Jump to content
HarleyDavidson

Spit MK XIV coming?

Recommended Posts

17 hours ago, sevenless said:

 

They are way too slow at producing collector planes. They lose a lot of money with that.

quality over quantity! ;)

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, OrLoK said:

quality over quantity! ;)

 

I know I know. Nevertheless a little acceleration wouldn´t hurt their business.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, OrLoK said:

quality over quantity! ;)

 

Or they could develop planes that are easier and quicker to research and develop.

 

For example, we need some light non-combat planes for the other nations to go along with the Po-2.

 

Aeronca_L-3B_Grasshopper_USAF.jpgboxart.jpg

 

Sell'm in a pack. Make an extra buck. 😊

Edited by Motherbrain
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And add an Artillery Spotting feature like RoF and thy would be a great addition.

 

Also a FR Mk XIVe, to get back on topic, if they add a photo recon capability, again like RoF.

Share this post


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

 

Or they could develop planes that are easier and quicker to research and develop.

 

For example, we need some light non-combat planes for the other nations to go along with the Po-2.

 

Aeronca_L-3B_Grasshopper_USAF.jpgboxart.jpg

 

Sell'm in a pack. Make an extra buck. 😊

 

Gimme an L-4 with bazookas!

 

https://lostgallery.blogspot.com/2009/01/piper-cub-with-bazookas-mounted.html

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


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

 

They are way too slow at producing collector planes. They lose a lot of money with that.

They have a problem of giving more then 10 airplanes in DLC 😄 so not mutch time to make collectable stuff

In bobp its not 10+1Ai but its basicly 16 +1ai and they did u-2 in same time. I would like also 2x extra collectable airplane every year or 6 months but it wont happend when they give them for free in main DLC 😄

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 71st_AH_Rob_XR-R said:

Also a FR Mk XIVe, to get back on topic, if they add a photo recon capability, again like RoF.

 

Oh yes! FR planes would be great and also could be integrated in the career mission structure. AFAIK we have the rare intercept recce plane mission already.

 

14 minutes ago, 77.CountZero said:

They have a problem of giving more then 10 airplanes in DLC 😄 so not mutch time to make collectable stuff

In bobp its not 10+1Ai but its basicly 16 +1ai and they did u-2 in same time. I would like also 2x extra collectable airplane every year or 6 months but it wont happend when they give them for free in main DLC 😄

 

If they would be outsourcing the collector plane production whenever possible they would have the necessary time for the core planes necessary for the game modules. U2V worked as an outsourcing project, other planes will work also. They only need to scale up the production facilities 😁. I have 8 collector plane candidates on my personal laundry list for BoBP alone 😎

Edited by sevenless

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm all for new planes but I suspect it's not as "quick" and easy as you guys think it is.

 

if it were then we'd have the Pacific Theatre by now.

 

I know more detail is available for other aircraft but that doesn't make the process any less time consuming or costly.

 

I want all the plane they can throw at me but we gotta give em time, which is what it takes.

 

I'm sure they'd like the profits too!

Share this post


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

Spit XIV with 25lb was short lived and iirc never saw operational use. 21lb boost was the boost used operationally. Postwar the 25lb was used on the Griffon used on the Shackletons.

 

It’s less top-end speed, more acceleration and rate of climb, coupled with sustaining speed while manoeuvring. The airframe was not much heavier than a IX but the added hp made a difference in the power-loading as it does with the G-14 vs. K-4 vs. K-4 special power version.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we get the XIV then I hope for the regular high-back rather than the bubble-top, the later only appeared in '45 (and not many of them  either) so would only be usable for a small portion of the BoBP campaign time frame whereas the former would be applicable for the whole campaign.
If the devs do bring us photo-recon, then something like an FR.IXc (armed), PR.XI or PR.XIX (unarmed) would be options, not to mention Mozzies and Mustang Is, as well as the F-6 for the US.

Share this post


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

If we get the XIV then I hope for the regular high-back rather than the bubble-top, the later only appeared in '45 (and not many of them  either) so would only be usable for a small portion of the BoBP campaign time frame whereas the former would be applicable for the whole campaign.

 

I´m with you on that:

 

 

41 sqd Spit XIV.jpg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

XIV would be fine but Typhoon would be better and Mosquito would waaaay better.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, CUJO_1970 said:

XIV would be fine but Typhoon would be better and Mosquito would waaaay better.

 

All of them would be best!

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, 71st_AH_Rob_XR-R said:

And add an Artillery Spotting feature like RoF and thy would be a great addition.

 

Also a FR Mk XIVe, to get back on topic, if they add a photo recon capability, again like RoF.


