Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

PC-9M vs. Spitfire

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • PC-9M vs. Spitfire

    Hi Jaboo
    What do you mean theres nothing else to move onto!!? an its not only a trainer its a highly capable aircraft an will do a lot more than train future pilots. Train for what? go look it up. at least try to post a convincing argument if your gonna start slating something you have no knowledge of!
    Betcha the spitfires we had a hundred years ago would outfly,outrun and outgun it
    :D

  • #2
    Originally posted by parkman
    Hi Jaboo
    Betcha the spitfires we had a hundred years ago would outfly,outrun and outgun it
    :D
    you mean this and the seafires:confused:
    Attached Files
    "ya might wanna raise your gear."

    Comment


    • #3
      would outfly outrun and outgun these:confused:
      i hope your being sarcastic
      Attached Files
      "ya might wanna raise your gear."

      Comment


      • #4
        They are here, sexy and here to stay put the only way we get otherwise is if one of u i running for Govt.............................................. ............

        Comment


        • #5
          Well the later marks of the Spitfires definitley had a speed advantage over the PC9s and nearly all marks of Spits had the benefit of fixed guns, various combos of .303 and 20mm.The PC9 though has advantages in weapons payload and range plus all the electronics and ejection seats, but still I'm a WW2 geek so I'll have to champion the Spit.I'll put up a full set of stats if anyone wants me to too see the comparison.What marks of Spitfires did you end up with anyway?
          Si vis pacem para bellum

          Comment


          • #6
            We had seafires, denavalised MKIII's got them back in 1947, twas the hurricane before that, think they had merlin 55m engines, somewhere round 357mph at 6,000ft, dont have proper stats so its a bit of a guestimation on my part, sure slap up the stats for an MKIII seafire and PC-9, but i cant see a seafire getin one over on a PC-9:p
            "ya might wanna raise your gear."

            Comment


            • #7
              Nice reflection in the Glass of an AC pilot's Celtic boss on the sea dont you think in the above pic?


              :-patriot:

              Comment


              • #8
                Sorry it looks more like the "Q.F.I" Badge. Apologies.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Ok, a Seafire MkIII
                  Max Speed-348mph at 6000ft
                  Range-with external tank 725 miles
                  Ceiling-33800 ft
                  Engine-1585hp Merlin 55M
                  Weapons load-Fixed- 2x20mm cannon, 4x .303
                  Disposable-around 500lb of bombs

                  And for a PC9
                  Max Speed-345 mph at 20015ft
                  Range-1020 miles
                  Ceiling-40025 ft
                  Engine-1150hp Pratt and Whitney Canada PT6A-62
                  Weapons load-6 hardpoints for a total weight of 2293lbs

                  Those stats are the one I have to hand.You may have seen others, I know I have seen various ones aswell, but I took mine from the sources I trust the most. There may have been some changes to the PC-9 because I don't know if the IAC asked to have any mods to theirs that would change things.I not going to start putting up dimesions becasue that doesnt mean much though the Seafire is slightly larger but only by a couple of feet or so each way.
                  The PC-9 beats it on most things but if you want to have a dog fight between the two I'd have my money on the Seafire.
                  Si vis pacem para bellum

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    The performance of the aircraft is quiet similar...I reckon at this stage it would be down to the guys flying them ! has the gauntlet been thrown down?:D
                    Covid 19 is not over ....it's still very real..Hand Hygiene, Social Distancing and Masks.. keep safe

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Actually, its probably quite simple. Leaving the aerodynamics aside for the moment, the Seafire has over 400hp more than the PC-9, and delivers its max speed at 6000ft, the Pc-9 is fastest at 20,000ft (according to Flug Revue, on the deck the pc-9 will do 312mph -500kph).

                      So the higher the fight, the more it will suit the Pc-9, but the lower and slower the more it will suit the Seafire, specially with its power advantage, it can literally haul itself around faster than the Pc-9.

                      In terms of weapons, if we're talking guns only, then the Pc-9 will have to drag around bulky, draggy external pods, and still only have a pair of .50s, so it'll be even slower. Those Hispano-Suiza 20mm cannon on the Seafire are a lot more effective. Aim-9Ms would change matters sifnificantly though.

                      In short, it depends entirely on where, at what altitude, fuel loads and pilots. In short though, the Sea Fire is (or was) a combat aircraft, the PC-9M is not.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Ever seen the film "Final Countdown" when the F14 Tomcat pilot uses a Sidewinder on a Japanese Zero?That changed matters significantly..
                        Last edited by ForkTailedDevil; 27 April 2004, 10:26.
                        Si vis pacem para bellum

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Simple really,

                          if the PC-9 pilot knew his aircraft and that of his enemy, he would know his best advantage was height for speed and maneoverability, so he would make sure the battle took place at his optimum performance altitude.

                          and that he had sidewinders :D
                          "He is an enemy officer taken in battle and entitled to fair treatment."
                          "No, sir. He's a sergeant, and they don't deserve no respect at all, sir. I should know. They're cunning and artful, if they're any good. I wouldn't mind if he was an officer, sir. But sergeants are clever."

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Oh just in passing if I'm not OT I remember watching spitfires [many moons ago]doing aerobatics.Now I recall the engine cutting out either in the climb or dive can't remember which and thinking that the pilots were practicing procedures for engine failure but I believe this was a design fault and in fact fuel did not flow into the engine in a dive/climb.Is this so?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              No Parkman, no Spitfire is allowed operate to-day without the schilling[spelling?] mod on the carb which prevents fuel starvation on a negative 'G' manouver.
                              Spit' drivers and P51's and other similiar overpowerd types have to pull the trottle, or the aircraft will carry on climbing ,till bordom or oxygen starvation sets in.:D :D :D
                              "We will hold out until our last bullet is spent. Could do with some whiskey"
                              Radio transmission, siege of Jadotville DR Congo. September 1961.
                              Illegitimi non carborundum

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X