PDA

View Full Version : The Spitfires beauty



BaldieJr
03-06-2006, 05:44 PM
is lacking!

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

DaimonSyrius
03-06-2006, 05:49 PM
Originally posted by BaldieJr:
is lacking ... ...a perceptible effect on your -possibly scarce or maybe dormant- aesthetic sensitivity. However, I find it to be abundant and plentiful, causing remarkable and distinct beauty perceptions when it strikes mine http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif

Cheers,
S.

faustnik
03-06-2006, 05:49 PM
Disagree 100%

Big, full round wings on a firm thin frame with a nicely curved tail, what more can you ask for?

Max.Power
03-06-2006, 06:02 PM
It's widely regarded as a beautifyl aircraft... I think it looks a little wimpy, personally. It is a beautiful aircraft- clean, sweeping lines.. but, as a combat aircraft, I think it could look more fearsome. The tropicalized ones with the air filter look a little more rugged than the european ones, tho.

danjama
03-06-2006, 06:06 PM
Originally posted by faustnik:
Disagree 100%

Big, full round wings on a firm thin frame with a nicely curved tail, what more can you ask for?

I'd ask for this http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

http://gorillamask.net/20050207_girlsaloud4.jpg

Sama51
03-06-2006, 09:06 PM
I've kicked myself a few times for looking on my six a lollering at the pretty bird acting all 'aggressive' and 'tough' and then finding out (to my dismay unfortunately) that the thing has guns.... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

VW-IceFire
03-06-2006, 09:28 PM
Originally posted by faustnik:
Disagree 100%

Big, full round wings on a firm thin frame with a nicely curved tail, what more can you ask for?
A nicer default skin with proper RAF markings on it http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

biggs222
03-06-2006, 09:38 PM
RGR that Ice... it really is a shame that we STILL dont have proper Markings. the Roundels on teh wings are too far out on the wing and the roundels on the underside of the wing are too big... and thats just the wings. :|

at least the Tempest has got them right for the most part.

faustnik
03-06-2006, 10:04 PM
Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by faustnik:
Disagree 100%

Big, full round wings on a firm thin frame with a nicely curved tail, what more can you ask for?
A nicer default skin with proper RAF markings on it http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'll take mine with USAAF markings thank you!

p1ngu666
03-07-2006, 06:31 AM
if u want aggressive take a tiffy or mossie http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

TX-Zen
03-07-2006, 07:24 AM
I'm partial to long nosed German women. Stephie Graff and Dora are the two that I am completely in love with.

AustinPowers_
03-07-2006, 08:00 AM
Originally posted by faustnik:
Disagree 100%

Big, full round wings on a firm thin frame with a nicely curved tail, what more can you ask for?



Agree 100%
http://www.celebstation.org/models/lisa_snowdon/Lisa_Snowdon-83.jpg

georgeo76
03-07-2006, 08:31 AM
Nothing is more beautiful than a spitfire.....on fire.

Xiolablu3
03-07-2006, 08:56 AM
Well I think the Mk8 is beautiful.

But I am biased, I drink a lot of tea, eat Bacon and Eggs and say 'old chap' a lot... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

My ancestors also wore red crosses and decided to go on killing sprees in the Middle East, 'In Gods name' hundreds of years ago. (We are not so bright http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/1072.gif)

Oh and if you need one more clue, we built an Empire by invading other countries and stealing their resources, but now complain and moan when they want to simply come and live in our country. Can you guess where I live yet? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Spitfire is the choice of Gentlemen! Be sure!

Viper2005_
03-07-2006, 09:20 AM
Originally posted by faustnik:
I'll take mine with USAAF markings thank you!

There's no accounting for taste...

panther3485
03-07-2006, 09:30 AM
IMHO:

A brilliantly conceived, curvaceous form with gentle, sweeping feminine lines.... possessed of an eye-catching beauty; yet built for deadly purpose - the distillation of the essence of a thoroughbred - a true fighter. An immortal classic.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

For those who wish to see, there is a strong hint, that this machine is somewhat shark-like in its deadly purpose. This reaches its first real maturity in the Mk. XVIII & IX and becomes even more strongly stated with the Mk. XIV.

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Of course, the above is only my opinion but I believe I should expect to be in very good company. Unless I am much mistaken, very many WW2 military aviation enthusiasts around the World, if asked to name their top 10 best looking classic planes, would surely place Reginald Mitchell's masterpiece somewhere in that 10, if not at number 1.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

I might even entertain the notion that in general terms at least, this could be a majority viewpoint?

