Jump to content
Panthera

Spitfire Mk.XIV poll

Should the Spitfire Mk.XIV be added as a collectors plane to IL-2 Bodenplatte?  

250 members have voted

  1. 1. Should the Spitfire Mk.XIV be added as a collectors plane to IL-2 Bodenplatte?

    • Heavens yes! IL-2 BP needs this aircraft!
    • Maybe..
    • Nope, simply not interested in this aircraft.


Recommended Posts

On ‎10‎/‎15‎/‎2018 at 4:59 AM, BlackSix said:

Except K-4 Gruppen in September, you've very strange knowledge in history...

There is no problem to put them in as collector planes, I'd like to see Typhoon, Spit XIV and Ar 234 in BOBP

 

No. K-4s began reaching active units in Oct 1944. First loss was on Oct 19 1944, WNr 330305. Only 16 K-4s (a staffel worth) were produced in Sept '44.

On ‎8‎/‎16‎/‎2018 at 3:25 PM, 56RAF_Talisman said:

From memory, I think it went 18 lbs, then 21 lbs and finally 25 lbs.  Easy to research.  Completely different engine from the IX.  Jeffrey Quill, the famous Spitfire test pilot, said in his book that the XIV was the best fighter version of the Spitfire of the war; and he should know!  Shame that combat sim developers seldom model it.   

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/obituaryjeffrey-quill-1340389.html

 

Happy landings,

 

Talisman

 

P.S.  The XIV was the 2nd TAF's higher altitude air superiority fighter.  

 

18lb, then 25 lb and then 21lb boost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, 56RAF_Talisman said:

Interesting Spitfire XIV combat reports with some good information from March 1945 showing FW 190 (inc Dora) and 109 kills.  They might be good source information for a career builder etc

 

 Interesting. Note the heights - the XIVs were never higher than 12,000ft when they spotted enemy and in some cases much lower. So the idea that the Spitfire XIV should be excluded because it was only a high altitude air superiority fighter is obviously not right. 

Edited by unreasonable

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, unreasonable said:

 

 Interesting. Note the heights - the XIVs were never higher than 12,000ft when they spotted enemy and in some cases much lower. So the idea that the Spitfire XIV should be excluded because it was only a high altitude air superiority fighter is obviously not right. 

 

true. You read 2nd TAF combat reports and you see most combat happened between 5,000-15,000 feet.

 

OTOH, below 18,000 feet, a Tempest V is as fast or faster than a Spit XIV and packs a heavier punch, i.e. 4x20 mm. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Sgt_Joch said:

 

true. You read 2nd TAF combat reports and you see most combat happened between 5,000-15,000 feet.

 

OTOH, below 18,000 feet, a Tempest V is as fast or faster than a Spit XIV and packs a heavier punch, i.e. 4x20 mm. 

Turn and climb not so good though, although Tempest V zoom climb is epic!

For me, the inclusion of the Tempest V is the thing I am most looking forward to in BoBP. 

 

Happy landings,

 

Talisman

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/15/2018 at 10:24 AM, 4./JG26_Onebad said:

 

I'm sorry but if we follow this logic then how many Bf-109 K-4 squadrons were around in September 1944? A big, fat zero. 

All I'm saying, is that if one side gets rare aircraft such as the K-4 or 190 D-9, which were build in fairly low numbers and rare enough that most allied fighter pilots would only ever hear about them, it would make sense to include similar types for the other.

 

Indeed in September production just started, real mass deployment started in October, i.e. about a week after 2 XIV and a similar number of Tempest sqns transferred to the continent in the very end of September. And we are speaking of actual operational deployment of some 150-200 109Ks that were around with operational frontline units by October, hardly insignificant, penny packet numbers. D-9s were deploying in September already, albeit somewhat slower than K-4s iirc. Compare that with two (2) transferred XIV units at the same time. Even if we assume they were full strenght (i.e. 18-20 a/c Sqn), that is like 40 aircraft at best in automn. ''Rare' must be a matter of perspective, but D-9s and K-4s were definietely not 'rare' by any standard.

