P-51D, not boring....

Nothing like a negative post to bring out the geeks who have nothing else to do with their lives.

 

Anyway......Yeah...this thing is hardly worth the time. And 4 hours is planty of time on it. I have flown Xplane, FSX, and even Lockon, I have sat with pilots in planes and seen how the plane reacts. This P51 flies like a 172.

 

As far as the controls....how do you even know your air speed??? The Horizen is waaay off. I have it all leveled out in the plane and I'm climbing when I do the outside view. You cannot see or identify (without scrolling all over the damn cockpit with multiple buttons) any of your controls. The view options are horrible.

 

If there is a way to adjust the joystic...like everything else in this thing it either doesn't work or they've hid it to the point that you just don't want to mess with it.

 

It's a shame because visually...this is a great game. It would have a lot of potential. But as usual, DCS saw fit to overcomplicate it to the point of utter uselessness.

When I buy a game, or any kind of electrical device or anything slightly complicated it does come with a manual for a reason, i suggest you read it

xplane,fsx and lock on are alot more boring than DCS series

again if you look on your dash you can locate your airspeed and other indicators very easily

you adjust your joystick through option

this is the least complicated aircraft in the DCS series...

and lastly if I may add to this. there are plenty of you tube videos on the p 51 on how to fly it landing, flight patterns, taxi, ect ect. you don't seem like you did enough research.

and these planes are not stable aircrafts at all ALOT of men died while training on these aircrafts they required ALOT of attention to detail. so you are not going to get it right with only 4 hours of flight time. if you feel frustrated go play something else then come back later and try again.

again read the manual, look up the youtube videos, look up the flight patterns for landing. read what people are posting and asking questions about. this aircraft requires alot of hands and feet to fly it, there is NO autopilot.

What a sad sack, and either has an agenda, or forgot to take his meds.

The Mustang is just plain brilliant. Caveat, if you have a crappy system, expect a crappy experience. With a good graphics card and a decent CPU, the P51 is a wonderful experience, so much so that I wish that one day DCS will have importable METAR and a global terrain mesh ... :)

Can we sticky this thread as an example of sim pilot elitism syndrome?

 

Let's not let ourselves get too full of ourselves. A subtle reminder that these products require a lot of time and effort is all that is required. 'Don't let the door hit you on the way out' is uncalled for. IMHO. And frankly, the biggest problem is probably the sim controls. I've used a normal joystick, and the OP's right, it's a pain. Using my floor mounted, long throw Cougar, it's awesome.

Mixed bag, Arm. I'll grant that you have some valid points, but there was a lot of boneheadedness in some of those anti-DCS posts which were being reacted to. As I mentioned before, despite disagreeing with their assessment of the sim as a whole, I entirely agree with their complaints about the GUI and camera system. I've been doing flight sims for my entire life, but I still have supreme difficulties with this camera system and stuff. And, of course, you are completely correct about the joysticks vs. real. I know we would all have a much easier time controlling a real Mustang than a virtual one, if all else was the same except for the sim stick & pedals vs. real stick & pedals. But that doesn't mean that the posts in question didn't contain the ludicrous--I'd like to point out again that the one fellow said in one post that our virtual P-51 is too difficult to fly, and then in the next post said that it was as easy as a Cessna 172. I'm not going to go point-by-point through his posts, but his attitude was unreasonable--e.g. the "4 hours should be enough to become proficient at flying a P-51" bit.

The Mustang is just plain brilliant. Caveat, if you have a crappy system, expect a crappy experience. With a good graphics card and a decent CPU, the P51 is a wonderful experience

Heck, I have a crappy system, and I'm still having a wonderful experience with our virtual P-51.

Tanx for all the comments!

I never said DCS/FC2 are boring...just the P-51D :)) I fully enjoy all other DCS/FC2 airplanes & think they are topnotch:)))

I have configured my saitek x52 joystick when I first bought the P51 by reading the forum posts....maybe I did something wrong?

