PDA

View Full Version : Information on 25lb boost Spitfire 9 needed ASAP.



crazyivan1970
01-23-2006, 09:11 AM
Ok gang, this is one of those times when your input can make a difference http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif. Information on performance of 25lb boost Spitfire is needed. Soooo, show me what you got. If you have something that for whatever reason cannot be posted here, please PM me and I will provide the e-mail http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

crazyivan1970
01-23-2006, 09:11 AM
Ok gang, this is one of those times when your input can make a difference http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif. Information on performance of 25lb boost Spitfire is needed. Soooo, show me what you got. If you have something that for whatever reason cannot be posted here, please PM me and I will provide the e-mail http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

faustnik
01-23-2006, 10:36 AM
Try here Ivan, all good stuff:

http://www.fourthfightergroup.com/eagles/merlin66_18_25.jpg

and here:

http://www.spitfireperformance.com/jl165rr.html

ICDP
01-23-2006, 11:06 AM
Do you mean 25lb boost? This is good news, the site posted by Faustnik has quite a bit of info regarding Spitfire testing at 25lb boost. Though I should point out that Faust has linked directly to a test of a Spitfire running at 18lb boost. An unintentional mistake I hope Faust http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Check this link for some info on performance of 25lb boost Spitfire MkIX

http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spitfire-IX.html

faustnik
01-23-2006, 11:21 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ICDP:
Do you mean 25lb boost? This is good news, the site posted by Faustnik has quite a bit of info regarding Spitfire testing at 25lb boost. Though I should point out that Faust has linked directly to a test of a Spitfire running at 18lb boost. An unintentional mistake I hope Faust http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Check this link for some info on performance of 25lb boost Spitfire MkIX

http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spitfire-IX.html </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

OOPS! Thank you! Fixed.

AustinPowers_
01-23-2006, 12:11 PM
Rolls-Royce, Ltd
Hucknall
8 October 1943

Spitfire J.L.165 with Merlin 66 at 25 lbs. Boost Pressure
http://www.spitfireperformance.com/jl165rr.html





Aircraft and Armament Experimental Establishment
Boscombe Down
1 Feb 1944

Spitfire IX JL.165
(Merlin 66)

Trials at +25 lb/sq.inch boost
with Rotol 4 blade propeller

http://www.spitfireperformance.com/jl165.html



JL.165 was manufactured at Castle Bromwich as a Spitfire V (Merlin 45) and delivered on March 27, 1943. It was subsequently converted to a LFIX (Merlin 66) at Rolls Royce, Hucknall. Performance trials at Rolls Royce, Hucknall using +25 lbs. boost in October 1943, AAEE for trials 11-11-43, Transfered to Air Service Training 3-6-44, 6 Maintenance Unit 26-10-44, 82 Maintenace Unit 10-11-44, Casablanca 15-1-45, Struck off charge 28-8-47.


Merlin 66 cleared for +25 BOOST operational use 10th March, 1944
http://www.spitfireperformance.com/25lbs_approval.jpg

JG53Frankyboy
01-23-2006, 12:39 PM
very nice to read http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
crossing fingers !


pls, perhaps convince oleg and team to CHANGE the actual Spitfire Mk.IXe and LF.MKIXe (CW) to 25boost performance - and not ad some new Spitfire variants.

BSA 650
01-23-2006, 12:39 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by crazyivan1970:
Ok gang, this is one of those times when your input can make a difference http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif. Information on performance of 28lb boost Spitfire is needed. Soooo, show me what you got. If you have something that for whatever reason cannot be posted here, please PM me and I will provide the e-mail http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


more UFO`s for IL2?, i hope no! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

Capt.England
01-23-2006, 12:43 PM
Ivan,

Which Mk are we talking about? I can scan the info that you need and send it tomorrow. Just let me know here or by PM, and let me know what format type of file that is of most use to the team.

If `Spitfire, the History` can be bettered for stuff about the Spiffy, then I like to see it (this book is 650 pages long, about the plane!).

