PDA

View Full Version : How good was the Spitfire in reality?



MEGILE
07-17-2007, 10:40 AM
On a scale of 1 - 10.. I give it a 7.5
It would have been 8 if it was better.

MEGILE
07-17-2007, 10:40 AM
On a scale of 1 - 10.. I give it a 7.5
It would have been 8 if it was better.

KraljMatjaz
07-17-2007, 10:45 AM
i wonder how come that german high command was shocked by appearence of and advised pilots against dogfighting with a yak3 under 6km (or so), yet there was never any such suggestion about spitfire. i find the two to be pretty evenly matched in PF below 6k.

3.JG51_BigBear
07-17-2007, 10:46 AM
Finally a rational discussion on the topic.

I give it an 8.21

Monty_Thrud
07-17-2007, 10:48 AM
All the way to eleventeen. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

na85
07-17-2007, 10:51 AM
It depends whether or not the pilot has his flaps bound to a slider, like a cheater.

AKA_TAGERT
07-17-2007, 10:52 AM
Im going with 9.972394759023847502394857487583390220394838784651 68795459972365482100154364554783

3.JG51_BigBear
07-17-2007, 10:53 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by na85:
It depends whether or not the pilot has his flaps bound to a slider, like a cheater. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Um...Yeah! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

faustnik
07-17-2007, 11:11 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Megile:
On a scale of 1 - 10.. I give it a 7.5
It would have been 8 if it was better. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It all depended on your position.

If you were behind an Fw190, it was great to be in a Spitfire. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

If you were in front of an Fw190, it really sucked to be in a Spitfire. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

JG4_Helofly
07-17-2007, 11:12 AM
7.5 IMO

faustnik
07-17-2007, 11:13 AM
Oh...8.3.

Low_Flyer_MkVb
07-17-2007, 11:14 AM
Eleven.

ploughman
07-17-2007, 11:16 AM
I'd buy it a beer, that good.

TgD Thunderbolt56
07-17-2007, 11:17 AM
I've only seen a few perfect 10's and they didn't have mg's or propellers...As for the Spit series? somewhere around 8.

TheBandit_76
07-17-2007, 11:17 AM
Spitfire wasn't that good, I mean, the wings are dumb.

GBrutus
07-17-2007, 11:23 AM
Well, during the Battle of Britain, even if a German pilot was downed by a Hurricane they still claimed it was a Spitfire to save face. So if it could shoot down the Luftwaffe without actually being there then I would say it's a pretty handy machine.

So 9.8 from me. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

SeaFireLIV
07-17-2007, 11:34 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by 3.JG51_BigBear:
Finally a rational discussion on the topic.

I give it an 8.21 </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Rational?

"On a scale of 1 - 10.. I give it a 7.5
It would have been 8 if it was better."

Riiight.

Large pool of water with angler and fishes come to mind.

MEGILE
07-17-2007, 11:36 AM
In game results:

http://img69.imageshack.us/img69/6131/aaaacz3.jpg

Xiolablu3
07-17-2007, 11:38 AM
Mk1 - 10 - Joint best in the world with Me109

MkV - 7.0 - 109F4 better and Fw190 outclassed it

MkIX - 8.5 - Great performer for 1943

MkVIII - 9.0 As IX but with added range and better airframe.

MkXIV - 9.5 - Amazing performer for 1944, however the Jets stop it getting a 10. Its just not 'the best' anymore like the Mk1 was.

Dtools4fools
07-17-2007, 11:39 AM
For looks I would give it a 8.

For what it is maybe a 3 or 4. Reasons:

- not very reliable.
- maintance nightmare outside of UK due to lack of spare parts.
- no all weather capabilitiy due to open cockpit.
- small, cramped cockpit.
- engine to weak, top speed not competitive.

Spitfire Mk III (http://www.swaqvalley.com/Blueprints/1967_Triumph_Spitfire_Mk_III_low.jpg)


*****

edited for spalling..
****

MEGILE
07-17-2007, 11:39 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
Mk1 - 10 - Joint best in the world with Me109

MkV - 7.0 - 109F4 better and Fw190 outclassed it

MkIX - 8.5 - Great performer for 1943

MkVIII - 9.0 As IX but with added range and better airframe.

