P-51D, 3 types of flights online

This pilot report obviously is completely unrealistic as it defies all laws of physics.. Either the pilot was inexperienced and saw a ghost or he wanted to tell a nice story. Either way 600 mph indicated will be an even higher TAS. To maintain this kind of speed at 1000 - 8000 ft he would need to dive at an angle of at least 50° pitch down.

Some middle school maths and physics show you why 600 IAS is impossible. Lets be conservative and say TAS was 620 mph.

v * t = s

620 mph = 277 m/s

15 min = 900 s

277 m/s * 900 s = 249300 m ~ 250 km

sin alpha * s = h

sin 50° * 250 km = 191.51 km ~ 190 km

So in 15 min of flight at 600 mph IAS he would have to loose roughly 190 km of altitude = 118 miles = 623360 ft. So the dood apparently was a satellite. Complete bs.

This pilot report obviously is completely unrealistic as it defies all laws of physics.. Either the pilot was inexperienced and saw a ghost or he wanted to tell a nice story. Either way 600 mph indicated will be an even higher TAS. To maintain this kind of speed at 1000 - 8000 ft he would need to dive at an angle of at least 50° pitch down.

 

Some middle school maths and physics show you why 600 IAS is impossible. Lets be conservative and say TAS was 620 mph.

 

v * t = s

620 mph = 277 m/s

15 min = 900 s

277 m/s * 900 s = 249300 m ~ 250 km

 

sin alpha * s = h

sin 50° * 250 km = 191.51 km ~ 190 km

 

So in 15 min of flight at 600 mph IAS he would have to loose roughly 190 km of altitude = 118 miles = 623360 ft. So the dood apparently was a satellite. Complete bs.

Or can simply be explained that the speed gauge reading gets funny near compressibility.

I would be very interested, but I don't really have the time or the skills to create such missions and organise things. However, if someone else does, I would be super happy to participate if the time is good for me.

With what can be done in the ME currently, I don't think missions like this could really be created, or they would require some really heavy and special script editing.

That's why I started the original thread, because I wanted to know if this had any merits or woke any interests before posting something in the "Wish" forum.

This is all great discussion However, I think I'm going to take a break from DCS WWII "combat" until 2 major issues are taken care of...

 

#1. Model visibility. I should not be able to hear aircraft before I can see them unless my eyes are 3" from my monitor. This is by far my biggest issue still.

 

#2. Damage Model. I didn't believe the cries at first because lets face it, I could never hit anything. But after having multiple good hits on an enemy only to have them eventually pull off a reverse and hit me resulting in my pilot being dead in one shot... It just isn't worth the frustration. People are not that lucky that often, even if I am bad enough to let them take the shot in the first place.

 

This post actually is complaining so I'll stop now. See you guys in the free flight servers.

I think those go without saying and should be addressed regardless of what kind of mission is being created.

Or can simply be explained that the speed gauge reading gets funny near compressibility.

Well, then how did he maintain compressibility for 15 min at 1000 ft? As I said either completely inexperienced pilot or a nice story. He certainly did not follow two Me 262s out of a 30° dive with jets on for 15 min and noone gained an inch. Complete bs.

Both are actively being worked on.

I am very glad to hear that:thumbup:.

In the meantime i think the best (and most fun) use of my time will still be in the free flight learning the do-s and don't-s of the P-51.

Also, my curiosity (and a 40% sale) got the better of me and I picked up the 109 as well... That thing is a MONSTER. I got to 28,000' on accident with it and it was still very happy. The claim that the P-51 out performs it at altitude is now in doubt in my mind.

Well, then how did he maintain compressibility for 15 min at 1000 ft? As I said either completely inexperienced pilot or a nice story. He certainly did not follow two Me 262s out of a 30° dive with jets on for 15 min and noone gained an inch. Complete bs.

Not BS if read with the emphasis in a different light - the grammar and sentence structure is not very well arranged which makes the sentence open to interpretation. You have interpreted - understandably - in one way. However there is a second interpretation possible.

1. The chase lasted 15 minutes overall at 74" HG

2. His IAS was 600mph after the long dive only - not the full 15 minutes*

If interpreted in this manner the account seems significantly more credible - the nuances of the English language are many and full of pitfalls

However even I'm still a little curious how he managed to reach such a high airspeed at under 10k feet. I shall have to try similar in DCS.