A MK-14 ok
A MK-14E  ok even if it's numbers were really low, like really really really really low....
A FR-14 ok , even if it's numbers were really low, like really really low....
A FR-14E...Nope as there was only ONE that was assigned to a squadron(414)  in the WWII timeframe.
😁

Share this post


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

Yes, just yes!

 

17198786616_744fc6f24f_b.jpg

That's my favourite spit,  seen it many times, sounds like a mk9, but with the volume turned up to 11😎

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, JV69badatflyski said:


A MK-14 ok
A MK-14E  ok even if it's numbers were really low, like really really really really low....
A FR-14 ok , even if it's numbers were really low, like really really low....
A FR-14E...Nope as there was only ONE that was assigned to a squadron(414)  in the WWII timeframe.
😁

 

This is the problem with gauging aircraft applicability, do you take:

- Aircraft produced

- Aircraft delivered

- Aircraft reported on strength by operational units

- Aircraft on unit strength in the specific map area

- % of types in the specific map area

- Aircraft availability in specific map area

- Aircraft likely to be operational over the specific map area

 

Depending upon the position that you take, the relevance of an aircraft changes significantly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, EAF19_Marsh said:

 

This is the problem with gauging aircraft applicability, do you take:

- Aircraft produced

- Aircraft delivered

- Aircraft reported on strength by operational units

- Aircraft on unit strength in the specific map area

- % of types in the specific map area

- Aircraft availability in specific map area

- Aircraft likely to be operational over the specific map area

 

Depending upon the position that you take, the relevance of an aircraft changes significantly.

 

I think another valuable point is the question of whether this specific plane can be one of the unique selling points of the game. By example the Me 262, the P-38, the P-47 and the Tempest are at present such unique selling points. The Spitfire XIV, if they decide to release it, or an Arado 234, will also become unique selling points for the game and thus can work as very potent attractors for new users.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, sevenless said:

 

I think another valuable point is the question of whether this specific plane can be one of the unique selling points of the game. By example the Me 262, the P-38, the P-47 and the Tempest are at present such unique selling points. The Spitfire XIV, if they decide to release it, or an Arado 234, will also become unique selling points for the game and thus can work as very potent attractors for new users.

 

I agree with you completely. The current aircraft set is a great compromise and has fantastic attraction / USP. Enthusiasm on these boards suggest revenue potential in several additional and very relevant models: the point I making was merely that applicability depends on how you frame it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, EAF19_Marsh said:

 

This is the problem with gauging aircraft applicability, do you take:

- Aircraft produced

- Aircraft delivered

- Aircraft reported on strength by operational units

- Aircraft on unit strength in the specific map area

- % of types in the specific map area

- Aircraft availability in specific map area

- Aircraft likely to be operational over the specific map area

 

Depending upon the position that you take, the relevance of an aircraft changes significantly.


Indeed, a very good summary :good:, i will remember it next time there is a talk about german numbers and will even quote you, no more numbers twisting possible if answers can't be delivered on the questions above:biggrin:

anyway, for the FR-E, the case is really simple:
-aircraft produced (before 8may45) :4
-aircraft delivered (before 8may45):1 (15april45) 414sq
-aircraft reported on strength operationnal unit: 1 or less
- % of types in the specific map area: if we take the low number of 1000 fighters on the continent: 0.001%
-aircraft on unit strength in the specific map area :1 or less
-aircraft availability in specific map area : 1 or less
-aircraft likely to be operational over the specific area : 4 if we count all the production airframes until 8thMay45.

The 14E, it's question about a production size of 46 airframes with the max assigned of 21 (assigned doesn't mean operational)(12 of them being lost(all causes))
The FR14 it's about +/-250 produced airfames with the max assigned being 58 on period 1st-10th may45

Those 3Marks won't give a PLUS for the game as they have been assigned  when the war was already over, the battles being on the "east side" of berlin when those marks started operational duty.
But yes i'd like to see the hotrod Mk14!:joy:

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JV69badatflyski said:

Those 3Marks won't give a PLUS for the game as they have been assigned  when the war was already over, the battles being on the "east side" of berlin when those marks started operational duty.
But yes i'd like to see the hotrod Mk14!

 

Sure, check the numbers accordingly (which I don’t have to hand in the 2TAF books). But if you apply that logic to the K-4 1.98 likely to be actually operational over the map you also end up with a vanishingly small number of aircraft. It cuts both ways. Where do you draw the line in terms of ‘could have been’ versus ‘actually was airborne’? The former favours the Luftwaffe, the latter the US and UK. That was why I also cited the last 2 points, as having 50 aircraft with 20% availability could be argued as less relevant than 10 aircraft with 100% availability or vice-versa. Depends on your measure of ‘relevance’ versus ‘interesting’ 😎

 

A Ta-152 would be fun, but based on the above, far, far rarer than a Spitfire XIV. As an example: despite the top-line numbers the chances of a random formation over the Rhein being Tempests or Me-262s is hugely in favour of the former, though more of the latter were built.

