DCS: Spitfire Mk LF IXc Discussion

So I believe the outcome of air combat depends on pilot skill, luck and who has what advantages. For most scenarios between WWII planes the most important of these is pilot skill, for an expert pilot will generally defeat a rookie even if the rookie has all sorts of advantages. Having a faster, better climbing, better rolling plane are all advantages and if I was taking a Bf190K4 or a FW190D9 against a Spitfire Mk LF MkIX I would generally reckon I had a somewhat better plane. However, it wouldn’t be as important as other advantages such as speed, altitude and surprise.

 

And that’s just 1-v-1, which most combat actually isn’t. Many-vs-many is far more complex and depends on so many things. That’s why air combat is interesting.

Again, that is only when you have Rookie vs Expert. That happens very rarely within combat flight sim communities.

Yes I agree, tactical advantage is very important, but even if the Spitfire is above the K4 right? He dives on the 109, and if the 109 notices that, he can dive away and Spitfire cannot hold with it in a prolonged fight.

Moreover, you say many vs many. That is exactly where faster airplanes have the advantage. The Spitfires will be unable to catch 109's in their vertical maneuvers, which will create a defensive situation for Spitfires.

I am not saying it is not interesting, I am a P-51D guy, so I couldn't care less for what Spit pilots will have to do. But I am just saying that Spit IXc with 18lbs is going to be at a severe disadvantage, but at least it has its own advantage.

Guys this discussion is not leading anywhere because everyone is only highlighting on side of the coin. Let me give you an example:

Have you played FIFA 16?

Is it possible to beat the 5 start team of Barcelona with a 2 star team from the Italian 2nd league? Sure it is possible.

Will player skill matter? Sure it will, if the player with Barcelona is much inferior.

Does the above mean that it is a fun, entertaining game that can end either way? Heck no.

Given that many players play this match several times, will it be somewhat frustrating for the ones controlling the 2nd league italian team on the long term? Heck yes.

Simple as that.

As for the timeline argument: Yes, some Spit IX-s were probably still around when the K came along. Using the same argument there could be a server with 109E-s vs Polish PZL P7-s, and the PZL drivers would have abolutely no right to complain, but take off and get shot down repeatedly and politely. Some of you could also enlighten them that it's the pilot, not the plane, because if my grandma sits in a 109, you could easily beat her with a PZL. Fair and square, isn't it?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not complaining, and I'm really looking forward to the Spitfire IX. It's one of my favorite planes.

As for the timeline argument: Yes, some Spit IX-s were probably still around when the K came along.

Uhm, "some", as in like 90+ % of the Spitfire force?

Uhm, "some", as in like 90+ % of the Spitfire force?

You are trying to prove fact a) by proving that fact b) is undeniably true. Yes, probably you are right, 90% of the Spits were IX-s (not to mention which variant...) But what % of the planes opposing the 109 K were Spitfires in, say ,the winter of 1944-45?

And let's go back to my example. What % of the Polish air force flew PZL-s? like 99+ %? Great! Then it's a fair and fun game, isn't it? ;)

You are trying to prove fact a) by proving that fact b) is undeniably true. Yes, probably you are right, 90% of the Spits were IX-s (not to mention which variant...) But what % of the planes opposing the 109 K were Spitfires in, say ,the winter of 1944-45?

 

And let's go back to my example. What % of the Polish air force flew PZL-s? like 99+ %? Great! Then it's a fair and fun game, isn't it? ;)

The analogy with the PZL is simply flawed. Just look at the 2nd TAF's order of Battle for late 1944/45. You will see that they had like 50 % Spit IXs, 40% Typhoons, 10% being Tempest and XIVs and all the miscellinous aircraft.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with the timeline and the Spitfire IX. Its was absolutely the most important, mainstay fighter of the RAF in 44/45. The backbone if you like. Just read back the thread for details, it was done to death already.

If that is not personal, then I do not know what standards you have.

You understand the word ADAGE don't you Solty? If not then allow me to help you out.... An adage is a generalism, or proverb. It means it cannot be taken as something pertaining to an individual, it is merely a statement of a widely held opinion or truism.

In other words, an adage is not a personal remark, which is why I prefaced the comment stating it was an adage. Specifically to stop anyone from taking offence by assuming it applied to them as an individual.

That is what I was referring to when I mentioned the nuance of language.

Fair enough? I would like to think the respect I have always had for your views wasn't misplaced. Are you about to disprove that?

The analogy with the PZL is simply flawed. Just look at the 2nd TAF's order of Battle for late 1944/45. You will see that they had like 50 % Spit IXs, 40% Typhoons, 10% being Tempest and XIVs and all the miscellinous aircraft.