MkXIV - 9.5 - Amazing performer for 1944, however the Jets stop it getting a 10. Its just not 'the best' anymore like the Mk1 was. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Source plz.

3.JG51_BigBear
07-17-2007, 11:41 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by 3.JG51_BigBear:
Finally a rational discussion on the topic.

I give it an 8.21 </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Rational?

"On a scale of 1 - 10.. I give it a 7.5
It would have been 8 if it was better."

Riiight.

Large pool of water with angler and fishes come to mind. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

sar·casm : A form of irony in which apparent praise conceals another, scornful meaning

MEGILE
07-17-2007, 11:46 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by 3.JG51_BigBear:


sar·casm : A form of irony in which apparent praise conceals another, scornful meaning </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

plz don't feed the trolls.

Xiolablu3
07-17-2007, 11:53 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Megile:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
Mk1 - 10 - Joint best in the world with Me109

MkV - 7.0 - 109F4 better and Fw190 outclassed it

MkIX - 8.5 - Great performer for 1943

MkVIII - 9.0 As IX but with added range and better airframe.

MkXIV - 9.5 - Amazing performer for 1944, however the Jets stop it getting a 10. Its just not 'the best' anymore like the Mk1 was. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Source plz. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

My head? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

The point is that the SPitfire was always near the top of rung, either in its MkV version or MkXIV. SO that puts it at least above 7/10 for each version.

Then you just have to work out the pros and cons of each mark versus other competing WW2 fighters. MkV comes out worst (A few better planes around) , Mk1 the best (joint best in the world) IMO.

FOr example in 1941 the FW190 gets 10, the Me109F4 gets 9.0, the SPitfire Vb gets 7.0. Spitfire Vc gets 7.5, much better armament, more ammo and bombs.

slipBall
07-17-2007, 12:00 PM
I'm gonna go with the goose step girls on this one...V V

DKoor
07-17-2007, 12:03 PM
7,5

Chumley-Warner
07-17-2007, 12:08 PM
I say.

Since we aren't speaking German today, Mr Cholmondley-Warner would have to rate the good olde spitty with.

8 out of 10

It lost 2 after a dreadful encounter with a cigar and a delightful little filly from Hemel Hempstead. Took nearly a week to calm the poor child. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif

ha ha ha, what what.

3.JG51_BigBear
07-17-2007, 12:20 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Chumley-Warner:
I say.

Since we aren't speaking German today, Mr Cholmondley-Warner would have to rate the good olde spitty with.

8 out of 10

It lost 2 after a dreadful encounter with a cigar and a delightful little filly from Hemel Hempstead. Took nearly a week to calm the poor child. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif

ha ha ha, what what. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif
Couldn't have said it better myself.

faustnik
07-17-2007, 12:40 PM
http://pages.sbcglobal.net/mdegnan/_images/SpitGoodness.gif

MEGILE
07-17-2007, 12:41 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Chumley-Warner:
I say.

Since we aren't speaking German today, Mr Cholmondley-Warner would have to rate the good olde spitty with.

8 out of 10

It lost 2 after a dreadful encounter with a cigar and a delightful little filly from Hemel Hempstead. Took nearly a week to calm the poor child. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif

ha ha ha, what what. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

We got a live one!

Monty_Thrud
07-17-2007, 12:44 PM
I think you need to get AKA Tagert on that graph faustnik...i smell a hamster.. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif

faustnik
07-17-2007, 12:45 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Monty_Thrud:
I think you need to get AKA Tagert on that graph faustnik...i smell a hamster.. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Is correct!!!! Be sure!

ploughman
07-17-2007, 12:50 PM
Some one call LF_Vb, tell him to bring graphs.

JG4_Helofly
07-17-2007, 12:55 PM
Great Graph Faustnik http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif
Just the green line is a bit too high http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

The early series of spitfires were very good and among the best of its time. Then there is a depression with early spit V and spit IX 61. With the new spit IX 66 and later versions , the plane was again competitive, but it had a big handicap compared to other later war fighters: Speed. The plane was still a good turner and climber but simply too slow and not very manoeuvrable at high speed ( ability to change direction quickly).