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

I realize, of course, that I've probably made far too much of an answer for a thread that is, at best, only half serious!

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

But I just can't contain myself. I also love the Mosquito, for a similar combination of aesthetic and functional reasons.


Best regards,
panther3485

BaldieJr
03-07-2006, 09:45 AM
Originally posted by georgeo76:
Nothing is more beautiful than a spitfire.....on fire.

Untill someone creates a giant fly-swatter and smacks a spitfire proper. Oh what a sight that will be!

panther3485
03-07-2006, 10:18 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif

Baldie, I'm starting to really appreciate your sense of humour now! For maximum economy of effort, make sure the swatter is large enough to catch the Spit and the Mossie in one swipe!

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

panther3485

DudeAbides82
03-07-2006, 10:43 AM
I have no beef with the Spit, it is purdy.. but I think that Tempest is pretty bad-a** looking. I like a tough looking plane rather than a pretty one. I also like Corsairs and P40's. There's also something cool about Stuka's...especially the G1.

robban75
03-07-2006, 11:00 AM
The Spitfire is beautiful no doubt, but the MkXIV is the only version that looks like a warplane IMO. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

stathem
03-07-2006, 11:54 AM
Dora :-

http://www.dw-world.de/dwelle/allgemein/bilder_show/0,3772,55958_6,00.jpg

Spitfire :-

http://images.art.com/images/-/Audrey-Hepburn---Breakfast-at-Tiffanys--C10101628.jpeg

robban75
03-07-2006, 12:13 PM
Originally posted by stathem:
Dora :-

http://www.dw-world.de/dwelle/allgemein/bilder_show/0,3772,55958_6,00.jpg

Spitfire :-

http://images.art.com/images/-/Audrey-Hepburn---Breakfast-at-Tiffanys--C10101628.jpeg

Who would win in a fight? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

TX-Zen
03-07-2006, 12:19 PM
Originally posted by robban75:


Who would win in a fight? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif


lol

Thats my point exactly and why I love Stephie and Dora so much. Beautiful and deadly

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

(edit: Long live the long nosed chicks)

Viper2005_
03-07-2006, 12:20 PM
Spitfire. Remember, if we're talking a fight between contempories then you've got a D-9 vs a Spitfire XIV.

The Fw-190 lost its edge after the LF.IX arrived on the scene. The Spitfire XIV was certainly superior, though it would have had a tougher time against the Ta-152 at altitude assuming that the GM-1 and MW-50 systems were working as advertised.

stathem
03-07-2006, 12:21 PM
There's more to life then fighting http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

robban75
03-07-2006, 12:30 PM
Originally posted by Viper2005_:
Spitfire. Remember, if we're talking a fight between contempories then you've got a D-9 vs a Spitfire XIV.

The Fw-190 lost its edge after the LF.IX arrived on the scene. The Spitfire XIV was certainly superior, though it would have had a tougher time against the Ta-152 at altitude assuming that the GM-1 and MW-50 systems were working as advertised.

The XIV would have a tough time against a D-9 between SL and 6000m.

D-9 advantages. Speed, dive acceleration, zoom climb, roll rate, light controls at all speeds, kommandoger√¬§t, cockpit visibility.

XIV advantages, slightly better turning ability at low speeds, level acceleration and climb rate.

Airmail109
03-07-2006, 12:46 PM
Originally posted by robban75:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Viper2005_:
Spitfire. Remember, if we're talking a fight between contempories then you've got a D-9 vs a Spitfire XIV.

The Fw-190 lost its edge after the LF.IX arrived on the scene. The Spitfire XIV was certainly superior, though it would have had a tougher time against the Ta-152 at altitude assuming that the GM-1 and MW-50 systems were working as advertised.

The XIV would have a tough time against a D-9 between SL and 6000m.

D-9 advantages. Speed, dive acceleration, zoom climb, roll rate, light controls at all speeds, kommandoger√¬§t, cockpit visibility.

XIV advantages, slightly better turning ability at low speeds, level acceleration and climb rate. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Slightly better turn? Way better mate, its turning circle is practically identicle to the Mk9s, climbrate was quite a bit better, and level speed was better.

stathem
03-07-2006, 12:52 PM
Besides, Audrey could do you a nasty mischief with that cigarette holder...

robban75
03-07-2006, 12:59 PM
Originally posted by Aimail101:
Slightly better turn? Way better mate, its turning circle is practically identicle to the Mk9s, climbrate was quite a bit better, and level speed was better.