 

As for buildt in fairly low numbers, 109K production amounted some 1600 (and another 2600 very similar G/K hybrids, the G-10s btw), D-9 production some 1800, 262 production some 1400. That's 7000+ aircraft... and I haven't even counted G-14s and G-14/AS yet. Now, we do not have the very numerous G-10s or the G-14/AS in the sim, because there are probably less manuals and other materials for them than for the K series, and in any case they are very similar to the K is performance, having the same engine and propeller. Basically the K-4 is standing in for those other very numerous 109 high altitude types as well. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, VO101Kurfurst said:

And we are speaking of actual operational deployment of some 150-200 109Ks that were around with operational frontline units by October, hardly insignificant, penny packet numbers.

I guess you won't disagree with adding the P-47M then? Since only about 130 ever served in combat.

 

Fact is, the allies should get at least one late war (performance wise) aircraft and if it can't be the P-47M it should be the Spitfire XIV.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only about 130 ever produced

 

Oh wait, you are already getting the Tempest. That counts a rare, late war, high performance fighter in my book. 

 

Anyway, as far as I go, both the XIV and the P-47M would be nice additions as collectors, but I would prefer other, more iconic types first, like the Typhoon. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How can there be 150-300 K-4s by Oct when only 15 were produced in Sept?.

2 hours ago, VO101Kurfurst said:

And we are speaking of actual operational deployment of some 150-200 109Ks that were around with operational frontline units by October,

 

On Jan1 1945 there was 165 K-4s on hand with the units participating in Bodenplatte. Only 90 actually flew the mission. There was 610 109s on hand for Bodenplatte and K-4s accounted for only 15% of that number that participated in Bodenplatte.

 

G-10 production was 1208

 

If one adds up the number of WKn assigned to the D-9 one will come up with the number 1800. The actual production number is approximately half that number.

 

"In September 1944, 41, 130, 350, and 610 squadrons, led by Wing Commander Colin Gray, made up the Spitfire XIV wing based at Lympne, Kent, their primary role being escorting bombers to Germany. 402 (RCAF) was first to move to the continent, arriving at Antwerp/Deurne, Belgium (B.70) in September followed shortly thereafter by 130 Squadron. These two Spitfire XIV squadrons then joined the Tempests of 80 and 274 Squadrons at Grave, Belgium (B.82) in early October to comprise No 125 Wing, No 83 Group, 2nd TAF before moving to Diest, Holland (B.64) in November. No. 2 and 430 fighter recce squadrons, based on the continent with No 35 Wing, No 84 Group, 2nd TAF, equipped with Spitfire XIVs in November. 350 and 610 Squadrons moved to Evere, Belgium (B.56) during the first week of December, while 41 joined 130 and 402 at Diest. At the end of the month 41, 130, 350 and 610 squadrons, comprising No 125 Wing, moved to Ophoven, Belgium (Y.32). 402 transferred to 126 (RCAF) Wing at Heesch, Holland (B.88) in December, staying there into April." 

 

Edited by MiloMorai

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Spitfire Mk XIV airpower over mainland Europe May 1944.

Number 322 (Dutch) Squadron:  Antwerp, Volkel, Ostend, Calais, Boulogne.

Historical evidence below in the form of extract from Operations Record Book.

 

322-Form541-15May44.jpg

Edited by 56RAF_Talisman
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In Oct 166 K-4s were delivered to units and 8 were lost. For Nov it was 140 and 57. For Dec it was 166 and 152. So 472 delivered out of 885 produced with 152 lost.

 

These are number for the units that participated in Bodenplatte.

As for the 1400 Me262s, around 100 max, usually less, were with operational units at anyone time.

 

What someone forgets, or ignores, it is not the total number produced that are relevant but the actual number with operational units and capable of operations and if the units can be kept at their establishment strength;. The western Allies had no problem doing that while the Germans couldn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, MiloMorai said:

What someone forgets, or ignores, it is not the total number produced that are relevant but the actual number with operational units and capable of operations and if the units can be kept at their establishment strength;. The western Allies had no problem doing that while the Germans couldn't.

 

Exactly. What's the generally accepted number of Me 262s that actually made it into operations, 300-400? That's a far, far cry from the total numbers built. 

 

8 hours ago, VO101Kurfurst said:

Now, we do not have the very numerous G-10s or the G-14/AS in the sim, because there are probably less manuals and other materials for them than for the K series

 

No, it's because the team had to choose a total of 10 initial planes for BoBP - 5 for each side - and the G-10 was just the odd plane out in the final selection. I know this, because I helped the guys on the team come up with that final list. Hopefully one day the G-10 will come.

