Spitfire makes only 300 mph?

The spit 2a should have a Merlin XII which ran at 9 lbs/ sq.in without boost cut-out. I believe that no plane would be fitted with a boost indicator that even doesn't show the nominal max boost. Currently the clock only shows 8 with boost cut-out. Also you have to have boost cut-out to exceed 6.2 lbs /sq.in

I think this is a bit strange. I think our Spit 2a is no Spit 2a but a Spit 1a with small modifications.

[fruitbat]

Originally Posted by Kwiatek

The most common Spitfire MK1-MK2 version should be:

Spit MK1 Merlin III ( pre BOB version) - 2 stage DH prop pitch, +6 1/2 lbs (87 octan fuel), no armoured windshield and no pilos armour ( the fastest SPit Mk1 at FTH but worse climb rate )

Spit MK1 Merlin III ( BOB version -could be MK1A) - CSP DH , +12 lbs ( 100 Octan), armoured windshield ( the fastest Spit MK1 at low level, good climb rate)

Spit MK2 Merlin XII - CSP Rotol, +12 lbs ( 100 Octan), armoured windshield and pilot armour)



Similar should be with Hurricanes:

Hurricane MK1 ( early) - 2 stage DH prop, +6 1/2 lbs ( 87 octan fuel)

Hurricane MK1 ( late) - CSP DH2, +12 lbs ( 100 Octan), armoured windshield ( pilot armour)

sounds perfect.

[reflected]

Originally Posted by fruitbat

sounds perfect.

+1

[lane]

Originally Posted by Kwiatek

The most common Spitfire MK1-MK2 version should be:

Spit MK1 Merlin III ( pre BOB version) - 2 stage DH prop pitch, +6 1/2 lbs (87 octan fuel), no armoured windshield and no pilos armour ( the fastest SPit Mk1 at FTH but worse climb rate )

Spit MK1 Merlin III ( BOB version -could be MK1A) - CSP DH , +12 lbs ( 100 Octan), armoured windshield ( the fastest Spit MK1 at low level, good climb rate)

Spit MK2 Merlin XII - CSP Rotol, +12 lbs ( 100 Octan), armoured windshield and pilot armour)

Similar should be with Hurricanes:

Hurricane MK1 ( early) - 2 stage DH prop, +6 1/2 lbs ( 87 octan fuel)

Hurricane MK1 ( late) - CSP DH2, +12 lbs ( 100 Octan), armoured windshield ( pilot armour)

+1
(Although I don't really see much point in the 87 octane set up except maybe for Hurricanes in France during the phoney war period).

[*Buzzsaw*]

Originally Posted by Kurfürst

Looks like it's only a faulty boost gauge Than..

Anyway it seemed to me that Oleg modelled the MkII as CSP+100 octane, the Mk Is are with two pitch props and 87 octane. Good choice IMHO.

Good choice for those who want the British to have aircraft with 1938 performance.

The facts are out there, despite the disinformation you post, and it is clear 100 octane was in predominant use, with 100% of the sector airfields in No. 10, 11 and 12 Group, showing clear use of 100 octane during the battle.

It is also very clear the two pitch De Havilland props in the Spitfire I were upgraded to constant speed in early July. In addition, all new Spitfires, (which were 50% of the aircraft on strength by September) coming off the production lines had constant speed props.

The facts have been shown on posts on this board, you have provided ZERO proof to the contrary.

By the way, the Spit 1A in the game is modelled graphically with a CSP Rotol prop, as historically it was, who knows why Luthier suddenly reversed the Flight Model. Who knows what false information was directed his way.

[*Buzzsaw*]

Originally Posted by 41Sqn_Stormcrow

The spit 2a should have a Merlin XII which ran at 9 lbs/ sq.in without boost cut-out. I believe that no plane would be fitted with a boost indicator that even doesn't show the nominal max boost. Currently the clock only shows 8 with boost cut-out. Also you have to have boost cut-out to exceed 6.2 lbs /sq.in

I think this is a bit strange. I think our Spit 2a is no Spit 2a but a Spit 1a with small modifications.

