Suddenly Spit IIa on all the servers?

[ElAurens]

Originally Posted by Jugdriver

the fact that the Spit II is overmodeld, (which it is)
JD
AKA_MattE

Actually it isn't, the other aircraft are undermodeled. This is the problem.

Just to clarify.

[Winger]

Originally Posted by Jugdriver

... they were very evenly matched during the BOB. [/B]

JD
AKA_MattE

With that you pretty much agree to what i say. Since the Spit IIa we have in game totally outclasses the 109 we have in game the only true solution is to leave it out.

Winger

[41Sqn_Banks]

[TomcatViP]

Originally Posted by Jugdriver

This may be true in your version of history, but the idea that the 109 was a superior aircraft to the Spitfire is not true, they were very evenly matched during the BOB.

The lamest part of this discussion is not the fact that the Spit II is overmodeld, (which it is) It is that some on this thread think this is a great opportunity to talk out of their a$$ in terms of the performance differences of these aircraft and whether the Spit II should be part of this time frame (which it should). Hence the ONGOING SpitfireUFO vs. Luffiewiner argument continues.

How about just shut up and fly.


JD
AKA_MattE

Yeah here it goes again : the great gentlemen with the fine sense of history and impeccable sciences knowledge thinking that the glory of the past are their own property and insulting who the hell are not lined with their miserable wisdom.

Seems we have seen that alrdy :

By the way "Superior" is not a term I wld hve use. That tells a lot...

[Jugdriver]

Originally Posted by TomcatViP

Yeah here it goes again : the great gentlemen with the fine sense of history and impeccable sciences knowledge thinking that the glory of the past are their own property and insulting who the hell are not lined with their miserable wisdom.

Yes, Tomcat exactly what you are doing, nothing more than the pot calling the kettle black.

Winger, I am not saying it should be in the plane set, I am saying that peoples personal agendas about whether the Spit II was in the BOB or that the 109 was better than the Spitfire during the BOB is not what should be discussed, does it belong in the servers with its present FM is the question. I see Bliss has already changed his server.

JD
AKA_MattE

[VO101_Tom]

Originally Posted by Jugdriver

...
Winger, I am not saying it should be in the plane set, I am saying that peoples personal agendas about whether the Spit II was in the BOB or that the 109 was better than the Spitfire during the BOB is not what should be discussed, does it belong in the servers with its present FM is the question. I see Bliss has already changed his server.

JD
AKA_MattE

Who said that the Spitt II isn't the part of BOB? This is bad for a joke. Unambiguously one of the best airplanes of the BOB era. No doubt. It enters service in July, in same month than E-7... wait... what? Do we have E-7? No... oh xxxx.
Anyway, we talk about server planesets, not BOB history.

[IvanK]

Something to try, A relative Performance test On line.

Start On line with a mate. Spit II and 109E4 Level flight close formation at 250Kmh in the weeds. Then Go max power (non WEP non Boost Cutout) at the same time. Keep it going until you max out. Control Eng temps as required with the Rad/s. You might be surprised just how close you still are at the end point. The 109 driver will need to control prop pitch/RPM actively (2300rpm seems to be a good value) and what IAS you both end up with.

Then do the same in a climb test. Start out the same in close formation on the deck, reset altimeters so both of you are using the same setting. In the climb Spit climb at 160MPH, E4 at 250Kmh as these are the respective best ROC speeds for each aircraft. Post results here.

[VO101_Tom]

Originally Posted by IvanK

Something to try, A relative Performance test On line.

Start On line with a mate. Spit II and 109E4 Level flight close formation at 250Kmh in the weeds. Then Go max power (non WEP non Boost Cutout) at the same time. Keep it going until you max out. Control Eng temps as required with the Rad/s. You might be surprised just how close you still are at the end point. The 109 driver will need to control prop pitch/RPM actively (2300rpm seems to be a good value) and what IAS you both end up with.

Then do the same in a climb test. Start out the same in close formation on the deck, reset altimeters so both of you are using the same setting. In the climb Spit climb at 160MPH, E4 at 250Kmh as these are the respective best ROC speeds for each aircraft. Post results here.

Hi. I made a small test, straight flying, sea level.
Spit IIa top speed without boost: 280 mph (450.6 km/h), with boost (no time limit) 310 mph (498.9 km/h)
109 E-4 top speed with 1.32 ata: 430 km/h, with (afterburner) 1.42 ata (1 min limit) 440 km/h*
109 E-3 top speed with 1.35 ata: 430 km/h, with (afterburner) 1.45 ata (1 min limit) 450 km/h* (E3 is faster )

I don't understand why would it necessary to do the test without a boost, when i flew more than half hour (Spit IIa, full throttle, half open radiator, sea level) without an any kind of trouble.

Please open this page, look at the first chart:
http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit1vrs109e.html
E-1 should reach the 300 mph (482.8 km/h) on sea level. The E-3 were being built with stronger engine already. DB 601 Aa (+72HP) instead DB 601 A-1.
This according to you surprisingly nearly?

*
Another thing: Please look at this chart:
The "start und notleistung" (call it "afterburner" in CloD) increase the performance with 200 PS (this considerable plus 20% performance the reason of the time limitation), but in CloD it causes only 3% speed acceleration. Compared to Spitfire: Boost causes 10.7% acceleration (30 mph). I do not know the correct values of the Merlin engines, but looking at the proportions... well... what do you think?

(source: www.enginehistory.org)

[Hellbender]

VO101_Tom made a good point. So far while playing online, I took Bliss´s advice for high alt combat to an experiment and flew around at +4000m altitude. My results were inconclusive since it was hard to find any opposition in shape of Spit IIs or 109 E-4s over ENgland and France. After having askedd people why they fly mostly between sea level and 2000m, they answered that there is nothing interesting up there and therefore it was so darn hard to find any opposition at high altitude. People said, when they wanna bomb ships, they can do that from "relatively" low altitude and when they just look for trouble they gonna strafe planes landing or taking off at the opposing airfields.

My suggestion, in order to drag more people into a historic correct and realistic altitude to observe how Spit II vs 109 performs at high altitude, I would say, remove the ships and add large bomber streams between France and England at 4000 to 6000m so that people find their targets up their. Whenever you wanna seek a dogfight you can protect your own bombers or hunt the enemy bombers. Alternatively, one can still bomb the enemy airfields, but the high alt. "pulks of bombers" (somewhere between 10 and 20 in numbers) should be the more tempting targets.
This would be an idea to focus dogfights higher in the skies, where the aformentiond handling of energy gets more important, even for the plane with a bit less overall speed performance.

[VO101_Tom]

Originally Posted by cheesehawk

The ATAG server has already implemented that idea, except they still have ships for the bomber guys. Even then, most people prefer to hunt players, not AI, and there's a lot of vulching. Both of these keep the fights down low.

Besides, most of the planes are atrocious at 5k+, by the time you reach 6k, you already need flaps or tons of up elevator trim. 5k feels like 8k.

Good thing if the bombers flying high. But the AFB's low protection would be important. Would not be worth it then to fly low above the other coast.