Coming from a 109 pilot, some frustrations...

After having flown the 109-K extensively in single player, I tried out the Dora for free. I was very excited to try what I had assumed was the Luftwaffe's most potent fighter. Perhaps that assumption was mistaken from the beginning, but I just can't seem to utilize it properly.

In the instant action mission for the Persian Gulf map that starts you head on against a P-51, I haven't been able to get a single kill out 30 or 40+ tries that wasn't simply a lucky head on joust. Conversely, using the Bf 109-K, I can beat the Mustang every single time. I can always out-turn it and get on his tail. Always.

Okay, so I see it has quite a long wingspan, and so I assume it isn't meant to dogfight the way a 109 can, but really it just seems like the turning performance is horrendous. Meant to be a higher altitude fighter, I guess? Regardless, I simply cannot get behind the Mustang, ever. Yes, the D-9 is much faster and climbs much better, but how do I use this to my advantage in getting behind the enemy? The P-51 is no slouch and will always turn to face me, and at that point it's whoever is lucky enough in those split seconds to put rounds in the other's face. Not a clean way of fighting.

The damn thing just won't turn. It loses control very quickly around 320 km/h in a sustained turn. I'm just curious to hear from some veterans of the Dora on what I might be doing wrong and how they engage P-51s. Should I forget about trying to fight in the horizontal plane? Should I just not be pulling on the stick as much? Moreover, why would I fly this thing over a bf-109? I'm just no good at booming and zooming, I guess.

Oh my! Where do I start? Let's see.. First, you must learn to turn coordinated, then you must teach yourself to be gentle with the stick, she doesn't like it rough and do NOT lose speed or you'd be dead soon. You cannot outturn the P51D in a horizontal turn, so what's left? Exactly.. use the vertical, just as you said, better climber. But remember that the P51 is a better diver (just a bit). You need a lot of hours to master the Dora. Remember that tactics is what makes you win a fight.. always. She's the best energy fighter that DCS has to offer, so use it to your advantage. AI will not make you better, as you'll develop bad habits. Go directly online and you'll quickly learn, probably de hard way, as we all did. See you in the skies! P.S. I personally love Dora.

Oh my! Where do I start? Let's see.. First, you must learn to turn coordinated, then you must teach yourself to be gentle with the stick, she doesn't like it rough and do NOT lose speed or you'd be dead soon. You cannot outturn the P51D in a horizontal turn, so what's left? Exactly.. use the vertical, just as you said, better climber. But remember that the P51 is a better diver (just a bit). You need a lot of hours to master the Dora. Remember that tactics is what makes you win a fight.. always. She's the best energy fighter that DCS has to offer, so use it to your advantage. AI will not make you better, as you'll develop bad habits. Go directly online and you'll quickly learn, probably de hard way, as we all did. See you in the skies! P.S. I personally love Dora.

I can perform a coordinated turn... but I tend to get a bit sloppy with that during combat. Vertical, huh? Alright, I'll try more of that. The Dora is definitely not forgiving of sudden stick movement. In a way it reminds me of the match up between the MiG-15 and F-86. I'm a MiG pilot, and I had the hardest time learning how to fight the Sabre until I eased up on the controls and took the fight vertical. You'd think some of that would have carried over, but jets are too different to begin with.

And yes, I know, you're right; I've gotta get my ass online.

Fly it like You have some eggs in the cockpit, think two maneuvers in avance and You could win even the UFO AI :)

Inviato dal mio BLA-L09 utilizzando Tapatalk

What I learned recently is that when you see P51 climbing you go Dive and Turn, he will loose speed temporarily and there is your opportunity to boom and zoom xD

Fw 190 d9 is very different plane

potent is a vague word, nowhere does it imply that it has to be better in every aspect

in real combat dogging your opponent through the turns is a good way to die and when history refers to a prop as good and potent it generally means it's good at engaging and disengaging

if you look at propfighter development they were always splitting hairs over single digit mph increases in top speed, not turn rate

the team with the more survivable airplanes tended to be able to overwhelm the enemy with numbers

basically turning is for losers

if you look at propfighter development they were always splitting hairs over single digit mph increases in top speed, not turn rate

Faster plane isn't necessarily the better one. A fighter needs to have a good balance between speed and maneuverability to be "good". For example Spitfire had a really astonishing turn rate, but somewhat lacked the speed. Was it a bad fighter? I wouldn't say so.