Edited by LukeFF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LukeFF said:

 

Exactly. What's the generally accepted number of Me 262s that actually made it into operations, 300-400? That's a far, far cry from the total numbers built. 

 

Well what you see to forget - or ignore - is that it is the same case for every fighter. Most went to storage, ready to be issued as replacements, or to create new units.

Sticking How many XIVs were built? Well, about 300 by the end of 1944, with only about 120 issued to units. Even by the wars end, with production totaling some 6-700 or slightly more, you still have but around 150 in operations. How many Mustangs were built, how many made it to operations.... ahh. Boo-hoo, a far cry from the total numbers built.

 

That's entirely normal and was the case with all air forces, unless it was run by lunatics who would dump all fresh aircraft on airfields, where there are no pilots to fly them, no organization to service them and no command structure to control them.

 

1 hour ago, LukeFF said:

No, it's because the team had to choose a total of 10 initial planes for BoBP - 5 for each side - and the G-10 was just the odd plane out in the final selection. I know this, because I helped the guys on the team come up with that final list. Hopefully one day the G-10 will come.

 

Apart of course from the part that there is literally nada for reference on the G-10. Or the G-14/AS. Have fun modelling the thing. What do you want to show the modeler guy, when he asks how to make textures for a G-14/AS copcit? A fraction of the manual here. A blurry photo there. A fraction of a flight performance paper without the conditions noted. Maybe. 

 

Its understandable, because as far as the LW was concerned, it was just weird hybrid, an interim solution to the K, or built only because it simplified logistics and saved time for the factories by not having to retool from G airframes.

 

The 109K on the other hand have complete reference manuals, complete parts manuals, complete drawings, they are all easily and cheaply available commercially, and far more flight performance tests. Modelling the 109K is a rational choice for any flight sim developer. Its far the easiest to make, and also the most interesting for customers as well, being not only different (I know, Gustav canopy never gets old, but still), but also has this air of 'ultimate 109' around it.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, VO101Kurfurst said:

Well what you see to forget - or ignore - is that it is the same case for every fighter. Most went to storage, ready to be issued as replacements, or to create new units.

Sticking How many XIVs were built? Well, about 300 by the end of 1944, with only about 120 issued to units. Even by the wars end, with production totaling some 6-700 or slightly more, you still have but around 150 in operations. How many Mustangs were built, how many made it to operations.... ahh. Boo-hoo, a far cry from the total numbers built.

 

That's entirely normal and was the case with all air forces, unless it was run by lunatics who would dump all fresh aircraft on airfields, where there are no pilots to fly them, no organization to service them and no command structure to control them.

The JGs flying K-4s couldn't even meet their establishment strength of 820 aircraft for Bodenplatte. Only 20% of ES. The other JGs flying 109s during Bodenplatte couldn't meet their authorized strength either.

 

Spitfires with crews were 65% with 20 more pilots than establishment strength. Jan 4 1945

 

The RAF had no problem replacing airplanes to maintain establishment strength.

 

Not all Spitfire XIVs and P-51s built went to ETO squadrons.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, VO101Kurfurst said:

That's entirely normal and was the case with all air forces, unless it was run by lunatics who would dump all fresh aircraft on airfields, where there are no pilots to fly them, no organization to service them and no command structure to control them.

 

So...much like the late-war Luftwaffe then, huh? The vast majority of 262s spent their whole service lives hiding in the trees next to an autobahn, waiting for fuel and pilots that never came, and / or they were bombed into oblivion by the Allies. 

 

5 hours ago, VO101Kurfurst said:

Well what you see to forget - or ignore - is that it is the same case for every fighter. Most went to storage, ready to be issued as replacements, or to create new units.

 

And what you're failing to see is that those Allied planes were ready to go when called upon (such as replacing the losses of the Bodenplatte attack), while the majority of the late-war Luftwaffe was stuck on the ground waiting for the previously-mentioned pilots and fuel. Why do you think JG 7 was never fully operational? 

 

5 hours ago, VO101Kurfurst said:

How many Mustangs were built, how many made it to operations.... ahh. Boo-hoo, a far cry from the total numbers built.

 

A hell of a lot more than 1.98 ata K-4s or Me 262s. Boo hoo indeed.

 

5 hours ago, VO101Kurfurst said:

Apart of course from the part that there is literally nada for reference on the G-10. Or the G-14/AS. Have fun modelling the thing. What do you want to show the modeler guy, when he asks how to make textures for a G-14/AS copcit? A fraction of the manual here. A blurry photo there. A fraction of a flight performance paper without the conditions noted. Maybe. 

