But it's the wrong Spitfire... or wrong Messerschmitt

[Dunravin]

Have been doing some research and it seems unlikely the Mk9 LF ever saw much action against 109K-4's. Its more likely to have been Mk14's

 

G-1 & G-2 Yes

K-4 No

[Rangi]

Lucky VEAO is making a mkXIV.

https://forums.eagle.ru/forumdisplay.php?f=335

 

I been pleasantly surprised at the competitiveness of the mkIX against the k4 and still just getting to know her.

[Zilch]

Huhboy, this bit again...

 

The 109K didn't exist in large numbers at all, but it is the plane we have. I think the same may be true for the Dora, which I think was out-produced by the more common A8 and similar (not sure on these numbers, I'm sure one of you will correct if wrong ). The P-51D we have is a late war Pacific Theater variant, IIRC. They specific models we have are not all period-matched or present in DCS in anywhere near the relative numbers and ratios they appeared in, historically.

 

Even the F-86F and MiG-15bis are not exactly what we'd find slugging it out over MiG Alley. Does that decrease the fun and challenge of the classic match up? Not in my opinion.

 

The P-51D and Spit IX would more commonly have seen far more G-model 109's, sure. However, that's not what we have, and I'm guessing the availability, or lack thereof, of accurate and reliable data for those models may have something to do with it.

 

They aren't the wrong planes, they're just the ones that the developers had enough access to in order to provide the most accurate simulation of that particular aircraft as possible.

 

Think of DCS more of a sandbox in which you can mix all kinds of things together and see what you get, rather than as a time-locked cross section of what planes were common in a given month, year, or theater. We do have a Normandy 1944 map coming, but that doesn't necessarily mean the specific versions of the aircraft we put in it are representative of that year or location...but they're the closest thing we have now, and it's fun as hell to play "what if."

 

For more, you can surely dig into the P-51D and Bf-109K subforums and read the endless, yet informative, debate on the mismatch between the "under-powered" Mustang we have with a mere 67" manifold pressure, and the "overpowered and unrepresentative" K-4, which only existed in small numbers and was likely built to sub-par standards given the state of the industry in 1944. Ultimately, we have what we have. It's not right or wrong, it just is.

 

Personally, I'm loving the Mk. IX anyway. It seems an excellent compliment to the P-51D on the Allied side of things and really helps even things up against the current DCS German fighters, aside from being awesome to learn and fly.

[Krupi]

Well said Zilch.

 

I am certain that the IX did come up against K4 however only over Germany. The XIV was not produced in sufficient numbers to replace all IX squads so a mixture of IX and XIV would be realistic. I am sure we will get a Bf109 Gustav at some point however even then an argument will rage on which one to get certainly not a G1/2 more likely a late G6, G10 or G14...

[Ala13_ManOWar]

Very well said Zilch :clap_2::clap_2::clap_2:.

 

Have been doing some research and it seems unlikely the Mk9 LF ever saw much action against 109K-4's

Yet you didn't research as thoroughly as you should, if I have to say :smilewink:.

 

L.F.Mk.IXc model was the more common Spitfire with up to 9000+ built. It was used even in many post-war Air Forces, well until mid 50's, almost 60's. Your fail is you focus on the number, like old Il-2 did, Mk.IX = 1942. Well, that's true, but it is not. First prototype and some examples were built in 1942 though in 1943 model isn't the same, and L.F.Mk.IXc, the one featured in DCS, with a +18Lbs boost Merlin 66 engine is a model built from march 1944 onwards. You get fooled by differences in nomenclature, while Germans changed names almost every time they updated a bolt, allied models tended to update current models without further notice and/or name changes. 1944 Spitfire IX isn't the same aircraft than 1942 one though kept the name.

 

But, keeping with your argument. It's well known that up to 40% of all the airborne Spitfires on D-Day were still Mk.Vb. Once there are a new model old ones don't disappear magically, you have to use them for a good while, and they are still capable aircraft indeed though not the latest refinement. Thinking in war like "this model, from this year, have to face this other model, same year", is just the stupid approach we have to blame old Il2 of, because they marked years as a guide to online servers balance. Nothing to do with real life.

 

 

K4 was built from October 1944 onwards, up to ~1000 units built. Dora from August 1944, up to 1800 built. Spitfire LFIX, ~9000 built, operated until 1957… If I have to guess, yes, Spitfire pretty much fought K4, D9, Me262 (we will eventually get), and everything, indeed she survived all German models.

