The "new" P-51D model. What can we expect?

[Pandacat]

As I understand it, ED is trying to bring the current module of DCS: P-51D model to the Europe 44-45 standard to be in line with other airplanes that we have or will have in DCS World Europe 44 because the P-51D was created before Europe 1944 was concieved and now ED feels it needs an update.

 

If this is the case then it makes a whole lot more sense. However, if this project would take up many months and tons of extra resources to do, I would say just slap a high octane engine onto existing module and be done with it. Honestly, besides the prospect of higher engine output, nothing else would really interest me. Also, time and resources would be more invaluably spent on churning out other game essential items such as WWII environment or even additional modules such as P47 or Me262 or even better, a bomber module such as B17. I mean if you really want to get a pulse of how the community would feel about this, you can post a poll on the following 2 possible scenarios:

 

1. 1944 standard P51 in 3 months but next aircraft module in 14 months

2. next aircraft module in 9 month, but no 1944 P51 standards

 

See how people would respond.

[Ala13_ManOWar]

I mean if you really want to get a pulse of how the community would feel about this, you can post a poll on the following 2 possible scenarios:

 

1. 1944 standard P51 in 3 months but next aircraft module in 14 months

2. next aircraft module in 9 month, but no 1944 P51 standards

 

See how people would respond.

You're presuming here it has to be one or another, but why can't ED get it all done? Remember they are busy now because 2.5 release, but once we get it everything should flow.

 

S!

[Solty]

You're presuming here it has to be one or another, but why can't ED get it all done? Remember they are busy now because 2.5 release, but once we get it everything should flow.

 

S!

Yeah, maybe it is work only for few people that already finished their work on the Thunderbolt? Also, seems ED wants to standarise that new Damage Model for the four airplanes we already have, which is a good time to also develop a new visual model for the P-51D and then progress towards the Thunderbolt. :book:

[GrapeJam]

Thanks Merlin, my mistake it is UncleDog, U - D in morse code.

 

 

 

this document is about possibility to use it and what would be necessary to do "in the event that AN- F -33 is aviable for P-51" (paragraph 9)

no evidence about use of it during last months in WWII

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/mustang/mustangtest.html

 

7th Fighter Command based on Iwo Jima: "In no wind conditions it was sometimes necessary to use 80 inches of manifold pressure from the Merlin engines at 2,800 to 3,000 rpm. It was virtually the only condition in which P-51 pilots went to 3,000 rpm (except for war emergency power) and none of them liked to do so."

Barrett Tillman, Mustangs of Iwo Jima (Flight Journal, Ridgefield CT, Summer 2002) p. 27.

Major James B. Tapp of the 78th FS, 15th Group wrote: "The Command had begun using the 115/145 Octane leaded gasoline."

Major James B. Tapp, 7th Fighter Command History.

[Merlin-27]

 

"...and none of them liked to do so."

 

 

My favorite part.

The health of that engine helped them avoid getting salt water on their flight suit.

[Vitormouraa]

…if P-51 Handbook hasn't changed lately, I think the exact D batch isn't stated anywhere, but after a fellow member thorough research here in the forums it was clear the variant matches an Iwo Jima P-51D-30 in 1945. That's why ED talks about "overhauling" the D model to better match a 1944 one.

 

S!

 

Thank you Ala13! :)

[ESA_maligno]

D model began to reach Europe in March 1944....

 

 

"44-13630, Special Project No. 92741-N, departed the US on 15 June 1944 and was issued to the 4th FG on 26 June 1944 where is served as VF-R “Rebel” with Joe Joiner before being reassigned to Melvin Dickey as “Betty Jane II”, also VF-R. It was subsequently transferred to the 339th FG where it seemed to spend a very short time as 6N-F “Honey” before being transferred again, this time to the 355th FG. With the 355th it was coded WR-M. Initially assigned to Clarence Graham as “Darlin’ Doris” it was reassigned to Albert Zimmerman as “Pittsburgh Smoker”. Zimmerman was the pilot involved in the 2 November incident when he suffered mechanical failure and bellied-in near Voorthoszen, Netherlands."

 

I also think it will be a similar model to the initial D

Edited July 21, 2016 by ESA_maligno

[Solty]

It shouldn't be the early D5 because of K4 and D9. Why should the Mustang be tied to the Normandy while German airplanes do not have to?

[Brigg]

Yes that is a fair point Solty, the version should reflect the same as any of the German planes.

[rel4y]

Yeah he is right, a D5NA is an ill choice. If we want a contemporary to the axis planes we have currently a block 20NA would be a good choice. The very first 20NAs were introduced in October 44. It would be the first type to be equipped with the K-14 gyro gunsight from the factory (mid/late production) and wouldnt need too many adjustments 3D wise to the current model.

 

The only real loss would be the HVAR rockets, but those werent really used in the european theatre at all by Mustangs. The three cell "christmas tree" launchers instead were used in the anti armor role. Well and the AN/APS-13 was introduced much later, around mid 25NA production. 25NA models first arrived in Europe around March 45.

Edited July 21, 2016 by rel4y

[Ala13_ManOWar]

It shouldn't be the early D5 because of K4 and D9. Why should the Mustang be tied to the Normandy while German airplanes do not have to?

Couldn't agree more. We still talk about "Normandy" because initial RRG idea but that isn't true right now, not in modules dates nor even probably in what the map will be if we have to trust in Wags data request.

 

S!

[MiloMorai]

It shouldn't be the early D5 because of K4 and D9. Why should the Mustang be tied to the Normandy while German airplanes do not have to?

 

Same could be said for the Spitfire IXc coming soon which is a mid '43 version.

