Jump to content

P-51 vs 109


Recommended Posts

When it comes to the player piloted P-51 vs the AI 109 the 51 has no chance. I do realize that this is partly because of the sfm the 109 uses but in reality was the 109 really that much better than the 51? I mean how could we have won the war if that was the case? Does ed plan to tweak the 109’s flight model to make it beatable in a dogfight?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 189
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

When it comes to the player piloted P-51 vs the AI 109 the 51 has no chance. I do realize that this is partly because of the sfm the 109 uses but in reality was the 109 really that much better than the 51? I mean how could we have won the war if that was the case? Does ed plan to tweak the 109’s flight model to make it beatable in a dogfight?

 

 

Use a mission where you're above 20,000ft maybe? The Mustang starts to shine at the higher altitudes... Especially if you're escorting the bombers. The 109's need to go up, if they want the bombers, and you'll be waiting... :)

MSI MAG Z790 Carbon, i9-13900k, NH-D15 cooler, 64 GB CL40 6000mhz RAM, MSI RTX4090, Yamaha 5.1 A/V Receiver, 4x 2TB Samsung 980 Pro NVMe, 1x 2TB Samsung 870 EVO SSD, Win 11 Pro, TM Warthog, Virpil WarBRD, MFG Crosswinds, 43" Samsung 4K TV, 21.5 Acer VT touchscreen, TrackIR, Varjo Aero, Wheel Stand Pro Super Warthog, Phanteks Enthoo Pro2 Full Tower Case, Seasonic GX-1200 ATX3 PSU, PointCTRL, Buttkicker 2, K-51 Helicopter Collective Control

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team
When it comes to the player piloted P-51 vs the AI 109 the 51 has no chance. I do realize that this is partly because of the sfm the 109 uses but in reality was the 109 really that much better than the 51? I mean how could we have won the war if that was the case? Does ed plan to tweak the 109’s flight model to make it beatable in a dogfight?

 

I am sure the question will bring lots of responses, but the K-4 was a beast, but by the time it hit the war, Germany was on its heels and the Allies had pretty much air superiority. 1v1, again, it will be an argument, but there are many variables to consider.

 

In your case, how many hours do you have in the P-51? The AI is very good and doesn't make a lot of mistakes. You will find though, with practice the AI is very beatable. Only thinkg ED is tweaking that will help is the damage modelling. The flight model is based on the real thing. Set up a scenario more akin to 1944-45, and you will find the K-4 wont fair very well.

 

SO the short answer is, there are no instant aces here, practice your craft, and understand where you need to beat the 109.

64Sig.png
Forum RulesMy YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug**

1146563203_makefg(6).png.82dab0a01be3a361522f3fff75916ba4.png  80141746_makefg(1).png.6fa028f2fe35222644e87c786da1fabb.png  28661714_makefg(2).png.b3816386a8f83b0cceab6cb43ae2477e.png  389390805_makefg(3).png.bca83a238dd2aaf235ea3ce2873b55bc.png  216757889_makefg(4).png.35cb826069cdae5c1a164a94deaff377.png  1359338181_makefg(5).png.e6135dea01fa097e5d841ee5fb3c2dc5.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the ai 109 isnt better than a player flown 109. its just the combination of the strengths of the 109 and the dcs ai logic. the dcs ai tends to climb if it notices to get outturned. it also climbs when it overshoots...and this fits best to the 109 out of the available ww2 fighters we have as long as it flies against a human...ai vs ai, the spit profits even more from this ai logic. thats why there are repeatable results when u set up missions with ai vs ai at same skill levels....there u will notice the fw190 loses against all other fighters while the spit wins against all others...the 109 loses against spit but wins against the other two and the p51 wins against the 190 but loses vs spit and 109...its because they dont fly to their aircraft strengths but follow the general rule described above...


Edited by birdstrike
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whenever I fly against AI 109s, I set (most of ) them to "average" skill. They're quite manageable.

 

In MP I used to think they are invincible - and if flown right, they are - but now I find it's not so impossible to be victorious in a P-51.

 

Keep your speed up, use 1 notch of flaps but only when needed - that is, when you have high speed and you need to turn tight. Otherwise they make you bleed your speed too fast.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team
When it comes to the player piloted P-51 vs the AI 109 the 51 has no chance. I do realize that this is partly because of the sfm the 109 uses but in reality was the 109 really that much better than the 51? I mean how could we have won the war if that was the case? Does ed plan to tweak the 109’s flight model to make it beatable in a dogfight?

 

It is a very often asked question on Russian forums but concerning to the Yak vs 109 or T-34 against V and VI tanks. :) The interesting question too, is how Midway was won with F-4F against Zero.