* 600 indicated could be possible when the following is taken into account: An error in the airspeed indicator, which presumes that the air is incompressible. However, air is compressible and the higher the speed, the higher pressure it will indicate. An ASI (airspeed indicator) over-reads because of the compressibility effect, and, so, the compressibility correction is always negative.

Not BS if read with the emphasis in a different light - the grammar and sentence structure is not very well arranged which makes the sentence open to interpretation. You have interpreted - understandably - in one way. However there is a second interpretation possible.

 

1. The chase lasted 15 minutes overall at 74" HG

2. His IAS was 600mph after the long dive only - not the full 15 minutes*

 

If interpreted in this manner the account seems significantly more credible - the nuances of the English language are many and full of pitfalls

 

However even I'm still a little curious how he managed to reach such a high airspeed at under 10k feet. I shall have to try similar in DCS.

 

That is how I read it as well.

The guy claims he zoomed from the ground to 8000 ft, reversed 180°, caught two Me 262s 4000ft below him at 600 mph indicated and then stayed on them for 15 mins at 1000 ft. Thats ridiculous.

Try diving from 8000 ft in a 90° nose down attitude and I guarantee you there is no way to get even close to 600 IAS before you crash into the ground and the guy was definitely not going max level speed after a zoom climb to 8000 ft and certainly wasnt diving 8k in a vertical dive. Also the 51 will not show 600 indicated at some significantly lower speed due to compressibility. Absolutely not. Maybe the instrument or pitot was defect/ iced, doesnt explain the next mystery though.

The Me 262 is aerodynamically cleaner, faster accelerating at high speed than the 51 and can sustain level speeds of around 525 mph at 4000 ft, if its in an 30° dive it will go much faster. The guy claims to have stayed in gunrange behind two diving Me 262 for 15 mins... After the initial 4k feet dive he could not possibly have been much faster than 500 mph, thats not even level speed of the 262s and they were supposedly 30° diving, yet he caught them. Even if he somehow ended up 800 yards behind them without speed advantage, after a 15 min chase the 262s would be way out of his sight. If he pushed his prop to 67", 74" or even 80" wouldnt have made any difference whatsoever. I still call it BS, but whatever.

The Me 262 is aerodynamically cleaner, faster accelerating at high speed than the 51 and can sustain level speeds of around 525 mph at 4000 ft, if its in an 30° dive it will go much faster. T.

I found this article about 262 divespeed.

On 9 April 1945, Fähnrich Mutke, part of the Ergänzungs-Jagdgeschwader 2 (EJG 2) conversion squadron, 3rd flight, took off from Lagerlechfeld in his Messerschmitt Me 262, marked Weiße 9, for a planned high-altitude flight. He was climbing through at an altitude of 12,000 m (36,000 ft) in near perfect weather with a visibility of over 100 km, listening to the radio conversations, when his chief instructor Oberstleutnant Heinz Bär detected a P-51 Mustang approaching the plane of another comrade, Unteroffizier Achammer, from behind.

Mutke went into a steep 40° dive with full engine power. While passing through the altitude of 12,000 m, his Me 262 started to vibrate and began swinging from side to side. The speedometer was stuck against its limit of 1,100 km/h (682 mph) (the maximum speed of the Me 262 is 870 km/h). The speed of sound is 1,062 km/h (670 mph) at an altitude of 12,000 m, depending on the environmental variables. The shaking intensified, and Mutke temporarily lost control of his plane. He reported that with the speedometer still off the scale he attempted to recover from the uncontrollable dive by adjusting the main tailplane incidence angle. Rather than just having an elevator flap, the Me 262 could change the angle of incidence of the whole tailplane, a design feature that was later added to the Bell X1. Suddenly, the buffeting stopped, and control resumed for a few seconds. Mutke throttled back and his engines flamed out, and after the short period of smooth flight, the buffeting resumed and the aircraft began shaking violently again. He fought to regain control and re-light the engines eventually reducing the speed below 500 km/h. After a difficult landing, it was found that his plane was missing many rivets and also had distorted wings.

Claims[edit]

At the time, Mutke did not understand the reasons for this strange behavior. Only after learning about the supersonic flights of Chuck Yeager in 1947 did he attribute these phenomena to the effects of supersonic flight and claim to have broken the sound barrier—years before Yeager did. This claim is disputed, and there are a number of other pilots and countries that claim the first supersonic flight. However, Mutke never claimed he was the first person to break the sound barrier, but instead argued that his flight was merely proof that the Me 262 was capable of reaching and exceeding Mach 1 and that therefore other German fighter pilots may have done so even before him.