I'm sorry, I can't agree with that. I don't care what the test report says. If you add half a ton to a fighter, turning ability will suffer. There's no way around it. With the XIV they traded manouverability and agility for speed. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Viper2005_
03-07-2006, 12:59 PM
Personally I fly the Fw-190 in game, but in a real fight I'd probably rather fly the Spitfire because it has a unique ability to fight its way out of trouble.

I haven't seen any really convincing data as to the combat performance of the D9;

http://www.spitfireperformance.com/fw190/fw190d9test.html

shows a massive spread, but has accounts which suggest a top speed of about 585 km/h at sea level using MW50. That's pretty much identical to the Spitfire XIV at +18.


It was originally intented that two aircraft should be converted to test the Fw 190 D-9 with the MW 50 system. The company planned to convert Werknummer 210 002 at Langenhagen and Werknummer 210 048 was equipped with the system in Sorau. The machine was supposed to go to Rechlin for testing of the MW 50 system, however, it crashed at Sorau while on the third flight. Pilot Finke was killed. In spite of this, testing of the MW 50 system continued on the ground. Interestingly, the special tank was filled with water only, as no methanol was available. Estimated maximum speed at ground level without methanol-water was 540 km/h at 3,300 rpm and 1.5 atm of boost. With methanol-water, maximum speed at ground level was 585 km/h at 3,300 rpm and 1.76 atm boost. In production aircraft it was planned that the MW 50 system could be used to draw fuel or methanol/water from the 115-liter tank. On account of delivery difficulties, however, it was decided to use the tank with methanol-water only, and this was dubbed the "Oldenburg System" (see III./JG 54). This system was installed in production aircraft beginning in November 1944.

robban75
03-07-2006, 01:08 PM
Originally posted by Viper2005_:
I haven't seen any really convincing data as to the combat performance of the D9;

http://www.spitfireperformance.com/fw190/fw190d9test.html

shows a massive spread, but has accounts which suggest a top speed of about 585 km/h at sea level using MW50. That's pretty much identical to the Spitfire XIV at +18.



Surely there were XIV's that didn't perform according to specs? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Besides, the reports on the Spitfireperformance page has this to say about the test reports.

The first problem with all flight trials of Wk.-Nr. 001 & 002 is that they were done with the initial batch of production engines, which have well documented problems with supercharger performance. These issues resulted in the engines producing 60-100PS less than that used in the calculations. The second problem is the engine gap. The drag data for the D9 most likely comes from scale models; those models will not have the engine gap as they are "carved out of one piece of wood". The scale model, therefore, has a smoother surface than the real airplane. The speed increase in the tests, where the gap was sealed, support this assumption. Nevertheless, the tests are representative of performance for operational Fw 190 D9s.

Some D-9's had the engine gaps, and some didn't. It depended on were they were built. Several pictures shows D-9's without gaps.

It must also be said, however, that operational planes with a good surface finish and an engine running to book values will perform better than both Wk.-Nr. 001 & 002.

danjama
03-07-2006, 01:59 PM
Originally posted by robban75:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Aimail101:
Slightly better turn? Way better mate, its turning circle is practically identicle to the Mk9s, climbrate was quite a bit better, and level speed was better.

I'm sorry, I can't agree with that. I don't care what the test report says. If you add half a ton to a fighter, turning ability will suffer. There's no way around it. With the XIV they traded manouverability and agility for speed. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You my friend are http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

robban75
03-07-2006, 02:09 PM
Originally posted by danjama:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by robban75:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Aimail101:
Slightly better turn? Way better mate, its turning circle is practically identicle to the Mk9s, climbrate was quite a bit better, and level speed was better.

I'm sorry, I can't agree with that. I don't care what the test report says. If you add half a ton to a fighter, turning ability will suffer. There's no way around it. With the XIV they traded manouverability and agility for speed. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You my friend are http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ok ok. I can put it this way. The XIV was still agile and manouverable, it's just that it was half a ton less agile and manouverable compared to the Mk IX. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif And hey, it was alot faster. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Viper2005_
03-07-2006, 02:12 PM
I'm sure that there were Spitfire XIVs that didn't make their book performance, but I'm also sure that the at that stage in the war a much higher percentage of Luftwaffe aircraft had substandard build quality and performance; which is why I'd rather fly the Spitfire even in a 1v1 fight.

AustinPowers_
03-07-2006, 05:04 PM
Originally posted by Viper2005_:
but I'm also sure that the at that stage in the war a much higher percentage of Luftwaffe aircraft had substandard build quality and performance; which is why I'd rather fly the Spitfire even in a 1v1 fight.

That is certainly Olegs opinion on the subject.