 

There is absolutely nothing wrong with the timeline and the Spitfire IX. Its was absolutely the most important, mainstay fighter of the RAF in 44/45. The backbone if you like. Just read back the thread for details, it was done to death already.

LOL

90% of the luftwaffe were also Gustavs and Antons.

By the end of August 1944 the XIV were pulled from anti diver to the continent and then by the end of 1944 the luftwaffe were basically gone, the frontline squadrons were therefore slowly upgrading to Spitfire Mk XIV and Tempest throughout 1944.

September 1944 - XIV Squadrons

41, 130, 350, and 610

On Jan 1 1945, the mainstay of the Luftwaffe (fighters) was the Fw190A-8 (257 -30.5%) and Bf109G-14 (255 -30.2%). There was almost twice as many Fw190D-9s (167 -19.8%) as there was Bf109K-4s (92 -10.9%).

Fw190A-9s 20 - 2.4%, Bf109G-10s 52 - 6.2% and 2 lonely Bf109G-6s.

These numbers are for serviceable a/c.

See Appendix 2 in Bodenplatte by Manrho/Putz

Indeed, the campaign didn't begin until the allies had already achieved air supremacy.

The air war had been fought and won over the Reich during the preceding bomber offensive. Those allied bombers were then all made available to soften up the beaches and transport hubs well before the invasion took place.

The Luftwaffe were there, sure, but as an effective fighting force capable of affecting the invasion effort, sorry no. The glory days were long gone by then, with the exception of a mere handful of veteran pilots, the majority of Luftwaffe air crews were a shadow of their predecessors. Their resources were scant too.

So yeah, a bit one sided, but not quite in the way of aircraft to aircraft comparisons.

You understand the word ADAGE don't you Solty? If not then allow me to help you out.... An adage is a generalism, or proverb. It means it cannot be taken as something pertaining to an individual, it is merely a statement of a widely held opinion or truism.

 

In other words, an adage is not a personal remark, which is why I prefaced the comment stating it was an adage. Specifically to stop anyone from taking offence by assuming it applied to them as an individual.

 

That is what I was referring to when I mentioned the nuance of language.

 

Fair enough? I would like to think the respect I have always had for your views wasn't misplaced. Are you about to disprove that?

"As you sow, so shall you reap"

LOL

 

90% of the luftwaffe were also Gustavs and Antons.

 

By the end of August 1944 the XIV were pulled from anti diver to the continent and then by the end of 1944 the luftwaffe were basically gone, the frontline squadrons were therefore slowly upgrading to Spitfire Mk XIV and Tempest throughout 1944.

 

September 1944 - XIV Squadrons

 

41, 130, 350, and 610

On Jan 1 1945, the mainstay of the Luftwaffe (fighters) was the Fw190A-8 (257 -30.5%) and Bf109G-14 (255 -30.2%). There was almost twice as many Fw190D-9s (167 -19.8%) as there was Bf109K-4s (92 -10.9%).

 

Fw190A-9s 20 - 2.4%, Bf109G-10s 52 - 6.2% and 2 lonely Bf109G-6s.

 

These numbers are for serviceable a/c.

 

See Appendix 2 in Bodenplatte by Manrho/Putz

Exactly!

Looks like someone is conjuring up Luftwaffe numbers from his buttocks again. ;)

Anyways, we have a K-4 and we will be getting a IXc and rightly so. I consider the rest the twitching of the proverbial dead horse.

Topic is DCS Spitfire IXc, please stay on topic.

Any word on how she is coming along? :D

Now the F-5E is out the hangar hopefully we will hear something soon?? :)

I have just been flying a spitfire in IL2 CLOD. Cannot wait for some DCS fidelity looks like it might be a nice winter 2016 playing with all our new toys in Caucasus redux;)

Just to show how appropriate the Spit IX is for the Normandy map, take a look at 2TAFs ORBAT for June 1944...

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

To all those arguing that the XVI would be a better choice, unless you want to fly unarmed recce missions over Normandy, then it must be either the IX or V for the period of the D-Day campaign.

It would be interesting to see a similar orbat for the Luftwaffe for the same time period.

Just a thought...

Just to show how appropriate the Spit IX is for the Normandy map, take a look at 2TAFs ORBAT for June 1944...

 

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

 

To all those arguing that the XVI would be a better choice, unless you want to fly unarmed recce missions over Normandy, then it must be either the IX or V for the period of the D-Day campaign.

 

It would be interesting to see a similar orbat for the Luftwaffe for the same time period.

 

Just a thought...

