News of our Beloved Spitfire?

[Bullets]

Will we be getting the Spit in the next patch? 

[Tuesday]

Don't think so, I believe the scheduled release date is in June.

[71st_AH_Mastiff]

June is the next release for the Spit but as we were ferring them to the front via alaska, china held us up at the border so it will be awhile longer. 

[ShamrockOneFive]

If the original schedule holds... IL-2 in May and Spitfire in June.

[Tag777]

Well, according to some pictures and info obtained from internet http://lend-lease.airforce.ru/english/articles/spit/ , I do not think they will give us the clipped wing Spit. Reason is that the Spits provided to the Russians had regular wing tips according to the few pictures available. Which is sad, because "below 6000 ft the clipped wing MkVb was as fast as 109G and faster than FW 190" (source: Spitfire Mark V aces 1941-1945 p17 - Osprey Aircraft of the Aces N16). 

[Livai]

I bet they still try to solve the complex Question how to make the beloved Spitfire Mirror flawless.............  

[III/JG53Frankyboy]

Well, according to some pictures and info obtained from internet http://lend-lease.airforce.ru/english/articles/spit/ , I do not think they will give us the clipped wing Spit. Reason is that the Spits provided to the Russians had regular wing tips according to the few pictures available. Which is sad, because "below 6000 ft the clipped wing MkVb was as fast as 109G and faster than FW 190" (source: Spitfire Mark V aces 1941-1945 p17 - Osprey Aircraft of the Aces N16). 

they would also need the cropped supercharger Merlin to do so !

It was the engine that meade the Spit so fast down low, not the wings..........

I am not sure the soviets got LF Merlin engines..........i doubt it actually

Edited April 25, 2017 by III/JG53Frankyboy

[Tag777]

Undoubtedly. The clipped wings gave the Spit a better roll rate. That is why they called the LF V "the clipped, cropped and clapped Spitty!!" (referring to its wings, supercharger, and age  ).

[Trinkof]

If I recall correctly some pilots and historan described the malta duel spit V vs Mc 202 the most balanced "duel" of the war, the macchi being a better flyer by a small margin while the spit had better firepower...

 

Regarding Macchi in game (which I like a lot...) and comparing it with any yak, I guess it is safe to assume spit V will be completly useless compared to a ak 1b, unless above 5k.

[CIA_Yankee_]

If I recall correctly some pilots and historan described the malta duel spit V vs Mc 202 the most balanced "duel" of the war, the macchi being a better flyer by a small margin while the spit had better firepower...

 

Regarding Macchi in game (which I like a lot...) and comparing it with any yak, I guess it is safe to assume spit V will be completly useless compared to a ak 1b, unless above 5k.

 

 

Hardly. We can probably expect the Spit V to do better than the Mig 3, which is still quite usable in any map. We're hardly talking about the P-40 here, after all

 

The Spit's not a ponderous brick that barely maneuvers. It's performance will likely not match the Yak-1b or its contemporary german competition, to be sure, but it's still a high performance fighter, and I'm sure plenty of pilots will be able to make good use of it. And for those of us who mostly fly for the VVS, I'm sure it will be an interesting change to have powerful wing weapons and good cockpit instrumentation (which is also something the P-39 will provide, of course).

[Trinkof]

Hardly. We can probably expect the Spit V to do better than the Mig 3, which is still quite usable in any map. We're hardly talking about the P-40 here, after all

 

The Spit's not a ponderous brick that barely maneuvers. It's performance will likely not match the Yak-1b or its contemporary german competition, to be sure, but it's still a high performance fighter, and I'm sure plenty of pilots will be able to make good use of it. And for those of us who mostly fly for the VVS, I'm sure it will be an interesting change to have powerful wing weapons and good cockpit instrumentation (which is also something the P-39 will provide, of course).

Just fly the mc 202 .... Vs a yak in game.... And think the spit V as an equal of the mc202 as descrbed by pilots from both sides .... Then you will probably have a guess spit V and yak will compare IN GAME. Being a huge fan of the mc202, the comparison is not really favorable to the macchi .... Not at all.

[senseispcc]

I bet they still try to solve the complex Question how to make the beloved Spitfire Mirror flawless.............

 

All Spitfires where not equiped with a miror, interior or exterior, far from it. 

Edited April 28, 2017 by senseispcc

[CIA_Yankee_]

Just fly the mc 202 .... Vs a yak in game.... And think the spit V as an equal of the mc202 as descrbed by pilots from both sides .... Then you will probably have a guess spit V and yak will compare IN GAME. Being a huge fan of the mc202, the comparison is not really favorable to the macchi .... Not at all.