In a series of carefully controlled flight tests conducted in World War II by Messerschmitt, it was established that the Me 262 went out of control in a dive at Mach 0.86, and that higher Mach numbers would lead to a nose-down trim that could not be counter-acted by the pilot by use of the joystick. The resulting steepening of the dive would lead to even higher speeds and self-destruction of the airframe due to excessive negative G loads. Postwar testing by the British government corroborated Messerschmitt's results, though neither actually exceeded Mach 0.86.

Mutke claimed to have overcome the ever steepening dive by adjustment of the 262's whole tailplane incidence. This is the same technique employed by Chuck Yeager in the Bell X-1 to avoid what is known as Mach tuck. Furthermore, Mutke's observation that he briefly regained control of the aircraft, while still accelerating, corresponds with later accounts of supersonic flight.

After the war, American test pilots filed reports about the Me 262, including the possibility of a speed of Mach 1. Compressibility in pitot tubes of the time often resulted in exaggerated speed readings near the speed of sound, particularly in German equipment, which was adversely affected by supply shortages as the war progressed. American Sabrejets and other high-speed aircraft (including the Bell X-1) also experienced anomalous airspeed readings in the high-subsonic flight regime (between 0.8 Mach and Mach 1). The Me 262's pre-area rule fuselage would have additionally resulted in very high transonic drag, and its engines were already underpowered and temperamental to begin with. However, aircraft such as the Bell X-1, F-86 Sabre and Convair F2Y Sea Dart similarly did not have area ruled fuselages yet are acknowledged to have flown at supersonic speeds — here the engine thrust, either alone or in combination with the pull of gravity during a dive, supplies enough force to accelerate the airplane to supersonic speed.

Due to the nature of Mutke's combat flight, it is impossible to determine the exact speed of his plane, and it is also difficult to estimate the exact speed of sound at that time and altitude. Therefore, it is not possible to either prove or disprove his claims, and there is much discussion among experts as to whether the Me 262 was able to break the sound barrier. It is believed that the damaging effects experienced by Mutke were a side effect of supersonic airstream and shock waves over different parts of the airframe, called buffeting. This effect occurs at speeds approaching Mach 1 but ceases above Mach 1. A number of other Me 262 experienced similar strange accidents, or breaking apart in the sky because of buffeting and the different aerodynamics at the sound barrier. Transonic buffeting effects had also been widely reported by pilots of propeller-driven Allied fighters including the Supermarine Spitfire, P-38 Lightning, P-47 Thunderbolt and P-51 Mustang, aircraft that were known to have top diving speeds of less than 0.85 Mach. Allied fighter pilots reported seeing supersonic shock waves and popped rivets during dives as the high-speed air rushing over the wing exceeded Mach 1 even though the forward airspeed of the overall aircraft was well below that speed.

Many proponents of the claim also believe that after the end of the war the allied powers had no interest in emphasizing any German achievements during the war. Mutke's claim, however, is unique and without controlled, experimental confirmation.

A computer-based performance analysis of the Me 262 carried out in 1999 at the Technische Universität München concluded that the Me 262 could indeed exceed Mach 1.

I am very glad to hear that:thumbup:.

 

In the meantime i think the best (and most fun) use of my time will still be in the free flight learning the do-s and don't-s of the P-51.

 

 

Also, my curiosity (and a 40% sale) got the better of me and I picked up the 109 as well... That thing is a MONSTER. I got to 28,000' on accident with it and it was still very happy. The claim that the P-51 out performs it at altitude is now in doubt in my mind.

About your first post.

I've put in the video a few booming atacks vs friendly Ai.This is how i get most kills with german planes online ,having the element of surprise. Even if i wouldn't get a kill right away i could damage the prop governor ,or make the 109 trail a white line making it more visible for friendly planes.

Attacking from a higher altitude is the best tactic by far, with any plane.Damage modeling is not accurate ,that goes for all ww2 planes at the moment imho .But you can get kills with booming .Like it's been said DModeling is going to be improved.

In the p51 vs p51 times i had quite a few victories 1 vs 2 humans so if someone posts that killing with a 109 is easier..., that.... might be true but for them only as their personal preference.

Also it takes lots of practice as in moths or years for some persons.I've been flying ww2 planes online since 2013. It's not something you learn flying a few missions.

KxPGW4LkWYk

I've also heard that the f86 weapons are weak.And that might be true i don't know.But it seems that the current DCS Damage Model functions best when you have a cool hand and hit with an accurate burst:

plaG8OaE4CU

MIn 1.14 and min 3.35. It is possible to get really good results.