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

Edit: silly me did not see Spitfire 9 http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

darkhorizon11
01-23-2006, 01:08 PM
Is this is hint for something coming in the next patch??

JtD
01-23-2006, 01:17 PM
I hope to see a 25 lb Spit too if the 28 is gonna make it into the game. And maybe a Focke with raised boost levels, and maybe a Bf-109F-2 with a 20 mm cannon?

Some info of Merlin 66@ 28lb. Did that thing ever make it into serverice?

http://www.spitfireperformance.com/merlin66hpchart.jpg

lrrp22
01-23-2006, 01:29 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JtD:
Some info of Merlin 66@ 28lb. Did that thing ever make it into serverice? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No. The closest thing to a +28 lbs Merlin is the P-51H's V-1650-9 at +29 lbs/90" Hg and ~2240 HP.

LRRP

SUPERAEREO
01-23-2006, 02:31 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JtD:
and maybe a Bf-109F-2 with a 20 mm cannon?
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>


AFAIK no F-2 had a 20mm cannon: F-1 and F-3 had the by then obsolete MG-FF, while the F-2 had the MG.151/15. It was only with the F-4 that the Mg-151/20 made its appearance in the production aircraft.


S!

JG53Frankyboy
01-23-2006, 02:44 PM
well, a lot of 109F-2s were modified with the MG151/20 , was no big deal !
i would more like to sea a G14 with MG151/20 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif - buts that another topic !! so OFFTOPIC here http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif


and Ivan "sure" ment a 25boost Spit 9 - the 28boost was most propably a typo http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
if this 28boost was NO typo, well than , bad choice in my opinion............. the 25 was actually a common modification in service (so far i read here in the forums)

Willey
01-23-2006, 02:52 PM
How about a '42 12lb IX (merlin 60), too - if we get some new stuff? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

This would be the other end http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

SUPERAEREO
01-23-2006, 02:54 PM
You may be right but then again in FB we have the F-4 with an MG.151/20 and a more powerful DB.601 E instead of the DB.601 N, so I don't see much the point for an F-2 with the 20mm.

Totally agree with you regarding the 28lbs/25lbs issue. And the G-14.


S!

Willey
01-23-2006, 03:26 PM
G-10 and G-14 with 20mm would be sweet. And 109F/190D with bombs http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

crazyivan1970
01-23-2006, 03:30 PM
I might made a mistake....25 lbs, you right. And no hints or high hopes. Just pump the info in http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

A.K.Davis
01-23-2006, 06:18 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by crazyivan1970:
I might made a mistake....25 lbs, you right. And no hints or high hopes. Just pump the info in http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Okay, now change the thread title before someone freaks out and goes on a forum rampage. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

ImpStarDuece
01-23-2006, 07:14 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Willey:
How about a '42 12lb IX (merlin 60), too - if we get some new stuff? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

This would be the other end http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Merlin 60 wasn't fitted to production Spitfire Mk IX's as far as I know. It saw some limited service on Wellington VIs in early 1942. All F. Mk. IX served with either a Merlin 61 at +15 overboost, or a Merlin 63/63A at +15 or +18 overboost.

Ideally, to give a representative sample of the Mk IX family, we should have:

mid 1942 (July) - F Mk. IX w/ Merlin 61 @ +15lbs (1,565 peak hp)
early 1943 (March) - F Mk. IX w/ Merlin 63/63A @ +18lbs (1,710 peak hp)
late 1943 (August) - LF Mk. IX w/ Merlin 66 @ +18lbs (1,720 peak hp)
early-mid 1944 (April)- HF Mk. IX w/ Merlin 70 @ +18lbs (1,710 peak hp)
mid-late 1944 (March)- LF Mk. IX w/ Merlin 66 @ +25lbs (2,050 peak hp)
late 1944 (October) - LF Mk. XVI w/ Merlin 266 @ +18lbs (1,720 peak hp)


As well as this you need clipped wing variants for the LF Mk IX and LF Mk. XVI, 'E' wing variants after November 1944, bubbletop canopies after Febuary 1945 for the XVI and versions with the option of an extra 65-75 fuel in rear fuselage tanks and 10 extra gallons in the foward fuselage tanks from mid 1944, or 60 extra gallons in aircraft with the bubbletop canopy http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

JG53Frankyboy
01-23-2006, 07:27 PM
'E'-wings after November 1944 ?
so late ?

