| | EFG_Osprey | | Membre |  | | 79 messages postés |
|  Posté le 20-05-2004 à 15:22:40   
| ftp://ftp.rossteam.ru/pub/downloads/IL-2_Fogotten_Battles/Other/il2c_v24n.rar
|
| | EFG_Osprey | | Membre | | | 79 messages postés |
| Posté le 20-05-2004 à 15:31:14
| pour info voici qu'on ma répondu sur SimHQ (au cas ou vous vous demandez pourquoi y'a pas les stats des modéles IX e) :
"G'day Shredder,
The expurgated version (the one without the gannet).
Firstly, the wings. The ‘c’ wing was the first attempt at a universal wing, capable of carrying cannon, machine guns and bombs. Each wing had two bays for Hispano Mk2 20 mm cannon, two bays in the outer wing for 0.303 machine guns and hard points for a bomb rack. The usual load out was two machine guns and one cannon, with the outer cannon bay blanked off. This is what we had on the MkVs in AEP 2.0.
The ‘e’ wing was introduced in 1944. It deleted the two 0.303 popguns, put the 20 mm in the outer cannon bay, and bunged a 0.50 machine gun in the inner bay. It also had provision for bomb racks and I seem to recall it was more robust than the c wing (better dive, perhaps?).
Many Spits – b, c and e wing - had their wing tips clipped, but this was not the origin of the LF designation. The clipped-wing versions (according to the RAF boys at Boscombe Down) were slightly more manoeuvrable at all altitudes up to 20,000 ft, above which the normal version was slightly superior. The LF or HF designations refer to the motor, which is the next part of this long streak of p*ss.
The MkIXc was the first version of the MkIX, and was basically a MkVc airframe with a Merlin 61 or 63 engine. The main advantage of these motors was that they had two-stage superchargers, delivering far more power at all altitudes, but at high altitude in particular. The full-throttle altitude of the Merlin 61 was about 26-28,000 feet. This meant that while the early MkIXs were far more of a match for the Fw190A than the poor old MkV, their real advantages didn’t kick in until about 20,000 ft.
The LF MkIX, regardless of wing and weaponry, was powered by the Merlin 66. The supercharger on this engine was geared specifically to improve the MkIX’s performance at the altitudes where the Fw190A was strongest: 12,000-18,000 feet. Consequently, the Merlin 66 had a full-throttle height of about 20,000 ft. The result was a plane with a rate of climb well in excess of 4,000 feet per minute up to 15,000 feet. It was also much faster below 10,000, although its absolute top speed was still around 400 mph, but at about 20,000 ft instead of 28,000 ft. Just to confuse the issue further, this version was sometimes referred to as the MkIXb. The LF MkIX was introduced in 1943 and was very common by 1944.
So, the rates of climb are as follows:
For the MkVb:
Height in feet Rate of climb in feet / min
2,000 3,240
5,000 3,240
10,000 3,250
15,000 3,250
20,000 2,440
25,000 1,750
30,000 1,170
I don’t have direct RoC data for the MkIX but the following table has time-to-height:
Height Speed (mph) Time to Alt
4,000 326 1 m 10 s
8,000 344 2 m 20 s
12,000 363 3 m 30 s
16,000 383 4 m 40 s
20,000 378 6 m 0 s
24,000 390 8 m 0 s
28,000 409 10 m 20 s
32,000 395 13 m 15 s
36,000 377 17 m 0 s
Jeez it goes above 20,000 ft, dunnit?…and for the LF MkIX:
Height RoC LF MkIX
2,000 4,725
4,000 4,730
6,000 4,735
10,000 4,745
13,800 4,350
20,000 3,450
30,000 1,950
As Ming has said, it’s a rocket on rails. I suspect it should out climb the Gustav, too, with these figures. (Does anyone have good RoC data for the Gustav?)
The HF versions were powered by Merlin 70s. Same deal as above, but optimised for high altitude. This version was less common than the others, but could fly and fight at 44,000 feet. Apparently, they actually did: they shot down some German recons above 40,000. Absolute ceiling was substantially higher.
Most of this little exposition is based on Alfred Price, The Spitfire Story, written extensive input from Jeffrey Quill. Here endeth the lesson.
Amen
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
--------------------
Respect bacteria: they're the only culture some people have"
|
| | EFG_Osprey | | Membre | | | 79 messages postés |
| Posté le 20-05-2004 à 15:42:54
| donc y'as pas de différences de perfs entre" IX c "et "IX e" c'est juste l'armement et un tout petit peu le roulis , mais ca m'etonnerait qu'on puisse le sentir dans la simu .
Par contre les "LF" de fin 43-1944 sont carrément plus puissants.
Je deteste les Spit V (ils ont rien de particulier) , mais j'avoue que j'ai un ptit faible pour le HF , ca doit etre sympa en haute altitude de croiser le feu, surtout avec ses 120 rpg de Hispano souza 
La comparaison entre mon bébé le " FW -190 A6" et le Spit LF MkIX c ou e est effrayente pour le Focke Wulf sur Il-2 Compare , juste un peu plus de vitesse ouf !
on va s'en prendre des prunes dans les fesses
|
| | skat | | dans la merde encore !!! | | Membre | | 183 messages postés |
| Posté le 20-05-2004 à 15:44:42
| et merde
--------------------
 |
| | Zeb | | Administrateur |  | | 157 messages postés |
| Posté le 20-05-2004 à 16:22:28 
| Faudra pas les rater à la première passe....
--------------------
N° 8 - "See, Decide, Attack, Reverse or Coffee Break" - E.H. |
| | beber | | Membre | | 210 messages postés |
| Posté le 21-05-2004 à 17:09:13
| merci
|
| |
|
