P-51...

[=362nd_FS=RoflSeal]

2 hours ago, ICDP said:

I'm not sure what you are trying to prove because I was specifically referring to the P51B 61" performance of late 1943 to mid 1944.  Your post I replied to was stating that the P51B was available before the later 109G10/14 and 190A8 at 1.42 ATA.  I was simply trying to clarify that in late 1943 - early 1944 the P51B was running at 61" and not much faster at SL than equivalent LW fighters.  My main point however, which you conveniently ignored and cut off from your unedited reply, was that performance between Western Allied and LW piston fighters in late 43 to end of the war was pretty close.

 

Credit for this chart goes to Mike Williams

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org

 

 

 

61 "Hg is military power

67 "Hg is War Emergency Power. 

Both were available when the engine saw service.

With 150 Octane, WEP was bumped up to 72-81 "Hg depending

[-332FG-Hank_DG]

The real question is when we will get the P-51. The DD this week sounded like they may not release anymore planes until the whole product is finished since they are fairly close to being done.

[ShamrockOneFive]

7 minutes ago, II./JG77_HankDG said:

The real question is when we will get the P-51. The DD this week sounded like they may not release anymore planes until the whole product is finished since they are fairly close to being done.

 

I didn't read it that way. My assumption is that we'll see the Mustang and potentially the Bodenplatte map together in the next major patch. It sounds like both are close and we've seen the Mustang in-engine already which leads me to think that it's fairly far along possibly with the art team signed off on it and the programming team working on it.

 

The Tempest, Lightning and Mitchell are a little further behind from everything we know.

[sevenless]

12 minutes ago, ShamrockOneFive said:

My assumption is that we'll see the Mustang and potentially the Bodenplatte map together in the next major patch.

 

Mid-End of July would be perfect. My flesh is ready for that ?

[BlitzPig_EL]

 

[ICDP]

8 hours ago, =362nd_FS=RoflSeal said:

61 "Hg is military power

67 "Hg is War Emergency Power. 

Both were available when the engine saw service.

With 150 Octane, WEP was bumped up to 72-81 "Hg depending

 

Thanks for the info, much appreciated.

 

Remember that in mid 1943 the LW could wait until the short range escorts had to turn back before attacking bomber formations.  In the context of WWII the fact the P51 could escort the USAAF strategic bombers all the way to Berlin and back was what killed the LW.  Prior to this the LW could use Ju88 and Bf110 heavy fighters, or gunpod equipped 109s and 190s with relative impunity.  When the P51B was introduced in Sep 43 it had the following effect on the LW.

• Bf110 and Ju88 heavy day fighters were no longer used with almost impunity against unescorted bombers and were eventually withdrawn.
• Bf109 and Fw190s could no longer be configured purely for anti bomber missions with gunpods killing performance.
• The available Fw190 and Bf109s had to be split between anti bomber and the anti escort role.

All of this meant the numbers of aircraft the LW were sending against bombers were drastically reduced in almost one fell swoop.  The same effect would have occurred if the USAAF had magically developed a long range P40N that was 40mph slower than a P51B.  It was the fact those long range escorts existed in large numbers that mattered, not that they had a speed advantage.

Edited June 30, 2019 by ICDP

[Bremspropeller]

I do agree with your big picture, but I'll have to energicly disagree about your assessment of the P-51.

What made the difference here was that the USAAF had an airplane that not only could do the job (Berlin and back on the big gas-bags; Prague was just about as far as they could go), but also could (out)perform the Luftwaffe at the critical altitude (at least way into summer '44). It was also fairly easy to handle and didn't require a very good pilot to extract most of it's capabilities.

 

People underestimate the qualities of the airplane.

 

I'm looking forward to Bill Marshall's new book on the P-51's early development.

 

 

[ICDP]

I'm not saying the P51 was poor and had no qualities as a fighter.  I am saying the strategic situation for the LW changed dramatically once long range escorts showed up because it rendered significant portions of the LW anti bomber force and their tactics obsolete.  The same effect would have been achieved if the P51 was 30-40mph slower, the fact it had that speed advantage at critical alt was a bonus rather than a requirement.