ImpStarDuece
01-23-2006, 09:58 PM
Ah, your right. I should stop trusting to memory on these things http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

The 'E' wing was tested in November 1943, but the first operational squadron to fly Spitfires witht he 'E' Wing was 74 squadron, who transitioned in April, 1944.

Most squadrons converted to 'E' wings August through November 1944. 5 squadrons in August, 4 squadrons in September, 5 squadrons in October and 3 squadrons in November.

JtD
01-23-2006, 10:50 PM
Another test report from the same site faustnik already linked, with minor differences:

http://www.spitfireperformance.com/jl165.html

Gibbage1
01-23-2006, 10:56 PM
I want the purple stuff please.

crazyivan1970
01-23-2006, 11:41 PM
Lets stay on the subject please, ok? Gibb dont make me hurt you http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Gibbage1
01-23-2006, 11:44 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by crazyivan1970:
Lets stay on the subject please, ok? Gibb dont make me hurt you http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Um... The "purple stuff" is 150 grade fuel. They colored it purple, and the 100/130 stuff green. Its on the web pages that were posted. Did you even read them? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

crazyivan1970
01-23-2006, 11:51 PM
I cant even crack a joke around here http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif "Lets stay on the subject please, ok" was for those who`s asking for things not related to the subject. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Gibbage1
01-23-2006, 11:55 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by crazyivan1970:
I cant even crack a joke around here http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://www.unityworldhq.org/Images/YakovSmirnoff.jpg

"I love Amerika! Heeeee Heeeee Heeeee"

Kwiatos
01-24-2006, 04:29 AM
It would be cool to get early Spitfire MK IX with Merlin 61 enigne too. MAby is it possible to make it beside these one with 25+ boost? And Fw190 A-4 with 1.42 Ata 2700RPM for good match? These versions no neeed any external changes just only change in performance.

JG53Frankyboy
01-24-2006, 04:53 AM
well a 1942 Spitfire Mk.IXc , the so called Mk.IXA , would at least need a "no pointed" rudder, wouldnt it ? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

luftluuver
01-24-2006, 01:08 PM
Make it a <span class="ev_code_YELLOW">Mk XVI</span>. Will stop some of the crying, maybe.

From what I understand the Mk Vs are a mess with performance and sub marks all screwed up.

ps <span class="ev_code_PINK">Ivan</span>. With all the 25lb threads (many of which you locked), how could you make such an error as saying 28lb? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

Monty_Thrud
01-24-2006, 01:32 PM
OH MY!...i've just wet myself... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

Are those links accessible from Russia..if not i can copy and paste the entire site, if though wishest...no really http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

p1ngu666
01-24-2006, 01:49 PM
just need 25lb mossie too.

having a interceptor style fighter able to keep up with a mossie is just wrong http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

interceptor types in eto = spit, 109, italian aircraft

Fish6891
01-24-2006, 05:34 PM
CrazyIvan

Are you trying to say that Oleg promised to add a flyable Spitfire IX with 25lb boost in the next patch which you promised would be released this coming friday?