 

Or maybe not. You do realize there is an original G-10 in the collection of the NASM, right? Same engines as the K-4, detailed blueprint drawings are available. So, what exactly is the issue here? Answer? There is none.

 

G-14 / AS? Probably not much different than a G-14 cockpit.

Edited by LukeFF
  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, LukeFF said:

G-14 / AS? Probably not much different than a G-14 cockpit. 

 

There was only 1 (one) G-14/AS produced. All others were conversion of G-14s.

 

Luftwaffe April 13 1945, http://www.gyges.dk/Lw ORBAT 13 APR 1945.pdf

Edited by MiloMorai
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No. Later maybe, a nice to have but not relevant to Bodenplatte.   <<<< EDIT My Bad. What I really meant was that it was billed as their high altitude defence fighter whilst Bodenplatte was essentially a low level LW GA mission.

 

What should have been included is the Typhoon. Whilst not as glamorous as the Tempest, three times as many RAF Squadrons in the OOB were Typhoons compared with the Tempest but  I am really looking forward to the Tempest :)

Edited by 56RAF_klem

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, 56RAF_klem said:

a nice to have but not relevant to Bodenplatte.

 

It is entirely relevant to Bodenplatte. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, LukeFF said:

 

It is entirely relevant to Bodenplatte. 

 

And both G-10 and G14/AS could be modelled by adapting the K4 3D-model. AFAIK both G-10 and G14/AS could be using the same 3D base modell but different engines. They look pretty similar from the exterior to me.

 

 

G-10.jpg

G14AS.jpg

 

However, before discussing another german 109 getting into the game, this one should be implemented first:

 

 

XIV.jpg

Edited by sevenless

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are some differences in the 3D model required. Different hatch position on the K-4. Extra access hatches on the G-10 and G-14/AS. Different location of the DF loop. All minor fixes tho.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, sevenless said:

 

And both G-10 and G14/AS could be modelled by adapting the K4 3D-model. AFAIK both G-10 and G14/AS could be using the same 3D base modell but different engines. They look pretty similar from the exterior to me.

 

 

G-10.jpg

G14AS.jpg

 

However, before discussing another german 109 getting into the game, this one should be implemented first:

 

 

XIV.jpg

 

Agreed. If Bodenplatte is the only western release we see then we'll definitely need more allied aircraft to keep it interesting in the long run imo. Some modifications for some of the older German aircraft would be nice as well, like the G6 running 1944 settings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On account of historical relevance YES.

 

Balance, maybe.  

 

262- K4- D9- VS P51- P38- XIV Does seem fair to me . 70% of my time spend ingame i fly germans btw.

 

Do you think it would be clubbbing K4’s ? I am really not so sure. Wouldnt the K4 out accelerate a XIV by a lot ?

Edited by BurBur

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Found this interesting combat report showing a FW 190 destroyed by a Spitfire XIV on the actual day of the operation Bodenplatte attack, 1st January 1945.

 

Note the account of American flak firing at the Spitfire.

 

610-Gaze-1jan45.jpg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gaze's victim was a Fw190D-9 WNr 210205 Blue 16 of 12./JG2 flown by Lt Fritz Swoboda (Stfhr) KIA.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, LukeFF said:

 

It is entirely relevant to Bodenplatte. 

My Bad. What I really meant was that it was billed as their high altitude defence fighter whilst Bodenplatte was essentially a low level LW GA mission.

 

There is a limit to what they will churn out for Bodenplatte and it has already been declared. The Spit XIV can come later.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, 56RAF_klem said:

My Bad. What I really meant was that it was billed as their high altitude defence fighter whilst Bodenplatte was essentially a low level LW GA mission.

 

There is a limit to what they will churn out for Bodenplatte and it has already been declared. The Spit XIV can come later.

 

But the "Bodenplatte" expansion is more than just Bodenplatte, it spans from Market Garden to nearly the end of the war.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/23/2018 at 12:52 PM, Legioneod said:

Fact is, the allies should get at least one late war (performance wise) aircraft and if it can't be the P-47M it should be the Spitfire XIV.

Are you implying the Allied setup lacks a high performance aircraft? I doubt it does - the P-51 and especially the Tempest Mk.V S.2 are very competitive.