The graphics model is of a Spit II. It has the six exhaust stubs per side instead of three, and there are other elements.

However, it doesn't even have the performance of a historical BoB Spit Ia at +12.

[ICDP]

Originally Posted by *Buzzsaw*

The graphics model is of a Spit II. It has the six exhaust stubs per side instead of three, and there are other elements.

However, it doesn't even have the performance of a historical BoB Spit Ia at +12.

The Spitfire II did not have six exhaust stubs per side, it had three. Have you tested the MkII in CoD yet? At SL it is getting correct speeds even with only 9lbs boost, I haven't tested all other altitudes yet but so far it looks like only the boost is being reported wrong.

So far the indications are that the MkIs are not modelled correctly and the CSP is broken on the MkIa, they both underperform quite badly.

The 109E is also performing well below its actual real performance.

It seems there is a lot of work required on getting the FMs and performance fixed on most aircraft.

[reflected]

I tried to fly the Spit MKI with full CEM. If you give enough throttle to climb a little the oil temperature goeas above 90 and your engine dies. Incredible...

And no, I'm not a sim noob, I know what's what in an aeroplane.

[lane]

Originally Posted by *Buzzsaw*

Good choice for those who want the British to have aircraft with 1938 performance.

The facts are out there, despite the disinformation you post, and it is clear 100 octane was in predominant use, with 100% of the sector airfields in No. 10, 11 and 12 Group, showing clear use of 100 octane during the battle.

It is also very clear the two pitch De Havilland props in the Spitfire I were upgraded to constant speed in early July. In addition, all new Spitfires, (which were 50% of the aircraft on strength by September) coming off the production lines had constant speed props.

The facts have been shown on posts on this board, you have provided ZERO proof to the contrary.

By the way, the Spit 1A in the game is modelled graphically with a CSP Rotol prop, as historically it was, who knows why Luthier suddenly reversed the Flight Model. Who knows what false information was directed his way.
-----
The graphics model is of a Spit II. It has the six exhaust stubs per side instead of three, and there are other elements.

Good posts. Two minor quibbles though; I've seen late June into early July for DH conversions (earlier for Rotol) and what photos I have of Spitfire IIs shows 3 exhaust stubs per side. Nice photo attached of a No. 19 Squadron Spitfire II at Fowlmere during September 1940.

[winny]

Originally Posted by Kurfürst

You are right (posting from an iPhone was pain.. ). There should be be a 2-pitch version, and a CSP with armor, both 87 octane. The Mk. II could then be used as a stand in for Mk. Is with 100 octane as well. Of course a third Mark I with 100 octane and CSP would be great as well, but IMHO redundant as its the same thing really as the current Mk. II performance wise.

I was just testing one Mk I (dunno Mk I or Mk Ia so I am not sure, but evidently at least one of them is with 2 pitch screws), as I was curious about how the CSP works in COD.

Il-2 was a serious disappointban the way it modelled CSP. Still is.. you don't seem to select RPM with it, as you should, you select "relative to maximum allowed rpm for given boost".

Speaking of which, "Mk Ia" is also a bit weird. AFAIK there was no such actual designation, it was Mk I. Mk IA is an ex post facto "designation", maybe born in post-war literature, like "Erla G-10". Hell some books even state the "Mk. I" was with four guns only..

All 8 gun RAF fighters were retrospectivley given the A suffix sometime in late 1940. Up till then they were just Mk 1s.

I'm wondering if the 'Early' Mk1 is just exactly that, early (Pre June '40). More of a Battle of France Spitfire, 2 speed De Hav and 87 octane. That would make more sense.

Here's an interesting pont. The first Modified (ie the cannons worked) Mk IB into action in the BoB was R6889, 19 Sqn . It was, to quote Spitfire, The History "Not an outstanding sucess, it was underpowered, even with the Merlin III and had to be flown at maximum power just to keep up with the browning armed Spitfires"