Thread: Spit1a > SpitII
View Single Post
  #8  
Old 05-26-2011, 02:29 PM
Kurfürst Kurfürst is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 705
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ze-Jamz View Post
I understand that but how much difference in RL which obviously will/should be in game was the performance between Spit1a to the SpitII and also do we know how much in game the is 109 underpowered?
In real life, there was no appreciable performance difference between the Spit I and II, as long as they had the same equipment, and same boost, fuel etc.

The airframes were very similiar, and the engine output was almost the same, the Spit II's Merlin had a marginally higher altitude performance, and a consequence, worse low altitude performance. But as I noted, the difference was completely insignificant - similiar differences were there between various Bf 109E variants with the old type and new type supercharger, for example. Both had pilot armor, armored windscreen and were (retro)fitted with CSP during the Battle. IMHO the only 'major' difference was the different starter system of the Mark II.

In the game the difference is due to that the Spit I variants appear to be modelled with 87 octane and lower engine outputs, while the Mark II with 100 octane and considerably higher engine outputs. Again in real life both types operated on both types of fuel, and then performance was similiar.
__________________
Il-2Bugtracker: Feature #200: Missing 100 octane subtypes of Bf 109E and Bf 110C http://www.il2bugtracker.com/issues/200
Il-2Bugtracker: Bug #415: Spitfire Mk I, Ia, and Mk II: Stability and Control http://www.il2bugtracker.com/issues/415

Kurfürst - Your resource site on Bf 109 performance! http://kurfurst.org
Reply With Quote