I Want my 4.09 Spit FM's back.........

[Insuber]

Originally Posted by 6S.Manu

Amen, and this is a thing I stated in another thread: flying Red (not PTO) I find vey few cooperation from my occasional teammates. In the Fw190s you are forced to fly that way and ask for "help" (usually during the extension for a good DnB... )

Manu - very true mate. It is very rare to fight against a coordinated pair of Spitfires in DF servers - luckily!

[Azimech]

Originally Posted by Fenrir

I'm not after this feature; as in depth and great it could be even I with my incredibly limited knowledge realise what a pig that could be to programme in game.

I have strong doubts about that. It could be a simple search in a folder, where people could make a simple text file with the name of the type, in the right format. No file means standard trim. Changing the GUI of the game to include sliders to adapt standard trim is too much work indeed, and people themselves should spend some time and energy. If loadout affects a style of playing, for example if you usually fly at high speed and this time you're doing a long range bombing run in formation, it could be nice to be able to adjust that too.

[Kwiatek]

I think TD make surly better job then 1C with Spits FM's and versions. Now they have more historical types ( engine models) and performance.

I dunno why people think that new Spits are more stally beacuse from my feeling new Spits have much more gentle stall then stock ones. And it is good beacuse Spits have good symptoms of incoming stall due to its wash wingtips. Spits should be quite easy plane to fly.

Impression of easier stall could be casued from much more longitudal instablilty of new spits which now are very unstable planes and have very big pitch up tendency. Still i think here is a space for improvement in general flight charactersitic of all new spits.

Also i dont like these stupid WEP activated by button. It is very wrong idea which allow to use WEP even belowe full throttle. It shouldnt be these way.

[Azimech]

Could it be that the pitch up tendency is a product of aft CG due to the rear tanks?



EDIT: No. I just tested it. 100% fuel vs 10% with an F Vc 1942. Same tendency.

[ImpalerNL]

Originally Posted by Sven

And you interpreted my way wrong, that's why we should stop interpreting. The pilot obviously meant flying the plane not mastering it, that's something totally different. The plane was meant for idiots ( read fresh pilots, as the Spitfire pilot obviously meant.)

Your lack of respect for spitifre pilots only shows your incompetence as a virtual LW pilot.
Cut the **** and practice more often.

[Kwiatek]

Originally Posted by Azimech

Could it be that the pitch up tendency is a product of aft CG due to the rear tanks?

Only some late Spits ( Marki VIII or Mark XVI) have rear fuselage fuel tanks. Such Spits with rear tank surly could have longitutad stability problems with rear fuel tank full similar to P-51s. But witht empty rear tank it should be any problem with COG.

Earlier types of Spits had only forward fuel tanks before pilot cocpit.

[Azimech]

Apparently the IX is unaffected as well, so if that type has rear tanks, the effect on CG is not modeled.

[swiss]

Originally Posted by Fenrir

I'm in the UK.

Suggestion for your next pleasure trip:

http://www.rafmuseum.org.uk/research/

[Sven]

Originally Posted by ImpalerNL

Your lack of respect for spitifre pilots only shows your incompetence as a virtual LW pilot.
Cut the **** and practice more often.

The exact words of the spitfire pilot again, ".. The spitfire could be flown by any idiot"

What do you think that means? That I have disrespect for Spitfire pilots?
I think this man who flew in the war knows what he is talking about, more than any one of you! What I understand from this sentence is that even FRESH PILOTS could fly the Spitfire, why the term idiot? Because it sounds better than raw recruits, otherwise the pilot wouldve said that, and it sounds funny as well.

You're extremely overreacting, and haven't got the slightest idea where I'm talking about, and keep personal thoughts about me to yourself, you have no idea.

EDIT I'm looking for the video to clear this all up, I remember the now old pilot had a very nice moustache

[kimosabi]

It's no secret that pilots thought the Spitfire was easy to fly.

Major Werner Mölders, JG 51, compared the British fighters to his own prior to the Battle:

"It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. The Hurricane is good-natured and turns well, but its performance is decidedly inferior to that of the Me 109. It has strong stick forces and is "lazy" on the ailerons.
The Spitfire is one class better. It handles well, is light on the controls, faultless in the turn and has a performance approaching that of the Me 109. As a fighting aircraft, however, it is miserable. A sudden push forward on the stick will cause the motor to cut; and because the propeller has only two pitch settings (take-off and cruise), in a rapidly changing air combat situation the motor is either overspeeding or else is not being used to the full." 114

Ofcourse, the Spits were fitted with constant speed propellers so his notes regarding the props were out of date when the battle kicked off.