 

By all accounts the Spitfire was a more maneuverable aircraft than the 109, and I imagine this will be preserved in the BoK planeset. I can't imagine any sim that would somehow depict the Spit as a terrible turn fighter. Being an older model, the Spit Vb will definitely be outclimbed and slower than the 109/190, but that's not very different from how things are right now with the russian planeset (except for the Yak-1b, which achieves decent parity).

 

Conservative 109 pilots who don't let themselves be caught in turning fights will have a significant edge, but pilots who let fights go horizontal will be giving the Spit Vb the advantage. This is the same dynamic we see today between the Yak-1 and the 109F4.

 

My main point here is that we are not looking at another P-40. The Spit isn't a brick that cannot climb or turn, whose only advantage is diving. It is a valid dogfighter, but like most russian planes is outclassed in the vertical. This is nothing new to VVS pilots, and does not make it useless.

 

One thing to wonder is how it will compare with the P-39. What niche will the Spit V fill that the P-39 doesn't (aside from sheer purtiness *grin*).

[-TBC-AeroAce]

Im no expert on this matter but I seem to remember the P39 being a little bit of a handful. I assume it will not be able to turn with the same level of finesse as the spit. No idea about the rest. P39 is possibly a better diver?

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

I don't have a reference in front of me but if '46 is anything to compare to the initial turn was very good but couldn't be sustained. Dive speed was also very good.

[DD_Arthur]

Im no expert on this matter but I seem to remember the P39 being a little bit of a handful. I assume it will not be able to turn with the same level of finesse as the spit. No idea about the rest. P39 is possibly a better diver?

 

  Upon his appointment as RAF Liaison Officer to the USAAF 100th. Fighter Wing;

 

As we wandered around the local area...Major de Fehr explained that Wing headquarters had only a single Spitfire and a few light aircraft to fly but others were expected by the day.

 

Unhappily it was rumoured that they might be getting a Bell P.39 (to me an Airacobra), in which case he, de Fehr, would immediately put in for a transfer, as the P.39 was the 'darnedest aircraft he had ever flown'.  Not only could you never keep the thing serviceable but also in certain conditions of flight it would tumble.  No Kidding!  It would actually go 'ass over tit', he would swear to God!  He knew because it had happened to him.

 

I found that story a little difficult to swallow, but made no mention of my doubts at the time.

 

   From "The Silver Spitfire" by Tom Neil.

Edited April 28, 2017 by DD_Arthur

[BlitzPig_EL]

I'm sure we could trade pilot anecdotes about the P39 all day long.  Chuck Yeager actually liked it, as did  Alexander Pokryshkin (obviously).

 

Unlike the Spitfire, it was more of an expert's plane because of it's very different configuration, and was, like the P40, hampered by it's lack of high altitude performance, owning to a mind numbing decision by the Army Air Corps to delete the turbocharger it was originally intended to have in it's design role as a high altitude bomber interceptor, and re shape the Airacobra into an Army cooperation type.

 

In any case I feel it will be an interesting plane to fly, and offer some much needed diversity of choice for the sim, and in good hands should do quite well.

[Riderocket]

I flew the P39 alot in 1946, I find its a good turn fighter, but only if you avoid rolling.

 

Do not try to perform rolling scissors, or any rolling maneuver really, like that quote above says "It would actually go 'ass over tit'"

 

Basically, when in a turn fight, if you roll the plane the back end would slide out and it'll tumble stall then flat spin.

 

You gotta keep the P39 very coordinated to keep her steady.

 

Even the manual says, avoid rolling maneuvers and inverted loops! (Not sure why inverted loops, most pilots cannot handle such maneuvers anyway)

[CIA_Yankee_]

I'm sure we could trade pilot anecdotes about the P39 all day long.  Chuck Yeager actually liked it, as did  Alexander Pokryshkin (obviously).

 

Unlike the Spitfire, it was more of an expert's plane because of it's very different configuration, and was, like the P40, hampered by it's lack of high altitude performance, owning to a mind numbing decision by the Army Air Corps to delete the turbocharger it was originally intended to have in it's design role as a high altitude bomber interceptor, and re shape the Airacobra into an Army cooperation type.

 

In any case I feel it will be an interesting plane to fly, and offer some much needed diversity of choice for the sim, and in good hands should do quite well.

 

As long as it doesn't have the P-40's abysmal energy capabilities, and terrible engine restrictions, it should be interesting. Sad that it doesn't perform well at high altitude, but then it's not like russians aren't used to focusing on flying cover for attack airplanes down on the deck.

[Tag777]

According to Pokryshkin, and other Russian aces, the p-39 was equal in speed and better in the ability to turn to any German fighter of the time (at low altitude, obviously). But he asserted that the German pilots tended to enter into vertical fights, thinking that they would retain their advantage over Yaks and Lags up to that point. Unfortunately for them, the p-39 climbed as well as the 109s and 190s. Let's see how that fact is reflected in the game  . I can not wait for have the Spit and the p-39 among my planes  .

