SoWC:BoB Multisquad Campaign Starting

[klem]

Originally Posted by 5./JG27.Farber

...............
501 and another ACG squad has yet to register themselves so its actually about even.

Great

[5./JG27.Farber]

Sorry Salmo, I'd opened the email to activate your account but not clicked the link.

In other news for Ozzies, we have decided to push the campaign back 1 hour to so they wont be late for work. However that means they have to go to bed an hour earlier.

[Jatta Raso]

Originally Posted by klem

At the moment we are short of RAF pilots.

If any single players out there want to fly RAF you don't, as the campaign website explains, have to be a member of a Squad. You can tag along with other Squads, we may be able to offer Leaders or we could help get some of you together to form your own temporary campaign Squad.

This is for RAF pilots only of course. The LW can, well... pfffttttt... they've got plenty already

i think the problem is about Reds not wanting to participate on a turkey shoot (i sure don't )

[5./JG27.Farber]

Originally Posted by Jatta Raso

i think the problem is about Reds not wanting to participate on a turkey shoot (i sure don't )

There has been talk of replacing the SpitIa with the SpitII however Ive asked for the max speed and climb graphs of the - SpitIa & Spit IIa in game and the SpitIa in real life, however no one yet has cme up with the goods!? So I cannot simply act on a whim.

Can anyone provide this?

[bw_wolverine]

Originally Posted by 5./JG27.Farber

There has been talk of replacing the SpitIa with the SpitII however Ive asked for the max speed and climb graphs of the - SpitIa & Spit IIa in game and the SpitIa in real life, however no one yet has cme up with the goods!? So I cannot simply act on a whim.

Can anyone provide this?

Aren't these all over the forums? I think IvanK recently threw up a few good graphs.

FM/DM subforum should have all this stuff.

[klem]

Originally Posted by 5./JG27.Farber

There has been talk of replacing the SpitIa with the SpitII however Ive asked for the max speed and climb graphs of the - SpitIa & Spit IIa in game and the SpitIa in real life, however no one yet has cme up with the goods!? So I cannot simply act on a whim.

Can anyone provide this?

Farber, with respect I don't think you can be tied to historical marks of Spitfire because we do not have historical Spitfire MkI or MkII performance (on several levels). 1C have not published charts for RAF a/c performance since the Patch+mini patch but I can show you how the pre-patch CoD Spitfire Ia compared with RL in the attached. The Orange/yellow line (taken from 1Cs own chart, also attached) is the pre-patch Spitfire MkI versus the RL data for the Spitfire I and 109s. It was pathetically undermodelled.

All the latest patch has done is:-
"Spitfire Mk.I
Fixed the top speed dip above 18,000 ft."
see http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showpos...49&postcount=1
So it's still pathetically undermodelled.

and they neutered the overmodelled (?) Spitfire MkII:
"Spitfire Mk.II
The aircraft's speed performance was too good at all altitudes, sometimes 60 mph better than the real thing."
(same link)

I have not done any tests on the MkII since the patch but we have been flying it exclusively since the patch and it is now unquestionably below the 109 performance so you have nothing to fear. My gut feeling is that it may now be something more like a Spitfire MkI or MkII running on 87 Octane fuel. The Spitfire MkII actually ran on 100 octane with the Merlin XII not 87 octane and would give a normal max boost of +9lbs and therefore more power than +6lbs but our MkII doesn't, it only gives ~6lbs. It seems to be modelled with 87 Octane fuel and so without the +9lbs boost. I believe its performance if it had used 87 Octane would have been little different to the MkI, the 100 octane simply allowed higher boost pressures to be used which is what gave the higher performance, not the simple fact that it was 100 octane. Similarly the maximum MkI performance with 100 Octane would have been similar to the MkII with 100 octane as they both allowed the same 12lbs short term boost. A lot is made of the difference between the Merlin III and the Merlin XII but in performance terms I don't think they were much different. The XII was structurally stronger and so was able to routinely use a higher normal max boost (9lbs with 100 octane) than the Merlin III (6.25lbs) which is why it could routinely outperformed the MkI.

If you want a meaningful combat scenario I think you should use the Spitfire MkIIa which we currently have in COD to represent Spitfire MkIa's running on 87 Octane. We know that in the BoB both front line Marks actually used 100 Octane and short term overboost (12lbs) giving short term low-medium altitude advantage but we can't get round that just now.

The COD Spitfire MkI is heavily porked. IMHO the CoD MkII seems to get closer to the real MkI than the CoD MkI but is still no match for a properly flown 109.

I hope no-one will drag up all the endless arguments about MkI/MkII, 87/100 octane, CoD/RL. The above is my belief and I won't argue any of those points in here.

[Osprey]

Originally Posted by 5./JG27.Farber

There has been talk of replacing the SpitIa with the SpitII however Ive asked for the max speed and climb graphs of the - SpitIa & Spit IIa in game and the SpitIa in real life, however no one yet has cme up with the goods!? So I cannot simply act on a whim.

Can anyone provide this?

I gave you these Farber, but klem has supplied some more I see, nice, I've not seen these.

The Spit II is slower than the 109 too, until 19kft apparently, I had a few fights up there yesterday, 501/64 vs JG26 and it was good. The IIa wasn't faster than the Ia IRL anyway, it was just built for 100 octane without conversion (in a nutshell). Klem is correct, in game the IIa is more like an 87 octane Ia (IIa never ran on 87), only with a totally botched ROC and FTH (2lbs @ 16kft!!!)

Nobody flies the Rotol anymore online, it is almost useless. Unfortunately we have a situation where the RAF are castrated so badly with the patch that online numbers have fallen off the Cliffs of Dover. Even Hurricane squadrons like 56 and 501 no longer want to fly them. If you want a decent fight and more fun for all then just have only IIa's, if you want historical numbers then put in 'the truth', but doing that will not give you any historical accuracy at all. I'm sorry you are forced into the corner on it, we are all suffering though.

[AbortedMan]

Am I too late to get in on the campaign with the 401 on red? Been ultra busy with work and finally got a second to get the details of the mission.

I've registered on the SoW forum, just not sure what else to do...

EDIT: Ah, I see someone posted my name as a tentative player on the registration list, thank you. I'll get with my squadron leader to confirm my attendance.

[5./JG27.Farber]

Everyone already registered please check forums! Aborted Man - your safe.

[AbortedMan]

Originally Posted by 5./JG27.Farber

Everyone already registered please check forums! Aborted Man - your safe.

Ehhh, safe as in "I'm on the roster" or as in "You're safe because you aren't flying the dangerous skies"? Hoping for the former.