DCS: Spitfire Mk LF IXc Discussion

[Krupi]

I agree entirely Talisman, this is not restricted to Normandy 1944 it is the same for all DCS products.

[BIGNEWY]

Here we are another day, please do not make the discussion personal.

 

and stay on topic DCS: Spitfire Mk LF IXc Discussion

[klem]

Flying the DCS Spit Mk IX on the DCS Normandy map will not be all about D-Day. Also, if the Normandy map includes the Channel and the South of England, the Spit Mk IX 25lbs would not be out of place and I have to disagree with you Klem. As a side note it may be worth remembering that ADGB took part in D-Day. Any way, the map is clearly not all about D-Day. They are calling it the Normandy map, but we are getting the English Channel and South Coast of England I believe. If that is correct, clearly the map building potential is not all about D Day. In fact the plane set we have is somewhat divorced from D-Day, so nothing is joined up. My point is that if we have a map that includes Normandy, the English Channel and the South of England, then that is the area of operations we have for the plane set we are given. So, the options we are given includes ADGB and the Spitfire Mk IX they flew in 44/45 (or are we not to bother defending UK airfields when the LW come across the Channel on the DCS map?) as well as 2nd TAF. Lets not get hidebound about this, we have the whole map and plane set to use for our pleasure as delivered by DCS. I am very much looking forward to launching on a raiding mission in a Spitfire Mk IX across the English Channel and back (I hope, lol). I am looking forward to all the opportunities the new map will give us, not just D-Day (particularly as the LW was not about much at the time).

I hope you "get it" now.

 

Happy landings,

 

Talisman

 

We can't have all our sweets at once mate. It started out as DCS WWII 1944 with, supposedly, a representative a/c of each type that was predominantly operating over Normandy. It went wrong when the 109 and FW190 we were offered - in Kickstarter - were not representative of LW a/c predominantly operating over Normandy. We knew that from the start.Quite a lot more work and testing would be required to change it now. Also I think ED have focussed on the MkIX because they have ready access to a real aircraft and pilots.

[Kurfürst]

In any case we will have a Mark IXc L.F. in DCS, so the discussion kinda moot. I am more concerned that it will have the full loadout i.e. for ground attack.

[rel4y]

Well there it goes again. For comparison purposes of the DCS Spit Mk IX, here is the chart posted before but added with a G-6/G14 AM. :smilewink: The data is based on real flight tests.

[Zunzun]

Dear Kurfust,

It would be good to know how many of those Vs were actually used in front line duties compared to the IX. If the later represented about 20% of the strength a year before (beginning of 43) I think they were in much bigger representative numbers in front line duties by the beginning of 44.

 

Regarding the 2nd TAF not being engaged on the heavy bomber campaign my point was that as we are getting a tactical theatre (Normandy) the spit were indeed very representative as no strategic missions were flown in Normandy in 1944 (only tactical ones).

In any case I agree you that if the Luftwaffe were to have its actual tactical and logistic situation represented in the sim (for the last months of the war) then the allies were going to have many boring mission unless engaged in ground pounding sorties.

Finally I have to disagree with your last stamen as the spit IX we are getting were facing not a single K4 for good three months in the second half of 1944. Basically zero Kurfust facing 300+ Spit for half the period.

In the end is a silly discussion as during the war there was a fluid situation with the different variants being introduced gradually and in different numbers depending on locations. So whatever the variants we get it will be representative for just a place and only a limited period of time.

[NineLine]

In any case we will have a Mark IXc L.F. in DCS, so the discussion kinda moot. I am more concerned that it will have the full loadout i.e. for ground attack.

 

Yeah, I am not sure what they are doing for load-outs right now.

[MiloMorai]

In any case we will have a Mark IXc L.F. in DCS, so the discussion kinda moot. I am more concerned that it will have the full loadout i.e. for ground attack.

 

A Spitfire expert with 16 years of research said this:

 

The Mk V. with C wings could indeed carry 4 Hispanos (it was rare though, IIRC there was a lack of Hispano supply), even though 2x20+4x7.7mm was more common. Indeed you are right that the Mk IX was basically a reworked Mk V structure, however you forget that the Mk IX was much heavier, and the tires/undercarriage could not support the extra weight of the Merlin 60 series AND the extra Hispanos. I have never ever seen evidence of any operational Mk IX ever carry 4 cannons. In fact it seems that the wing structure and u/c could not support that until the redesign occuring w. the Mk 2x series.

