Spit IIa is now so much more inferior to the 109

[Crumpp]

The Hurricane I Pilot's Notes mention that during take-off 2850 RPM will not be achieved with fixed-pitch propeller.

Exactly why you cannot draw blanket conclusions from engine instructions! All installations are different, even with the exact same engine/propeller combination.

The Spitfire Operating Notes distinguish between the Merlin II and Merlin III by rpm. The Merlin II is restricted to 2850 rpm and the Merlin III to 3000rpm. In a dive, both engines can momentarily achieve 3600 rpm. The run up can be deciving too as the engine is not under an airload.

[Crumpp]

I just reread the Spitfire and it does make a distinction between the Rotol and DeHavilland propellers on run up. The Operating Notes on a Merlin engine make no such distinction.

The difference in rpm is probably due to lack of airload on run up unless Rotols were not mounted to Merlin III's.

[Crumpp]

Anybody notice you do the run up on a Spitfire at full throttle!!!

Wow, that must have been beast and no wonder the Operating Notes require TWO men holding down the tail!

[Crumpp]

The following publications give 2850 RPM for Merlin II and 3000 RPM for Merlin III:
Notes for Pilot's on Merlin II, III and IV - 1940
Merlin II and III & V Aero Engine, 2nd Edition A.L. 4 - 1940
Spitfire Pilot's Notes - 1940

Well there you go...

In 1940 the Merlin III was given an rpm increase to 3000 rpm.

[41Sqn_Banks]

Originally Posted by Crumpp

Exactly why you cannot draw blanket conclusions from engine instructions! All installations are different, even with the exact same engine/propeller combination.

Sorry forgot to mention that the Hurricane I Pilot's Notes are from 1939. I think it also give only limits for Merlin II an not III.

The following publications give 2850 RPM for Merlin II and III:
Notes for Pilot's on Merlin II and III - 1939
Merlin II and III Aero Engine, 2nd Edition - 1939

The following publications give 2850 RPM for Merlin II and 3000 RPM for Merlin III:
Notes for Pilot's on Merlin II, III and IV - 1940
Merlin II and III & V Aero Engine, 2nd Edition A.L. 4 - 1940
Spitfire Pilot's Notes - 1940

[TomcatViP]

it has more to do with the airstream ard the prop, hence the aircraft speed in that case (fixed pitch).

Max rpm is more a function of admissible eng wear. It always a trick for eng manufacturer to increase rpm to raise the number of HP available.

I think tht latter in the war, the Merlin's limits were raised to 3k rpm [confirmed - see above].

There is nothing hidden here: just like you ride your bicycle, you can't reach your max rpm at high gear starting from rest.

The Hurri had a thicker wing, so it didn't need so much speed at T.O as the Spit. Hence the T.O pitch setting wldn't need to be as lean as tht one for the spit. If the Merlin was tuned for both aircraft, it wld seems normal tht the max admissible rpm for the Merlin wld hve been fixed as a ref for the Spit and then wld hve differed slightly with the Hurri.

This are only supposition. Take it only as it shld be.

[gimpy117]

I don't agree when we say the Spit is worse. It sure as heck isn't. I caught a Spit down low and toyed with an ME-109 for a good while untill he yo-yo'ed me. I decided to loop around and to to find where he was. unfortunately he got off a very small burst that seemed to get my roll controls somewhere. I just broke off, let a buddy deal with him as he was pretty shot up and I was guns dry...and used my rudder to induce roll to get home.

So really, He who has E wins. And if you catch an ME-109 Down low (which happens often) it's his funeral. The only huge advantage I can tell the ME-109 has is those 20mm cannon that can shred you pretty fast.

The Spit if anything still retains energy really, really well in turns and such. The only reason it's not cleaning house is because ME-109 pilots aren't playing their game (or at least the patient ones) and son't get into a turn fight where the spit will just about enter at the same speed it came out of the turn.

[CaptainDoggles]

Spit is only worse if you are one of the noobs flying around on the deck, turning circles kicking up dust.

My wingman and I confronted some Spitfires up high over England two nights ago and they were extremely formidable.

Can we please put this tired topic to rest?

[Bokononist]

Originally Posted by CaptainDoggles

Spit is only worse if you are one of the noobs flying around on the deck, turning circles kicking up dust.

My wingman and I confronted some Spitfires up high over England two nights ago and they were extremely formidable.

Can we please put this tired topic to rest?

Good pilots are good pilots for sure Doggles, and I class myself as a distinctly avarage pilot at best! The issue though is caused by the fact that this a simulator designed to model the battle of Britain which was fought with Hurricanes and Spitfires (both 1 and 2s) all modified for 100 octane fuel. What we have are planes that are not the ones that fought this battle. Whatever the standard of pilot is not really relevant here, the reds are flying the wrong planes for the BoB. Of course people are annoyed, and with the game in a state of flux at the moment those people want to bring the subject to the attention of as many people as possible, in the vain hope that the devs will acknowledge and correct this glaring historical error.
Boko.

[Kwiatek]

Originally Posted by Bokononist

Good pilots are good pilots for sure Doggles, and I class myself as a distinctly avarage pilot at best! The issue though is caused by the fact that this a simulator designed to model the battle of Britain which was fought with Hurricanes and Spitfires (both 1 and 2s) all modified for 100 octane fuel. What we have are planes that are not the ones that fought this battle. Whatever the standard of pilot is not really relevant here, the reds are flying the wrong planes for the BoB.
Boko.

Performacne of british fighters in Clod now not even match historical performacne of these planes at 87 octan fuel not mention 100 octan fuel boost