 

In the context of this sim in late 44 early 45, the P51D does not have that speed advantage at all.  Even if we had a BoX late 43 P51B vs Fw190A5 it was not significantly faster at the low medium altitudes a tactical airwar sim entails.  I would much rather have a P51A in that scenario

 

Scroll down to the graphs at the bottom of the Fw190A5 reports.  While the graph does not show a P51B

 we can see that at low - medium altitudes it is not dominating a contemporary 190A as some would expect.

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/fw190/fw190a5.html

 

I think I am trying to temper people's expectations on what the P51D will deliver in the context of a late 44 - mid 45 tactical airwar sim.

Edited June 30, 2019 by ICDP

[[DBS]TH0R]

13 hours ago, ICDP said:

In the context of BOBP, we are getting a mid 1944 - 1945 P51D, not a late 1943 P51B and as such it faced the later 109s and 190Ds.  We are also going to need to remember that neither numbers, nor build quality are a factor.  So for the most part the P51D will have a very limited set of advantages against a 109K or 190D 1 v 1.

• Keep fast and use the 109s poor high speed agility it and the P51D might edge the fight.
• Against the Dora, I can't think of any real advantages, the Dora will have a small edge in a turn fight, better climb, acceleration and about as fast.
• Obviously taking 100% fuel is pointless given map sizes but the LW guys have that option also.

I remember using the P51 very effectively in old IL2 when using 25% fuel.  It could hold it's own against the late war LW types but it was a bloody challenge

 

Both in IL-2 1946 and in DCS the P-51 easily out turns the Dora. Dora might have an advantage at higher speeds in turning fights. Also, vs. the 109s the P-51 did have a turning advantage in the initial turn that bled all of its energy. You had that one trick up your sleeve but then you were done as far as the turning fight goes. Flaps also helped a lot.

 

Also worth noting, based on the last DD - if they implement G force fatigue on pilots, P-51 might find its own advantage here due to G-suits allied pilots used.

 

I few hundreds of hours P-51 in the old IL2 1946, and out of the three main late war contenders (Dora, Tempest and Mustang) the P-51 was indeed the most difficult to master. Mainly because of the guns - unlike the other two that packed some heavy firepower, the .50s needed sharpshooting skills. With 50% fuel load, you could easily do a +1h sortie without saving fuel / cruise power.

Edited June 30, 2019 by [DBS]TH0R

[=362nd_FS=RoflSeal]

4 hours ago, ICDP said:

 

All of this meant the numbers of aircraft the LW were sending against bombers were drastically reduced in almost one fell swoop.  The same effect would have occurred if the USAAF had magically developed a long range P40N that was 40mph slower than a P51B.  It was the fact those long range escorts existed in large numbers that mattered, not that they had a speed advantage.

P-40N wasn't a long range model and had largely the same fuel capacity as the previous marks

 

28 minutes ago, [DBS]TH0R said:

 

 

Mainly because of the guns - unlike the other two that packed some heavy firepower, the .50s needed sharpshooting skills. With 50% fuel load, you could easily do a +1h sortie without saving fuel / cruise power.

This is because the 50cals in old IL-2 were bad and in DCS are useless peashooters. The 50cals in BoX are actually pretty good especially when you hit someone at convergence range.

Edited June 30, 2019 by =362nd_FS=RoflSeal

[Mac_Messer]

14 hours ago, ICDP said:

 

I remember using the P51 very effectively in old IL2 when using 25% fuel.  It could hold it's own against the late war LW types but it was a bloody challenge

Well, because first thing people did was rush off into the blue and fly the Pony exactly like they fly the 109s. Big mistake starting American Whinecity over at the ubi forums.

 

What ingame P51 will be, is a more nimble 190 with noticeable performance advantage over LW pistons over 24.000ft. If you throw it around like a Spitfire, you`re going to get shot down.

4 hours ago, Bremspropeller said:

People underestimate the qualities of the airplane.

What? The thread alone is proof people treat the Pony as the lone LW beater. Sounds like overestimation to me.

