Prop interconnection/why an early production LF Mk IX?

The official pilots notes for the Spitfire Mk IX/XVI series state that in later aircraft, when the propeller control lever is pulled back to a stop in the throttle quadrant (fully aft), prop and throttle controls are governed together:

Is there a reason why this is not a feature? I'm assuming that the in-sim Mk IX is based on MH434, which was one of the first LF Mk IXs produced (early 1943), which may explain it. But that raises a further question: why is an early LF Mk IX being modelled when it's supposed to face aircraft not introduced until the winter of 1944 (except the Anton)? There are many refinements in later series Mk IXs which would make life a bit easier for players, and maybe a bit more competetive: interconnection, E wing, omission of the wobble pump, +25lbs (risky), Mk IID gunsight - to name a few. All of these features were in operational use by D-Day. What spurred the modelling a less capable LF Mk IX?

This is an age old discussion. In short: they had access to MH434, so that's what they modelled. Many (me included) hope that they'll add variants for later models that put us more on par with the D9 and K4.

The official pilots notes for the Spitfire Mk IX/XVI series state that in later aircraft, when the propeller control lever is pulled back to a stop in the throttle quadrant (fully aft), prop and throttle controls are governed together:

 

Is there a reason why this is not a feature? I'm assuming that the in-sim Mk IX is based on MH434, which was one of the first LF Mk IXs produced (early 1943), which may explain it. But that raises a further question: why is an early LF Mk IX being modelled when it's supposed to face aircraft not introduced until the winter of 1944 (except the Anton)? There are many refinements in later series Mk IXs which would make life a bit easier for players, and maybe a bit more competetive: interconnection, E wing, omission of the wobble pump, +25lbs (risky), Mk IID gunsight - to name a few. All of these features were in operational use by D-Day. What spurred the modelling a less capable LF Mk IX?

its only small feature helping pilot operate aircraft it wont improve its preformance but 25lbs would definetly change things a lot :)

i am siting on this forum not too long but i encounter countles threads about this topic :)

I think that we do have to accept that ED are doing what they can after having the WWII project dumped in their laps, so to speak, after the infamous Luthier did a smart 180 about turn. This project was taken on by them perhaps somewhat reluctantly but they are committed to it and we should acknowledge that.

There is a lot about the map of Normandy that attracts criticism and rightly so. The collection of aircraft that we have is not optimal by any stretch of the imagination but it is a constant work in progress and considering that it was never ED's intention to roll-out such a project themselves and they could have simply shelved it, what we do have is workable and provides something of an environment for us to enjoy.

Better aircraft will appear down the line, Thunderbolt and Mosquito to name but two and the Me262 also. It's a sandbox after all.

Rocket firing Hawker Typhoon (bubble canopy) is a must have!

Rocket firing Hawker Typhoon (bubble canopy) is a must have!

Not sure how that relates to prop and throttle interconnection in the MkIX Spitfire?