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

[Sven]

Originally Posted by Seeker

All the nasty "sissyfire" quotes make you a liar.

Svend.

? I don't quite understand, what sissyfire quotes did I made again?
I can make a quote if you want, If I remember right this is what a spitfire pilot said in an interview: "The spitfire could be flown by any idiot."
In that point of view IL2 got it spot on, the plane is meant for idiots.

Getting back to the thread direction, which seems to be ailerons, I think I'm going to take the Spit for a ride, had too much Ju-88 A17 practise, time to do something different.

[SEE]

Originally Posted by Sven

?
I can make a quote if you want, If I remember right this is what a spitfire pilot said in an interview: "The spitfire could be flown by any idiot."
In that point of view IL2 got it spot on, the plane is meant for idiots.

I doubt that pilot meant it in the way you have interpreted. For sure, there will be testing times for Spitty/Hurricane pilots in CoD with a/c that have inferior firepower and requires utmost concentration when engaging the Bf's. A wise pilot will not try and follow it in a dive and neither will he be able to match it in a climb. He will certainly need to manage his energy trade off in T&B and deal with the carburretor float problem - these facets alone require the pilot to have the necessary awareness and skills that an 'idiot' would hardly posses. We will see in March - hopefully........

[MicroWave]

Fascinating. 7 pages in a little more than 24 hours.

You gotta love this game.

[SEE]

Originally Posted by MicroWave

Fascinating. 7 pages in a little more than 24 hours.

You gotta love this game.

and guess who's bloody fault that is......lol.....

[Sven]

Originally Posted by SEE

I doubt that pilot meant it in the way you have interpreted. For sure, there will be testing times for Spitty/Hurricane pilots in CoD with a/c that have inferior firepower and requires utmost concentration when engaging the Bf's. A wise pilot will not try and follow it in a dive and neither will he be able to match it in a climb. He will certainly need to manage his energy trade off in T&B and deal with the carburretor float problem - these facets alone require the pilot to have the necessary awareness and skills that an 'idiot' would hardly posses. We will see in March - hopefully........

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.)

[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.

[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.

[Kwiatek]

Remember that Molders tested SPitfire MK1 with only 2-stage prop pitch ( not constant speed propeller unit) and lower boost settings( +6 1/2 lbs). But of course flying charactersitic (not peformacne) were the same. Also German report confirmed that both Hurricane and Spitfire could turn tigher then 109 E even with older 2-stage prop pitch and lower boost.

[SEE]

I appreciate all the contributions made and many thanks to Fenrir in particular for his technical arguments wether you agree with them fully or not . On a personal note, I find the Bf's just as stable to fly and in many areas even better than the Spit, particularly the early Mk1 variants which are not modelled in the stock game. Interestingly, I see on other forums that pilots have noticed the LA7 has it's FM improved in 4.10 and it still retains a better rate of fire than what I have always believed it should have but I am no expert so accept that.

I have read accounts from BOB Spit pilots who said that young inexperienced flyers did not turn hard enough for fear of stalling and that one aspect of the Spit was the airframe would shudder and shake violently before the onset of stall making it very predictable even if somewhat unpleasant.

OK, let's accept that the previous FM of the Spit was too much in favour of the 'Reds' and that changes were necessary but it might just be that some aspects need questioning and supported with good technical evidence (for and against).

It will be very interesting to see how the MK1 Spit FM will be modelled in CoD given the new benchmark set by 4.10 (allbeit for the later variants which had many improvements). Hmmm,....I wonder if we will see similar Spit FM threads in the CoD forum if there is any discrepancy compared to 4.10?