Jump to content

P-51 D mismatch


TEOMOOSE

Recommended Posts

Just a quick reminder. Engine performance from an aircraft engine will change with air pressure (altitude) and temperature. I see alot of numbers being thrown out with correlating altitudes and compared to power at other altitudes. That's not how physics or thermodynamics work.

 

The reason that ED and third parties seek out SME is that ideal numbers from a manufacturer don't withstand contact with the real world. Today the estimations are far better due to computer aided design, however, this aircraft was built before all of that. A decent amount of variance can be be expect from the ideal estimations and real a world performance. In this case the team had access to a real airplane, and I can assume with 90% confidence that the numbers in the DCS manual are experimental values and not that of manufacturer.

 

Sent from my BLU R1 HD using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would trust numbers written measured during WW2 as opposed to anything recorded today. Modern aircraft are rare and expensive to operate and maintain. No one in their right mind is going to push such an aircraft to the limits the military did on a daily basis during wartime... except for racers that aren't even close to stock.

 

The problem is that data from that far in the past was often collected with less than precise methods. A typical argument is about the top speed of the F6F Hellcat. When its top speed was evaluated, did it include or ignore an error in the IAS of the cockpit gauge. The F4U and F6F had the same engine and similar aerodynamics. So many argue that the F6F should be given credit for the recorded speed + the known error which makes it very competitive with the F4U's top speed. But wouldn't the Navy have evaluated its top speed vs other aircraft rather than just its own gauge measurement... particularly, operationally in combat against both friendlies and enemies?

 

The P-51 has its own series of myths that have been propagated for years. One is that the extra extension on the P-51Ds vertical stab was to make up for area lost when the razorback was cut down for the the bubble canopy. In reality, the P-51B/C was know for having some lateral stability issues that degraded its performance as a gun platform. The extra strake was already needed and just happened to be designed after the D went into production. D's were delivered to combat without the extension. Some P-51Bs were field modded to the same standard.

 

The only way to know for sure which engine is better for the P-51 is to know for sure what altitude you are going to be fighting at and the exact model of the opposing aircraft. If you know you are going to be fighting between 14,000 and 20,000 feet, you probably want the high altitude engine associated with the P-51B (which also is much better above 28,000 feet). But if you are going to be below 14,000 feet or between 20,000 and 28,000 feet, the normal P-51D engine is a better option.

 

If it wasn't for the gun jamming problem, I generally prefer a P-51B with the high altitude engine, a Malcom hood canopy, and the stabilizer extension. Of course, some P-51Bs were field modded to eliminate the gun jamming problem. You just have to be a pretty good shot to make up for the 4x0.50 call armament.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@streakeagle

Every aircraft ever gets run through the woodwork during dev and afterward by test pilots. It's absurd to think that the engineers designing and testing this stuff would just go '*shrug* we don't know it just works'.

 

 

 

Nasa doing high alpha tests with an F-18 studded with instruments. I didn't watch that whole video, but I've seen them abusing aircraft in unusual ways just to study.

 

War or not they didn't test stuff like that in the 40s because it was a death sentence. With modern safety equipment and ejection seats you can get away with a lot more.

 

The point is OP is using a random wikipedia article to argue engine power specs, which has nothing to do with Mustang power curves at various altitudes.

Де вороги, знайдуться козаки їх перемогти.

5800x3d * 3090 * 64gb * Reverb G2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Zhukov, I think you missed Streakeagles point, it was not well articulated. I believe that his point was that no bird owner is going to allow that level of potentially destructive testing on a priceless aircraft that can't be replaced.

 

During the war however, they pushed engines and airframes to and past the engineered limits as it was a matter of life and death and let's face it they weren't a dime a dozen but they could be replaced.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The DCS P-51D still only has 67" MP.

 

Meanwhile the Bf 109K-4 has MW-50 all of the time in multiplayer; no one dares limit its use.

 

The low altitude performance mismatch between these two fighters is large enough to erase differences in pilot ability.

 

Pilot A in 109; Pilot B in P-51 -> Pilot A wins.

Pilot A in P-51; Pilot B in 109 -> Pilot B wins.

 

But go on... say it's the pilot and not the plane, I will prove you wrong.

P-51D | Fw 190D-9 | Bf 109K-4 | Spitfire Mk IX | P-47D | WW2 assets pack | F-86 | Mig-15 | Mig-21 | Mirage 2000C | A-10C II | F-5E | F-16 | F/A-18 | Ka-50 | Combined Arms | FC3 | Nevada | Normandy | Straight of Hormuz | Syria

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The low altitude performance mismatch between these two fighters is large

And a Landover will beat a Maserati up a muddy hill.

 

If you're going to fly it at low altitude, maybe you should ask for an "A" with a Allison V-1710 ? rather than a few extra inches boost ?