If a pair of extra cannons can't be fitted then certainly no bombs or exernal fuel tanks could be carried.

[rel4y]

Mhh, that sounds weird.. How are two .303s per wing easier on the structure than a second Hispano? Also there is a lot of pictures of Mk IX Spits flying heavy stuff around.

 

http://bestetotnutoe.nl/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/spitfire-beer-3.jpg

[NineLine]

Yup, if we cant transport beer in DCS, what's the point :)

[rel4y]

Well I just think the beer barrels are heavier than the bombs usually carried.. Many Spitfires of 2nd TAF carried 250 lbs bombs under their wings.

 

Here is a picture of 317 squadron for example.

 

http://www.polishsquadronsremembered.com/317/a26.jpg

 

PS: Here is some information on the bomb racks for Mk IXs.

 

http://i181.photobucket.com/albums/x224/ausflyboy/spit20a.jpg

 

http://s165.photobucket.com/user/EdgarBrooks/media/wingrack22_zpscf63d0c0.jpg.html

 

And here is an interesting read ob the "Spitbomber". :D

 

http://www.vintagewings.ca/VintageNews/Stories/tabid/116/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/405/language/en-CA/Spitbomber.aspx

Edited April 19, 2016 by rel4y

[Zunzun]

Yup, if we cant transport beer in DCS, what's the point :)

 

A sad war :cry:

[bart]

Just to get us in the mood take a look at this video guy's.....

 

[ame=

]

[/ame]

 

yes.....yes.... I know we are getting the IXc and this is a IXe (anyone know the exact difference?) but I thought I'd share it anyway. Do yourselves a favour guy's, stick some headphones on and crank up the volume and feel the hairs on the back of your neck stand up!!

 

ED Merlin Sound Team - take note of that awesome sound :D may we have this please :thumbup: please :D please!! :cry:

 

EDIT - I tried to add just the link to the video but it came up with the whole thing, but you will have to go to you tube to watch it.

Edited April 19, 2016 by bart

[Redglyph]

Just to get us in the mood take a look at this video guy's.....

 

Great sound, goosebump-inducing and way better than music! Thanks :)

 

I'm wondering what the other front aircraft is, it sounds like the P-51 and its whistling scoop but I can't quite recognize it for sure (seems to have a flatter belly).

[klem]

Just to get us in the mood take a look at this video guy's.....

 

 

yes.....yes.... I know we are getting the IXc and this is a IXe (anyone know the exact difference?) but I thought I'd share it anyway. Do yourselves a favour guy's, stick some headphones on and crank up the volume and feel the hairs on the back of your neck stand up!!

 

ED Merlin Sound Team - take note of that awesome sound :D may we have this please :thumbup: please :D please!! :cry:

 

EDIT - I tried to add just the link to the video but it came up with the whole thing, but you will have to go to you tube to watch it.

 

The IXe (E wing) could carry 2 x Hispanos and 2 x 50 Cals, a pair each side, as you can see in the video, there are no 2 + 2 red patches covering the Browning .303 gun ports cos they ain't there.

[71st_AH Rob]

The Mk IXe could also carry 4x 20 mm cannon in place of the .50 cal and 20 mm combination and 1000lb of bombs.

[saburo_cz]

I know we are getting the IXc and this is a IXe (anyone know the exact difference?)

 

Wing type is that difference, only.

Both could be LF or HF, it depends on engine type, and both could be CW or classic.

 

I think that E type wings were equiped with underwing bomb racks as a standard.

Guns and cannons were explained above.

[Friedrich-4B]

Wing type is that difference, only.

Both could be LF or HF, it depends on engine type, and both could be CW or classic.

 

I think that E type wings were equiped with underwing bomb racks as a standard.

Guns and cannons were explained above.

The E type armament was introduced before D-Day (see attachments - excerpts from Shores & Thomas' 2nd Tactical Air Force Volume Four), and, by the end of July five Wings of 84 Group were equipped with what were initially called "Spitfire IX LF .5"s.

