Questions about new Spitfire Mk IXc

[FeuerFliegen]

As someone who doesn't fly the Spitfire very often, what are the specific differences between this and the other Mk.IX that came with Battle of Bodenplatte?  I thought I recalled being told that this would have an earlier Merlin engine, but I guess not.  I've heard it has a different wing?  If so, can someone tell me the differences, regarding technical, performance, pros/cons, etc.?

 

The only thing I've really noticed by looking at it is the vertical stabilizer/rudder is different.  Regarding that- can anymore explain to me the differences, and specific pros/cons of each tail setup?

 

 

 

 

And while I'm thinking about it- the one other comparison I can relate to this is the relationship between the Bf109 G-6 and Bf109 G-6 Late.  Assuming you don't add any additional options to the late variant such as Erla canopy or MW50, it also appears to be the same plane other than a newer design of the vertical stabilizer and rudder.  

 

Can anyone tell me if there are any other differences between the two G-6 variants, as well as the specific pros/cons of each tail setup?

 

Thanks!

[JG27_Steini]

4 hours ago, FeuerFliegen said:

As someone who doesn't fly the Spitfire very often, what are the specific differences between this and the other Mk.IX that came with Battle of Bodenplatte?  I thought I recalled being told that this would have an earlier Merlin engine, but I guess not.  I've heard it has a different wing?  If so, can someone tell me the differences, regarding technical, performance, pros/cons, etc.?

 

The only thing I've really noticed by looking at it is the vertical stabilizer/rudder is different.  Regarding that- can anymore explain to me the differences, and specific pros/cons of each tail setup?

 

 

 

 

And while I'm thinking about it- the one other comparison I can relate to this is the relationship between the Bf109 G-6 and Bf109 G-6 Late.  Assuming you don't add any additional options to the late variant such as Erla canopy or MW50, it also appears to be the same plane other than a newer design of the vertical stabilizer and rudder.  

 

Can anyone tell me if there are any other differences between the two G-6 variants, as well as the specific pros/cons of each tail setup?

 

Thanks!

 

For the 109 G6 here is a good summary.

 

https://stormbirds.blog/2020/11/18/the-sweet-spot-how-bf109g-6-late-fits-into-il-2-great-battles/

[jollyjack]

4 hours ago, FeuerFliegen said:

As someone who doesn't fly the Spitfire very often, what are the specific differences between this and the other Mk.IX that came with Battle of Bodenplatte?  I thought I recalled being told that this would have an earlier Merlin engine, but I guess not.  I've heard it has a different wing?  If so, can someone tell me the differences, regarding technical, performance, pros/cons, etc.?

 

The only thing I've really noticed by looking at it is the vertical stabilizer/rudder is different.  Regarding that- can anymore explain to me the differences, and specific pros/cons of each tail setup?

 

Armament for one, engine power especially in regards of climbing speed, wing type and move ability. Differences IMO very well modeled in IL2.

[Jade_Monkey]

2 hours ago, jollyjack said:

 

 engine power especially in regards of climbing speed

 

 

Is this true? I thought they have the same engine

[357th_KW]

They both have the Merlin 66 as the base engine and the Merlin 70 as an option, running the same power settings.

[LukeFF]

As others have mentioned, the main differences are the armament and the tail section. Internally, there are some cockpit differences, including the bomb release control panel on the left-hand side which is on the to-do list to add to the Mk IXe, and some miscellaneous stuff elsewhere on the right-hand side.

 

The engine variants are exactly the same as the IXe.

[Jaegermeister]

The Spitfire Mk. IXb airplanes are what is referred as the Mk. IXc in game. The early Mk. IXc planes were Mk. Vc airframes converted to use the larger Merlin 66 engine with a 2 stage supercharger and an intercooler along with some other differences. They had the Universal C wings converted to use 2 cannons instead of 4 and 4x .303 cal machine guns. The "C" wing is where the later reference as the Mk. IXc came from. Most of these models had the Merlin 66 engine, many had clipped wings and they were referred to at the time as LF Mk. IXs. They could carry 2x 250 lb bombs on the wing racks or 1x 500 lb bomb on the centerline rack instead of the extended range "Slipper" tank.

 

The "C" model was transitioned to the MKIXe model with the new "E Wing" which had 2x .50 cal machine guns instead of the .303s and provisions for 4x 20mm cannons. Most of the "E" models were sent to the front lines as high altitude interceptors with the Merlin 70 engine whereas the 66 engine was optimized for lower altitude. The HF MK IXe models were supposed to be designed as high altitude interceptors, so they were less likely to be assigned to ground attack squadrons than the C models.

 

The Mk. XVI was a MK IXb with the Merlin 266 engine, which was simply an American built Packard Merlin 66 instead of a Rolls Royce engine. It was built as a low altitude fighter, so if you put the Merlin 66 engine, clipped wings and 2x .50 cal machine guns on the MK IXc, you would essentially have a MK XVI.

 

Confused yet? Me too... Similar to the BF109 series, the different Spitfires tended to overlap and morph from one model into the next.

[FeuerFliegen]

So the wings are different from the Mk.IX from Battle of Bodenplatte?  Is this with both the .303 and .50?  

 

If so,  do they perform any differently, or is it simply the fact that they can carry the 4x.303?

 

Can anyone tell me the pros/cons of each tail section? 

 

Which Mk.IX plane would you pick,  assuming both had identical armament?  What are the pros/cons to each?

[FeuerFliegen]

16 hours ago, JG27_Steini said:

 

For the 109 G6 here is a good summary.

 

https://stormbirds.blog/2020/11/18/the-sweet-spot-how-bf109g-6-late-fits-into-il-2-great-battles/

 

Thanks for the link but he didn't say anything regarding my question.  I am already very familiar with every Bf109 in the game so there was no new information there; the only thing I am unfamiliar with is:

 

What was the reason for the tail upgrade? 