La7_brook
01-24-2006, 07:07 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Willey:
G-10 and G-14 with 20mm would be sweet. And 109F/190D with bombs http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE> ya like too see this come

crazyivan1970
01-24-2006, 11:36 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Fish6891:
CrazyIvan

Are you trying to say that Oleg promised to add a flyable Spitfire IX with 25lb boost in the next patch which you promised would be released this coming friday? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Nice try Fish http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Fish6891
01-25-2006, 01:24 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by crazyivan1970:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Fish6891:
CrazyIvan

Are you trying to say that Oleg promised to add a flyable Spitfire IX with 25lb boost in the next patch which you promised would be released this coming friday? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, that is correct Fish. I would also like to gurantee you that all guns are to be desynched http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


AND he's desynching all the guns?! Thanks for the info Ivan!

p1ngu666
01-25-2006, 04:54 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Oleg_Maddox
01-26-2006, 06:10 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Capt.England:
Ivan,

Which Mk are we talking about? I can scan the info that you need and send it tomorrow. Just let me know here or by PM, and let me know what format type of file that is of most use to the team.

If `Spitfire, the History` can be bettered for stuff about the Spiffy, then I like to see it (this book is 650 pages long, about the plane!).

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

Edit: silly me did not see Spitfire 9 http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

We talk about MKIX with 25lbs boost.
I need the info about exact model (with clipped or not wings at list) with tropic or not filter and use in service.

Please send to PF@1c.ru asap this info.

If it match the 3D models that we have and was in Service in the end of the war, we can make it flyable in the next patch.

FA_Whisky
01-26-2006, 06:20 AM
And what about a high boost P51d than too. Tons of data about it and the 3D model is already there....Somewhere on this forum there is a thread about it.

JG53Frankyboy
01-26-2006, 07:29 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Oleg_Maddox:


We talk about MKIX with 25lbs boost.
I need the info about exact model (with clipped or not wings at list) with tropic or not filter and use in service.

Please send to PF@1c.ru asap this info.

If it match the 3D models that we have and was in Service in the end of the war, we can make it flyable in the next patch. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

well, the easy way would be:
take the already in game
Spitfire Mk.IXe &
Spitfire LF.MK.IXe (CW)
and change their flight performance to the 25lb boost standart.

that would leave the Mk.IXc for 1943-mid1944 operations with their 18lb boost performance. and the Mk.IXe for mid1944-1945 operations.
the actual Mk.IXe would anyway need a date correction from (the 4.02 actual 1943) to 1944 - as you can read in this topic http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

if you dont like that idea, wich i think http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif , take nevertheless these two in game models and call them with the prefix "....._Late" or "....._25lb".

i know you like Nymes Spitfire VIII 3Dmodel more than Gibbages MkIX (sry , gibbage, no offence http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif ) , BUT the Mk.IX have already the needed bombs as armamant option. so less work for your team.


another option would be btw name this new Spitfire as Mk.XVI , but i dont know if this variant with its american build Merlin266 flew also with 25lb boost settings ?!

luftluuver
01-26-2006, 08:12 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG53Frankyboy:
another option would be btw name this new Spitfire as Mk.XVI , but i dont know if this variant with its american build Merlin266 flew also with 25lb boost settings ?! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes it did, there is a doc on the Spit performance site that has:

25 sqds of MkIX
5 sqds of MkXIV
5 sqds of MKXVI

given the clearance to use 25lb. (since Kurfurst equates 'clearance' with 'useage' should be no problem. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif)

<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">I suggested renaming the Spit to a Mk XVI earlier</span>. This would make it distinct from the Mk XIs. Afaik the XVI was mostly CW.

Kurfurst__
01-26-2006, 10:52 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG53Frankyboy:
another option would be btw name this new Spitfire as Mk.XVI , but i dont know if this variant with its american build Merlin266 flew also with 25lb boost settings ?! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The MkXVI would not be a good choice. Firstly, the licensed built Packard-Merlin seems to have been only cleared for +21boost, as opposed to the MkIX Merlin 66 at +25 lbs boost. Documentation tells of ignition problems in the end of 1944 with the 266. There's also some dispute wheter the 266 was the same thing as the 66, or had different supercharger gearing.

Also I believe the 3D model has small differences of a late production plane, and it was all built with clipped wings, and was not very numerous compared to the MkIX.