 

This is mooted as a general debate, BTW. The IXLF was a far better inclusion than the XIV, but the XIV had 5 (going off my head, here) in 2TAF for Jan 1945. That is at once a small % of overall units, but a significant number of fighters assigned to the air superiority role and - crucially - they were likely to be airborne and looking for a fight. Is that better or worse than a larger number of other fighters signed off by the factories but not operational?

Edited by EAF19_Marsh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Guys, 
It wasn't my goal to make a flamed discussion, just wanted to point out the fact the MK14's submarks were irrelevant in the game and iRL, compared to the "simple" MK14, that even if it's proportional numbers to other airplane types were low, it saw plenty of action so she would make a nice addition as a collector.
EAF_19Marsh, you came out with the counting theory, and it's good and rather logic, but it you seems to want to apply it to the 152, if so  it will end with a much higher ratio than the MK14 submarks, just because of total airplanes on LW side especially if we talk about spring45. Numbers and statistics are a double edge sword. That's why i took the raw numbers for the MK14, you can't turn them the way you want: it was assigned or in repair or in waiting delivery or exported or SoC, no twisting possible possible of the kind "yeah but it was in repair, maybe it could be send to combat if needed, blablabla"...Nope, it was in repair, unavailable. point.
For my part, even if i like the 152's Shape, i don't like fly the bird, i have my own favorite hotrod for fast action scenario's : and it's total production numbers are even higher than the MK14 as those numbers are until the V-day, not like the MK14's :P
FW-190 A-9!

PS: and why don't i like the MK14??? Because like 25years ago, when working on the Cockpit of the 14 in Brussel's museum, i dropped a screw, and even with the seat out of the plane, i wasn't able to find that screw, i've search the whole fuselage from cockpit to tail without effect. i'm sure this screw is still inside moving from one corner to the other when they move the plane.:biggrin:

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont mind having it. But to me it wont matter I am dead in a Tempest and sure to die in a xiv too. But it is a shame a Typhoon was not in from the start. 
But they should add a JU 188 / DO 217K and a allied medium bomber too. I do not care if it is a flyable B 25 or a Mossie, well I would love a Mosquito. But my hope this is going to happen is so small that I take anything. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/15/2019 at 1:15 AM, CUJO_1970 said:

XIV would be fine but Typhoon would be better and Mosquito would waaaay better.

 

As for the Tiffy...I found this one by the original artist. So there might be hope. https://www.artstation.com/roen911

 

antonis-karidis-bodenplatte-artwork-temp

Edited by sevenless

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wouldn’t a B26 be even more relevant than a 188 or 217 (except for the very boddenplatte op, obviously).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, KGM_Roll said:

Wouldn’t a B26 be even more relevant than a 188 or 217 (except for the very boddenplatte op, obviously).

Yes I would say so. I think we aint getting any since this pack obviously was a moneymaking pack. 
All you need is looking at the forum. Money lies in one engined hotrods, and they are cheaper to make. 
I think Jason would like to , but there is always a tone of budget when he go public. 
i guess the price tag set is to be hold. They probably got reasons to believe they cant make more expencive packs

Edited by LuseKofte

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An Mk XII would be adequate and probably more appropriate. 300 Mph at sea level etc and more commonly employed in combat than the XIV

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Ace_Pilto said:

An Mk XII would be adequate and probably more appropriate. 300 Mph at sea level etc and more commonly employed in combat than the XIV

Close that book and never open it again.
The 12 was the worst spit ever build.
 

Share this post


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

Wouldn’t a B26 be even more relevant than a 188 or 217 (except for the very boddenplatte op, obviously).

 

Absolutely. I think in general terms we need way more twin-engined planes on the BoBP map fort both sides. My dream would be 3-4 per side. However they need to calculate that against a budget and twin-engined planes take more time to develop, versus less financial turnover compared to single-engine planes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, JV69badatflyski said:

t wasn't my goal to make a flamed discussion, just wanted to point out the fact the MK14's submarks were irrelevant in the game and iRL, compared to the "simple" MK14, that even if it's proportional numbers to other airplane types were low, it saw plenty of action so she would make a nice addition as a collector.
EAF_19Marsh, you came out with the counting theory, and it's good and rather logic, but it you seems to want to apply it to the 152, if so  it will end with a much higher ratio than the MK14 submarks, just because of total airplanes on LW side especially if we talk about spring45. Numbers and statistics are a double edge sword. That's why i took the raw numbers for the MK14, you can't turn them the way you want: it was assigned or in repair or in waiting delivery or exported or SoC, no twisting possible possible of the kind "yeah but it was in repair, maybe it could be send to combat if needed, blablabla"...Nope, it was in repair, unavailable. point.
For my part, even if i like the 152's Shape, i don't like fly the bird, i have my own favorite hotrod for fast action scenario's : and it's total production numbers are even higher than the MK14 as those numbers are until the V-day, not like the MK14's :P
FW-190 A-9!