 

The answer can be in "outnumbered" or "outplayed" or in much more available resources or in better tactics.. Germany could not win fighting against endless Russian manpower and territories, American and British industry and science.

 

Returning to 109K... if it has almost 1900 hp for 3400 kg against Mustang's 1650 for 4300 (even if you have it with the same fuel weight as 109 it is at least 4000 kg), 16 m2 vs 22 m2 - 109 outclimbs P-51 easily. Add 109's better engine indicator power management because of variable speed blower, as it does not have this sawtooth power dependance on altitude.

 

Anyway, especially on online, especially during teamwork 109's advantages are not absolute.

Ніщо так сильно не ранить мозок, як уламки скла від розбитих рожевих окулярів

There is nothing so hurtful for the brain as splinters of broken rose-coloured spectacles.

Ничто так сильно не ранит мозг, как осколки стекла от разбитых розовых очков (С) Me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the subject of reality and tactics, do bear in mind that apparently the majority of kills were not made from dogfights, they were by pilots taking another aircraft by surprise.

System: 9700, 64GB DDR4, 2070S, NVME2, Rift S, Jetseat, Thrustmaster F18 grip, VPC T50 stick base and throttle, CH Throttle, MFG crosswinds, custom button box, Logitech G502 and Marble mouse.

Server: i5 2500@3.9Ghz, 1080, 24GB DDR3, SSD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

P51 beats 109 in real life because:

 

 

better pilot training/deeper reserves

numbers

all fights at 20k+ ft

better range/endurance

109s chief objective isn't to shoot down P51, but bombers

actual turning fights are not rare but not as common. most of the time 109s dying to swooping attacks rather than concerted duels. in reality you rarely start from a neutral position and do several turns- more often mustang comes from above or to your side and just shoots you to death in one gunburst. P51 is just as vulnerable to this, but there are a bunch more planes and pilots- not so with 109.

fights were VERY many vs many. the biggest fight i've seen in WWII DCS was probably 5v5 at most. in small unit engagements you can hope to keep at least a rough track of everyone's positions- you might know that there's somebody behind you before he opens fire and maneuver to prevent it, but in many vs many odds are you are going to be planform to someone, and can die without warning at any time. in such a situation, your superlative maneuverability is less able to frustrate mustang's ability to shoot you.


Edited by Cik
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think there is another thing in play here - experience in combat. I'll explain.....

 

We who have flown flight sims for lcose to 2 decades have made thousands of mistakes, many times taking more than once to learn the lesson, and have gained valuable experience. While many of us would not have survived air combat most likely we now are more than equivalent to any Experten who flew from Condor Legion through to the end of the war.

 

Now I realize the we aren't flying real warbirds, but at no point in the history of air combat did a person with tens of thousands of hours worth of combat time go against another with the same experience, let alone many of these vs many of these. With people like us flying simulations we have learned to exploit our favorite plane's strengths better over other plane's weaknesses, and the pilot makes the difference up. Some of us started in FS1 and Jane's WWII Fighters, came up through IL2, 1946, CloD, and now this and BOX series. We all are more experienced fighter pilots then any who have flown in real life.

 

The 109 is superior to the Mustang in some ways, initial rate of turn, initial climb, but in WWII the Mustang was flown by more experienced pilots and usually enjoyed a 5 to 1 advantage in numbers. that's a no brainer. But for every story a US airman told of shooting down a German there's another about how in a 1v1 engagement with a 109 it took everything trick a Mustang pilot knew to even survive and it had to have been flown by an old head. While the 109 was an outdated design by WWII standards it could more than hold it's own vs any US fighter when flown by someone who had flown one for years. I've even read that some Experten had zero respect for the Mustang 1v1, but didn't like to fight Jugs.

 

~Rob

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The answer is simple. Germany lost because they bit off more than they could chew. It had nothing to to with the planes, except Germany didn't have enough of them.

 

I love the P-51 and wouldn't fly any other WW2 plane. However, I don't fool myself into thinking it was the best plane.

 

It will never happen but what would happen if you took the best P-51 pilot in the war and put him against the best 109 pilot. in the war? One on one. Who wins?

Buzz

Link to comment
Share on other sites

P-51 was a superior bird in that specific situation though- as an escort fighter 109 is hopeless as range is too short to make it anywhere important and back.

 

 

one vs one is a useless comparison for the most part as 1v1 duels are very rare. what matters is many vs many fights and the ability to GET to the many vs many fight.

 

 

what's a better tank, the tiger or the sherman? nose to nose, the tiger may win odds on but the sherman is a better tank because:

 

 

he wins everywhere the tiger isn't, which is most places

he outnumbers tiger 20:1

 

he's good enough

he doesn't have to skulk around rail because he can actually strategically maneuver without breaking down

he has combined arms support to bust anything he can't kill himself

easy to manufacture, en masse and can fit on a liberty ship

 

 

T-34 is better tank than tiger as well for these reason(s)

 

 

tl;dr 109 would have been terrible for anybody else than germany, as it had meager range. only reason it was good was because germany was already in a losing position and forced into a point defense role.