 

 

 

And as a final thought. Whenever someone says something about this stuff, "this model is wrong, we should have that", and so, I remember Roald Dhal's memories. Once war begun he joined RAF, and was trained in a Hawker Hart as fighter. He was thinking all the time about getting to front line unit so he could fly a better ride, but once he did he was assigned a Gloster Gladiator, and told by his commander something like, this is what we have kid. After he had an accident and returned to service, by then he was given a Hurricane, like amid war… Go tell them Germans couldn't use their G models against Hurricanes. Dissimilar combat happens mate. Stop that balance thinking.

 

 

S!

Edited January 14, 2017 by Ala13_ManOWar

[Talisman_VR]

Very well said Zilch :clap_2::clap_2::clap_2:.

 

Yet you didn't research as thoroughly as you should, if I have to say :smilewink:.

 

L.F.Mk.IXc model was the more common Spitfire with up to 9000+ built. It was used even in many post-war Air Forces, well until mid 50's, almost 60's. Your fail is you focus on the number, like old Il-2 did, Mk.IX = 1942. Well, that's true, but it is not. First prototype and some examples were built in 1942 though in 1943 model isn't the same, and L.F.Mk.IXc, the one featured in DCS, with a +18Lbs boost Merlin 66 engine is a model built from march 1944 onwards. You get fooled by differences in nomenclature, while Germans changed names almost every time they updated a bolt, allied models tended to update current models without further notice and/or name changes. 1944 Spitfire IX isn't the same aircraft than 1942 one though kept the name.

 

But, keeping with your argument. It's well known that up to 40% of all the airborne Spitfires on D-Day were still Mk.Vb. Once there are a new model old ones don't disappear magically, you have to use them for a good while, and they are still capable aircraft indeed though not the latest refinement. Thinking in war like "this model, from this year, have to face this other model, same year", is just the stupid approach we have to blame old Il2 of, because they marked years as a guide to online servers balance. Nothing to do with real life.

 

 

K4 was built from October 1944 onwards, up to ~1000 units built. Dora from August 1944, up to 1800 built. Spitfire LFIX, ~9000 built, operated until 1957… If I have to guess, yes, Spitfire pretty much fought K4, D9, Me262 (we will eventually get), and everything, indeed she survived all German models.

 

 

 

And as a final thought. Whenever someone says something about this stuff, "this model is wrong, we should have that", and so, I remember Roald Dhal's memories. Once war begun he joined RAF, and was trained in a Hawker Hart as fighter. He was thinking all the time about getting to front line unit so he could fly a better ride, but once he did he was assigned a Gloster Gladiator, and told by his commander something like, this is what we have kid. After he had an accident and returned to service, by then he was given a Hurricane, like amid war… Go tell them Germans couldn't use their G models against Hurricanes. Dissimilar combat happens mate. Stop that balance thinking.

 

 

S!

 

You may want to correct something you have said in your post, as I believe you will find that the Mk LFIX with the Merlin 66 @ 18lbs boost started front line service in March 1943 (not 44). You may have been getting mixed up with March 1944 when this aircraft was given full service approval to use 150 Octane fuel and 25lbs boost; May 44 first squadrons operational with 25lbs boost and 150 Octane fuel. At the moment we do not have the 25lbs boost Mk LFIX model.

 

Happy landings,

 

56RAF_Talisman

[probad]

And as a final thought. Whenever someone says something about this stuff, "this model is wrong, we should have that", and so, I remember Roald Dhal's memories. Once war begun he joined RAF, and was trained in a Hawker Hart as fighter. He was thinking all the time about getting to front line unit so he could fly a better ride, but once he did he was assigned a Gloster Gladiator, and told by his commander something like, this is what we have kid. After he had an accident and returned to service, by then he was given a Hurricane, like amid war… Go tell them Germans couldn't use their G models against Hurricanes. Dissimilar combat happens mate. Stop that balance thinking.

this is really it. the only thing this whole balance mentality aids is one's ego, it's not relevant to reality, and by extension, not relevant to simming.

Edited January 14, 2017 by probad

[Talisman_VR]

Very well said Zilch :clap_2::clap_2::clap_2:.

 

Yet you didn't research as thoroughly as you should, if I have to say :smilewink:.

