tempestglen

Love to see Tempest MKV in DCS!

When will US government declassify the D model as per traditional rule? in 2050?

I support chn6 for this meaningful suggestion!

Crumpp, you are here. Remember we discussed the propeller blade several years ago?

Hawker Typhoon Mk.Ib 3D model I saw this link yesterday, and wonder if we can develope a Typhoon even Tempest MKV in DCS. http://www.turbosquid.com/FullPreview/Index.cfm/ID/906874

BTW，how is the anti-G suit modeled in P51D? Has P51 pilot less blackout than K4/D9's?

hi Crumpp, do you remember the dive acceleration discuss on 1C forum? about propeller efficiency. :smilewink: How does a P51D outvdive K4 in DCS? Let's have a test.

Guys, my stick broken so I can't test P51D vs Dora dive difference. In history, a "dive extend and pitch back" tactic was used by P47P51. Let's do this. Both D9 and P51 cruising at 400TAS @4000m altitude, side by side, dive at 45 degree with full throttle at same time and hold until to SL. What will happen? Will P51 run away from Dora?

Pilum, I am interested in propeller efficiency at high speed dive, such as 800 TAS. Still 85%? I doubt about that. What if P51D 75% while Dora 65% efficiency at 800TAS?

I suggest DCS developers model both 67" and 75" P51D, so everyone will be happy. Why not RAF Mustang IV? 80" inch ?

Then we bring up P51H.:lol:

I read somewhere saying MW50+BMW801 leads to damage/crack on some engine conponents. So after test, German forbid MW50 usage on 801.

In 1942-1943, the heat dissipation and spark plug issues were the main reasons why DB506 could NOT reach high boost, not fuel. C3 was there.

Fuel is a kind of weapon. Why German had no P51? A-bomb? Panic? B4 is 87#, C3 was almost near to 100/130 especially in late period, ie C3=97/127, sth. like that. Anyway, before 1944, C3 was no use for Bf109s because of other engine limits. 1944 Spiring, B4+MW50=100/130 and C3+MW50=115/150 fuel. In WWII, Germans fuel could satisfy their engines without problems. German aircrafts could NOT gain perormance enhencement with allied 100 or 150 fuel. BTW, USA (Standard Oil company)already provided the lead tetraethyl technology(know how) to 3rd Reich before WWII, and German chemical industry had no difficulty producing high grade fuel. Don't play "fuel" cards. LOL

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/fw190/wright-field-fw190d-9.pdf Allied test pilots needed rudder/aileron trim for Dora.

I wonder how is DCS Dora compared to these? I prefer the red line more suitable for 1944 Dora which is vs 11lbs tempy.

11lbs boost Tempy on 100/130fuel was regular in late 1944, am I right?

Since it's difficult or expensive to find some proof, I suggest both sides accept 1945 scenario where high boost spit/109 dora/tempy/mustang are widely used.

Reason is very very simple, Spring-summer, the time is when luftwaffe shrank to their motherland's sky and desperately defended 3rd Riech against B17/P47p51 swarms. The combat area is definetly OUT OF SPITFIRE's RANGE. And Spitfires lost their jobs at that time, and USAAF called them Run Away Fast(RAF) :lol:because spitfires always had to "bingo" when reaching france/holand erea. You can imagine how sad the B17ers were seeing your escort fighter turning away. How can you find combat records when spitfire had almost no chance to fight, no enemy to shoot at? Don't forget low-countries were in german's hand, Bf109 can take off from France base while spitfire couldn't.

Very good Diving data for fw190!

I've read the mock dogfight of D13 vs tempy years ago, and remember finally the D13 outclimb tempy at high altitude. We need more detailed information to exam whether D13 climbed to high altitude more than 3000m. And if so, D9 could not achieve this for its 1-stage superchager. The climb rate of 11lbs tempy and dora are almost equal, and 13lbs tempy maybe a little better but I won't argue for this tiny difference. Don't forget 11lbs sabre engine is 2400HP, 13lbs --2800HP and 9lbs only 2000HP. When you mention tempy please note the boost pressure. Of course Dora is high boost version in my comparation. This mock fight, IMO the German TOP ACE, lange, with 150 grade fuel (=C3+MW50) could reach highest boost(1.8-1.98ata) and outclimb tempy at high altitude(5000m?) and with this energy advantage,lange come down to tempy and dogfight, the result is "same dogfight performance". If D13 could turn and climb obviously better, how could it be for a 70 victories ACE? Dora has somewhat advantage over 9lbs tempy in dogfight and roughly same as 11-13lbs tempy(probably in that mock). That's the conclusion of both sides in that mock. However, if you put a bf109g6as/g10 and p51d in this scenario(low altitude, 1v1 from same energy), the 109 will probably outclimb-BnZ p51d. P51d has little chance given that both pilots skill are equal. If you put a 25lbs Spitfire IX and Dora in this circustance, I believe Spit always outclimb BnZ Dora in same way. Real air combat is far from 1v1, low altitude. The P51Dvs 109, Dora vs Spit IX and Tempy vs 190, F6F vs zero are of hit&run, BnZ, drag and clean. In such way, those winners in 1v1 dogfight feel quite disadvantageous. And history proved this tactic. Once again, I WILL test Spitfire IX and P51D dive acceleration when Spit available, if I could NOT reproduce the famous Johnson P47C vs RAF Instrcutor's Spit IX story at low altitude(P47C beat Spit with "extend and pitch back" tactic), the dive/zoom FM of DCS definitely has flaw in it. Let's wait and see.

Every D9 has a ETC504, and that slow down D9. Should I bring up P51 speed chart without wing rack? 1) Lange, a 70 victories ACE vs a no name canadian pilot's tempest. 2) Did lange say his D9(D13) had no MW50? Did RAF provide 150 fuel to D13? 3) although lange was told not to exceed 3000, who can assure that lange(D13) did not climb to 5000-6000m high?

Since you can post your very late D9/K4 compared with outdated Spit IX and low boost P51P47 and title the thread " DCS WW2 fighter comparison". If there are no 25lbs Mustang, P47M, 11-13 lbs tempest and Spitfire XIV in DCS, I believe the plane set in DCS WWII is absurd. That's my conclusion. Please K4/D9 enjoy your holiday with outdated allied planes.

D-13 and D9 are quite different because D-13 has two-stage supercharger while tempest has 1-stage so D13 can easily outperform tempy at high altitude. But D9(also 1-stage supercharger) is no better than tempy at high altitude. I don't wanna talk about D-13 which is almost nowhere in WWII.

The Aeroplane June 21st 1946. http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/sl-wade.html Dives Speed and acceleration in the dive is an essential quality to a successful fighter, but a decisive conclusion on the order of superiority is largely dependant on throttle settings, and the maximum speed in straight and level flight of the individual aircraft. Here again, however, by carrying out a number of tests under different conditions, it is reasonable to assume that the Meteor is well ahead of its rivals, followed by the Tempest, Thunderbolt, Mustang and Spitfire in that order. Efficient streamlining and maximum speed both influence the dive, although a jet propelled aircraft will invariably have the advantage, particularly at the higher speeds, when the conventional fighter is progressively more handicapped by airscrew drag, and the accessory protuberances common to all conventionally powered fighters. No account is taken in this order of Mach number limitations or altitude, as at around 500 mph the limitations imposed on the maximum permissible speeds for each type cause considerable change in the order, but it should be appreciated that these do not affect the diving qualities of the aircraft as opposed to maximum speed of which they are capable. First prize to the Meteor.