 

 

it's very maneuverable and the armament is good, but many vs many it's less invincible than it seems while you're trying to outmaneuver it with a fuel tank 10 times the size of your opponent. it's not significantly resistant to .50 cal, you're planform to someone at all times, many times you are dead with no real recourse to your maneuverability or climb rate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 on 5, 10 on 10, 50 on 50, probably with some sort of objective so that it isn't just a frag contest.

 

 

air superiority is nice, but it doesn't win wars by itself. at some point you have to theoretically do something on the ground, most of the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It still goes back to experience....and training. I don't believe the Germans had much of either in the later stages of the war...mounting loses and limited resources would have prevented later German pilots from gaining the experience and training on the Allied level. Ive read several books written by P-51 pilots and they all stated that new pilots to the Mustang were required a minimum of 200 hours of flight time in aircraft qualification and tactics training before they were sent into combat for the first time. I would suspect that if anyone new to DCS P-51 spent that much time learning the aircraft, practicing basic aerobatics and air to air combat maneuvers before engaging in "combat" probably would not find it near as tough to come out the victor in an engagement!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's my take of the DCS WWII community, particularly the 109 croud:

 

You won't find the red coalition outnumbered regularly. Sometimes, red outnumbers blue.

People won't fly up to bomber altitudes because they have dinner in half an hour.

Can't stretch distances between blue and red airfields, and limit the 109's fuel, because time, and complaints from biased players about how unfair it would be.

Bias. When it comes to newcomers to DCS WWII, the 109 is often blasted in their face. This feeds into the number of 109 armchair pilots.

Out of the box, a newbie vs a newbie, the 109 would come out on top most of the time. The 109 is easier to handle against the Mustang. This feeds into the bias, as well as the numbers.

 

This takes away a lot from the Mustang. No need for escort. No need for high altitudes. No need for long distance trips. Red force is not outnumbered that often.

 

When it comes to it in DCS, and the pilots or equally skilled, the Mustang will get shot down. The P-51 isn't meant to nimble, it's meant to fly very long distances. The 109 is vice versa, making it perfect for quick matches in DCS.


Edited by Magic Zach

Hardware: T-16000M Pack, Saitek 3 Throttle Quadrant, Homemade 32-function Leo Bodnar Button Box, MFG Crosswind Pedals Oculus Rift S

System Specs: MSI MPG X570 GAMING PLUS, GTX 1070 SC2, AMD RX3700, 32GB DDR4-3200, Samsung 860 EVO, Samsung 970 EVO 250GB

Modules: Ka-50, Mi-8MTV2, FC3, F/A-18C, F-14B, F-5E, P-51D, Spitfire Mk LF Mk. IXc, Bf-109K-4, Fw-190A-8

Maps: Normandy, Nevada

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The matchup it also not fair or so historical accurate, the k4 is a late 1944 aircraft and we have a early 1944 P51 engine boost.

 

Here's the problem with DCS P51D: The plane is limited to 67"hg of manifold pressure, a setting that was used with 100/130 octane fuel for like 2 months when the early P51D blocks was introduced into service, after ward it was raised to 70"hg of manifold pressure.

 

But for most it's service life, USAAF P51D ran at 75"hg with 150 octane fuel, and British Mustang IV ran on 81"hg(and many USAAF pilots ran on this setting).

 

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/mustang/75inch-clearance-v-1650-7.jpg

 

http://www.spitfireperformance.com/mustang/combat-reports/353-hinchey-14nov44.jpg

 

Pacific USAAF P51Ds ran at 80"hg with 115/145 octane fuel.

Here's the unhistorical thing: The P51D we have a in game is a late version of the P51D, indicated by the presence of the tail fin, tail radar. There's no reason for it to be limited at 67"hg, it should run at 75"hg at the very least.

 

So we have a very underpowered P51 against the latest models 109s and 190s with MW50 boost, i dont know why. And its not a good matchup i think in this late war scenario.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've said it enough times already, however it bears repeating:

 

Only 8th Air Force used P-51s running 150 octane in the ETO - those of the 9th used straight 100 octane.

Whilst this means that the majority of all P-51 units in theatre would have been operating on the 150 grade fuel, it does not by any means indicate that all would.

 

The famed 354th FG (Pioneer Mustang Group) achieved its notable record in entirely 67"hg Ponies.

 

The issue here is complicated by the mixed up chronology of the map and the aircraft available.