I'm an pilot IRL. so I should be able to judge (from my perspective) the p51s in sim flightdynamics, compared with A2A's P51 in FSX...well it's an different beast. A2A are very accurate & highly rated in the FSX world.

I always fly in "realistic mode" never in "game/easy mode" & never had this problem before in DCS/fc2.

I will try to reconfigure my joystick & maybe that will get me back in:)) If I can configure the P51D to fly as the A2A one, I'll be a happy flyer:))

I never said DCS/FC2 are boring...just the P-51D :))

boring ? :P :pilotfly:

Nothing like a negative post to bring out the geeks who have nothing else to do with their lives.

 

Anyway......Yeah...this thing is hardly worth the time. And 4 hours is planty of time on it. I have flown Xplane, FSX, and even Lockon, I have sat with pilots in planes and seen how the plane reacts. This P51 flies like a 172.

 

As far as the controls....how do you even know your air speed??? The Horizen is waaay off. I have it all leveled out in the plane and I'm climbing when I do the outside view. You cannot see or identify (without scrolling all over the damn cockpit with multiple buttons) any of your controls. The view options are horrible.

 

If there is a way to adjust the joystic...like everything else in this thing it either doesn't work or they've hid it to the point that you just don't want to mess with it.

 

It's a shame because visually...this is a great game. It would have a lot of potential. But as usual, DCS saw fit to overcomplicate it to the point of utter uselessness.

Someone needsTRACKIR!!!!!:music_whistling:

I often notice complaints about the behavior of the P-51. That it's too sensitive or impossible to control and that seems unrealistic. When I first flew it I thought it was an impossible monster of a thing But when you realise that it's effectively a massive propeller attached to a very powerful engine fitted to a small airframe then you come to appreciate that that would cause some very remarkable dynamics. It takes a fair bit of practice to tame all of what's going on with it.

Not boring, love it!

Ok so I bought the P51 when It came out..& I've used it maybe 10 times since then. Mainly becouse of the flightdynamics I thought it would bee more stable like the A2A P51 in FSX...but this thing is just to hard to fly, to sensitive on the controls, stalls all the time, yaws like crazy when u try to shoot....not many multiplayers either.....I hope I can get the love back for it some day in DCS, but now I'm just disappointed:(

Go through the training tutorials Rodd, they really help.

The P51 will fly easy but you have to check trims and speed etc. Taking off took me a few times to perfect, I dont use take off assistance now. Hold the breaks, 5" rudder starboard trim, nose trim down a little, apply power till 30 presssure, release breaks, pull stick back a little to keep tail wheel on the deck, if the tail wheel rises at this point you will leave the runway :helpsmilie: Around 50 mph increase throttle smoothly to around 60 pressure, centralise the stick, a couple of small rudder inputs, @ V2 100kts IAS rotate, pull back the stick gently and you are away:-) :thumbup:

Most sims are too easy and dont represent how an aircraft should handle. Real planes only need small gentle inputs and constant monitoring of instuments :smilewink:

Its all about energy management, I guess you know this as a real pilot already

Absolutely loving the new version. It was great before, and better now.

I have a question about the handling as compared to that of the P-51D represented in IL2 : 1946. Some people have suggested that its a bit gimped (performance wise) in IL2, its still super difficult to fly. I was always considering getting it, post beta, as I'd like fly the most accurate representation of the P-51D. Along with being able to shoot stuff. It seems both sims suffer from AI that flys better than their planes should be able to. Atleast I know this was the case at some point in the DCS beta revisions.

blkspade - Just to increase the chances of you geting an answer - What was the question ?

I have a question about the handling as compared to that of the P-51D represented in IL2 : 1946. Some people have suggested that its a bit gimped (performance wise) in IL2, its still super difficult to fly. I was always considering getting it, post beta, as I'd like fly the most accurate representation of the P-51D. Along with being able to shoot stuff. It seems both sims suffer from AI that flys better than their planes should be able to. Atleast I know this was the case at some point in the DCS beta revisions.