 

L.F.Mk.IXc model was the more common Spitfire with up to 9000+ built. It was used even in many post-war Air Forces, well until mid 50's, almost 60's. Your fail is you focus on the number, like old Il-2 did, Mk.IX = 1942. Well, that's true, but it is not. First prototype and some examples were built in 1942 though in 1943 model isn't the same, and L.F.Mk.IXc, the one featured in DCS, with a +18Lbs boost Merlin 66 engine is a model built from march 1944 onwards. You get fooled by differences in nomenclature, while Germans changed names almost every time they updated a bolt, allied models tended to update current models without further notice and/or name changes. 1944 Spitfire IX isn't the same aircraft than 1942 one though kept the name.

 

But, keeping with your argument. It's well known that up to 40% of all the airborne Spitfires on D-Day were still Mk.Vb. Once there are a new model old ones don't disappear magically, you have to use them for a good while, and they are still capable aircraft indeed though not the latest refinement. Thinking in war like "this model, from this year, have to face this other model, same year", is just the stupid approach we have to blame old Il2 of, because they marked years as a guide to online servers balance. Nothing to do with real life.

 

 

K4 was built from October 1944 onwards, up to ~1000 units built. Dora from August 1944, up to 1800 built. Spitfire LFIX, ~9000 built, operated until 1957… If I have to guess, yes, Spitfire pretty much fought K4, D9, Me262 (we will eventually get), and everything, indeed she survived all German models.

 

 

 

And as a final thought. Whenever someone says something about this stuff, "this model is wrong, we should have that", and so, I remember Roald Dhal's memories. Once war begun he joined RAF, and was trained in a Hawker Hart as fighter. He was thinking all the time about getting to front line unit so he could fly a better ride, but once he did he was assigned a Gloster Gladiator, and told by his commander something like, this is what we have kid. After he had an accident and returned to service, by then he was given a Hurricane, like amid war… Go tell them Germans couldn't use their G models against Hurricanes. Dissimilar combat happens mate. Stop that balance thinking.

 

 

S!

 

Again, you may want to amend your post above, as I don't think you give the full picture when you say that 40% of all airborne Spitfires on D-Day were MkVb. This source shows that the Spitfire MkV aircraft were in Air Defense Great Britain (ADGB) Reserve squadrons, plus a few air spotters. I think you will find that very few MkV were in action and they were used less and less in the weeks and months after D-Day.

 

http://www3.sympatico.ca/angels_eight/2tac.html

 

Also, when squadrons were rested from the front line it was practise to give swap their later Mk Spitfires and take over MkV aircraft whist resting in less busy locations in the UK.

The MkV at this stage of the war was rather old hat and mostly used for training, spotting and ground attack, as it had been superseded by the Mk IX, XIV and XVI, etc.

 

Happy landings,

 

56RAF_Talisman

Edited January 14, 2017 by 56RAF_Talisman
Add link.

[DD_Fenrir]

Talisman, only a limited number of ADGB Spitfire Squadrons were cleared for 150 octane fuel in 1944.

 

2nd TAF didn't start using 150 octane till early '45. As such 18lb Spit IX vs 109K4 or 190D9 is very much a prototypical match-up.

[Ala13_ManOWar]

You may want to correct something you have said in your post, as I believe you will find that the Mk LFIX with the Merlin 66 @ 18lbs boost started front line service in March 1943 (not 44). You may have been getting mixed up with March 1944 when this aircraft was given full service approval to use 150 Octane fuel and 25lbs boost; May 44 first squadrons operational with 25lbs boost and 150 Octane fuel. At the moment we do not have the 25lbs boost Mk LFIX model.

I would gladly correct, but it's been discussed before and I think it was 44. A whole year to clear 150 octane use that then it wasn't very common used to the end of the war doesn't seems completely correct. Sources? If you mean about the "I want 25Lbs boost and I find sources whatever it takes but nobody more sees them" discussion, related to the similar "I want 1.98Ata, blah, blah", for K4, along with "I want 75" in P-51, blah, blah", I'm not on that.

 

 

S!

[Ala13_ManOWar]

Again, you may want to amend your post above, as I don't think you give the full picture when you say that 40% of all airborne Spitfires on D-Day were MkVb. This source shows that the Spitfire MkV aircraft were in Air Defense Great Britain (ADGB) Reserve squadrons, plus a few air spotters. I think you will find that very few MkV were in action and they were used less and less in the weeks and months after D-Day. …

Same. Weren't them there on 6 June 1944, yes or no? Of course I get Mk.V were progressively less and less used in 1944, that makes sense. Still my point is they don't miraculously just disappear, they are there, and they are used.

 

 

S!

