfire airframe with the MkVIII, they made the ailerons smaller?

Did it stop the ailerons from becoming as heavy at higher speeds?

From The Spitifre Story, Alfred Price;



On the Mark VII and later versions featuring its strengthened wing, the ailerons were reduced in span by 8.5 inches, to 6ft 3 in. This was to reduce the length of the aileron outboard of the outer hinges, to make aileron flutter less likely.

Xiolablu3
08-07-2008, 03:31 PM
Thanks STathem http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

SlickStick
08-08-2008, 09:56 AM
A couple of nice shots there, Xio. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

@stathem

Yes, that pic was an awesome find indeed. I had to make it my new desktop. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

I would also love to see that wartime picture of MV268, JE-J.

stathem
08-08-2008, 10:02 AM
Here you go, just got home from work

I left the blurb on, some might find it interesting.

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/griffnav/Gallery/Jej450001.jpg

SlickStick
08-08-2008, 10:08 AM
Cool, thanks.

WTE_Ibis
08-09-2008, 06:26 AM
Originally posted by stathem:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SlickStick:
Actually, the number might be MV268. From Wiki on Johnnie Johnson:

"He ended the war flying a Mk XIVe, MV268, JE-J."

I did a search and he did indeed fly the XIVe noted above. While searching, I found this schweet shot of it. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

http://img528.imageshack.us/img528/7470/spitxivjejpq6.jpg


Oooh I've got a picture of it in wartime service with JEJ. I'll scan it and post it tomorrow, albeit it's not very big and you can't quite make out the codes.

Nice pic btw SlickStick

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/griffnav/FL2007/FL2007m.jpg </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
-------------------------------------------
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

http://premium1.uploadit.org/Ibissix//P1050698.JPG