 

MH434: August 1943, was air tested, 222 Sqd 13-8-43

[Brigg]

yeah but VEAO are doing the mk xiv so that should balance it out

[Captain Orso]

The real solution would be to have models of the 190 and 109 which were most prevalent in mid-44.

[Merlin-27]

Well and the AN/APS-13 was introduced much later, around mid 25NA production. 25NA models first arrived in Europe around March 45.

 

Can you share your source about the An/APS-13? I've been very curious about the topic. Since the English discovered that the GAF was exploiting the tail radar (MONICA - the precursor of the APS-13) and disallowed its use after July '44 I wonder why the US AAF would still use it? Also I've found it very hard to find any pilot accounts of it's use in Europe.

[Merlin-27]

Couldn't agree more. We still talk about "Normandy" because initial RRG idea but that isn't true right now, not in modules dates nor even probably in what the map will be if we have to trust in Wags data request.

 

S!

 

Wait, are you saying that plan wasn't well thought out?

Sorry, couldn't resist. I paid $1000 to say that joke.

 

Actually, isn't it currently very much like the advertised RRG idea? The aircraft and the setting? The Normandy beachhead is most definitely included along with the 190,109,P-47,Spit and 262. So yes... it's the legacy that ED is thankfully shouldering despite it's flaws.

[Ala13_ManOWar]

Haven't you read the forums and how that ended up? Luthier plan wasn't thought out at all, it was undoable, unaffordable, unfulfillable. That's why I pledged 1$, I highly untrusted Luthier because of his past and sadly I were right in being cautious.

 

 

Anyway, ED is coming along nicely with the project, and what I mean is even though later than said at first we are getting even better things than promised by Luthier. The map, if we expect something even barely close to Wags info request will be quite nice sized, nothing to do with ridiculous small map Luthier planed. That's why I say still calling it Normandy, not only because of size but provided the planeset we will initially have focused in late 44/45, is pointless IMO.

 

S!

[Merlin-27]

Haven't you read the forums and how that ended up? Luthier plan wasn't thought out at all, it was undoable, unaffordable, unfulfillable. That's why I pledged 1$, I highly untrusted Luthier because of his past and sadly I were right in being cautious.

 

 

Anyway, ED is coming along nicely with the project, and what I mean is even though later than said at first we are getting even better things than promised by Luthier. The map, if we expect something even barely close to Wags info request will be quite nice sized, nothing to do with ridiculous small map Luthier planed. That's why I say still calling it Normandy, not only because of size but provided the planeset we will initially have focused in late 44/45, is pointless IMO.

 

S!

 

Haven't you... read my post? :huh: I had a front row seat to "how that all ended up" And, unlike you, I paid dearly for my optimism.

 

Anywho, Same locale, same planes (for the most part) but now with a realistic timeline. The "New" P-51D is a nice bonus as I don't think it was part of that first plan.

[rel4y]

Can you share your source about the An/APS-13? I've been very curious about the topic. Since the English discovered that the GAF was exploiting the tail radar (MONICA - the precursor of the APS-13) and disallowed its use after July '44 I wonder why the US AAF would still use it? Also I've found it very hard to find any pilot accounts of it's use in Europe.

 

Sure! All you have to do is look at the respective AN 01-60JE-4 Parts Catalog P-51D and P-51K Aircraft, British model Mustang IV. (I used 10. March 1945, they go up to 1953.)

 

Then find the part/ part number and check the usage code. With the usage code you can allocate a specific part number to a SN range of aircraft which were factory built with that particular part. Now I have effectively surrendered my little secret to IDing and "Block" assigning every little part of the P-51. :smilewink:

 

But thats not bad because you actually made me look up the specifics again and I realized I was mistaken. So the AN/APS-13 was actually introduced on late 20NA models instead of 25NA as I incorrectly remembered. SN 44-72127 upwards. The first batch to be equipped with AN/APS-13s (SN 44-72127 to SN 44-72226) ran off the production line between 12/44 and 1/45. Somewhere around March and April 45 they first saw action in the ETO.

 

PS: Pilots usually turned it off and used their mirrors instead, as the warning radio did not differentiate between friend and foe.

 

 

Edited July 22, 2016 by rel4y

[Brigg]

So what are the differences between a European P51 and the one we have now, is it just a case of more power or are there other factors as well?

[Ala13_ManOWar]

Haven't you... read my post? :huh: I had a front row seat to "how that all ended up" And, unlike you, I paid dearly for my optimism

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: Well, not really, you were so convincing in your first attempt I didn't realize your joke, sorry :thumbup:.

 

But now we are getting everything in ED quality (that also was a concern for me after Luthier precedents… :music_whistling:). I know you must have been screwed but that's a change for good, really good IMO.

 

S!

[saburo_cz]

So what are the differences between a European P51 and the one we have now, is it just a case of more power or are there other factors as well?

 

Only increased power is that.

Systems which identify DCS Mustang with 7th AF Mustangs are not functional in DCS.

Minor changes on external appearance and in cockpit will be for the most players negligible.

[BSS_Sniper]

Same could be said for the Spitfire IXc coming soon which is a mid '43 version.

 

MH434: August 1943, was air tested, 222 Sqd 13-8-43

 

Yup, personally I could've done without the rare axis birds. I'm still not sure why so much time and effort is put into these late and rare models instead of more common types. We've had more of those two axis planes fly here on DCS servers than 100 times the actual war numbers. lol

[Rangi]

. I'm still not sure why so much time and effort is put into these late and rare models instead of more common types.

 

The quick answer, access to information.

[GrapeJam]

The quick answer, access to information.

Pretty sure, information on the BF 109G and FW190A are much accessible than the BF 109K and FW 190D, seeing as the G and the A are the most produced version after all.