Edited January 17, 2017 by Ala13_ManOWar

[Talisman_VR]

Talisman, only a limited number of ADGB Spitfire Squadrons were cleared for 150 octane fuel in 1944.

 

2nd TAF didn't start using 150 octane till early '45. As such 18lb Spit IX vs 109K4 or 190D9 is very much a prototypical match-up.

 

I only posted to try and sort out the correct date of 1943 for Spit IX with Merlin 66 and 18lbs boost. If you read, I was thinking that perhaps the mix up by ManOWar was the date for 150 Octane. Lets not start a 150 Octane red herring, LOL. Be sure that 150 Octane was used though.

 

Happy landings,

 

56RAF_Talisman

Edited January 14, 2017 by 56RAF_Talisman

[Talisman_VR]

Same. Weren them there on 6 June 1944, yes or no? Of course I get Mk.V were progressively less and less used in 1944, that makes sense. Still my point is they don't miraculously just disappear, they are there, and they are used.

 

 

S!

 

Not used in large numbers on the continent, as could have wrongly been assumed by your post. Let us be careful and not give the wrong impression to the casual reader.

 

Happy landings,

 

56RAF_Talisman

[Talisman_VR]

I would gladly correct, but it's been discussed before and I think it was 44. A whole year to clear 150 octane use that then it wasn't very common used to the end of the war doesn't seems completely correct. Sources? If you mean about the "I want 25Lbs boost and I find sources whatever it takes but nobody more sees them" discussion, related to the similar "I want 1.98Ata, blah, blah", for K4, along with "I want 75" in P-51, blah, blah", I'm not on that.

 

 

S!

 

Please correct to 43, not 44 for Spit LFIX Merlin 66 @ 18lbs boost. If you want to still claim 44, then you should post source as you posted first with no source at all.

Please do not use 150 Octane as a red herring to my post.

 

Happy landings,

 

56RAF_Talisman

[Zilch]

You know, I won't really fault anyone for wanting something of a balance in the game. It's a natural response, especially considering other games, even flight sims, take great pains to have balanced matches so every side has a fair chance at victory.

 

However, that's not what we have here, and we have to remind ourselves of that every so often. We have a study simulator, with realism as a priority over everything else. The F-15, for example, dominates most A2A engagements because the actual F-15 dominates most A2A engagements and our FC3 module has similar BVR capabilities as far as radar, weapons, T/W ratio and whatnot.

 

So the trick then is to learn your bird as well as you can and get every bit of performance out of it. Fly it to the edge of its performance envelope, master aerial gunnery, learn both energy and angles tactics so you can adjust to fluid situations.

 

I probably sound like a broken record by now regarding this in both DCS and other games like Star Citizen, but a worse craft flown to 100% is usually going to be in better shape than a great one flown at 30% of its envelope. Don't rely on the damn plane to win for you, that's your job.

 

The Mustang can't turn or climb with the K4 for example, but it has other traits that make it competitive as long as you don't get outside of your comfort zone. I won't rehash this here, as others have done so in better fashion than I can.

 

The Mk. IX, though, is a completely different animal. Sure, it can't quite climb with the K4, but if the Kurfurst goes vertical while being chased, the Spit IX can certainly hang onto its tail long enough to make the kill. It need not match it climb for climb exactly as long as you can hang on long enough to make your shot...the 109 won't be any more dead by nature of you having a few more feet/sec in climb rate than it does now when you out-fly it using this or other means.

 

Mustangs can shoot down K4's and even MiG-15's. F-5's can shoot down Su-27's. MiG-21's can bag F-15's. It's all a matter of knowing what your plane can do well and what it can't do, sticking to regimes where you can maintain control of things and avoid the opponent's comfort zone. It's not a matter of "better" or "worse" or "right" or "wrong." Just different, and to varying degrees of difficulty.

[ophiuchus]

One needs to remember, that beside "balanced - nonbalanced" capabilities of current aircraft lineup there are obligations, that ED took after KS campaign, and that all models were chosen back then by a different team, so any additional variants of Bfs, Fws and others are all up to current developer, and probably are highly dependant on profit from what we have now. Not to mention P-47, and hopefully Me262.

As for me, I enjoy a lot what we have now. And bow to ED for not abandoning the project.

[Zilch]

I can't wait for that P-47. It'll be a totally different beast. And don't forget the P-40!

[DefaultFace]

Don't rely on the damn plane to win for you, that's your job.