All in all, a +25lbs MkIXe 1945 seems to be a better choice.

luftluuver
01-26-2006, 11:58 AM
Are you blind Kurfurst? Clearance and conversion for 25lb boost was given in Nov 20 1944. The doc was posted in the 25lb boost thread.

http://www.spitfireperformance.com/150grade/150-grade-fuel.html

Since when did numbers produced have any meaning in the game?

p1ngu666
01-26-2006, 12:05 PM
oleg, this is offhand, but the later merlin engines didnt need a filter added on like the earlier merlins, it was already inbulit http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

the early typs have a little intake, while the IX/VIII have a bigger pod, think the filter is housed in the pod.

griffon spits have a larger pod http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

no external differences that i know of between a 18lb spit and a 25lb'er, just one is spanking fast http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

in terms of what to call it, IX and XVI where bulit side by side, think only the engine and screws where different. so what to call it should be based on ingame clarity imo, XVI fits the bill nicely. if copy and paste is avalible, the 4 types c wing, c wing clipped, and the same with e wing would be nice. just 2 etype wings be fine http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

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

josephs1959
01-26-2006, 04:34 PM
Why stop there with the boost for the spitfire? why not rockets in the tail for instant added speed? Remote control shells that you can aim in flight with an increase in explosive power equal to a 105MM shell? (incase you realize you're missing your target) Oh I know, Radar controlled shells that can't miss! Lets see cannons in the tail and on the wing tips aiming outward ( you never know)Blagh!!! blagh!!! blagh!!! Now i know what is meant by SUPERMARINE spitfire.

Fish6891
01-26-2006, 06:11 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by josephs1959:
Why stop there with the boost for the spitfire? why not rockets in the tail for instant added speed? Remote control shells that you can aim in flight with an increase in explosive power equal to a 105MM shell? (incase you realize you're missing your target) Oh I know, Radar controlled shells that can't miss! Lets see cannons in the tail and on the wing tips aiming outward ( you never know)Blagh!!! blagh!!! blagh!!! Now i know what is meant by SUPERMARINE spitfire. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
^^^

Sir, You is wrong.

JtD
01-26-2006, 11:36 PM
So, has anyone sent the required data to Maddox Games?

Or will this offer be ingnored so we can continue with our weekly 10 page whining topics?

I know there are quite a few people here who can provide the data with close to no effort. Please let me know when you do, otherwise I have to get buisy over the weekend - and still might send rubbish.

p1ngu666
01-27-2006, 02:53 AM
jtd, im going to send them this

http://premium1.uploadit.org/pingu666//spit25lbboostfromspitstory.jpg

Slickun
01-27-2006, 08:08 AM
I am excited about all this.

25 pounds Spit!

Yeah BayBee!

nsu
01-27-2006, 08:10 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by FA_Whisky:
And what about a high boost P51d than too. Tons of data about it and the 3D model is already there....Somewhere on this forum there is a thread about it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Yes and the blue side need:

Bf 109 G6/AM with 1800PS Startleistung
Bf 109 G6/DC with 2000PS Startleistung
Bf 109 G6/L with 1700PS Startleistung

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

SlickStick
01-27-2006, 09:29 AM
Please, please, please correct the bomb loadout for the Mk. VIII. It should carry the same payload as a IX.

I thought all late-war IXs and VIIIs were modeled in-game with Merlin 63s only? LFs should have Merlin 66s and HF should have Merlin 70, right? If the Mk. VIII CW we have has a Merlin 66 modeled, wouldn't the +25lb boost be valid for that plane as well?

Franky, you are right. To represent the early IX, it should have the rounded tail of the Mk. V airframe. We only have pointed rudder type IXs, as you stated, which came as a change during the Mk. VIII design.

anasteksi
01-27-2006, 03:26 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by NSU:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by FA_Whisky:
And what about a high boost P51d than too. Tons of data about it and the 3D model is already there....Somewhere on this forum there is a thread about it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Yes and the blue side need:

Bf 109 G6/AM with 1800PS Startleistung
Bf 109 G6/DC with 2000PS Startleistung
Bf 109 G6/L with 1700PS Startleistung

Gruß NSU http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>blue flyers must have those messers... boosted g10 & k4 too..