I've been flying ww2 planes online since 2013. It's not something you learn flying a few missions.

I've been "flying" WWII planes since Their Finest Hour:joystick:. I will concede that the skill set from that game probably doesn't transfer well to DCS hahaha

Regarding the P-51 video. It is extremely hard for me to get into this position on player controlled 109's/190's.

To get into position to boom in on the enemy you have to be quite a bit higher than him.

Being higher makes you much easier to spot, while making those camouflaged 109's and 190's much more difficult to spot.

If you fly a bit lower, to make it easier to spot the enemy, I'm finding he's zooming up into a tail position, because he's already spotted you from afar, and then the game is over already.

I can't count the number of times I've spotted an E/A 3-400 yards at between 4 and 8 o'clock, mostly closer to 6, zooming up quickly, especially in the 109.

As long is air quake is the mission, the 51 is at a great disadvantage. It's not the 51's environment or mission envelope.

that seems to be exactly the same situation i find myself in more often than not

To get into position to boom in on the enemy you have to be quite a bit higher than him.

 

Being higher makes you much easier to spot, while making those camouflaged 109's and 190's much more difficult to spot.

 

If you fly a bit lower, to make it easier to spot the enemy, I'm finding he's zooming up into a tail position, because he's already spotted you from afar, and then the game is over already.

 

I can't count the number of times I've spotted an E/A 3-400 yards at between 4 and 8 o'clock, mostly closer to 6, zooming up quickly, especially in the 109.

 

As long is air quake is the mission, the 51 is at a great disadvantage. It's not the 51's environment or mission envelope.

In my online flights i noticed i'm almost never spotted when i attack with the d9 because the attack is much faster .When i attack with the 109 i can't dive that fast because of the controls blocking so i get spotted lots of times.

Someone that flies higher than me might kill me but someone that flies much lower has no chance.Also i posted how i fly.The p51s can dogfight 109s and even zeros from inferior altitude if they want to .

To get into position to boom in on the enemy you have to be quite a bit higher than him.

 

Being higher makes you much easier to spot, while making those camouflaged 109's and 190's much more difficult to spot.

 

If you fly a bit lower, to make it easier to spot the enemy, I'm finding he's zooming up into a tail position, because he's already spotted you from afar, and then the game is over already.

 

I can't count the number of times I've spotted an E/A 3-400 yards at between 4 and 8 o'clock, mostly closer to 6, zooming up quickly, especially in the 109.

 

As long is air quake is the mission, the 51 is at a great disadvantage. It's not the 51's environment or mission envelope.

If we had 72'hg the P-51D would be fine within these mission parameters. Yes, it is not an interceptor, but it would be faster than the K4 and turn better than the D9, and that is enough to say that it would be capable. Even though both airplanes can climb and accelerate better.

Right now it is the K4 that makes every fight a nightmare, because even inexperienced pilots can have an upperhand. That is mitigated by a wingman, but P-51D should never be in a position where it is slower than the 109.

I'm not really up on my air-war history, but did the allies actually ever conduct air superiority missions? IE fly to an area, and loiter there, challenging any E/A that came to accept their challenge?

Sent from soul-sucking dumb-phone thru Tapier-Talk

I'm not really up on my air-war history, but did the allies actually ever conduct air superiority missions? IE fly to an area, and loiter there, challenging any E/A that came to accept their challenge?

 

Sent from soul-sucking dumb-phone thru Tapier-Talk

After Doolittle took over the Eight, the role of escort fighters changed. Their mission was not to protect the bombers, but to destroy the Luftwaffe. The bombers - apart from taking out strategic targets - were now baits to help the fighters achieve this.

After Doolittle took over the Eight, the role of escort fighters changed. Their mission was not to protect the bombers, but to destroy the Luftwaffe. The bombers - apart from taking out strategic targets - were now baits to help the fighters achieve this.

Exactly:thumbup:

Yeah it totally baffles me when ED are trying to sell the Normandy arena that they would put a Pacific spec Mustang in there. And tbh the k4 is like a UFO compared to the pony we have a the moment.

Pacific spec Mustang

what does it exactly mean?

btw. DCS Mustang was released long time before first DCS WWII plan was announced...

I'm not really up on my air-war history, but did the allies actually ever conduct air superiority missions? IE fly to an area, and loiter there, challenging any E/A that came to accept their challenge?