For this reason, and because fighter pilots get spoiled by BoBP, I don't think the Spitfire Mk. XIV would be a justified first premium addition. Maybe after the Mitchell Mk. II and the Typhoon are done. Other than that, there is no reason to deny the Spit XIV.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, BurBur said:

 Honestly think the IX is quite obsolete already. 

 

 

It isn´t. Spitfire IXs and XVIs shot down more planes than any other fighter in 2 TAF between 9/44 and VE-Day. In reality german fighters were a) in a huge numerical disadvantage and b) badly trained. This wasn´t the Luftwaffe of 1943 fame and not even the quality of June 44 we see end 44/45.

 

However both factors a) numerical disadvantage and b) pilot quality you obviously don´t have if you play MP, hence MP is a completely artificial environment which has nothing to do with historical realities the guys faced back then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, sevenless said:

 

It isn´t. Spitfire IXs and XVIs shot down more planes than any other fighter in 2 TAF between 9/44 and VE-Day. In reality german fighters were a) in a huge numerical disadvantage and b) badly trained. This wasn´t the Luftwaffe of 1943 fame and not even the quality of June 44 we see end 44/45.

 

However both factors a) numerical disadvantage and b) pilot quality you obviously don´t have if you play MP, hence MP is a completely artificial environment which has nothing to do with historical realities the guys faced back then.

 

Agreed, during the actual operation bodenplatte the IX obviously wasn’t ‘obsolete’ as in useless or ineffective.

 

I meant ‘obsolete’ as in ‘out of date’ compared to the top speed, acceleration, climbrate (engine power) of the K4 and XIV. 

 

Imho the K4 vs XIV is a closer match. 

 

Edited by BurBur

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Legioneod said:

 

But the "Bodenplatte" expansion is more than just Bodenplatte, it spans from Market Garden to nearly the end of the war.

 

Then IMHO it's badly titled, badly conceived and short on aircraft particularly the Typhoon which was a major player throughout that period and, yes, I'd then agree the SpitXIV.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 56RAF_klem said:

 

Then IMHO it's badly titled, badly conceived and short on aircraft particularly the Typhoon which was a major player throughout that period and, yes, I'd then agree the SpitXIV.

 

They have to select one battle to have selection of 10 airplanes make sence. and if you select any other operation betwen sep44 and april 45 they would have to make 4 engine bombers and thats no go, so with bodenplate we get what works in game and aditionaly they can make 5 chapters of battles for career on same map that is not to big.

 

from dd193:

"Operation Market Garden (September 17 – 26, 1944)
Battle of Aachen (October 2 – 21, 1944)
Battle of the Scheldt (October 2 – November 8, 1944)
Operation Queen (November 16 – December 15, 1944)
Operation Watch on the Rhine (December 16 – 25, 1944)
Allied Counter-Offensive (December 26, 1944 – January 25, 1945)
Operation Bodenplatte (January 1, 1945)
Operation Veritable (February 8 – March 10, 1945)
Operation Clarion (February 22 – 23, 1945)
Operation Grenade (February 23 – March 10, 1945)
Operation Plunder (March 23 – 28, 1945)

 

 

As said above, we won't be able to recreate these ground operations in super detail, but the overall situation, mission tasks, home airfields and mission targets will change as they should historically just as you experience with Stalingrad, Moscow and Kuban. This, along with the corresponding features of the Career mode like pilot biographies, squadron histories, newspaper articles, videos, squadron rosters, medals and rank progression will create an authentic experience of flying on the Western Front during the late war period. The whole timeframe will be divided into 5 chapters:

 

Chapter 1: Fighting in Holland (September 17 – October 1, 1944)
Chapter 2: Autumn Offensive (October 2 – December 15, 1944)
Chapter 3: Battle of the Bulge (December 16 – 25, 1944)
Chapter 4: Allied Counter-Offensive (December 26, 1944 – February 7, 1945)
Chapter 5: Battle of the Rhine (February 8 – March 28, 1945)"

 

Typhoon isted tempest would make more sence but then ppl would complain why not tempest and how allied side gets week airplanes and axis strong, spit 14 insted 9 would also be ok but then ppl would complain why not spit9 as it was used in bigger numbers and so on...

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Spitfire IX was a bomb taxi.

Tempest is a low-mid level altitude air superiority  fighter

Spitfire XIV is a mid-high altitude air superiority fighter.

