Jump to content

Strengths and weaknesses Dora/Mustang


Recommended Posts

I agree with what has been said here.

 

It was very much down to the pilots experience and willingness to throw his crate around so yes a grain of salt is indeed needed.

 

That said I find Gerhard Kroll's review of the Americans report quite interesting... obviously some things like vibration and braking performance etc... depend entirely upon what the pilot was used to and therefore deemed acceptable but Kroll does raise some good points on the potential state of the test aircraft.

 

I am not claiming that the Dora was superior to the P-51, in fact before read through these books and accounts I thought the P-51 held the advantage, now I believe them to be a very close match.

 

Still at the end of the day the biggest factor is luck and who spots who first and then takes advantage of the situation... fight or flee :)

 

 

 

Im not claiming the 51 to be overall superior either. I consider them very evenly matched exchanging advantages depending on alt.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]Weed Be gone Needed

Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree with what has been said here.

 

It was very much down to the pilots experience and willingness to throw his crate around so yes a grain of salt is indeed needed.

 

That said I find Gerhard Kroll's review of the Americans report quite interesting... obviously some things like vibration and braking performance etc... depend entirely upon what the pilot was used to and therefore deemed acceptable but Kroll does raise some good points on the potential state of the test aircraft.

 

I am not claiming that the Dora was superior to the P-51, in fact before read through these books and accounts I thought the P-51 held the advantage, now I believe them to be a very close match.

 

Still at the end of the day the biggest factor is luck and who spots who first and then takes advantage of the situation... fight or flee :)

 

I remember reading somewhere that the D-9 in the US test was rebuilt after the war from a crashed D-9, which would mean it probably wasn't in pristine condition. Allied ground crews did not know how to handle the FW 190, evident from earlier 190 test like the A-4, where the ailerons were improperly aligned by the ground crew but they just wrote it down as an aircraft fault.

 

Probably explains why the test pilots had such a different experience to what Kroll members.

FW 190 Dora performance charts:

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=128354

Link to post
Share on other sites
I am sticking to my assessment of the Dora... that is its lucky the Allies had a numerical/supply advantage at this time in the war.... This coming from someone that loves the Spitfire more than any of these birds ;)

 

In all fairness, it's not as if the allies didn't have plenty of new machines in the works, too. One might consider a comparison with a P-51H, which was ready and scheduled for full production at war's end... or the P-80. The persistent attitude that the allies were technically incompetent irritates me: in many cases they could have easily switched to more technically advanced designs (for example, the M26 Pershing had been fully developed and could have started production at the onset of 1944 and been the primary tank by Normandy) due to logistical and strategic reasons. The allies won the war, with a favorable overall casualty ratio (particularly considering they were on the offensive for so long), and that would seem to vindicate those choices.

Link to post
Share on other sites
In all fairness, it's not as if the allies didn't have plenty of new machines in the works, too. One might consider a comparison with a P-51H, which was ready and scheduled for full production at war's end... or the P-80. The persistent attitude that the allies were technically incompetent irritates me: in many cases they could have easily switched to more technically advanced designs (for example, the M26 Pershing had been fully developed and could have started production at the onset of 1944 and been the primary tank by Normandy) due to logistical and strategic reasons. The allies won the war, with a favorable overall casualty ratio (particularly considering they were on the offensive for so long), and that would seem to vindicate those choices.

 

I am not going to get into a debate about whose stuff is better than the other guys, but Germany had its back against the wall, and was struggling to get any new equipment to the front, not to mention questionable leadership... in many ways the Germans lost the war by their own actions...

 

That is not saying the allies were incompetent... far from it, so dont try and paint me with that silliness... but lets be honest... the Germans had something going for them the way everyone devoured their scientists, research etc after the war...

spacer.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 post
Share on other sites
The Dora does not out turn the 51. You barely have to try in order to defeat the excellent AI in a turn. Nor does it out turn the 51 in other sim. This will be evident soon enough tomorrow.

 

Dive recovery is debatable, depends on alot of factors, not just that bloody trip tab.- up to and including the 51's lower drag, and more sophisticated trim system overall. Have you dove the mustang? even in compression it can still be maneavered even at high alti, when most planes would be complete bricks.

 

Initial dive speed is irrelevant, you will be at low speeds for such short amount of time, and at higher altitudes your forced to fly faster just to stay airborne, and at high speeds the better initial acceleration of the Dora is even more irrelevant because youll start every maneuver at high speed.

 

I agree no way the fw190 can out turn a P-51

Link to post
Share on other sites
I am not going to get into a debate about whose stuff is better than the other guys, but Germany had its back against the wall, and was struggling to get any new equipment to the front, not to mention questionable leadership... in many ways the Germans lost the war by their own actions...

 

That is not saying the allies were incompetent... far from it, so dont try and paint me with that silliness... but lets be honest... the Germans had something going for them the way everyone devoured their scientists, research etc after the war...