I don't think anyone is arguing that a XIV would be more appropriate. I'm glad we are getting the IX. Who hasn't seen those pictures of MkIX-s carrying beer kegs?

The argument is about having to face late war, top notch German fighters. Some say it's a bit off and unfair, some say they were the most natural enemies. ;)

... then it must be either the IX or V for the period of the D-Day campaign.

Agreed.

Ooooo, it's Friday... maybe we'll get an update?

Just to show how appropriate the Spit IX is for the Normandy map, take a look at 2TAFs ORBAT for June 1944...

 

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

 

To all those arguing that the XVI would be a better choice, unless you want to fly unarmed recce missions over Normandy, then it must be either the IX or V for the period of the D-Day campaign.

 

It would be interesting to see a similar orbat for the Luftwaffe for the same time period.

 

Just a thought...

I entirely agree with this however the problem I have is that we are going up against the latest and greatest Bf109K-4 a rare late 1944 aircraft against an early 1943 Spitfire variant currently modeled (physically not performance wise) on a V upgraded to a IX when in reality it is supposed to be resemble MH434, if it was the Spitfire IXe then I would be a bit happier.

My problem is not the Spitfire IX in Normandy it is the K4 just wasn't around at that time so the argument for making the Spitfire IX an IXc and not an IXe falls flat on it's face :doh:

The K4 main rival at the end of 1944 would have been the XIV, Tempest, P-51 and P-47.

I entirely agree with this however the problem I have is that we are going up against the latest and greatest Bf109K-4 a rare late 1944 aircraft against an early 1943 Spitfire variant currently modeled (physically not performance wise) on a V upgraded to a IX when in reality it is supposed to be resemble MH434, if it was the Spitfire IXe then I would be a bit happier.

 

My problem is not the Spitfire IX in Normandy it is the K4 just wasn't around at that time so the argument for making the Spitfire IX an IXc and not an IXe falls flat on it's face :doh:

 

The K4 main rival at the end of 1944 would have been the XIV, Tempest, P-51 and P-47.

Exactly!

PS. P-38L too.

Exactly!

 

PS. P-37L too.

P-38L maybe. huh?! :music_whistling:

P-37 was a modernised P-36 Hawk, which never entered production.

I entirely agree with this however the problem I have is that we are going up against the latest and greatest Bf109K-4 a rare late 1944 aircraft against an early 1943 Spitfire variant currently modeled (physically not performance wise) on a V upgraded to a IX when in reality it is supposed to be resemble MH434, if it was the Spitfire IXe then I would be a bit happier.

 

My problem is not the Spitfire IX in Normandy it is the K4 just wasn't around at that time so the argument for making the Spitfire IX an IXc and not an IXe falls flat on it's face :doh:

 

The K4 main rival at the end of 1944 would have been the XIV, Tempest, P-51 and P-47.

And a spitfire XIV 21lbs is in the works.Maybe we will get 109g14 and fwA8 for Normandy too some day.Who knows.

And a spitfire XIV 21lbs is in the works.Maybe we will get 109g14 and fwA8 for Normandy too some day.Who knows.

That would be amazing, I really hope that we get mid war aircraft

I entirely agree with this however the problem I have is that we are going up against the latest and greatest Bf109K-4 a rare late 1944 aircraft against an early 1943 Spitfire variant currently modeled (physically not performance wise) on a V upgraded to a IX when in reality it is supposed to be resemble MH434, if it was the Spitfire IXe then I would be a bit happier.

 

My problem is not the Spitfire IX in Normandy it is the K4 just wasn't around at that time so the argument for making the Spitfire IX an IXc and not an IXe falls flat on it's face :doh:

 

The K4 main rival at the end of 1944 would have been the XIV, Tempest, P-51 and P-47.

And its perfectly historical to get the IXc. After all in everywhere but the most uninformed/biased circles everyone knows we are getting the K-4's main rival at the end of 1944, the +18 lbs Spitfire IXc and the P-51D-25. We are only missing the P-47D in fact.

Now, I can perfectly understand why some would want ridiculously rare and 'uber' planes like the XIV or the Tempest that turned up in insignificant, penny packet numbers at the very end of the conflict, but luckily, the correct and historical choice was already made.

Kurfürst: According to your sources, what plane was the most common adversary of the Mk IXc throughout its operational history? If it was a pie chart, how much percentage would the 109 K get?

I truly admire your knowledge about these aircraft, but calling the Tempest a "ridiculously rare uber plane that turned up in insignificant numbers at the very end of the war" made me laugh out loud. The Tempest reached the frontline half a year before the 109K and there was 1700 built in total as opposed to the 1593 109K-s. Yet, you wouldn't use the same expressions for the Kurfürst, would you?