 

I didn't think you were, mate, I thought it was a perfect civil exchange of ideas and perspectives. As mentioned, I think the RAF aircraft set was a good compromise with room for expansion. A XIV would be nice but should be the most common mark by whatever is the most sensible count (probably total number in service, which as you say would probably be whatever is the Autumn-Winter .44 model in squadron service). In the case of 2TAF we have a lot of paperwork covering what was operational and in what numbers so it is a little easier.

 

The -152 point was simply to illustrate that there is no one condition that can guide the developers and so it is a compromise. I suppose there were a larger number of A-9s over the Ardennes / West to April '45 so it makes perfect sense (though I'd pay through the nose for an Ar-234)

 

6 hours ago, JV69badatflyski said:

PS: and why don't i like the MK14??? Because like 25years ago, when working on the Cockpit of the 14 in Brussel's museum, i dropped a screw, and even with the seat out of the plane, i wasn't able to find that screw, i've search the whole fuselage from cockpit to tail without effect. i'm sure this screw is still inside moving from one corner to the other when they move the plane.

 

Bugger! 😂

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

An Mk XII would be adequate and probably more appropriate. 300 Mph at sea level etc and more commonly employed in combat than the XIV

The Mk XII would be wholly inappropriate for the map we have, they were withdrawn from frontline service in Europe in the summer of '44, before there were any allied airfields on the BoBP map.

 

As for the Mk XIV, there were as many operational squadrons as there were Tempest squadrons. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was 315 A-9s delivered up to the end of Jan '45. It has been said that some A-8s got A-9 engines.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, EAF19_Marsh said:

The -152 point was simply to illustrate that there is no one condition that can guide the developers and so it is a compromise.

 

16 of those Ta-152 were in operational use with JG 301 in 1945 according to Willi Reschke. Airfields were Alteno and Neustadt-Gleve. As much I´d like to have that monster plane in the game for 3/45, I think there are more important planes missing. Tiffy, Mossie, Ar 234 and Mk XIV spring to mind immediately and all were operating in significant numbers in the Rheinland map area. And yes Fw-190 A9 is also relevant for the endgame in the west. Wasn´t it Maj. Guenther Specht (CO JG 11) who was lost over Maastricht in a A9 on 1st Jan. 1945?

 

Here with Kurt Tank at his 106 G6/AS in 1944.

 

Bundesarchiv_Bild_101I-676-7975A-28,_Wun

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

 

16 of those Ta-152 were in operational use with JG 301 in 1945 according to Willi Reschke. Airfields were Alteno and Neustadt-Gleve. As much I´d like to have that monster plane in the game for 3/45, I think there are more important planes missing. Tiffy, Mossie, Ar 234 and Mk XIV spring to mind immediately and all were operating in significant numbers in the Rheinland map area. And yes Fw-190 A9 is also relevant for the endgame in the west. Wasn´t it Maj. Guenther Specht (CO JG 11) who was lost over Maastricht in a A9 on 1st Jan. 1945?

 

Here with Kurt Tank at his 106 G6/AS in 1944.

 

 

 

Yes, it was simply a rhetorical example. Seems like the A-9 is the choice for players who like the Fw series.

 

Tank looks unimpressed with Willi's efforts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, JV69badatflyski said:

PS: and why don't i like the MK14??? Because like 25years ago, when working on the Cockpit of the 14 in Brussel's museum, i dropped a screw, and even with the seat out of the plane, i wasn't able to find that screw, i've search the whole fuselage from cockpit to tail without effect. i'm sure this screw is still inside moving from one corner to the other when they move the plane.:biggrin:

Come on. This way of doing things is the corner stone of British engineering. You can see that even in every car they made up until that industry was taken over by Indians and Germans.

 

There was one plane that was the exception, the MB5. Eric Brown specifically commented about its „very clean cockpit floor“. Maybe that was the reason that plane had no future among the British. Besides, when patching holes in the airframe, they probably were happy finding a lot of spare parts. 😁

 

 

5 hours ago, sevenless said:

Here with Kurt Tank at his 106 G6/AS in 1944.

Does the 109 G6/AS have a rudder trim?

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, ZachariasX said:

Does the 109 G6/AS have a rudder trim?

 

You can see it better here:

 

 

Specht_G6_AS.jpg

 

specht1.jpg

Edited by sevenless
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

You can see it better here:

Wow... at least on that type they wisened up. It looks rather improvised though. But I didn‘t know they ever installed such on a 109. I wonder where they put the trim knob in the cockpit.

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...