DCS P-51D Block found out (and a bug)

Well from what i gathered it was a p51D mostly based on D20, but I too alwasy felt that thye sort of just used characteristics from various D model Blocks. its a bit of a Franken mustang since it not specifically modeled strickly on 1 block type.

shares features from P51D30 and yet retains different equipment and engine settingsover from various blocks from an earlier year.

What matter more is engine settings , so performance wise we may as well be a 1944 D model Stang. although all those green camos and very few silver types that were more common in Europe probably point to a pacific theatre mustang.

Then again thats what happens when a developers tries to have 1 aircraft variant cover too many period, and the p51 is one of those planes that served on many theatres as well as post war.

IE Europe 1944, Pacific 1945, Korean war.

anyways its good to know that we would have 2 versions of the stang. 1944 Europe, and then the specific p51D30 for pacific era 1945.

I'm happy to hear this is possibly getting re-visited. The circle of life.

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1994107&postcount=4

Current P-51D was planned long before the Normandy map came to scene. So we have late war Pacific variant in the DCS now.

I'm very appreciated for such great research. We'll update our Mustang for War in Europe in near future.

Will that include a fuel update?

@Racoon

But if we get the new stang model. Will it replace the current one? Or will it just be a new option in the editor?

Just please don't make a too early mustang. We have already suffered enough. Especially that we already have oponents that shouldnt even fly over Normandy, as they were not in production back then (K4&D9).

I just want to say that IMO it would be great if you focused on the best possible opponent to the current German airplanes, because June 1944 Mustangs would fight Bf109G6 and Fw190A8.

:smilewink:

I just want to say that IMO it would be great if you focused on the best possible opponent to the current German airplanes, because June 1944 Mustangs would fight Bf109G6 and Fw190A8.

Lets focus instead at the plane the June 1944 G-6s and A-8 would fight - the P-47D and Spitfire. Far more common than Mustangs, especially the yet barely seen P-51D.

Lets focus instead at the plane the June 1944 G-6s and A-8 would fight - the P-47D and Spitfire. Far more common than Mustangs, especially the yet barely seen P-51D.

Well they were beeing introduced to units since March 1944, and were supposedly in quantity when D-Day started.

http://www.mustangsmustangs.com/p-51/variants/p51d

I just do not think that P-51D5 is capable oponent for the K4. Hence why I would like to see P-51D20.

Kurfurst does it even matter to you? I mean seriously we are not getting G6, so why focusing on that. You have the most advanced mass produced Bf109. What do you want more?

In the flight manual it says metal covered elevators eliminated porpoising until M0.8

Sounds correct.

Porpoising.- The P-51D airplane, at high speeds, is subject to the longitudinal instability commonly referred to as porpoising. The results to date indicate that the condition may be induced at a Mach number of 0.70 and above, but may be encountered at somewhat lower Mach numbers at low altitude. It is known that the fabric bulge in the elevator surfaces is more critical at low altitudes and may be related to the airplane’s increased tendency to porpoise at lower Mach numbers in that range.

Metal elevators were first introduced with 25NA models. Onwards of Mach .76 compressibility and vibration will be experienced anyway.

for who still calling "June 44 plane set", mostly G-6 and A-8, Mustang model D was at that time very rare bird, only few were in service.

 

so, Bf-109G-6, Fw 190A and P-51B/C is only proper and the most accurate plane set from that time...

The P-51B was actually slightly faster than the D due to its thinner wing and less draggy razorback fuselage, so performance wise it wouldn't make much difference compared to the current mustang assuming that the B/C ran at the same boost pressure. The weakpoint of that design is far inferior vision from the cockpit and only 4 guns in really crappy mountings that made them prone to jamming at inopportune moments (rather like the 109's MK108 :D).

... its thinner wing

this myth is not true, wings airfoil thickness remained the same during Mustang A/B/C/D production

B/C were faster at high altitude because different engine and lower weigh, due to its engine B/C were slower than D model at low altitude

Yeah but the lack of the tail fin makes the plane unstable which leads to bleeding of energy during high speed chases, that would make the P51D5 a slower airplane than the D30. We are slow as it is. It would also take away the K14 sight, which would aggregate the DM issue.

