K-4 is a P51 Killer

1. Cant comment on preferances.

2. 10% would be between 109 and spit.

In a fight against 51 the109 has all advantages.

 

K4 is

Faster or at least as fast

As maneuverable

Has better turn

Better climb

Better acceleration

Better stall speed

 

So P51 can't run. Can't turn. Can't climb. And in a dive sooner or later k4 will catch him.

Only roll at High speed is better for 51.

 

Scissors are the only way... And not a good way.

It's not that simple. Mustang have better handling and agility at higher speeds. It's better in dives and also accelerates faster in dive as it's heavier and have better aerodynamics. It's got much better visibility. It also have faster roll rate at most speeds. 109 with MW50 is clearly better only in climbing and slower speed turn fights.

Hopefully the Mustang will get a bit of a boost to reflect what would have been a more common engagement.

I'm sure it will get updated before DCS:WW2 is out.

4 x 10 minutes, IIRC at least 5 min. pause between every time.

I don't get this excitement with the "MW boost running out"... It simply never did in practice, since by the you'd use it up, you'd also use up the fuel tank as well, and no air combat lasts for 30 mins, all the time at full throttle... I don't get the 10 minute thing either - this was a soft limit to increase engine lifespan (same as the Mustang, in which WEP was allowed for 'only'' 5 minutes). The engine wouldn't just blow in the 6th or 11th minute - during clearance test they would run these engines for hours at max power..

It's got much better visibility.

I think this doesn't get enough attention. Even the D-9 is much more enjoyable and, in my opinion, easier to do well in than the K simply because of the visibility and ease of situational awareness.

And a big f*** you to the headrest/armorplate in the 109!

I'm still only going to fly the 109, though

True, but the guy who designed that longitudinal canopy frame in the center top of the D-9 canopy should have been fired from Focke-Wulf early on... and then maybe crucified, hanged and impaled.

I don't get this excitement with the "MW boost running out"... It simply never did in practice, since by the you'd use it up, you'd also use up the fuel tank as well, and no air combat lasts for 30 mins, all the time at full throttle... I don't get the 10 minute thing either - this was a soft limit to increase engine lifespan (same as the Mustang, in which WEP was allowed for 'only'' 5 minutes). The engine wouldn't just blow in the 6th or 11th minute - during clearance test they would run these engines for hours at max power..

Well you have good point there, i must agree. And average lifespan of dogfight IRL was many times only few minutes...

True, but the guy who designed that longitudinal canopy frame in the center top of the D-9 canopy should have been fired from Focke-Wulf early on... and then maybe crucified, hanged and impaled.

:megalol: True also, but i think it was not as big issue in real life than it is in sims.

I don't get the 10 minute thing either - this was a soft limit to increase engine lifespan (same as the Mustang, in which WEP was allowed for 'only'' 5 minutes). The engine wouldn't just blow in the 6th or 11th minute - during clearance test they would run these engines for hours at max power..

I've read several accounts by German pilots saying they were told to never use MW50 for more than 5 minutes... And most of them said they took this very seriously and used it much less than that. These aircraft kept them alive and they didn't purposely do things they knew would be a detriment to the engine lifespan unless absolutely necessary.

It's not that simple. Mustang have better handling and agility at higher speeds. It's better in dives and also accelerates faster in dive as it's heavier and have better aerodynamics. It's got much better visibility. It also have faster roll rate at most speeds. 109 with MW50 is clearly better only in climbing and slower speed turn fights.

P51D vs K4 would be an alright fight, till you factor in the FW 190 D9.

What caused most Allied victories?

 

That's right! TEAMWORK!

 

Stop moaning about balance and get a wingman.

Or get off the forest floor and climb to have an altitude advantage. All this crying about boost or octane ... it probably isn't going to change the turn time enough for those dreaming of their Mustang being like the Spitfire or P-38. I've never seen Dora's slaughtering Mustangs and I imagine the same will be true of the 109. It will come down to the pilot to exercise energy discipline and learn to fight to their planes abilities.

Or you could tone down. Its not about turning its about acceleration and energy retention. More power better flight performance.

It is also about historical accuracy. WW2 1944 means 150 octane

As stated elsewhere, fuel and the ability to change fuel types will be looked at down the road, but for now you have to deal with the hands that you were dealt. The ability to change the contents of the MW-50 tank on the 109 is a good sign they have it on their minds...

Thank you. Awesome news.

And of course, for every 109 in the sky, there should probably be 20 P-51Ds, and 100 Bombers which is where the balance will be found.

And of course, for every 109 in the sky, there should probably be 20 P-51Ds, and 100 Bombers whinors where the balance will be found.