[ICDP]

18 minutes ago, =362nd_FS=RoflSeal said:

P-40N wasn't a long range model and had largely the same fuel capacity as the previous marks

 

This is because the 50cals in old IL-2 were bad and in DCS are useless peashooters. The 50cals in BoS are actually pretty good especially when you hit someone at convergence range.

 

I know the P40N was not a long range model, I was hypothesising that even if it "magically" was then it would have had the same net effect against the LW.  Essentially the LW would still no longer have the option if sitting back with Ju88 and Me110 heavy fighters waiting for the short range escorts to eff off home.

 

The USAAF needed a long range fighter escort and it ended up being the P51B.  The fact it was superior over the 109 and 190 at high alt was a bonus.

Edited June 30, 2019 by ICDP

[=362nd_FS=RoflSeal]

1 minute ago, ICDP said:

 

I know the P40N was not a long range model, I was hypothesising that even if it "magically" was then it would have had the same net effect against the LW.  The USAAF needed a long range fighter escort and it ended up being the P51B.

I really doubt that. The P-40s were slower then the 109s nevermind the 190s and just got much worse at high altitude where the bombers flew. When the P-51B/C came it had at 20-40mph speed advantage over the German types and had a higher critical altitude.

[ICDP]

18 minutes ago, Mac_Messer said:

What? The thread alone is proof people treat the Pony as the lone LW beater. Sounds like overestimation to me.

 

Indeed, that is my perception from reading quite a few posts in this thread as well.

[[DBS]TH0R]

27 minutes ago, =362nd_FS=RoflSeal said:

This is because the 50cals in old IL-2 were bad and in DCS are useless peashooters. The 50cals in BoS are actually pretty good especially when you hit someone at convergence range.

 

Not really. Like here, if you knew how to use them (i.e. like you said, fire in the convergence range) they were devastating:

 

 

They did lack the incendiary round, which was added later on in one of the TD patches. IIRC.

Edited June 30, 2019 by [DBS]TH0R

[=362nd_FS=RoflSeal]

1 minute ago, [DBS]TH0R said:

 

Not really. Like here, if you knew how to use them (i.e. like you said, fire in the convergence range) they were devastating:

 

 

Honestly that may have been the case. I am a much better shot now then since 1946. The DCS 50cals, though, which extends to the whole damage modelling in that game are absolutely atrocious

[ICDP]

22 minutes ago, =362nd_FS=RoflSeal said:

I really doubt that. The P-40s were slower then the 109s nevermind the 190s and just got much worse at high altitude where the bombers flew. When the P-51B/C came it had at 20-40mph speed advantage over the German types and had a higher critical altitude.

 

The LW heavy fighters were decimating unescorted bombers, as were the heavy gunpod anti bomber versions of the 109 and 190.  They could do this because there were no escorts to worry about.  Once those long range escorts showed up the LW had to withdraw their heavy fighters and had to start sending 109 and 190s up as anti escorts.  Essentially their limited resources were no longer mostly dedicated to shooting down bombers.  Any semi decent fighter capable of holding its own against a 109 or 190 and easily capable of taking care of heavy fighters would have had the exact same effect.

 

My "magic" long range P40N was made as a tongue in cheek reference to the fact the appearance of long range escorts was more about the strategic effect it had.

Edited June 30, 2019 by ICDP

[MeoW.Scharfi]

Just now, [DBS]TH0R said:

Not really. Like here, if you knew how to use them (i.e. like you said, fire in the convergence range) they were devastating:

 

In DCS they are quite bad tho. The P51s in DCS would be far more evil if the damage model of it was as good as in il2.

 

33 minutes ago, Mac_Messer said:

What ingame P51 will be, is a more nimble 190 with noticeable performance advantage over LW pistons over 24.000ft. If you throw it around like a Spitfire, you`re going to get shot down.

4 hours ago, Bremspropeller said:

People underestimate the qualities of the airplane.

What? The thread alone is proof people treat the Pony as the lone LW beater. Sounds like overestimation to me.