Brain32
01-28-2006, 04:55 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> blue flyers must have those messers... boosted g10 & k4 too.. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Why, new Spit will have 575-580kph deck speed, on par with G6AS,G10,G14,K4...
If Oleg wants to help us we would welcome some higher altitude fighters(HINT:FW190D13) http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

p1ngu666
01-28-2006, 06:10 AM
indeed brain, similer performance, and time period too http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

p1ngu666
01-28-2006, 06:27 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">The Fw 190D-10 was an experimental version of the D-9 with an engine-mounted MK 108 cannon and two MG 151 cannon in the wing roots. Only two of these were built.

The Fw 190D-11 was powered by the Jumo 213F with MW 50 boost. The fuselage-mounted guns were eliminated, and there were two MG 151s in the wing roots and two MK 108s in the outer wings. Only seven prototypes were built.

The Fw 190D-12 was a fighter-bomber variant, which differed from the D-9 by having a three-stage supercharged Jumo 213F-1 engine rated at 2060 hp for takeoff mounted in a new, more extensively armored cowling. Armanent was one engine-mounted 30-mm MK 108 cannon and two 20-mm MG 151s in the wing roots. Although primarily a ground-attack plane, the D-12 also made an effective fighter and could attain 453 mph at 37,000 feet when MW 50 boost was used. Production began in March 1945 at the Arado and Fieseler plants, but only a few were delivered.

The D-13 differed from the D-12 by having a Jumo 213EB engine and by having a 20-mm engine-mounted MG 151 cannon in place of the 30-mm MK 108 unit. However, only a couple of prototypes were built.

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://www.csd.uwo.ca/~pettypi/elevon/baugher_other/fw190d.html (http://www.csd.uwo.ca/%7Epettypi/elevon/baugher_other/fw190d.html)

37,000 = 11,277.6metres

http://www.cebudanderson.com/yellow10.htm

some nice pictures http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

anasteksi
01-28-2006, 06:37 AM
well it doesn't matter if g10 and newer messers are faster than spit IX if spit can climb, turn and accelerates much better in game. you cannot escape spit if you don't fly to new useless clouds... if you hit to spit's wing with 20mm, spit won't even feel that but if bf109's wing get hit by 20mm it becames unflyable. even some mg hits makes 109 unflyable. same thing with 190. it would be fair if we get some boosted german planes.. but no wi will get do335 which would be wonderfull but it will be banned to servers asap. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif


sorry for the offtopic...

Brain32
01-28-2006, 07:02 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> http://www.csd.uwo.ca/~pettypi/elevon/baugher_other/fw190d.html (http://www.csd.uwo.ca/%7Epettypi/elevon/baugher_other/fw190d.html)

37,000 = 11,277.6metres

http://www.cebudanderson.com/yellow10.htm </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Wow, great links, THX http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif I guess I mixed up D13 with D12... A fast fighter-bomber would be a nice addition to LW ground pounders which are quite limited even now...
EDIT: Even a bombrack for the present Dora woudn't hurt http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

p1ngu666
01-28-2006, 07:09 AM
think the mk108 factory got bombed or something with the supply of mk108s ment they used mg151/20 instead. id rather have the mg151/20 over the mk108 anyways
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

i do wonder how good it would be at high alt in terms of handling, and being able to df abit, ie actual useage cos of those iccle wings

luftluuver
01-28-2006, 09:00 AM
There was more than just a couple of prototype D-13s produced. The one example left (WNr 836017) was assigned to an operational unit. The pilot of this a/c is said to be Maj. Franz Gotz.

Dr Heinz Lang flew a D-13 in a post war mock combat against a Tempest and trounced it.

The prototype D-13s were WNr 350165 and 350167.