 

+1 :thumbup:

[Tomsk]

You know, I won't really fault anyone for wanting something of a balance in the game. It's a natural response, especially considering other games, even flight sims, take great pains to have balanced matches so every side has a fair chance at victory.

 

So I fly for fun, and personally I think a more balanced line-up would be more fun. More fun when I fly German, more fun when I fly Allied. I think when making a sim it makes perfect sense to choose a relatively balanced set from the set of all planes that flew against each other. I don't think very unbalanced situations are as interesting ... after all in DCS you can fly F-15s against 109s, but people generally don't because it wouldn't be much fun.

 

But this is just my opinion, and not everyone shares it, and that's okay too :)

[Ala13_ManOWar]

Please correct to 43, not 44 for Spit LFIX Merlin 66 @ 18lbs boost. If you want to still claim 44, then you should post source as you posted first with no source at all.

Please do not use 150 Octane as a red herring to my post

No red herrings, my point is clear. I think I remember it was discussed and stated it was 44. I'm not wasting time perusing the whole forum. If you are so sure about your date, please just tell me where I can check it, tell a source, or something. Otherwise I'm sticking with the date I think I remember (though my memory sometimes slips for sure).

 

 

S!

[Ala13_ManOWar]

Not used in large numbers on the continent, as could have wrongly been assumed by your post. Let us be careful and not give the wrong impression to the casual reader.

Fair enough, though not my intention at all.

 

 

S!

[Zunzun]

No red herrings, my point is clear. I think I remember it was discussed and stated it was 44. I'm not wasting time perusing the whole forum. If you are so sure about your date, please just tell me where I can check it, tell a source, or something. Otherwise I'm sticking with the date I think I remember (though my memory sometimes slips for sure).

 

 

S!

 

http://www.spitfireperformance.com/611merlin66.jpg

[Friedrich-4B]

No red herrings, my point is clear. I think I remember it was discussed and stated it was 44. I'm not wasting time perusing the whole forum. If you are so sure about your date, please just tell me where I can check it, tell a source, or something. Otherwise I'm sticking with the date I think I remember (though my memory sometimes slips for sure).

S!

 

Production of the Supermarine built Spitfire L.F. Mk. IXs started in February-March 1943,

beginning with EN529 - 583, after which production was concentrated on Mk VIIIs, including several hundred L.F. Mk. VIII w/Merlin 66, built in 1943.

 

Castle Bromwich production of the L.F. Mk. IX started in August 1943,

* beginning in the MH35xserial range:

 

* then MH612 & on, alongside of Merlin 63 F. Mk. IXs:

 

*MH813-MJ516 alongside of Merlin 63 F. Mk IXs (September - mainly October '43):

 

*MJ16x - MJ428 serial range (October/November '43):

 

* MJ441-MJ698 (November-December '43:

 

* MJ712-MJ942 (mainly December 1943).

 

All Merlin 66s were able to use +18 lbs boost right from the start. So, no, the so-called "LFIX Merlin 66 @ 18lbs boost" was not built only from 1944 on.

[MiloMorai]

 

L.F.Mk.IXc model was the more common Spitfire with up to 9000+ built. It was used even in many post-war Air Forces, well until mid 50's, almost 60's. Your fail is you focus on the number, like old Il-2 did, Mk.IX = 1942. Well, that's true, but it is not. First prototype and some examples were built in 1942 though in 1943 model isn't the same, and L.F.Mk.IXc, the one featured in DCS, with a +18Lbs boost Merlin 66 engine is a model built from march 1944 onwards. You get fooled by differences in nomenclature, while Germans changed names almost every time they updated a bolt, allied models tended to update current models without further notice and/or name changes. 1944 Spitfire IX isn't the same aircraft than 1942 one though kept the name.

 

But, keeping with your argument. It's well known that up to 40% of all the airborne Spitfires on D-Day were still Mk.Vb. Once there are a new model old ones don't disappear magically, you have to use them for a good while, and they are still capable aircraft indeed though not the latest refinement. Thinking in war like "this model, from this year, have to face this other model, same year", is just the stupid approach we have to blame old Il2 of, because they marked years as a guide to online servers balance. Nothing to do with real life.

 

S!

 

The Spitfire IX modeled by DCS was built in 1943.

 

Listed here are the units from the RAF which took part in the actions over Normandy.

http://www.raf.mod.uk/history/Units.cfm

 

I count 24 Spitfire IX squadrons and 6 Spitfire V squadrons.

[rel4y]

The DCS Spitfire actually has Nov 1944 features, but who cares honestly..