 

iF yoU tHrOw It ArOuNd LiKe A sPItFiRe, yOu'Re gOiNg To gEt sHoT dOwN

 

?LAUGHS IN P47 FLAPS?

[Sublime]

Wake me up when one of the really smart guys does a write up on the instances Sov planes and P51s accidentally got into tangles over Germany.

Several Soviet accounts mention this and its an interesting subject.

Especially as the Western theater was considered much tougher in air to air generally by the Germans and at least from the Sov pilots side (which is biased of course)  I never once read of the Soviets getting trounced... Of course theres so little other info out there.

[9./JG27DefaultFace]

That story is told from several of the Mustang pilots perspectives in the book "The Fight in the Clouds". 

[MeoW.Scharfi]

 

55 minutes ago, ICDP said:

1 hour ago, Mac_Messer said:

What? The thread alone is proof people treat the Pony as the lone LW beater. Sounds like overestimation to me.

 

Indeed, that is my perception from reading quite a few posts in this thread as well.

 

"lone LW beater" 

The P51 is an airplane that will make the typical LW only flyer make think twice before he starts running away(except 262). We don't have any allied airplane YET that can match the topspeed of the D9 or Bf109K4 yet, not even the Fw190A8.

 

With the P51 we will get the first allied airplane that can catch german planes or having equal topspeed. The typical dogfights end up in the lw plane trying to run away. This won't be so easy anymore against the P51D just to "run away". Some Waffles should start to learn defensive flying.

Edited June 30, 2019 by MeoW.Scharfi

[Sgt_Joch]

22 minutes ago, Sublime said:

Wake me up when one of the really smart guys does a write up on the instances Sov planes and P51s accidentally got into tangles over Germany.

Several Soviet accounts mention this and its an interesting subject.

Especially as the Western theater was considered much tougher in air to air generally by the Germans and at least from the Sov pilots side (which is biased of course)  I never once read of the Soviets getting trounced... Of course theres so little other info out there.

Depends on the source, I know the Russians make that claim, but I also read the contrary.

 

The average Soviet pilot was a rookie up until mid-44 with much less training and flight time that the average USAAF pilot. Soviet pilot skills improved into 45 since the LW pretty much disappeared but it is doubtful it ever reached U.S. standards.

 

The few accounts around seem to be of Russian aces running into average U.S. pilots which do not really prove anything.

Edited June 30, 2019 by Sgt_Joch

[Sublime]

Just now, Sgt_Joch said:

Depends on the source, I know the Russians make that claim, but I also read the contrary.

The average Soviet pilot was a rookie up until mid-44 with much less training and flight time that the average USAAF pilot. Soviet pilot skills improved into 45 since the LW pretty much disappeared but it is doubtful it ever reached U.S. standards.

 

The few accounts around seem to be of Russian aces running into average U.S. pilots which do really prove anything.

Theres enough accounts + common sense of how giant WW2 was.. But it definitely happened.

Yes the Sov ace thing Ive read as well and the better pilot almost always will triumph.. So yeah theyre outliers.

Im sure much of the accounts is bias and I agree US pilots were probably better trained on average.

Theres countless factors we cant know like combat experience of the units involved etc.

Its a interesting question to me howeber and a lot of recent stuff Ive read lately like the excellent Me262 kill/death write up recently has given me new faith that theres still quite a bit of really interesting info out there to be gleaned by people smarter than me.. Thats why Im hoping for some excellent write up (lol)

You know o/t a little but in scripted careers can you assign either side any planes you want or does the AI automatically target certain types? What Im driving at is in QMB I often match up allied v allied planes etc. The AI is so terrinle in P47s and tyeyre so fat and unwieldy any time I want to test out a unfamiliar plane or weird weapon theyre my targets.  That was a hard learned lesson on flying the 262.. Ironically p47s were much easier targets than A20s or Ju52s

 

16 minutes ago, 9./JG27DefaultFace said:

That story is told from several of the Mustang pilots perspectives in the book "The Fight in the Clouds". 

Ooh ty I never heard of that book.