Not to mention that the P51D blocks were actually upgrades which makes it nearly impossible that any rare units were left with D5 in November 1944. And we have to remember that 8th AAF is the most important player on the Western European scene.

That is why I propose the D20 or D25 block. It would be the most representative enemy for the 109K4 and 190D9. And it would also mean way less work for ED as these are similar to D30

Normandy should not be the main reason for the P51D model. Because if it was, we still would not have a single German fighter to fight against. There was 0 Bf109K4 and 0 Fw190D9 over Normandy.

this myth is not true, wings airfoil thickness remained the same during Mustang A/B/C/D production

B/C were faster at high altitude because different engine and lower weigh, due to its engine B/C were slower than D model at low altitude

Last production blocks B-15 and C-10 models were fitted with the same V-1650-7 engines on the D, and they were a tiny weeny bit faster then the D models AFAIK at the same altitudes since they were less draggy due to razorback and gun ports

398 P-51B-10-NAs, 390 P-51B-15-NAs, and 1350 P-51C-10-NTs were built, all powered by the V-1650-7 engine.

1990 B models

1759 C models

As can be seen most of the C model had V1650-7 engines.

this myth is not true, wings airfoil thickness remained the same during Mustang A/B/C/D production

B/C were faster at high altitude because different engine and lower weigh, due to its engine B/C were slower than D model at low altitude

Interesting. I read that the P-51D's wings were thickened to allow the guns to be mounted upright, solving the B/C model's chronic jamming issues. Perhaps the gun jamming problems are also a bit of a myth?

Nerd. Were the wings thickened for the 20mm armed Mustangs? Nope, as there was enough thickness to accommodate the larger weapon.

The gun jamming is not a myth, perhaps overblown tho.

Nerd. Were the wings thickened for the 20mm armed Mustangs? Nope, as there was enough thickness to accommodate the larger weapon.

 

The gun jamming is not a myth, perhaps overblown tho.

fair point.

Manuals waren`t (and aren`t) issued inaccurately.

There are quite a few examples of flat-out errors. I don't remember any off-hand for the P-51D manual (there were some), but I distinctly remember several in the P-38 one. For one, the P-38L's listed WEP speed was actually obtained at MIL power, not WEP. Not even the lowest-used factory WEP of 60". It was the MIL rating of 54". Plain and simple clerical error there.

There were also things like the whole "You cannot perform a turn into a dead engine" thing, which Tony Levier (Lockheed test pilot) later had to disprove by going from airbase to airbases, performing aerobatics with an engine shut off & feathered (including barrel rolls into the dead engine).

It's been a long time, but I did a good deal of hard study of the manual & compared it with more reliable sources--including Bodie's book, which had a foreword by Kelly Johnson (one of the P-38's two designers), saying (I paraphrase) "this book is the straight stuff--none of the other authors ever bothered to consult me before writing a book about my airplane." Fact is, there were a number of errors in the USAAF manuals, plain & simple. Some of them were pretty serious. The guy in charge was one of those types who doesn't like to be told he's wrong. I don't remember his name, but Bodie's book went into some detail on the point.

So that 414 MPH at WEP figure you see everywhere for the P-38L, which originated in the official manual? Wasn't gotten at WEP. 414 MPH was the speed they got at 54" MIL. It was ~421 at 60" WEP (to say nothing of 66" WEP).

Similar problems existed in the P-51 manual, but I've forgotten which ones are there, so someone else is going to have to give you specific examples of errors in the P-51 manual. Point is, you cannot trust the period USAAF manuals. They did contain errors.

Are they going to look into this? As is stands, having the IFF gear in there is like having fuel in the center tank, you don't want to fight like that. It would be nice to have the option to remove this IFF junk. I'm not sure why the three WW2 fighters we have happened to be the rarest of the rare. I hope in the future we get more common aircraft with more common loadouts.

ETA nvm, I see they will be updating the 51 to a more common loadout. That's good news.

I assumed the Mustang in DCS is a P-51D-20NA because it says on the left side of the aircraft. Guess not?