Cajun76
03-07-2006, 09:15 PM
I find the responses about Spitfire "beauty" suprising,


Big, full round wings on a firm thin frame with a nicely curved tail...

since this is the image the Spitfire invokes....


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v30/Cajun76/RowanAtkinson02.jpg


Adding power didn't do the Spit any favors either...

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v30/Cajun76/RowanAtkinson01.jpg

faustnik
03-08-2006, 12:46 AM
OUCH!!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif


*****************

But, this make me feel better. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

http://pages.sbcglobal.net/mdegnan/_images/yankeespitfires.jpg

stathem
03-08-2006, 01:33 AM
Originally posted by Cajun76:
I find the responses about Spitfire "beauty" suprising,

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> Big, full round wings on a firm thin frame with a nicely curved tail...

since this is the image the Spitfire invokes....


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v30/Cajun76/RowanAtkinson02.jpg


Adding power didn't do the Spit any favors either...

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v30/Cajun76/RowanAtkinson01.jpg </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, if we're gonna get nasty...

P-47 :-

http://seespanrun.com/cloning/roseanne.jpg

For comparison, P-51 :-

http://digilander.libero.it/loid/immagini/files_immagini/marilynmonroe.jpg

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

panther3485
03-08-2006, 02:11 AM
Hi, robban75

Quote:
"Ok ok. I can put it this way. The XIV was still agile and manouverable, it's just that it was half a ton less agile and manouverable compared to the Mk IX. And hey, it was alot faster."

Mate, that's a perfect summary IMHO.

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

Yes, there was a trade-off for the extra power (more weight) but it was considered to be well worthwhile. It was a 'contest' between the two sides. Many WW2 fighter types were upgraded in the engine power department, either to keep up with the opposition or in the effort to get one jump ahead. The results were mixed, to say the least. The Spitfire's airframe absorbed a succession of upgrades better than most. It was what you might call a 'happy' design. Part of its greatness as a fighter, IMHO.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Best regards,
panther3485

HellToupee
03-08-2006, 02:21 AM
Originally posted by robban75:
The Spitfire is beautiful no doubt, but the MkXIV is the only version that looks like a warplane IMO. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

But then a spitfire was a plane used in war, and since a spitfire looks like a spitfire, and a spitfire is a warplane then a spitfire does indeed look like a warplane.

major_setback
03-08-2006, 02:56 AM
Need I say more:

http://www.aeroflight.co.uk/types/uk/supermarine/spitfireI-III/spitfire.jpg

http://www.bibl.u-szeged.hu/bibl/mil/ww2/kepek/planes/pics/spitfire_3.jpg


http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y129/major-setback/a58spitfire1xd.jpg



http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y129/major-setback/Spitfire20-2005kopia.jpg

panther3485
03-08-2006, 03:54 AM
Quote from robban75:
"The Spitfire is beautiful no doubt, but the MkXIV is the only version that looks like a warplane IMO."

Quote from HellToupee:
"But then a spitfire was a plane used in war, and since a spitfire looks like a spitfire, and a spitfire is a warplane then a spitfire does indeed look like a warplane."


I think I understand what robban75 is trying to say. The Spitfire is beautiful, but it doesn't really look the way he believes a warplane should. [Correct me if I've got you wrong, robban.]

One of my best model club mates has aesthetic views very different from mine. He prefers the look of the Typhoon over the Spitfire, the Beaufighter over the Mosquito, the P-47 'razorback' over any version of the P-51. In most cases, he feels the transition to bubble canopies ruined the looks of fighters that changed to them!

I was tempted to believe that his 'eye for lines' was totally different from mine, until I discovered that he and I share precisely the same taste when it comes to women's figures (go figure?)

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

He is perfectly entitled to his opinions, as I am to mine - it's very subjective.

I must admit I go against my own general trend for the F6F Hellcat; for some unexplained reason I really love the look of that bird, even over the F4U. This opinion seems to put me squarely in a minority when it comes to US carrier fighters.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

Horses for courses, guys!


Best regards,
panther3485

robban75
03-08-2006, 10:06 AM
Originally posted by panther3485:
I think I understand what robban75 is trying to say. The Spitfire is beautiful, but it doesn't really look the way he believes a warplane should. [Correct me if I've got you wrong, robban.]


That would sum it up quite well, yes. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Grue_
03-08-2006, 04:28 PM
Looking for some trade http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v458/flyingscampi/SpitXIV-1.jpg

danjama
03-09-2006, 01:50 PM
http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a194/danjama/spitfire.jpg

meh