 

Oh, sorry if it came off that way... I didn't mean to imply that you were trash-talking the allies, simply that on a great many online forums (and among tabletop gamers, before that!), there is a quite pervasive attitude that the Germans made super-weapons of immaculate engineering, while the allies made utter crap (the whole "Shermans always blow up and kill everyone" myth, for example; the Pzkw IV statistically burned just as often as the Sherman). That kind of generalizing (particularly when driven by popular conception rather than factual support) is a personal pet peeve of mine. Both sides made some very good kit, and some very bad kit. On average, they were comparable in most respects.

 

As to the German scientists being snapped up after the war... sure, of course. The Germans had world-beating knowledge in certain niches (rocketry being the most immediately obvious; optics and some fields of small arms design as well. To an extent, armour design... but I think the allies were more interested in their metallurgy than in the actual engineering of their tanks) But by the same token, if the Germans had won, they'd have been falling over themselves to recruit the Manhattan project crew and the allied aircraft, radar, computer, and other fields' experts.

 

I get the same way about Japanese vs European fencing, by the way: in the US, at least, most laymen seem to think the Japanese swordsman was some kind of mystical blade wizard, but that medieval European swordsmen barely knew the pointy end from the handle and had no techniques more sophisticated than bashing each other inelegantly. .....in both WW2 technology and ancient fighting technique, I take great pleasure in divesting people of their popular-media-fueled misconceptions


Edited by OutOnTheOP
Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree no way the fw190 can out turn a P-51

That clearly tells me the AI for the Mustang does not know that...

First try yesterday, dogfight instant action. After a bit of high and low yoyo'ing we got in a turning spiral and I put the Pony on my nose after about 3.5 turns... and still I totally suck at dogfighting, so I doubt my "superior pilot skills" can be the reason here.

Either the AI does not know how to turn, or the flight model is utterly flawed... hmmm, or the Dora can out turn a Pony?

Honestly, I think it's the AI, but that would mean the AI flying the Dora may not representing the real Dora's performance, either?


Edited by shagrat

Shagrat

 

- Flying Sims since 1984 -:pilotfly:

Win 10 | i5 10600K@4.1GHz | 32GB | GeForce RTX 2080S - Acer XB280HK 28" 4k | TrackIR5 | Simshaker & Jetseat | VIRPIL CM 50 Stick & Throttle | MFG Crosswind Rudder Pedals | TM Cougar MFDs | a hand made UFC | AHCP | 2x Elgato StreamDeck (Buttons galore)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd say it would be the AI. My impression is that AI doesn't turn too good in any aircraft in DCS. Be it modern or warbird, I simply don't remember a fight where I've said "wow AI turns soo much better than my aircraft", even when he was in a superior turning aircraft.

 

For example I've made a mission where my flight of 3 F-86 were against a flight of 4 L-39. L-39 did seem to turn somewhat better but I could still get on their tails after a while by utilizing vertical plane in turns. My AI wingmens though, flying with (more or less) same AI but in different aircraft, did not fare well at all against L-39s. Again, when I flew Fw-190D vs AI P-51D, it was obvious he was turning somewhat better than me but instead of pressing on with turn, he eases up or tries going vertical in a climb, like other AI aircraft tends to do.

 

Only AI fights that gave me trouble were P-51D vs AI Fw-190D for a while (but then figured it out) and F-86F vs MiG-15Bis (which I gave up on :D). And I believe these may have specially tailored AI scripts for these specific engagements.

Modules:

MiG-21Bis, Fw-190D, Bf-109K, P-51D, F-86F, Ka-50, UH-1H, Mi-8MTV2, Hawk T1A, C-101, FC3, A-10C, CA, Mirage 2000C, Gazelle, L-39, MiG-15Bis, F-5E, AJS 37 Viggen, Yak-52, Christen Eagle II, MiG-19, I-16, JF-17, F-14, F/A-18C, Fw-190A8, AV-8B/NA, Spitifre IX

 

Mods:

A-4E, MB-339, Edge 540

 

Utility modules:

Combined Arms, NS 430 GPS

Link to post
Share on other sites

A bit off topic, but in another thread it mentions the performance of the Sabre has been tweaked and he could successfully stand against the Migs... even shoot down two of them!

Maybe worth to try again. I'll do tonight, for sure.

EDIT found it http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=2140196


Edited by shagrat

Shagrat

 

- Flying Sims since 1984 -:pilotfly:

Win 10 | i5 10600K@4.1GHz | 32GB | GeForce RTX 2080S - Acer XB280HK 28" 4k | TrackIR5 | Simshaker & Jetseat | VIRPIL CM 50 Stick & Throttle | MFG Crosswind Rudder Pedals | TM Cougar MFDs | a hand made UFC | AHCP | 2x Elgato StreamDeck (Buttons galore)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been flying against the MiG on average pilot setting. Seems to be a decent challenge for me. Maybe a little on the easy side as I always get the kill, but still have to work for it. Makes for a fun dogfight though.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...