Yes, the performance and handling characteristics of the P-51D in DCS far surpass those of the P-51D in Il-2. It will still jump all over the place, and it extremely difficult to get the hang of, but it performs very well if you can get control of it. As for the AI, they are not able to fly better than people do. It is just that most people do not know how to fly and get frustrated when the AI consistently shoots them down. It is very easy to clobber the AI (even on max difficulty) if you know how to fly the stang properly.

To be fair, early AI flight model allowed the plane to fly when the player would stall. This has been fixed.

As for the AI, they are not able to fly better than people do.

Not entirely true, but mostly true. It actually is able to do one thing that humans are not, which is stall without dropping a wing from the torque. At least, it could last version--I haven't tried it this version yet.

I have a question about the handling as compared to that of the P-51D represented in IL2 : 1946. Some people have suggested that its a bit gimped (performance wise) in IL2

lol IL-2's "P-51"

To be fair, early AI flight model allowed the plane to fly when the player would stall. This has been fixed.

I read a post forever ago with someone complaining about keeping up with the AI, I don't remember in detail. Good that it no longer exists.

I felt frustrated flying the P41 A2A simulations in FSX. something not right about flying a war bird without guns, I knew I had to look elsewhere when I strated makiking rrraattt ta tattt noises with my mouth, not good at 50 , :no:

Well I downloaded this and it is sensational! the plane is A2A quality and easy to fly. I dont understsnd where the complaints are coming from. Yes if you fly it out of the box it will snap and spin but 5 mins tuning the axis and in game mode I cant get it to stall no matter how much bank I use, rock solid and in normal mode it just needs a bit of luvin in return and all is good

I have come to like the P-51 a great deal more since it has left beta and i have noticed that it is alot harder, but I take that as a challenge and it just makes me want to fly it even more. The handleing is granted an ass but once I mastered takeoff and landing I found that I learnt more about the aircraft in terms of the aircraft limits. You just need to take it step by step and try not to get too frustrated over little mistakes. ^_^

Boring. Not! This is a real fly by the seat of your pants aircraft. One that demands real flying skills. No AOA gauge for landing. No GPS maps. Great to practice cross country flying under VFR. As others say, just need some contempary opposition.

Boring. Not! This is a real fly by the seat of your pants aircraft. One that demands real flying skills. No AOA gauge for landing. No GPS maps.

I'm convinced that anyone who says the P-51D is boring isn't quite being truthful with himself. Rather than "boring," I think these folks really mean "too difficult for them to figure out, because they're too lazy to put in the effort required." I see that most people have no love for Second World War fighters, but I wish they'd at least be honest about their reasons. : /

just need some contempary opposition.

JimMack says they're working on it. Woohoo! http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1578574&postcount=174

What a nice suprise having someone from ED mentioning WW2 content :)

I'll suggest again, set your axis saturation to less than 100 (this is not the curves that Yo-Yo spoke off). The Mustang is easy to fly. It's fast and agile, but it's also a piece of 1940's technology with a big twist producing motor, no fly by wire, and no high AoA devices. You have to treat it as such.

 

.

Hello Exorcet

Could you please be more informative about "axis saturation".

I have a Thrustmaster Warthog and a Saitek rudder pedals.

I am a little bit lost with these X and Y axis saturation ...:(

What Yoyo is speaking of are related to the Curve ( 60% on the curve line for the Pitch axis and 40% on the roll axis ) isn't it ?

Is saturation % related to speed of reaction ?

Is curve % related to intensity of reaction ?

Is it possible to tune the differential brakes sensitivity ?.

What axis is intensity related (X or Y ) ?

Also I read somewhere in this forum that it is not advisable to modify the curve of the axis...

What do I have to think about all this :(

Thank You very much for your help

Madcop.:)

I have a Saitek X52, which i recon to be a very precise stick, and I find it rather hard to fly without modifying the axis curve. Two machines that suffer the most when going standard settings are the Ka-50 and... the Mustang.

I have a Saitek X52, which i recon to be a very precise stick, and I find it rather hard to fly without modifying the axis curve. Two machines that suffer the most when going standard settings are the Ka-50 and... the Mustang.

