Flight Replicas has released its second set of Spitfires, this time the Mk. V. Skipped the Mk I as I had AH’s excellent early Spit already, but picked up the Mk V as it fits nicely between that and the FlyingIron Mk. IX. Decision was made really easy because FR split the package into two versions (total price is the same as their larger Mk I package), and I was able to pick up the Mk. V Tropical for under $9! My great uncle flew Wellingtons for the RCAF in the N. Africa theater, so that’s the one I wanted anyway. Both regular and clipped-wing models are included, with authentic liveries for each.
Haven’t had time to do thorough test-flying yet, but initial impressions are that the cockpit and exterior are beautifully detailed, and the handling/performance feels great. No obvious issues, though I don’t have a lot of time in it yet, so consider this a heads-up and first impression and not a review in any way. A bargain for Spit fans at that price, though!
Nice post, I’m surprised more people aren’t jumping on this. For $12.50 U.S., it’s half the price of others and better quality than some. Beautiful modeling and it’s obvious he took some time to get the textures correct, which is refreshing. I’m sure I’ll get the trop version. A real bargain.
I’m exactly same as original poster i didn’t get Mk1 as i had the AH one but i love the Mk V so for the money i took a chance ( i also have their Fox Moth and enjoy it)
only done a couple of flight but im very happy with it what even better is that the clipped wing version is included
visually it’s significantly inferior to both AH and FlyingIron. No Flight Replicas plane has been anything special so far. And the flight model of the Flying Iron is also much better than any other Spitfire so far. So I’m not surprised
Whist it could be considered a matter of opinion, it is clear that you don’t know too much about Spitfires!
As far as visuals, the FR 3D models are the most detailed and accurate too appear in any sim to date. The FI MK.IX whilst very nice has a number of things incorrect as regards the 3D model.
And they do not offer the choice of an earlier rudder, ‘e’ armament wing, and other small details that they could have to give the user different versions of the MK.IX.
FR on the other hand have done far superior job in getting minor and major differences between sub types of MK.V, and by using the original Supermarine drawings and combined with Mike’s talent, have done an outstanding job for a very, very good price, something that cannot be said of the others!
It’s true that I cannot say anything about the accuracy of the 3D model, however the QUALITY of the texturing is years behind FI and AH. On the other hand systems and flight model of AH aren’t very good, so that plane is also a non-starter for me.
So even if the 3D model is accurate 100% (which noone with an absolutely fanatical in-depth knowledge will ever be able to notice) the texturing on both the inside and the outside simply isn’t up to what I expect today.
No argument about the price. It’s extremely attractive.
But since I’m a visual guy - and I really don’t know THAT much about the differences in Spitfire models I prefer the more visually pleasing FI model which also seems to fly pretty acurately from all I’ve seen and read about its performance.
Also honestly I don’t care THAT much for one simple reason: it’s extremely difficult to pinpoint the versions anyway, since there were several dozend of them with some versions converted into other versions and customised, rebuilt, re-engined and upgraded in innumerable ways throughout the war. So most likely no Mk. V still flying today is identical in performance to another one. Not even highly standardised aircraft like the C172 behave the same. I have flown two C172M IRL and while they’re similar they both have their quirks and differences.
Finally the number of people playing MSFS who have had the actual chance to fly a real Spitfire is most likely somewhere between 0 and 2. Noone will ever be able to verify if the flight model is even remotely accurate.
Nothing really wrong with the AH Mk1 don’t even think of comparing it to FI MK IX because they are two different planes this MK V is nearer the Mk 1 than the Mk IX
Flight Replicas’ Spitfires are the most visually-accurate and complete, both in modeling and texturing, and they fly very closely to the book. They have all of the right contours, having been modeled accurately to the original engineering drawings. The textures are accurate down to the correct panel lines and rivet placement, etc., and with weathering that is applied as how it truly was. The markings and colors on each paint scheme are actually well-researched and executed using all of the latest knowledge on the subject.
Super-subjective and from the looks of the other posts – and the screenshots – a minority opinion.
I have FR, AH, and FI Spits. They all look great, IMHO. Sorry whatever quality you’re looking for in the textures isn’t there, but these are professional and highly accurate. I get that some people look for specific characteristics – exaggerated aging and weathering, specific shines to paint, etc – but again, subjective.
Comparing all three, I think anyone finding fault with the texturing/detail on any of them needs to be sent back in time to play Combat Flight Simulator V1. Or maybe Aces Over Europe.
Your screenshots are absolutely superb. Looks like it could easily be an air to air shoot.
There’s a lot to like about this addon. It looks utterly superb, the detail is fantastic and I like the flight modelling too. There’s a generous number of liveries and they all look absolutely fantastic.
It isn’t perfect though, the P-51 sounds don’t quite match up for my liking, the mix is also quite quiet. If I’m being really picky, the startup smoke is a bit much. But the one area I would really like worked on is that I really wish it had real tail wheel physics, that’s the area that does let it down for me as it’s the most glaringly obvious part of the package that isn’t accurate.
Overall though for the price, it’s a very good addition to the sim. Cannot wait for the Seafire either.
Premise: I have only bought the trop version.
Great 3D model, still the textures look flat and washed, kind of FSXish, and I am not very pleased by the flight dynamics, I find the aircraft quite unstable on the ground and flying at low speeds.
I hope in a flight dynamic patch in the future and some nicer textures by Jankees or other talented repainters.
I’m with you with the textures, but the Spitfire is supposed to be unstable on the ground and at low speeds. The huge torque of the engine and the narrow wheelbase makes handling difficult.
From the screenshots only, the textures do look a bit flat. To say they are bad would be grossly unfair though. They look very good, just not quite at the same level as the best of the best. Certainly more than good enough for the price.
But from what I gather reading the comment from @DuckDuckDuck500 it’s using Asobo P51 sounds? Is that right? If so, that’s a pass from me I’m afraid, especially as I already have the excellent Mk IXc.
I own all three Spitfires and without question Flight Replica’s is best looking in terms of modelling and texturing in compassion to the aircraft they represent. The texturing details on the font and the weathering is all pretty pitch perfect. It’s clearly been very well researched. All the textures also match the aircraft represented, Flying Iron have a couple of textures that are from early Mk.IX aircraft with the rounded tail while their representation is the latter pointed tail aircraft.
And yes, it is using the Asobo P-51 sound pack. It doesn’t sound quite right however, I don’t like the latest sound update to Flying Iron’s Mk.IX which went way to heavy on the supercharger noise, in my opinion, something which isn’t very audible on the real aircraft from the outside. So it’s swings and roundabouts for sure!
Thanks for the clarification. I have one of the Asobo P51D and the sounds are rather uninspiring, so that is a bit of a killer for me. It does seem like it’s otherwise a very good aircraft though.
I wish FR would make a little more use of PBR (not weathering, but ambient reflected light). I prefer the look of the FI bird in that respect, but the markings are beautifully researched and crafted.
Having watched a review on YouTube there is no way the 3D modelling or textures are as good as the FI Mk.XI. That’s not to say they aren’t accurate of course.