Faster plane isn't necessarily the better one. A fighter needs to have a good balance between speed and maneuverability to be "good". For example Spitfire had a really astonishing turn rate, but somewhat lacked the speed. Was it a bad fighter? I wouldn't say so.

Agree, But i must disagree that spitfire IX was lacking speed, it was a little slower, compare to G-6.

Compare to Fw190 A8 is about the same in speed, maybe little faster at high alt. Spitfire IX is just a blast fighter, it lacks speed only compare to high end Germans fighters like D-9s or K-4s.

If we want to compare to D-9 or K-4 bring Spitfire Mk IVX with griffon engine.

I don't know if i remember correctly but i think MK IVX with 150 fuel could push +390mph at SL, that is impressive :) definitely MK IVX will smoke both K-4 and D-9

Aerodynamically speaking, it's either high speed or good maneuverability as the laws of physics doesn't allow them both. What we see in DCS is just a point of view of somebody and doesn't mimic the reality, at all. For that, we need serious computing power.

Aerodynamically speaking, it's either high speed or good maneuverability as the laws of physics doesn't allow them both. What we see in DCS is just a point of view of somebody and doesn't mimic the reality, at all. For that, we need serious computing power.

Aerodynamically speaking it depends, we can have very fast and maneuverability plane at low mach but it can go bad at high mach numbers like bf 109, and spitfire perform very good in both range of speeds.

Very fast at low Mach??? What are you talking about..?

Very fast at low Mach??? What are you talking about..?

At SL you can be fast but mach number is low. At high alt mach number is much higher and this change a lot.

And spit perform extremely well at high mach, better then P-51.

At SL you can be fast but mach number is low. At high alt mach number is much higher and this change a lot.

And spit perform extremely well at high mach, better then P-51.

You cannot compare the performance of 2 planes just by TAS or IAS.. you need EAS. It's more complicated than you think..

You cannot compare the performance of 2 planes just by TAS or IAS.. you need EAS. It's more complicated than you think..

That is why some one created this very important and universal unit called Mach number.As bf 109 perform well at low mach numbers it sucks hard at high mach.

And i didn't mentioned any TAS or IAS so don't put words in my mouth.

The Mach number doesn't tell all the truth.. as I said. It's a bit more complicated than that.

It says enough :)

The point is, it's either speed or maneuverability.

The point is, it's either speed or maneuverability.

Absolutely speaking yes, but bf 109 isnt perfect plane and other planes can be more maneuverable and faster at the same time.

You can also check the energy-maneuverability theory, it's quite interesting.

You can also check the energy-maneuverability theory, it's quite interesting.

Problem is that it is much harder to utilize FW 190 advantages in any DCS MP server then Spitfire advantages.

In DCS, the power to weight ratio is what matters the most. So the quantity of fuel in each plane is very important. For example, the P51, in real life, would fly very long missions, in DCS, not so much. So if you have a very light P51 you could outmaneuver a fully fueled 109, easily.

In DCS, the power to weight ratio is what matters the most. So the quantity of fuel in each plane is very important. For example, the P51, in real life, would fly very long missions, in DCS, not so much. So if you have a very light P51 you could outmaneuver a fully fueled 109, easily.

And pls add the high speed and high mach bf109 problems :)

But i think, DCS is the most complex sim if it comes to FM. Price and development time stands for it.

And pls add the high speed and high mach bf109 problems :)

But i think in DCS is the most complex sim if it comes to FM. Price and development time stands for it.

All planes suffered at high Mach number not only the 109. I do believe that the 109 stick forces are exaggerated in DCS. As that DCS sports the best FM in the gaming industry, I also believe so, but I wonder for how long. There are other sims (not necessarily combat sims) that will be release this year, that would bring both breathtaking graphics and, at least, the same level FM complexity.

at least, the same level FM complexity

That is to be hoped, but has, ahem, this particular civvie sim competitor said what kind of tech they're using for their physics engine? Am asking since I'm very much out of the loop.