Notice the different WNr blocks.

robban75
01-28-2006, 04:59 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by p1ngu666:
think the mk108 factory got bombed or something with the supply of mk108s ment they used mg151/20 instead. id rather have the mg151/20 over the mk108 anyways
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

i do wonder how good it would be at high alt in terms of handling, and being able to df abit, ie actual useage cos of those iccle wings </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The D-13 was good for 770km/h at 9500m, it could probably keep up with other allied fighters in turns at altitude. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Not many were built though. The world famous "Yellow 10" was the 17th built D-13. And as Luftluuver said it fought against a Tempest and managed to outclimb it and engage it in a turning fight from above. Quite impressive, not just because the Tempest was a very capable fighter, but because Yellow 10 didn't use MW50. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

Btw, as I've said earlier, I'm all for a boosted Spit. And I'm really looking forward to the Tempest(awesome and beautiful machine).
But I'd also like to see some boosted late war Antons. As well as a D-13.

JtD
01-29-2006, 01:42 AM
I just sent a whole bunch of info myself, everything that is available from Spitfireperformance.com on the subject has been sent.

The question spitfireperformance.com does not answer is which exact models were used with 25 lb boost. I think all existing 3D models of the Spit IX could be used as 25 lb boost models without making a mistake, the CW Spits more likely. Anyone disagree?

Brain32
01-29-2006, 04:13 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> The question spitfireperformance.com does not answer is which exact models were used with 25 lb boost. I think all existing 3D models of the Spit IX could be used as 25 lb boost models without making a mistake, the CW Spits more likely. Anyone disagree? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Nope http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif But I would like to see the boost on MkIXe non CW http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

p1ngu666
01-29-2006, 10:58 AM
one full and one clipped if possible http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Willey
01-29-2006, 06:19 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Brain32:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> blue flyers must have those messers... boosted g10 & k4 too.. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Why, new Spit will have 575-580kph deck speed, on par with G6AS,G10,G14,K4...
If Oleg wants to help us we would welcome some higher altitude fighters(HINT:FW190D13) http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You have a point there. But nevertheless at least a K-4 2000PS with 611 on the deck should be possible, as well as D-9 with A-Lader (646 on the deck without ETC, but worse above ~5k then the normal ones - similar to the LF Spit 5 thingy). We don't need a boosted version of every single plane IMHO. Also, get that rated altitude of the "G-6/AS" right, it's too low. And give that "P-47D" a name like P-47D-27 late or something like that, and that paddle blade prop of the D-27. It's hardly faster than the non-boosted D-27.

Willey
01-29-2006, 06:25 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Brain32:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> http://www.csd.uwo.ca/~pettypi/elevon/baugher_other/fw190d.html (http://www.csd.uwo.ca/%7Epettypi/elevon/baugher_other/fw190d.html)

37,000 = 11,277.6metres

http://www.cebudanderson.com/yellow10.htm </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Wow, great links, THX http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif I guess I mixed up D13 with D12... A fast fighter-bomber would be a nice addition to LW ground pounders which are quite limited even now...
EDIT: Even a bombrack for the present Dora woudn't hurt http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, D-11 and D-12 would make most sense out of those. More performance (imagine, 2050PS without MW-50/Sondernotleistung!), and better weapons, the one has more guns, the other would be a ground pounder. But yes, we need those loadouts on the existing D-9 ('44 variant would be enough), too.
Also, I'd like the Ta-152C to fill the gap beween Dora and 152H. But that would need a new external model (internal should be the same like in the 152H) with 152 fuselage, 20mm cowling guns and 190D wings.

But this is getting OT http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Willey
01-29-2006, 06:27 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by p1ngu666:
one full and one clipped if possible http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yep, just add one Mk.IXe and one Mk.IXe CW with 25lb boost each.

luftluuver
01-30-2006, 12:48 AM
Willey, 152C did not have a Dora wing. The C had a slightly larger wingspan, 11.0m to 10.5m.

WOLFMondo
02-01-2006, 05:28 AM
Didn't the C also have a different armourment? And a totally different wing to either the Dora or Ta152H?