Cheers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Indeed, I don't really see what that has to do with anything, for one. One is better at low altitude than the other? That's..... to be expected. Fight in your arena or not at all ideally. If a 109 is better at low altitude, then.... don't fight at low altitude.

 

Secondly, I seriously doubt it "erases differences in pilot ability". Been there and done that enough times to know it's BS, and typically neither pilot knows what he's doing and persists in fighting a fight he can't win (for example, at low altitude if one has a considerable advantage as you say).

 

A smart pilot would avoid the fight until he could gain an advantage, in this case in altitude, even if it takes considerable time. If the Mustang pilot in question is impatient and forces the fight he can't win, then it's his fault more than any difference in aircraft.

 

Put a Yak-9, La-5, or A6M on the deck and they'll eat all 109s, 190s, 51s, AND Spitfires for lunch... probably at the same time. Don't fight the fight you're not designed to fight.

Де вороги, знайдуться козаки їх перемогти.

5800x3d * 3090 * 64gb * Reverb G2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

109K-4 has great performance at high altitudes, too. Don't assume it has the same weakness as a DB605A.

 

If either of you care to duel to see for yourselves, send me a pm and maybe we can test it out this weekend. This isn't a bigger d*** contest. Just an establishment of facts. I fully expect a competent pilot to win every time with the 109, and to equally lose with the P-51.

P-51D | Fw 190D-9 | Bf 109K-4 | Spitfire Mk IX | P-47D | WW2 assets pack | F-86 | Mig-15 | Mig-21 | Mirage 2000C | A-10C II | F-5E | F-16 | F/A-18 | Ka-50 | Combined Arms | FC3 | Nevada | Normandy | Straight of Hormuz | Syria

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sometimes I feel like this forum has the same discussions over and over again.

 

Really the only thing you can't do in the Mustang vs the 109 is follow it in extended, steep climbing maneuvers. Just like you can't keep up with the Mustang in a dive when flying the 109. Otherwise the differences are minimal tbh. With practice you should be able to kill most 109 pilots in dcs online in a dogfight with the P-51. TBH same goes the other way around too.

9./JG27

 

"If you can't hit anything, it's because you suck. If you get shot down, it's because you suck. You and me, we know we suck, and that makes it ok." - Worst person in all of DCS

 

"In the end, which will never come, we will all be satisifed... we must fight them on forum, we will fight them on reddit..." - Dunravin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Going back to some earlier discussions. Is it true that:

1. Current in-game P51 engine's data are based off an actual plane?

 

If that's the case, are K4's engine data based off an actual flyable plane? The thing you don't really want to do is have one plane based off actual flyable but the other based off written records. That way you can't really kill off repeating challenges on the true performance. The best way is to base on same source of data. If you base P51 off an actual plane then find a flyable k4 and use its data. If you can't find flyable plane, it would be the best to use written records. Written records may not be 100% correct, but since the data come from the same source, they are subject to the same biases.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
Going back to some earlier discussions. Is it true that:

1. Current in-game P51 engine's data are based off an actual plane?

 

If that's the case, are K4's engine data based off an actual flyable plane? The thing you don't really want to do is have one plane based off actual flyable but the other based off written records. That way you can't really kill off repeating challenges on the true performance. The best way is to base on same source of data. If you base P51 off an actual plane then find a flyable k4 and use its data. If you can't find flyable plane, it would be the best to use written records. Written records may not be 100% correct, but since the data come from the same source, they are subject to the same biases.

There is no flyable k4. Ed uses all valid sources out there, especially wind tunnel data and the data for the p51 is from the ww2 area aswell I suppose. Considering the problems they had in finding this type of data for the p47, an aircraft that exists today too, this is probably the case.

 

Gesendet von meinem WAS-LX1A mit Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sometimes I feel like this forum has the same discussions over and over again.

 

Really the only thing you can't do in the Mustang vs the 109 is follow it in extended, steep climbing maneuvers. Just like you can't keep up with the Mustang in a dive when flying the 109. Otherwise the differences are minimal tbh. With practice you should be able to kill most 109 pilots in dcs online in a dogfight with the P-51. TBH same goes the other way around too.

 

The 109 K4 completely out classes the P 51D in DCS. It out climbs, out turns and accelerates way faster then the P 51D. I hardly fly the 109 on DCS combat anymore because it's way to easy. The only time a P 51 has a chance is when it is low on fuel and the 109 is high on fuel. And even then if the 109 pilot knows what he is doing there is very little hope for the P51D.