 

Sent from soul-sucking dumb-phone thru Tapier-Talk

In a manner of speaking. For the RAF:

Rodeo was the codename for a dedicated fighter sweep in RAF parlance. Many of these became GCI directed from the UK on the run up to D-Day and then after when mobile radar sites were operational in Normandy.

After Autumn '44 when Luftwaffe activity declined over the frontlines these sweeps became more generalised, becoming the RAF 2nd TAF 'armed-reconnaissance' missions; the name is something of a misnomer as the reconnaissance is not the specific photography type that we tend to associate with aerial operations. Instead these were aggressive hunting patrols where any enemy activity, air or ground, was to be attacked and noted.

If we had 72'hg the P-51D would be fine within these mission parameters. Yes, it is not an interceptor, but it would be faster than the K4 and turn better than the D9, and that is enough to say that it would be capable. Even though both airplanes can climb and accelerate better.

 

Right now it is the K4 that makes every fight a nightmare, because even inexperienced pilots can have an upperhand. That is mitigated by a wingman, but P-51D should never be in a position where it is slower than the 109.

I have to agree with this at the moment. I'm transitioning to the P-51 due to the deluge of new 109's in MP and the lack of 51's, but I have to admit coming from the 109 the 51 is a nightmare in the knife fight.

Even with full prop and throttle open I don't get the zoom sensation I get with the 109, and turning the plane is extremely frustrating when the underside wing loses lift (which seems nearly often regardless of speed).

The difficulty in flying the aircraft in a dogfight makes one almost question its legendary status, and this is besides how finicky the modeled engine is. One or two violent stalls from trying to turn in to the enemy, and suddenly the engine craps out. My first and so far only MP encounter with another player ended in an embarrassing crash from a violent stall. Back to AI training....

I have a new found respect for dedicated Pony drivers. I felt good for every PvP 51 kill I'd get, but now it seems a bit cheaper understanding the workload the pilots have to endure.

-SLACK

I have to agree with this at the moment. I'm transitioning to the P-51 due to the deluge of new 109's in MP and the lack of 51's, but I have to admit coming from the 109 the 51 is a nightmare in the knife fight.

 

Even with full prop and throttle open I don't get the zoom sensation I get with the 109, and turning the plane is extremely frustrating when the underside wing loses lift (which seems nearly often regardless of speed).

 

The difficulty in flying the aircraft in a dogfight makes one almost question its legendary status, and this is besides how finicky the modeled engine is. One or two violent stalls from trying to turn in to the enemy, and suddenly the engine craps out. My first and so far only MP encounter with another player ended in an embarrassing crash from a violent stall. Back to AI training....

 

I have a new found respect for dedicated Pony drivers. I felt good for every PvP 51 kill I'd get, but now it seems a bit cheaper understanding the workload the pilots have to endure.

 

-SLACK

Historically, the average Pony driver in late summer '44 and beyond had a huge advantage over his Luftwaffe counterparts in flight hours, experience and aircraft maintenance, not to mention numbers. Bear in mind also that a great many Bf-109G/K models were not in the peak of factory quality modeled here--there are certain drawbacks to using slave labor, if you know what I mean. In a one on one combat, especially at medium to low level, the '109 holds most of the cards because it is basically a hot rod--quicker off the mark, better climb, tighter turning and the guns fire straight ahead--none of that convergence nonsense for them!

However, the key to any fight is making the other guy react to you, and forcing him to fight on your terms. The Mustang does some things that the 109 can't do, or do as well, in the right circumstances. Find those things and those circumstances, become skilled at them, and get a regular wingman and pick your fights accordingly.

cheers

horseback

After Doolittle took over the Eight, the role of escort fighters changed. Their mission was not to protect the bombers, but to destroy the Luftwaffe. The bombers - apart from taking out strategic targets - were now baits to help the fighters achieve this.

Exactly:thumbup:

The issue until this paradigm shift was that the German's were using a head-on attack on their first pass, which was very successful. Since the 8th's SOP was for the escorts to remain with the bombers until attacked, this first pass was unopposed and uninterrupted by fighters. Even if the escorts spotted the interceptors, they were not in a position to do anything about it.

One of the first things which changed, was that the fighters, or a portion of the fighters, positioned themselves far ahead of the bombers, this preventing a head-on attack and breaking up the interceptor formation.

The other thing which changed, was that once the bomber were heading back to England, and outside the likely attack radius of interceptors, the escorts were to quit the bombers and attack airfields and other ground targets, like rail yards.

Basically, none of this is in in anyway represented in air-quake or any other mission I've seen.