JG52Karaya-X
02-01-2006, 07:54 AM
Armament for the Ta152C was:
2xMG151/20 in the cowling
2xMG151/20 in the wing roots
1xMk108 firing through the propeller hub

p1ngu666
02-04-2006, 04:48 PM
theres graphs for a lader, but its never been proven it was actully used?

something like 1 plane MAY Have used it, one of the jv44's because it was abit faster than the other dora's.

ta152c didnt see any action, or much production either?
one or two where tested tho.

Bremspropeller
02-05-2006, 02:21 PM
A FEW A-Lader Doras were used in combat (meaning you could count them with two hands at maximum), but I'd rather use the (somewhat limited) time for other, much more important planes...

Gumtree
02-06-2006, 03:49 PM
I have played this game series since its beginning in Sturmovic.I have frequented these forums under different names for about 3 years (keep forgeting login details)I have chased the blue planes all over the skies only to see them get away before I get the clear shot to often.

I have a dream that one day I will get the +25 lb Spit which will keep the Me \ Fw in range for a good killing shot .

Now perhaps it will come!All I can say is that Oleg and his cohorts have given me years and years of enjoyment from the online flying to the arguments that spring in these very forums,often bringing tears to my eyes as yet another trawling foray begins and gets set upon like Seagulls upon cold chips at the beach.

I supose what I am getting at is with this level of support Oleg you make buying BOB a forgon conclusion in my house 8)

Yes not all planes meet the exact specifications of this chart or that chart ,yes some planes are pure fantasy in reguards to actual usage in the battle,but at the end of the day I dont care as I get to fly the virtual sky's at a moment in time that has facinated me since childhood.

Keep up the great work.

HayateAce
02-07-2006, 03:17 AM
Hmm, you are man of misery?

JG53Frankyboy
02-12-2006, 05:12 PM
well, for a unknown reason the 25lb boost Spitfire IX got a "C" armament http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

still belive the "e" armament would be more "logical" . also a Clipped Wing version would be nice.............

Viper2005_
02-12-2006, 05:24 PM
Clipped wings make more sense than an "e" wing.

The wing tips were simple to remove; the ground crew could replace them with wooden blanks on their own initiative. This offered a quick and easy 6-10 mph performance boost, along with increased roll rate.

On the other hand turning a "c" wing into an "e" wing would have been quite hard work!

Since +25 psi was effectively a field mod it therefore seems more important to me that we get clipped wings than "e" armament. Doubtless there were considerable numbers of "c" winged Spitfires in service with +25 boost...

p1ngu666
02-12-2006, 06:50 PM
a e cw maybe a nice comprimise.

i thought a cw 25lb boost would be obivous, be a low alt hot rod..

Grey_Mouser67
02-12-2006, 07:25 PM
I'm not a big fan of the CW versions, especially since the Spit is now so prone to snap stalling...but I was rather suprised with the "c" wing.

Yes, e wing would be better...especially since this is a poor man's MkXIV which had the e wing armament and a CW version would be cool too!

GC_85FG_Thunder
02-21-2006, 04:32 PM
Here's a little info i picked up

Spitfire MkIXs using 150 grade fuel, which allowed the use of 25lb boost produced just over 2000 hp at 4000'. This was used on combat spits flying at low altitude. The griffon could produce over 2400 hp at 25lb boost, but was limited to 21lb boost under normal conditions, it only produced 2200 hp then. All of which was cleared for use and used in combat by march 1944.

jagdmailer
02-21-2006, 09:50 PM
That was C-3 if I recall...

Ta 152C-1 was:

2xMG151/15 in the cowling
2xMG151/15 in the wing roots
1xMk103 30mm firing through the propeller hub

all long-barreled, high-velocity/flat trajectory weapons.....

Deadly...

Jagd

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
Armament for the Ta152C was:
2xMG151/20 in the cowling
2xMG151/20 in the wing roots
1xMk108 firing through the propeller hub </div></BLOCKQUOTE>