Flight Replicas Spitfire Mk.XVI released!

vipgroup said:
In reply to the tailwheel question.

Sitting on the ground in this model, and not moving, the rudder pedals do not activate the tailwheel movement. Start to move forward, and the tailwheel does turn with the use of rudder. But not sure if this is because of turning physics as opposed to mechanical linkage.
Click to expand...
Thanks! FR chose to make the tailwheel steerable via virtual linkage which is not present in the real aircraft. Understandable as a selling point as it makes the aircraft much easier for the average pilot but turning the aircraft into a warbird eyecandy with GA behaviour. This is however easy to correct in the flightmodel.
 
ftl818 said:
Thanks! FR chose to make the tailwheel steerable via virtual linkage which is not present in the real aircraft. Understandable as a selling point as it makes the aircraft much easier for the average pilot but turning the aircraft into a warbird eyecandy with GA behaviour. This is however easy to correct in the flightmodel.
Click to expand...
The model is steered on the ground with differential braking and air blown over the rudder.
 
Always wondered about the door...
It's more weight to carry, and: d'you have to open it to bail out??

Bubble top.png
 
Wing_Z said:
Always wondered about the door...
It's more weight to carry, and: d'you have to open it to bail out??

View attachment 194953
Click to expand...
The cockpit of the Spitfire is very narrow, and the sidewalls are very high -- when you have the canopy closed it's just your neck and head above the canopy rail. At the same time, when standing on the wing the canopy rail is above waist height. The door was added so pilots could get in and out easier. And no, you don't have to open it to bail out, because you generally aren't stepping onto the wing.
 
There are 2 convenient longerons which could have boot-sized recesses above them, to facilitate climbing up and over.
If aerodynamics precluded holes in the side of the plane, a couple of spring loaded flaps would solve the problem.
You'd do away with a heavy door + locking mechanism. (Nicely modelled here, to stay on topic!)
Not to mention having to route longitudinal stresses around a large hole in the fuselage, not a good idea.
Perhaps it was simply drawn that way by a draughtsman in a hurry, and no-one thought to challenge the idea...

Spitfire cutaway.jpg
 
... and while digging into the cockpit detail, I noticed a little flightsim modelling which blew my socks off: the canopy has lugs which engage the guide channel for opening!

Microsoft Flight Simulator Screenshot 2026.08.09 - 13.55.02.83.png

You would not normally see this unless you crawled inside the rear fusleage. Wow
 
Why would I need another Spitfire? I know, I know. Stupid question. ;)

I've only flown two brief low-levels in the Mk.XVI but I'm pleased. She seems to perform about right (275 mph TAS at Sea Level, +7/2800 RPM) and once her rudder is trimmed, she's stable and forgiving.

Yes, she comes with some compromises. She's quite tame during takeoff with little tendency to swing and taxiing is simplified with what seems to be a steerable tailwheel, and that's fine with me. While it sacrifices some realism, trying to counteract an aerodynamic effect in MSFS without any aerodynamic feel is often an exercise in futility that just leads to over-controlling and frustration.

As an aside, I'm even more frustrated than ever with the Marketplace. I sorted by new products and was presented with another 737, some new airports, a few ridiculously expensive "flight plan" packages, a mishmash of mediocre liveries for random airplanes, and then, way down at the very bottom, the Spitfire Mk.XVI. Seriously. Does anyone else feel like us warbird fans are often treated like second class users?

Regardless, I'm very happy to have the last Merlin Spitfire in the hangar now. Thanks, Mike!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top