 

from a 2 TAF squadron list posted by re14y

131 Wing

302 (Polish) Squadron Spitfire IX WX

308 (Polish) Squadron Spitfire IX ZF

317 (Polish) Squadron Spitfire IX JH

 

132 Wing

66 Squadron Spitfire IX LZ

331 (Norwegian) Squadron Spitfire IX FN

332 (Norwegian) Squadron Spitfire IX AH

 

134 Wing

310 (Czech) Squadron Spitfire IX NN

312 (Czech) Squadron Spitfire IX DU

313 (Czech) Squadron Spitfire IX

 

135 Wing

222 Squadron Spitfire IX ZD

349 (Belgian) Squadron Spitfire IX GE

485 (NZ) Squadron Spitfire IX OU

 

145 Wing

329 (French) Squadron Spitfire IX

340 (French) Squadron Spitfire IX GW

341 (French) Squadron Spitfire IX NL

 

plus 125 Wing of 83 Group:

 

125 Wing

132 Squadron Spitfire IX FF

453 (RAAF) Squadron Spitfire IX FU

602 Squadron Spitfire IX LO

 

While the wing bomb racks may have appeared to be standard on the E, they could always be removed when not required.

Edited April 19, 2016 by Friedrich-4/B
add list of 84 Group units

[Krupi]

Quick question, the type c wing could still have bombs fitted right?

[rel4y]

Yes

[71st_AH Rob]

Quick question, the type c wing could still have bombs fitted right?

 

Two x 250 lbs bombs if I remember correctly under the wings, the racks were in different locations than the E wing and could not support as much weight.

 

I believe it could also carry a 500lbs bomb center-line or a slipper tank on the latter models smame as the E wing aircraft. Not at my library at the moment, can confirm when I get home...

[rel4y]

The C and E type wings were structurally the same and also the attachment points for the wing racks were the same. Thus only difference being the armament itself.

 

Interestingly 485 (New Zealand) Squadron converted their C-type wings to E-type wings just prior to D-day. Only threw out the .303s and put in some M2 .50s. No magic going on there.

[MiloMorai]

A little trivia:

 

It was Spitfires (IXCs) of 401 Sqd RCAF that shot down the 2cd Me262 by the Allies and the 1st by RAF on Oct 5 1944. This was WNr 170093 flown by Hptm. Hans-Christoff Buttman.

 

On Jan 1 (Bodenplatte) 401 still flying IXCs claimed 7 Lw a/c damaged or destroyed. One of those destroyed was a K-4 WNr 330119 rote 12 of 10./JG77 flown by experienced Lt Hans-Jurgen Schumacher (Stfhr). F/LT John McKay was the 401 pilot.

[Friedrich-4B]

Interestingly 485 (New Zealand) Squadron converted their C-type wings to E-type wings just prior to D-day. Only threw out the .303s and put in some M2 .50s. No magic going on there.

 

I doubt if it was as simple as that; at the very least, any squadron carrying out such a conversion would need the conversion kits issued by Supermarine, if not help and advice from Supermarine or Castle Bromwhich field teams. Don't forget that at about the same time, 485(NZ) Sqn's Mk IXs were also being fitted with the gyroscopic gun sights, so life would have already been busy for the ground crews.

 

As it is, 485 Sqn's ORBs from January through May 1944 show no evidence that any such work was carried out by the squadron, so it's far more likely the conversion work was done by 135 Airfield (later Wing), which also incorporated 222 and 349(Belgian) squadrons. (The ORBs do show that 485(NZ) Sqn re-equipped with L.F. Mk IXs between February 13 and 20: the first operations over France with the IXs, escorting Ramrod raids, ran through from March 4 to 20, then recommenced on April 4 through to May 30.)

[fastfreddie]

A little trivia:

 

It was Spitfires (IXCs) of 401 Sqd RCAF that shot down the 2cd Me262 by the Allies and the 1st by RAF on Oct 5 1944. This was WNr 170093 flown by Hptm. Hans-Christoff Buttman.

 

On Jan 1 (Bodenplatte) 401 still flying IXCs claimed 7 Lw a/c damaged or destroyed. One of those destroyed was a K-4 WNr 330119 rote 12 of 10./JG77 flown by experienced Lt Hans-Jurgen Schumacher (Stfhr). F/LT John McKay was the 401 pilot.

 

Those doubting how well this plane will do on the servers might be surprised. I think this plane will do very well especially against new German pilots. Plus the German side seems to be less coordinated into pairs than the allies especially on the Dow server. Won't be anyone to bail you out if you get low and slow.