 

I cant remember if I have ever been shot down by a P51D in 1v1 combat while flying the 109 K4.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:thumbup:

9./JG27

 

"If you can't hit anything, it's because you suck. If you get shot down, it's because you suck. You and me, we know we suck, and that makes it ok." - Worst person in all of DCS

 

"In the end, which will never come, we will all be satisifed... we must fight them on forum, we will fight them on reddit..." - Dunravin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While the 109 does outclass the Mustang in almost every aspect, I do find it hard to fight in the 109 due to the loss of control as soon as your speed builds up.

 

In case the advice helps : trim to turn helps a lot, though it prohibits fast reaction, but you can follow anyone at any speed (perhaps not Spits) with proper trimming.


Edited by Whisper

Whisper of old OFP & C6 forums, now Kalbuth.

Specs : i7 6700K / MSI 1070 / 32G RAM / SSD / Rift S / Virpil MongooseT50 / Virpil T50 CM2 Throttle / MFG Crosswind.

All but Viggen, Yak52 & F16

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In case the advice helps : trim to turn helps a lot, though it prohibits fast reaction, but you can follow anyone at any speed (perhaps not Spits) with proper trimming.

 

 

You got it! Trim nose down for continuous level flight, but when you're engaging, trim up again and just hold the stick forward if you're going fast. That way you'll be able to reach critical AoA/max G.

 

 

I'm pretty sure that's how real 109 pilots did it.

 

 

AD

Kit:

B550 Aorus Elite AX V2, Ryzen 7 5800X w/ Thermalright Phantom Spirit 120 SE, 2 x 16GB Kingston Fury DDR4 @3600MHz C16, Gigabyte RTX 3070 Windforce 8GB, EVGA SuperNova 750 G2 PSU, HP Omen 32" 2560x1440, Thrustmaster Cougar HOTAS fitted with Leo Bodnar's BU0836A controller.

--Flying is the art of throwing yourself at the ground, and having all the rules and regulations get in the way!

If man was meant to fly, he would have been born with a lot more money!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's usually more trouble than its worth in dogfights. I think Walter Schuck mentioned in his book that he used it in a dogfight once but who knows how common it was.

 

It's use causes much rage on other forums where some people think it gives the 109 an unfair advantage in the game.

 

In DCS you're really just better off chopping the throttle and slowing down a bit than playing with the stabilizer.

9./JG27

 

"If you can't hit anything, it's because you suck. If you get shot down, it's because you suck. You and me, we know we suck, and that makes it ok." - Worst person in all of DCS

 

"In the end, which will never come, we will all be satisifed... we must fight them on forum, we will fight them on reddit..." - Dunravin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, I didn't exactly test & compare, but seeing how "trim" works in a 109 and in DCS, trimming when your controls are locked should permit you to reach more G and better turn :

DCS simulate controls lock-up at high speed by cutting the max deflection possible on the stabilizer axis, ie past some point, pulling the stick more does asbolutely nothing anymore.

The 109 Stabilizer trims doesn't move actual stabilizer "more", which would be cut by the DCS lock-up implementation, but it moves the whole stab. Which ends up adding to the stab movement induced by the stick, so you should have more authority....

To be tested, gut feelings tell me that using trim makes for tighter turns at high speed.

Whisper of old OFP & C6 forums, now Kalbuth.

Specs : i7 6700K / MSI 1070 / 32G RAM / SSD / Rift S / Virpil MongooseT50 / Virpil T50 CM2 Throttle / MFG Crosswind.

All but Viggen, Yak52 & F16

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes it certainly does, as it should. But usually doing this causes more problems than the extra little bit of G for a few seconds helps you.

 

If you trim tail heavy into the turn then you lose all ability to push the nose down, or in extreme cases even just fly straight. Considering the way most pilots in dcs tend to either on purpose or by accident use backflips, cartwheels or just wild pushing of the stick against the instrument panel as their go to evasive maneuvers you end can't react fast enough to change direction with them.

 

You also lose alot of feeling for how far you can pull without stalling if you use the trim. It takes different stick deflection depending on where the trim is set. Especially in high G turns you bleed speed so quickly that it is very easy to stall the airplane suddenly, which cancels out any advantage you may have gotten from using the trim in the first place. When I fly Mustang I notice alot of people doing this. They pull like crazy in the 109 and it works because of the stick forces for a bit, but then as it gets slower they stall, the wings waggle and they are a sitting duck.

 

Its much smarter in the 109 to just pull the power out a bit, maybe add some flaps or reduce prop pitch for some drag and tighten the turn like this than playing with the trim. Mostly the trim would only help above 400-450 kmh anyway (unless server lag is making stick forces at 300kmh again). Most turning dogfights get slow very fast, where the trim is not useful anymore.

9./JG27

 

"If you can't hit anything, it's because you suck. If you get shot down, it's because you suck. You and me, we know we suck, and that makes it ok." - Worst person in all of DCS

 

"In the end, which will never come, we will all be satisifed... we must fight them on forum, we will fight them on reddit..." - Dunravin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...