 

Also one must consider the problem of getting proper documentation for the Tempest, so would imagine this would be the same for the Typhoon.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, sevenless said:

 

It isn´t. Spitfire IXs and XVIs shot down more planes than any other fighter in 2 TAF between 9/44 and VE-Day. In reality german fighters were a) in a huge numerical disadvantage and b) badly trained. This wasn´t the Luftwaffe of 1943 fame and not even the quality of June 44 we see end 44/45.

 

However both factors a) numerical disadvantage and b) pilot quality you obviously don´t have if you play MP, hence MP is a completely artificial environment which has nothing to do with historical realities the guys faced back then.

Totally agree that we don't want to simulate air superiority, that is the fundamental reason why a PC combat simulator needs to take account of the technological time line in terms of aircraft matching from opposite sides.

 

The aim is not to re fight the war, LOL.  The developers need to balance the historical aircraft Technological development time line alongside historical numbers of aircraft that took part, because at this stage they are not able to make all the aircraft that took part available.  Any aircraft that historically took part in effective numbers is perfectly valid.  We could have a poll for each and every aircraft that took part and be able to vote yes for all of them.   

 

The Allies were able to continue to field older less well performing aircraft for longer and still be successful because they had air superiority.  Older less well performing aircraft like the Typhoon, possibly the worst RAF fighter of WWII ( https://warfarehistorynetwork.com/daily/wwii/the-hawker-typhoon-1a-1b-worst-raf-fighters-in-wwii/ ),  were employed and not so many of the high performance air superiority aircraft were needed.  But the higher performing aircraft were very much there and played their part in making sure the older types were still viable, even if technologically obsolete.

 

Happy landings,

 

Talisman 

 

4 hours ago, 56RAF_klem said:

 

Then IMHO it's badly titled, badly conceived and short on aircraft particularly the Typhoon which was a major player throughout that period and, yes, I'd then agree the SpitXIV.

I would like to see the Typhoon as well, but I would not vote down the Spitfire XIV just because I would like to see a Typhoon.  I don't understand the logic of doing such a thing.  This poll is not about a choice between different aircraft, it is a poll about eventually seeing the Spitfire XIV as a collectors aircraft, nothing more.  You could always start a Typhoon poll for a collectors aircraft if you want.

 

The Typhoon was possibly the worst RAF fighter of the war, but even so it has it's place.

https://warfarehistorynetwork.com/daily/wwii/the-hawker-typhoon-1a-1b-worst-raf-fighters-in-wwii/

Edited by 56RAF_Talisman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the link: "In early July, Typhoons were diverted to attack Adolf Hitler’s V-1 and V-2 facilities. That same month they pounced on Field Marshal Erwin Rommel’s staff car as he was driving along an open road, seriously injuring the general."

 

It was spitfire IXs from a Canadian squadron, not Typhoons.

 

https://www.tangmere-museum.org.uk/articles/who-shot-rommel

Edited by MiloMorai

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, 56RAF_Talisman said:

The Typhoon was possibly the worst RAF fighter of the war, but even so it has it's place.

https://warfarehistorynetwork.com/daily/wwii/the-hawker-typhoon-1a-1b-worst-raf-fighters-in-wwii/

Typhoon possibly worst RAF fighter? There are far more balanced assessments available (eg: Chris Thomas' books) than that simplistic opinion peice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I voted maybe. I am all for more aircraft, but there are other, maybe more important aircraft i'd like for BoBp as Collector planes..

Namely Typhoon, Mosquito and Arado 234. This scenario is lacking bombers and two-engine aircraft

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, II./JG77_Manu* said:

I voted maybe. I am all for more aircraft, but there are other, maybe more important aircraft i'd like for BoBp as Collector planes..

Namely Typhoon, Mosquito and Arado 234. This scenario is lacking bombers and two-engine aircraft

 

Well, BoK gave us the Yak 1B, the La5FN, the Me109 G6 and the Ju 52 as additional collector planes, so there might be the remote chance that in case of BoBP they also manage to crank out (at least) 4 additional planes. I´d buy all of them you suggested, Typhoon, Mosquito, Arado 234 and of course my favorite the Spit XiV. Maybe we can also hope for a Ju 88 S to fill up the two-engine department a little bit assuming they get the A20 in and work on a non-flyable-AI-only B25 Mitchell. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...