It definitely happened more than once

[Bremspropeller]

2 hours ago, Mac_Messer said:

What? The thread alone is proof people treat the Pony as the lone LW beater. Sounds like overestimation to me.

 

They treat it that way for the wrong reasons.

[FTC_Riksen]

6 hours ago, ICDP said:

I'm not saying the P51 was poor and had no qualities as a fighter.  I am saying the strategic situation for the LW changed dramatically once long range escorts showed up because it rendered significant portions of the LW anti bomber force and their tactics obsolete.  The same effect would have been achieved if the P51 was 30-40mph slower, the fact it had that speed advantage at critical alt was a bonus rather than a requirement.

 

In the context of this sim in late 44 early 45, the P51D does not have that speed advantage at all.  Even if we had a BoX late 43 P51B vs Fw190A5 it was not significantly faster at the low medium altitudes a tactical airwar sim entails.  I would much rather have a P51A in that scenario

 

Scroll down to the graphs at the bottom of the Fw190A5 reports.  While the graph does not show a P51B

 we can see that at low - medium altitudes it is not dominating a contemporary 190A as some would expect.

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/fw190/fw190a5.html

 

I think I am trying to temper people's expectations on what the P51D will deliver in the context of a late 44 - mid 45 tactical airwar sim.

 

I'm very eager to get my hands on the P51 as it is my favorite plane but, like you, I have realistic expectations on how it should perform. I do not expect it to outurn the 109s or to be faster than a K4 and those having this expectation will be disappointed since that was not the case IRL. I do expect it to look amazing and hope they get the engine sound and the whistle right! Although it will be inferior than most top notch LW planes, the difference will not be big and in some areas the Mustang will be even better. In these situations where the plane capabilities are similar, it will once again come down to pilot skill and tactics ... Expecting the plane to magically do that for you is just wrong.

Edited June 30, 2019 by SCG_Riksen

[ICDP]

2 hours ago, MeoW.Scharfi said:

 

 

"lone LW beater" 

The P51 is an airplane that will make the typical LW only flyer make think twice before he starts running away(except 262). We don't have any allied airplane YET that can match the topspeed of the D9 or Bf109K4 yet, not even the Fw190A8.

 

With the P51 we will get the first allied airplane that can catch german planes or having equal topspeed. The typical dogfights end up in the lw plane trying to run away. This won't be so easy anymore against the P51D just to "run away". Some Waffles should start to learn defensive flying.

 

The La5FN, says hold my beer ?

 

It already fills that role at the altitudes most tactical fights took place and has done for a while now.  The La5FN is much faster at medium and lower altitudes than a contemporary 109 and the 190A needs to use the C3 boosted version just to keep up.

 

So the idea that the P51D will finally give the allies a competitive aircraft does not hold up to scrutiny.

Edited June 30, 2019 by ICDP

[[DBS]TH0R]

7 minutes ago, ICDP said:

 

The La5FN, says hold my beer ?

 

It already fills that role at the altitudes most tactical fights took place and has done for a while now.  The La5FN is much faster at medium and lower altitudes than a contemporary 109 and the 190A needs to use the C3 boosted version just to keep up.

 

So the idea that the P51D will finally give the allies a competitive aircraft does not hold up to scrutiny.

 

Unless the P-51 starts losing control surfaces above 700 km/h I disagree. Also, we're, last I checked, discussing Boddenplate plane set, i.e. late war one.

 

Not to say the FN isn't great and does put the LW on the defensive.

[Psyrion]

20 minutes ago, ICDP said:

 

The La5FN, says hold my beer ?

 

It already fills that role at the altitudes most tactical fights took place and has done for a while now.  The La5FN is much faster at medium and lower altitudes than a contemporary 109 and the 190A needs to use the C3 boosted version just to keep up.

 

So the idea that the P51D will finally give the allies a competitive aircraft does not hold up to scrutiny.

Don´t forget however that the dive speed limit of the lala FN severely limits that. Both the 109 and 190 can leave a fight whenever they want if they have a bit of altitude left.