 

Are there any downsides to the change?

 

Is it just the vertical stabilizer and rudder?  i.e. is the elevator different too in any way?

 

 

From my own experience, it feels like the newer tail gives you more control at extremely high speeds, but I wonder if the older version is better at slower speeds?

[ShamrockOneFive]

10 hours ago, FeuerFliegen said:

So the wings are different from the Mk.IX from Battle of Bodenplatte?  Is this with both the .303 and .50?  

 

If so,  do they perform any differently, or is it simply the fact that they can carry the 4x.303?

 

Can anyone tell me the pros/cons of each tail section? 

 

Which Mk.IX plane would you pick,  assuming both had identical armament?  What are the pros/cons to each?

 

I've got a summary of all of this over here: https://stormbirds.blog/2024/03/01/a-look-at-il-2-great-battles-new-spitfire-mark-ixc/

 

In short, the C wing has four .303s and two 20mm and the E wing has two .50cal and two 20mm. The wing itself is actually almost entirely the same with very few modifications between them but the armament is obviously different.

 

The broad chord rudder you see in-game on the Spitfire IXe is superior to the standard rounded rudder you see in-game on the IXc.

 

There's very little difference between the two models for performance. Armament and lateral stability (from the rudder) are basically the only practical differences. Historically there were many more Spitfire IXc's during Normandy and then as the war progressed you saw more of what we have as the IXe.

9 hours ago, FeuerFliegen said:

 

Thanks for the link but he didn't say anything regarding my question.  I am already very familiar with every Bf109 in the game so there was no new information there; the only thing I am unfamiliar with is:

 

What was the reason for the tail upgrade? 

 

Are there any downsides to the change?

 

Is it just the vertical stabilizer and rudder?  i.e. is the elevator different too in any way?

 

 

From my own experience, it feels like the newer tail gives you more control at extremely high speeds, but I wonder if the older version is better at slower speeds?

 

My old article there on the G-6 doesn't seek to answer that because in practical terms, in-sim, it makes virtually no difference. The taller tail is, like with the Spitfire's taller tail, intended to enhance stability. IL-2's flight model is a bit too stable in a few places and so the differences between them are negligible. Everything else I mention, as point of comparison, is more important.

Edited March 13, 2024 by ShamrockOneFive

[FeuerFliegen]

Thanks for the info; I think I understand everything now. 

 

Originally, the reason I made this thread and had questions about the Mk.IXc, was because I saw a handful of people praising the new Spitfire as this unique new addition to the game, when from my perspective, there was practically nothing new that we(people who own both BoB and BoN) were getting except for those very minor details, wondering if I was just missing something.  That being said, I still appreciate the devs for adding this plane and have no intentions of discounting their work.

[ShamrockOneFive]

38 minutes ago, FeuerFliegen said:

Thanks for the info; I think I understand everything now. 

 

Originally, the reason I made this thread and had questions about the Mk.IXc, was because I saw a handful of people praising the new Spitfire as this unique new addition to the game, when from my perspective, there was practically nothing new that we(people who own both BoB and BoN) were getting except for those very minor details, wondering if I was just missing something.  That being said, I still appreciate the devs for adding this plane and have no intentions of discounting their work.

I think most of the praise you were hearing wasn't because it was unique or new. Rather because they decided to add it "for free" to Battle of Normandy's aircraft line-up rather than release it as a Collector Plane and charge $19.99 USD for it. There wasn't quite enough new to make it worth a Collector Plane purchase but it does bolster the value that is in Battle of Normandy.

[LukeFF]

And for those running post-Normandy scenarios, the Mark IXc armed with .303s is still very much a relevant airframe. The Polish Spitfire wing on the continent didn't dispense with their .303-armed Spitfires until the end of January 1945.

[puyo3]

Very late to this post, but I will add that in offline use the Mark IXc is noteable superior to the IXe in combat; as Jaegermeister explained above, the Merlin 66 in the c was tuned for low to mid altitude, whereas the 70 was optimized for higher altitude. I mainly flew against the IXe during offline, but switched to the IXc and immediately noticed the better performance, very noticeable. Was looking for an explanation and this explains it. 

 

[LukeFF]

1 hour ago, puyo3 said:

Very late to this post, but I will add that in offline use the Mark IXc is noteable superior to the IXe in combat; as Jaegermeister explained above, the Merlin 66 in the c was tuned for low to mid altitude, whereas the 70 was optimized for higher altitude. I mainly flew against the IXe during offline, but switched to the IXc and immediately noticed the better performance, very noticeable. Was looking for an explanation and this explains it. 

 

The IXc and IXe use the exact same Merlin 66 engine. The only major differences are the armament and the shape of the tailfin. 

 

The Merlin 70 is an option but certainly isn't enabled by default in any missions I have seen. 

[Jaegermeister]

The model 70 was used for high altitude bomber escort. Not much of that over Normandy

 

 

Edited November 18, 2024 by Jaegermeister

[ShamrockOneFive]

On 11/17/2024 at 2:23 PM, puyo3 said:

Very late to this post, but I will add that in offline use the Mark IXc is noteable superior to the IXe in combat; as Jaegermeister explained above, the Merlin 66 in the c was tuned for low to mid altitude, whereas the 70 was optimized for higher altitude. I mainly flew against the IXe during offline, but switched to the IXc and immediately noticed the better performance, very noticeable. Was looking for an explanation and this explains it. 

 

I think you're experiencing a placebo effect. The performance differences between these models is negligible as LukeFF points out that they have the same engines. You can test these things in back to back speed runs for example if you want to see the data in motion.