[BlitzPig_EL]

Well, the P39 didn't climb as well as a Bf 109, that's for sure, though it's mid altitude (16,000ft.) speeds are pretty good.

[-=PHX=-SuperEtendard]

Maybe with very high boost (50"-56"), giving the Allison some pretty high HP levels I guess the P-39 could climb with the 109s... hopefully the -63 engine will have 5 min limit at this emergency setting, according to the manual.

[=EXPEND=Dendro]

EVERYTHING happens on the deck in this game.... if the spit is anything similar to the yak1 then it will still help the Reds dominate the ground pounding. As long as it can turn like the yak which seems it will be the case then it will produce a lot of flailing 109s low and slow on the deck which the reds just love!

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

Well, the P39 didn't climb as well as a Bf 109, that's for sure, though it's mid altitude (16,000ft.) speeds are pretty good.

Not the models we have now but the Q series seems to be almost on par with the Gustav in many respects.

[Finkeren]

Not the models we have now but the Q series seems to be almost on par with the Gustav in many respects.

Apart form high altitude speed, the Q-5 was every bit the performer the mid-war 109s were.

[CIA_Yankee_]

EVERYTHING happens on the deck in this game.... if the spit is anything similar to the yak1 then it will still help the Reds dominate the ground pounding. As long as it can turn like the yak which seems it will be the case then it will produce a lot of flailing 109s low and slow on the deck which the reds just love!

 

You fail to understand the magnitude of the danger the LW faces.

 

As they finally see a Spitfire, they will be so entranced by its graceful lines and sheer schmexyness that even P-40s will be bagging hapless, besotted 109s.

 

Or, more seriously, you're probably right. Personally I'm more looking forward to having actual decent cockpit instrumentation. OMG, an artificial horizon!

[Riderocket]

I wonder how much the Negative G's will effect the spitfire fuel flow.

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

Shouldn't affect it much. The "Miss Schilling" carb fix was implemented on the Vb already.

Edited May 4, 2017 by II/JG17_HerrMurf

[Tag777]

I asked to the developers if the engine would have the RAE restrictor with no success. Probably is assumed it will have, taking into account that was 1943 when the plane was provided to the Russians.

[novicebutdeadly]

Maybe the devs will allow you to change the engine in the Spitfire to be competitive.. ;-)

https://defenceoftherealm.files.wordpress.com/2014/11/spitfire-db605-3.jpg

Edited May 5, 2017 by novicebutdeadly

[Finkeren]

Maybe the devs will allow you to change the engine in the Spitfire to be competitive.. ;-)

 

https://defenceoftherealm.files.wordpress.com/2014/11/spitfire-db605-3.jpg

A reverse Buchon! Awesome.

[Herne]

I was just thinking about the conversation earlier in the thread regarding the speed of the spit. Is it possible that there may be some confusion between MPH and Knots ? (Nautical Miles) 

 

If so then then the spit should possibly be faster than represented in game

[Herne]

This was an interesting read. particularly the combat trials and tactical comparisons.

 

http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit14afdu.html

[6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann]

Fitting a Spit with Daimler Benz --> Awesome

Fitting a 109 with a Merlin --> Abomination

Edited May 11, 2017 by 6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann

[Feathered_IV]

Fitting a Spit with Daimler Benz --> Awesome

 

That, is the most appalling thing I have ever read on the internet.

 

MODERATORS!!!!!!!!!

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

Not to mention that one of them made the aircraft a better performer while the other did the contary.

[6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann]

109 with Stuka Engine --> Dangerous

 

Edited May 11, 2017 by 6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann

[AndyJWest]

109 with Stuka Engine --> Fearsome

I think the word you are looking for is 'dangerous' - for the pilot. To quote Wikipedia:

The S-199 continued to use the Bf 109G airframe but, with none of the original engines available, an alternative engine had to be used. It was decided that as a replacement for the original engine, the aircraft would use the same (Junkers Jumo 211 F) engine and propeller as the Heinkel He 111 bomber. The resulting combination of parts was an aircraft with extremely poor handling qualities. The substitute engine with the propeller lacked the responsiveness of the Daimler-Benz unit and the torque created by the massive paddle-bladed propeller made control very difficult. This, in combination with the 109's narrow-track undercarriage, made landings and takeoffs extremely hazardous.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avia_S-199

Edited May 11, 2017 by AndyJWest

[Bullets]

Spit is next :D wooohoooo

[6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann]

 

 

I think the word you are looking for is 'dangerous'

Corrected