[MeoW.Scharfi]

41 minutes ago, ICDP said:

The La5FN, says hold my beer ?

 

It already fills that role at the altitudes most tactical fights took place and has done for a while now.  The La5FN is much faster at medium and lower altitudes than a contemporary 109 and the 190A needs to use the C3 boosted version just to keep up.

 

So the idea that the P51D will finally give the allies a competitive aircraft does not hold up to scrutiny.

 

Which you can outdive easily.

[Ehret]

In the game we can dismiss the long range and high altitudes as practical advantages thus the P-39L mimics the D in some ways. The L has high level speed and high speed maneuverability yet to survive you have to rely on dives and don't stray too far from friendly AFs...

That was the BOK; in the BOBP it gets relatively (and much) worse. When you are going to be constrained to about 40km from a friendly AF then why not just to log in the Berloga, instead?

 

Once the P-51D is available reread all charts and notes about the 51 (like the one with climbing test up to 40K at WEP for 28m), log in the game and (literally) prepare for some serious WEEPing...

[ICDP]

4 hours ago, MeoW.Scharfi said:

 

Which you can outdive easily.

 

Lol, you did say you wanted an aircraft that made the waffles learn defensive flying, what do you think diving away from a fight is?  You keep moving those goalposts bud. ?

3 hours ago, Ehret said:

In the game we can dismiss the long range and high altitudes as practical advantages thus the P-39L mimics the D in some ways. The L has high level speed and high speed maneuverability yet to survive you have to rely on dives and don't stray too far from friendly AFs...

That was the BOK; in the BOBP it gets relatively (and much) worse. When you are going to be constrained to about 40km from a friendly AF then why not just to log in the Berloga, instead?

 

Once the P-51D is available reread all charts and notes about the 51 (like the one with climbing test up to 40K at WEP for 28m), log in the game and (literally) prepare for some serious WEEPing...

 

This is an issue that affects all aircraft until/if a better engine management model is added.

Edited June 30, 2019 by ICDP

[Ehret]

Just now, ICDP said:

This is an issue that affects all aircraft until/if a better engine management model is added.

 

Not all; only the "wrong" ones. Yaks, the LaGG and the La-5F are all free from "the issue". The FN can fly +550km/h at SL just on a continuous. The LW's planes have very long combat modes which are about as strong as lowered WEP in the US' planes.

 

Russian pilots considered Cobras a close match to FNs. In the game difference in usable continuous between them is about (!) 70km/h and full power endurance is 2m vs 10m. Good joke. One can wonder how Pokryskin and other Cobras pilots could score so well (or just survive) if it was true...

Edited June 30, 2019 by Ehret

[ICDP]

1 hour ago, Ehret said:

 

Not all; only the "wrong" ones. Yaks, the LaGG and the La-5F are all free from "the issue". The FN can fly +550km/h at SL just on a continuous. The LW's planes have very long combat modes which are about as strong as lowered WEP in the US' planes.

 

Russian pilots considered Cobras a close match to FNs. In the game difference in usable continuous between them is about (!) 70km/h and full power endurance is 2m vs 10m. Good joke. One can wonder how Pokryskin and other Cobras pilots could score so well (or just survive) if it was true...

 

You are making the assumption that the Yaks, LaGG and La-5F are all accurate?  To me it is a case of two extremes of the same problem.  So arguing some planes are free from the issue is ignoring the wider issue.  It would not be a "fix" to simply give all other aircraft the same behaviour as the Yaks, LaGGs and La-5F.  Conversely some aircraft such as the P40E, P39, early 109E, F and early Gs all have very limited and IMHO, unrealistic emergency boost restrictions but I would not want all aircraft to be given the same restrictions for "balance".

 

If you want all aircraft to behave like Yaks, LaGG and La-5F then just turn off engine overheat... "issue" solved.  IMHO a proper fix would be to model a better engine limitations for all aircraft to fix both extremes.

Edited June 30, 2019 by ICDP

[Legioneod]

9 hours ago, MeoW.Scharfi said:

 

 

"lone LW beater" 

The P51 is an airplane that will make the typical LW only flyer make think twice before he starts running away(except 262). We don't have any allied airplane YET that can match the topspeed of the D9 or Bf109K4 yet, not even the Fw190A8.