Use trim, it helps a ton. And, the reason you shouldn't be modding the curves, is because it ruins the sensitivity on the control limits. In this way it actually makes the aircraft harder to control, not easier.

Use trim, it helps a ton. And, the reason you shouldn't be modding the curves, is because it ruins the sensitivity on the control limits. In this way it actually makes the aircraft harder to control, not easier.

We (Virtual Horsemen) use curves & saturation adjustment for our formation work - it's definitely a benefit to us and certainly not harder.

Hello Exorcet

 

Could you please be more informative about "axis saturation".

 

I have a Thrustmaster Warthog and a Saitek rudder pedals.

I am a little bit lost with these X and Y axis saturation ...:(

What Yoyo is speaking of are related to the Curve ( 60% on the curve line for the Pitch axis and 40% on the roll axis ) isn't it ?

Is saturation % related to speed of reaction ?

Is curve % related to intensity of reaction ?

Is it possible to tune the differential brakes sensitivity ?.

What axis is intensity related (X or Y ) ?

 

Also I read somewhere in this forum that it is not advisable to modify the curve of the axis...

 

What do I have to think about all this :(

 

Thank You very much for your help

 

Madcop.:)

Madcop, Axis Saturation limits how much you use of the motion available to you. I'll do a short diagram underneath to illustrate what I mean:

[----------------------------------------------------------------------------] <--- Saturation at 100%

[------------------------------------] <--- Saturation at 50%

So, the top example means that if I pull my Joystick all the way back, the Elevators will move as much as they possibly can in the direction I have chosen.

The Lower example, with the saturation at 50% means that if I pull my Joystick all the way back, the elevators will only move to 50% of their maximum deflection so, with 50% Saturation, the elevators are half as sensitive. - When tweaked, it can be very, very useful if you need precise input and never need to use the maximum amount of elevator (or any axis for that matter) deflection.

Curvature is a little more difficult to explain...

Curvature does not change how much pull is available, it changes how much pull is applied relevant to your joystick position. When you have zero curve, moving your stick is directly proportional the movement of the stick you see in game. So, with 0 curve, If I move my stick 50% of the way backwards, I will see the stick move 50% of the way backwards in game.

Saturation is great if you never need maximum control input, but sometimes you do. So, what if you want less sensitivity, but still want to be able to use maximum control inputs every once in a while? This is where curvature comes in, it's basically a comprise... Using curvature means you can effect how much pull is used in relative to how much pull you apply to your joystick. I will do another short diagram to explain. The top line is the pull on your Joystick, the bottom line is the pull represented in game. Here is an example with 0 curvature set:

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% %80 %90 %100

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% %80 %90 %100

You can see above that 0 curvature means that if you were to apply say 40% pull to your stick, you would use 40% pull in game.

For this second expample, I will show curvature (The figures may not be accurate, but the principal will be clear). Again, the top line represents the amount of pull on your joystick, the bottom line represents the amount of pull you actually use in game with curvature set

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% %80 etc...

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

0% 3% 8% 15% 24% 35% 48% 63% %79 etc...

As I said, the figures in this second example are accurate, the last 2 inparticularly but what you should see is that, initially, the stick is much less sensitive than it is with no curve. But, the more you pull, the more sensitive the stick gets after a certain point. With Curvature, 0% and 100% will always correspond with each other - what happens inbetween depends on how you set up the curvature.

I hope that helped...

*EDIT* Googled graphs quickly as this may be easier to demonstrate with...

You can see the red line represents no curvature - As I explained above, the movement of your joystick is directly proportional to the movement of the controls in game.

The green line shows when curvature is applied - initially it is much less sensitive (shown by the shallower gradient), but, as you pull more, the sensitivity increases (Shown by the gradient of the line increasing). Not that the lines meat at 0% and 100% so you still have full control authority. Changing the curvature amount effect when and how sharply this change in gradient occurs which inturn effects the sensitivity of your stick.

(Sorry for such a long post... :/ )