3.JG51_BigBear
07-17-2007, 01:05 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by faustnik:
http://pages.sbcglobal.net/mdegnan/_images/SpitGoodness.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

We need Tagert to make another chart comparing this valuable data with in-game performance.

Richardsen
07-17-2007, 01:49 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
Mk1 - 10 - Joint best in the world with Me109

MkV - 7.0 - 109F4 better and Fw190 outclassed it

MkIX - 8.5 - Great performer for 1943

MkVIII - 9.0 As IX but with added range and better airframe.

MkXIV - 9.5 - Amazing performer for 1944, however the Jets stop it getting a 10. Its just not 'the best' anymore like the Mk1 was. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Agree, but the LF Vb,c should have raised the Mark V close to an 8.
The LF Vb was among the best Spits at low altitude.

Friendly_flyer
07-17-2007, 02:01 PM
Oleg, we need a patch, or some news on BoB NOW!

AKA_TAGERT
07-17-2007, 02:06 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by faustnik:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Monty_Thrud:
I think you need to get AKA Tagert on that graph faustnik...i smell a hamster.. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Is correct!!!! Be sure! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Disagree 100%!

I took the data from your graph and re-ploted it for you.. Not sure where you made your mistakes.. but this is how it should have looked..

http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/STFU/FUGRAPH/IGOTYOURGRAPHRIGHTHERE.jpg

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

MB_Avro_UK
07-17-2007, 02:09 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Chumley-Warner:
I say.

Since we aren't speaking German today, Mr Cholmondley-Warner would have to rate the good olde spitty with.

8 out of 10

Welcome 'Chumley-Warner' to the asylum...I suspect that you will fit in well here http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

You'll be saying something about women knowing their place soon....

Best Regards,
MB_Avro.

It lost 2 after a dreadful encounter with a cigar and a delightful little filly from Hemel Hempstead. Took nearly a week to calm the poor child. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif

ha ha ha, what what. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

3.JG51_BigBear
07-17-2007, 02:14 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by faustnik:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Monty_Thrud:
I think you need to get AKA Tagert on that graph faustnik...i smell a hamster.. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Is correct!!!! Be sure! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Disagree 100%!

I took the data from your graph and re-ploted it for you.. Not sure where you made your mistakes.. but this is how it should have looked..

http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/STFU/FUGRAPH/IGOTYOURGRAPHRIGHTHERE.jpg

SAVVY? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

Low_Flyer_MkVb
07-17-2007, 02:15 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Ploughman:
Some one call LF_Vb, tell him to bring graphs. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Here you go...

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y231/Low_Flyer/Chart2.jpg

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y231/Low_Flyer/Chart1.jpg

Got a write-up from some Lufty technical specialist somewhere, if you think it would help.

MEGILE
07-17-2007, 02:19 PM
Cherry picking Kurfurst would be proud of.

Low_Flyer_MkVb
07-17-2007, 02:20 PM
I took his cherry years ago http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Chumley-Warner
07-17-2007, 02:21 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by MB_Avro_UK:

Welcome 'Chumley-Warner' to the asylum...I suspect that you will fit in well here http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

You'll be saying something about women knowing their place soon....

Best Regards,
MB_Avro.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Indeed.

It is vital to the very fabric of civilised society that women understand their role within said societal environs.

May I thank you for the gracious manner of acceptance within this fine establishment.

Long may she sail.

Ha ha ha, what what.

faustnik
07-17-2007, 02:47 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by faustnik:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Monty_Thrud:
I think you need to get AKA Tagert on that graph faustnik...i smell a hamster.. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Is correct!!!! Be sure! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Disagree 100%!

I took the data from your graph and re-ploted it for you.. Not sure where you made your mistakes.. but this is how it should have looked..

http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/STFU/FUGRAPH/IGOTYOURGRAPHRIGHTHERE.jpg

SAVVY? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

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

Abbeville-Boy
07-17-2007, 03:20 PM
spit was the schnizzel!

BGs_Ricky
07-17-2007, 03:34 PM
Ď€^2