 

With the P51 we will get the first allied airplane that can catch german planes or having equal topspeed. The typical dogfights end up in the lw plane trying to run away. This won't be so easy anymore against the P51D just to "run away". Some Waffles should start to learn defensive flying.

 

Yes we do, just not at the low altitudes most people fly. The main advantage of the P-51 imo is the fact that it's decently fast at all altitudes whereas the P-47 really only gets fast at higher alts that no-one really fly at.

[357th_Dog]

The P-51 should be plenty quick...even at normal rated power (IE continuous @ 46 inches and 2700 rpm) it should cruise at 323 mph/ 520 kmh on the deck

 

At combat power (61”/3k RPM) it’ll do 364 mph/ 585 kmh) 

 

fastest? No. But quick enough 

[FTC_Riksen]

3 hours ago, 357th_Dog said:

The P-51 should be plenty quick...even at normal rated power (IE continuous @ 46 inches and 2700 rpm) it should cruise at 323 mph/ 520 kmh on the deck

 

At combat power (61”/3k RPM) it’ll do 364 mph/ 585 kmh) 

 

fastest? No. But quick enough 

 

If that is the case, the 51 will be faster than the G14 and any variant of the fw-190 Anton on deck (not to mentioned at high alt) which is how I expected it to be. Hopefully it comes soon Cant wait to fly it!

[[CPT]Crunch]

Nothing changed just because escorts could reach all the way to Berlin, what changed the tide was Jimmy Doolittle's new doctrine of releasing the hounds once they were deep in enemy territory.  All of a sudden you have hundreds of free hunters all looking for some points.  Freedom to pick the time and place with an altitude advantage, oh yeah.

18 hours ago, [DBS]TH0R said:

 

Both in IL-2 1946 and in DCS the P-51 easily out turns the Dora. Dora might have an advantage at higher speeds in turning fights. Also, vs. the 109s the P-51 did have a turning advantage in the initial turn that bled all of its energy. You had that one trick up your sleeve but then you were done as far as the turning fight goes. Flaps also helped a lot.

 

Also worth noting, based on the last DD - if they implement G force fatigue on pilots, P-51 might find its own advantage here due to G-suits allied pilots used.

 

I few hundreds of hours P-51 in the old IL2 1946, and out of the three main late war contenders (Dora, Tempest and Mustang) the P-51 was indeed the most difficult to master. Mainly because of the guns - unlike the other two that packed some heavy firepower, the .50s needed sharpshooting skills. With 50% fuel load, you could easily do a +1h sortie without saving fuel / cruise power.

There's a different problem with .50's, and all non exploding rounds.  The way the game calculates kinetic energy, they can't get added energy off of closure rates, so damage effects are reduced, not so the explosive round.  Your getting the speed effect, the calculation don't matter, the explosion does it for you.

[CountZero]

6 hours ago, SCG_Riksen said:

 

If that is the case, the 51 will be faster than the G14 and any variant of the fw-190 Anton on deck (not to mentioned at high alt) which is how I expected it to be. Hopefully it comes soon Cant wait to fly it!

But for 5 min only, and hell be facing faster K4s D9s and 262s, but it will be best allieds wil have so better that then what allieds have now ?

[D3adCZE]

Give that man a Pony! 

Now seriously, I want it, not only because I react to it's shape like Pavlov's dog, immediately biting my teeth in it's juicy wings(when flying German planes), but for it's required fighting style which suits me. I will definitely learn it, fly it and hopefully be successful with it.

[Bremspropeller]

16 hours ago, 357th_Dog said:

The P-51 should be plenty quick...even at normal rated power (IE continuous @ 46 inches and 2700 rpm) it should cruise at 323 mph/ 520 kmh on the deck

 

At combat power (61”/3k RPM) it’ll do 364 mph/ 585 kmh) 

 

A great point you're making here:

The P-51 cruises darned fast. That's one of it's hidden qualities.