But why making assymetrical teams when they can change power settings to those of the mighty 8th and give allied planes ability for better competition.

Nobody likes when 5 teammates swarm his target and that would always make impossible for axis to win. Not to mention that more people like 109s.

For what its worth we will be developing the Spitfire XIV to be historically accurate (as much as possible) using real world data gathered from airworthy aircraft and current pilots. Historical data although good is often not reliable as it is often a biased view and/or a matter of relativity.

 

We do not "balance" our aircraft, we will make them in line with all of the data we have at our disposal, if that means that Spitfire XIV's and Bf109's rule the roost then so be it ;)

I don't know why you took my comment to be about "balancing aircraft," which is abhorrent to me.

But if you feel the need to defend the integrity of the Spit XIV project I was not trying to attack it. Rather, we can all agree that it would be a pity if the 109K-4 and Spit XIV make up 90% of the WW2 aircraft in DCS multiplayer because everyone needs to have the very best all the time.

In DCS we are now passing into the supremacy of WWII aircraft.

A truth of fact, the Crème de la crème.

We have the 109 and now we need the spit to balance it all out.

And of course it goes without saying... the bearcat.... will be the cat amongst the pigeons!

(...) Rather, we can all agree that it would be a pity if the 109K-4 and Spit XIV make up 90% of the WW2 aircraft in DCS multiplayer because everyone needs to have the very best all the time.

This balancing issue mostly applies to open public servers running basically a "team deathmatch". There isn't really an easy way around it. No aircraft are ever going to be exactly equal so there's always going to be one considered better than another. For more realistic scenarios it would have to be organized better.

In DCS we are now passing into the supremacy of WWII aircraft.

A truth of fact, the Crème de la crème.

We have the 109 and now we need the spit to balance it all out.

 

And of course it goes without saying... the bearcat.... will be the cat amongst the pigeons!

Hopefully they only include aircraft that actually saw combat in WWII.

This balancing issue mostly applies to open public servers running basically a "team deathmatch". There isn't really an easy way around it. No aircraft are ever going to be exactly equal so there's always going to be one considered better than another. For more realistic scenarios it would have to be organized better.

With the DCS mission editor it is very easy to limit the availability of aircraft as the designer sees fit. So for more casual play it doesn't have to be a bunch of 109Ks and SpitXIVs humping each other ad nauseum.

With the DCS mission editor it is very easy to limit the availability of aircraft as the designer sees fit. So for more casual play it doesn't have to be a bunch of 109Ks and SpitXIVs humping each other ad nauseum.

Although I haven't used this feature as I have not made any MP missions it sounds like it would work. So problem solved then? Perhaps what is needed is just more variation so that both sides can have a collection of better and worse.

Was it ever mentioned why the p-51d was only modeled with 67 manifold?

Also I've heard Bud Anderson (P-51 ace) talk about shooting down the 109. His conversation made it sound pretty clear he could out maneuver the 109 at will and even shot many down waiting for them to stall before he did. I really don't know but I don't think that many experienced German pilots saw as much action in the K4? I'll have to post the video

Here's some info on the K-4. Some have stated 2200HP but only 2000hp and that was with higher octane which wasn't used.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messerschmitt_Bf_109_variants#K-4

Well you have good point there, i must agree. And average lifespan of dogfight IRL was many times only few minutes...

Right. Talking to several of the veterans from both sides, the thing that struck me was how little they used these over-boosted power settings that are so important to players.

Oscar Bösch used it once when his staffel was bounced by ~60 Mustangs. He was the sole survivor.

http://www.warart.com/bailey-robert-all/war-wolf

Outside of that incident he never used Start-und Notleistung in any of the other 13 victories.

And no wonder, Aside from the obvious mechanical strain, these over-boosted conditions can be detrimental to an aircraft's performance under many conditions. Instead of seeing a performance boost, the airplane would lose performance even without engine damage just because of the physics of propeller aircraft.

A few years ago, I was flying a Glasair-3 to an airshow. I was cruising at 13,000 feet, 2400 RPM, wide open throttle. I was running a bit behind schedule, so in pursuit of a few more knots, I decided to operate at max power (2700 RPM, WOT). It was something of a surprise when I lost about 15 knots of airspeed. I set the RPM back to 2400, and regained the lost 15 knots. Later I did the calculations to verify that the loss was due to the sudden loss of efficiency.

http://www.epi-eng.com/propeller_technology/selecting_a_propeller.htm

So, flying in high density altitude conditions such as summer and turning on some over-boost could easily result in a huge performance loss as the propeller disc was suddenly loaded with several hundred more horsepower than the blades can transfer in those conditions and rpm induced tip losses.