The Spitfire is perfectly compatible with the Essex-class aircraft carrier

[Hariskut]

As long as it's properly controlled, the braking distance is very short — it's even easy to take off again from the spot where you stopped. In fact, I performed three takeoffs and landings in this video.

[Raven (Elysian Angel)]

Imagine the Brits actually doing this in WW2… A Seafire if you will

[Nealius]

If only we could hack in the hook physics from the Corsair.

[DD_Fenrir]

https://www.veterans.gc.ca/en/remembrance/memorials/canadian-virtual-war-memorial/detail/1533293

 

[Mr_sukebe]

2 hours ago, Nealius said:

If only we could hack in the hook physics from the Corsair.

 

Yes please...

Maybe ED to give the Spit a visual overhaul, give us 1944 levels of boost, add the hook as an option and charge us a smallish amount for the update.

[Hariskut]

6小时前，DD_Fenrir说：

https://www.veterans.gc.ca/en/remembrance/memorials/canadian-virtual-war-memorial/detail/1533293

 

A very good real-life example. If he succeeded on his first attempt, it shows he’s exceptionally gifted. It was extremely difficult for me at the beginning — things only started to go smoothly after I discovered a few tricks.

[Hariskut]

3小时前，Mr_sukebe说：

 

Yes please...

Maybe ED to give the Spit a visual overhaul, give us 1944 levels of boost, add the hook as an option and charge us a smallish amount for the update.

According to DCS's simulation standards, that would be a completely different Spitfire — the 1944 version should be the Spitfire Mk XIV with the Griffon engine. It's one of my favorite planes in IL-2. The takeoff handling feels very different compared to the current Spitfire Mk IX.

[DD_Fenrir]

12 minutes ago, Hariskut said:

According to DCS's simulation standards, that would be a completely different Spitfire — the 1944 version should be the Spitfire Mk XIV with the Griffon engine. It's one of my favorite planes in IL-2. The takeoff handling feels very different compared to the current Spitfire Mk IX.

The Seafire 15 never saw operational service as far as I am aware.

The Merlin 55 engined Seafire F/L Mk.III certainly did, alongside F4U-1D and Corsair Mk.II in the pacific theatre. 

The F/L Mk.III however, is more closely related to the RAFs Mk.V version than the LF IXc we currently have.

Just putting a hook on our Spitfire LF.IXc really does not adhere to EDs own standards.

 

[Nealius]

1 hour ago, Hariskut said:

According to DCS's simulation standards

What standards? We have an F-35 in the pipeline.

[Pikey]

I've already got my AI Indefatigable Seafires and skin landing on the Essex. There's a post in hawkeye60's mods for a plugin that allows AI hook deployment.

TF57 had to copy the Americans who were well ahead of them in carrier warfare, but copy they did, fought with them, they did, right to Tokyo. It's sadly missed story, you dont get many Oscars for a supporting role.

[Gunfreak]

37 minutes ago, Pikey said:

I've already got my AI Indefatigable Seafires and skin landing on the Essex. There's a post in hawkeye60's mods for a plugin that allows AI hook deployment.

TF57 had to copy the Americans who were well ahead of them in carrier warfare, but copy they did, fought with them, they did, right to Tokyo. It's sadly missed story, you dont get many Oscars for a supporting role.

My favourite aviation historian of late is Thomas McKelvey Cleaver, he has an a like 6 or 7 book series on the Pacific war. From Pearl Harbour to the end. With books covering the beginning, middle and end. He has his own book for the South Pacific from Guadalcanal to the pacification of Rabaul.  The last book in the series cover the home islands and the last campaign on Japan proper. And does cover and give credit to the FAA and Royal navy. 

He uses sources from all combatants, his books on Korea kills a few scared cows, he's not one to let his nationality dictate. And he used American, North Korean, Chinese and soviet sources.  And his Korea book dealing with the Navy again gives due credit to the royal navy and FAA.