 

If the map takes precedence then we have the wrong P-51 (should be a D-5 or more accurately a B variant as they were most prevalent over Normandy), the wrong 109 (should be a G-6 or G-14) and the wrong 190 (should be an A-8 ).

 

If we have the right Luftwaffe types then we have the wrong map, the wrong P-51 3D model.

 

In both cases depending on whether we are representing a typically 8th AF or 9th AF P-51, then we may or may not have the right engine manifold setting. Are we focussing on Tactical Air War or Long Range Strategic Bomber Offensive?

 

If gameplay only is the issue then yes, perhaps to make things a little more even the 75"HG variant should be modelled, but that won't be a panacea - it'll help make the Mustang a little quicker on the level, and improve climb somewhat, but it will never be as manoeuvrable or as quick accelerating as the K-4; wing- and power-loadings alone will define that.

 

There is no simple answer.


Edited by DD_Fenrir
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When talking about DCS P51 vs 109 it's all about fuel quantity. The pilot with less fuel will win the 1v1 contest. That's it. Period.

Specs:

Asus Z97 PRO Gamer, i7 4790K@4.6GHz, 4x8GB Kingston @2400MHz 11-13-14-32, Titan X, Creative X-Fi, 128+2x250GB SSDs, VPC T50 Throttle + G940, MFG Crosswinds, TrackIR 5 w/ pro clip, JetSeat, Win10 Pro 64-bit, Oculus Rift, 27"@1920x1080

 

Settings:

2.1.x - Textures:High Terrain:High Civ.Traffic:Off Water:High VisRan:Low Heatblur:High Shadows:High Res:1920x1080 RoC:1024 MSAA:4x AF:16x HDR:OFF DefS: ON GCI: ON DoF:Off Lens: OFF C/G:390m Trees:1500m R:max Gamma: 1.5

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've said it enough times already, however it bears repeating:

 

Only 8th Air Force used P-51s running 150 octane in the ETO - those of the 9th used straight 100 octane.

Whilst this means that the majority of all P-51 units in theatre would have been operating on the 150 grade fuel, it does not by any means indicate that all would.

 

The famed 354th FG (Pioneer Mustang Group) achieved its notable record in entirely 67"hg Ponies.

 

The issue here is complicated by the mixed up chronology of the map and the aircraft available.

 

If the map takes precedence then we have the wrong P-51 (should be a D-5 or more accurately a B variant as they were most prevalent over Normandy), the wrong 109 (should be a G-6 or G-14) and the wrong 190 (should be an A-8 ).

 

If we have the right Luftwaffe types then we have the wrong map, the wrong P-51 3D model.

 

In both cases depending on whether we are representing a typically 8th AF or 9th AF P-51, then we may or may not have the right engine manifold setting. Are we focussing on Tactical Air War or Long Range Strategic Bomber Offensive?

 

If gameplay only is the issue then yes, perhaps to make things a little more even the 75"HG variant should be modelled, but that won't be a panacea - it'll help make the Mustang a little quicker on the level, and improve climb somewhat, but it will never be as manoeuvrable or as quick accelerating as the K-4; wing- and power-loadings alone will define that.

 

There is no simple answer.

 

 

The answer should be simple, we have late war german aircraft so we should also have later variants off the mustang. Anyways, im waiting for the P51 mustang in the ´´other`` ww2 sim. Going to be interesting to see what kind is modeled there. My guess is there will be engine variants.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Remember also, we are getting an updated P-51 to match out timeframe a bit better.

 

Thanks for advising. I must have missed that.

Would you have a link to anymore details?

System: 9700, 64GB DDR4, 2070S, NVME2, Rift S, Jetseat, Thrustmaster F18 grip, VPC T50 stick base and throttle, CH Throttle, MFG crosswinds, custom button box, Logitech G502 and Marble mouse.

Server: i5 2500@3.9Ghz, 1080, 24GB DDR3, SSD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for advising. I must have missed that.

Would you have a link to anymore details?

Afaik, the only update coming to the Mustang is the one concerning textures for in the cockpit (and maybe exterior).

Nine/SiTh, are you saying that the Mustang would get an increase in manifold? If so, would this update come alongside the texture update?

Hardware: T-16000M Pack, Saitek 3 Throttle Quadrant, Homemade 32-function Leo Bodnar Button Box, MFG Crosswind Pedals Oculus Rift S

System Specs: MSI MPG X570 GAMING PLUS, GTX 1070 SC2, AMD RX3700, 32GB DDR4-3200, Samsung 860 EVO, Samsung 970 EVO 250GB

Modules: Ka-50, Mi-8MTV2, FC3, F/A-18C, F-14B, F-5E, P-51D, Spitfire Mk LF Mk. IXc, Bf-109K-4, Fw-190A-8

Maps: Normandy, Nevada

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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