PDA

View Full Version : P-51 Can't Turn!



Codex1971
10-28-2004, 10:21 PM
Don't know who these guys are, stumbled accross this in another siming forum.

Very interesting interview about the 109G, P-51 and Spit MkV

http://mnemeth1.brinkster.net/movies/EAA_Interviews.wmv

Codex1971
10-28-2004, 10:21 PM
Don't know who these guys are, stumbled accross this in another siming forum.

Very interesting interview about the 109G, P-51 and Spit MkV

http://mnemeth1.brinkster.net/movies/EAA_Interviews.wmv

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2004, 11:02 PM
Oy!

... (goes to find ANOTHER aspirin)...

Korolov
10-28-2004, 11:10 PM
We can neither trust nor discredit pilot interviews. Thus, they remain unreliable at best and should not be used in place of real, hard technical data.

TAGERT.
10-28-2004, 11:13 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Codex1971:
Don't know who these guys are, stumbled accross this in another siming forum.

Very interesting interview about the 109G, P-51 and Spit MkV

http://mnemeth1.brinkster.net/movies/EAA_Interviews.wmv <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Your a little late

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=400102&f=23110283&m=9811095432

or

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=400102&f=23110283&m=2051008432

Now yours makes 3.. Not counting SimHq witch makes yours 4

WTE_Dukayn
10-28-2004, 11:36 PM
*goes and makes a new thread with a link to the flying lawn mower*

El Turo
10-29-2004, 12:02 AM
Don't forget the 10 pager girlscout hair pulling fight over at WWII Online as well begun by Wound.

Bravo! This may be better distributed than that Star Wars spastic kid video.

PlimPlam
10-29-2004, 12:08 AM
Star wars kid was much more popular. He was just a guy in hs after all.

VW-IceFire
10-29-2004, 07:46 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Codex1971:
Don't know who these guys are, stumbled accross this in another siming forum.

Very interesting interview about the 109G, P-51 and Spit MkV

http://mnemeth1.brinkster.net/movies/EAA_Interviews.wmv <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Saw it...we've discussed it. Doesn't really say anything except what they think. No variables included...altitude, speed, etc.

Chuck_Older
10-29-2004, 07:54 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

Don Gentile could make a P-47 outmanuever FW 190s

Imagine what a guy like Gentile did with the P-51 and then say the Mustang can't turn.

Please, don't say that "well Gentile was not the avergae pilot", because the fact is, if the plane couldn't turn, Gentile couldn't have made it turn. The potential is there, he used it

KGr.HH-Sunburst
10-29-2004, 08:02 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chuck_Older:
Don Gentile could make a P-47 outmanuever FW 190s
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

just like it can ingame ,whats your point?
the P47 is on par with the Dora so it shouldnt be that hard,should it?

Chuck_Older
10-29-2004, 08:09 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by KGr.HH-Sunburst:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chuck_Older:
Don Gentile could make a P-47 outmanuever FW 190s
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

just like it can ingame ,whats your point?
the P47 is on par with the Dora so it shouldnt be that hard,should it? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif

That IS my point. The thread topic is "P-51 can't turn". That is my input on the subject. I don't understand how I'm confusing you

TgD Thunderbolt56
10-29-2004, 08:18 AM
My P-51 can't turn very well when:

1. <span class="ev_code_RED">My screen is a variable shade of red</span>

2. <span class="ev_code_GREEN">My controls have been damaged</span>

3. <span class="ev_code_YELLOW">My screen is blacked out from excessive "G"'s (which is often in the Pony).</span>


TB

mnemeth1
10-29-2004, 08:50 AM
Don't forget the 10 pager girlscout hair pulling fight over at WWII Online as well begun by Wound.

Bravo! This may be better distributed than that Star Wars spastic kid video.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

HO HO HO

I honestly had no idea the kind of uproar this video would cause. I was really more focused on the G vs Spit as I assumed it was a given the 51 turned like shat.

Facinating -current usage stats from my site indicate over 70,000 megabytes of data transfer since I distributed these videos lol.

Most of that under the 11 meg version.

Rough estimate of 3800 downloads since distribution and it keeps going up.

S.taibanzai
10-29-2004, 09:20 AM
for the guys who now history

wel P51 did suck in turn against the BF109

p 51 cant turn !!! remember that but al we have here are US whiners whel wile move this tread in to the german forum they say wat is treu

those guys are for real, here you have FANTASY WHINERS

not smart to seeck normal reply's in here

you wont get them they al think that Alies planes most be much bether regardles the history because Alies won the war

Cajun76
10-29-2004, 09:25 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by mnemeth1:
Don't forget the 10 pager girlscout hair pulling fight over at WWII Online as well begun by Wound.

Bravo! This may be better distributed than that Star Wars spastic kid video.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

HO HO HO

I honestly had no idea the kind of uproar this video would cause. I was really more focused on the G vs Spit as I assumed it was a given the 51 turned like shat.

Facinating -current usage stats from my site indicate over 70,000 megabytes of data transfer since I distributed these videos lol.

Most of that under the 11 meg version.

Rough estimate of 3800 downloads since distribution and it keeps going up. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Maybe you haven't actually seen the vid.... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

Since everything in that vid is being quoted as fact, it was stated that "The P-51 dosen't turn at all..." This would be confirmed by reports from England. If the crew chiefs didn't line up the Mustangs on the runway precisly, the P-51 would be unable to correct it's course midflight and would miss Germany completely. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif Score one for the Riech! Heck, we might even be able to reverse the course of the war if generlizations by airshow pilots are regarded as historical fact. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

Chuck_Older
10-29-2004, 09:27 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by S.taibanzai:
for the guys who now history

wel P51 did suck in turn against the BF109

p 51 cant turn !!! remember that but al we have here are US whiners whel wile move this tread in to the german forum they say wat is treu

those guys are for real, here you have FANTASY WHINERS

not smart to seeck normal reply's in here

you wont get them they al think that Alies planes most be much bether regardles the history because Alies won the war <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, all the US pilots who flew P-51s and said that the plane could turn were liars, and when they did turn inside a German plane, it was because the Luftwaffe had to train blind quadriplegics as pilots by that point in the war, while all US pilots were experts. All eyewitness accounts of P-51s turning with a German plane were by liars, aka: Americans. fact.

TAGERT.
10-29-2004, 09:51 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Cajun76:
Since everything in that vid is being quoted as fact, it was stated that "The P-51 dosen't turn at all..." This would be confirmed by reports from England. If the crew chiefs didn't line up the Mustangs on the runway precisly, the P-51 would be unable to correct it's course midflight and would miss Germany completely. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>ROTFL

TAGERT.
10-29-2004, 09:54 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chuck_Older:
and when they did turn inside a German plane, it was because the Luftwaffe had to train blind quadriplegics as pilots by that point in the war, while all US pilots were experts. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>ROTFL!
Best part is when you try and use that same line of reasoning.. ie young un-experanced pilots with limited flight time and no combat time.. to explain why EARLY in the war the P39 and P40 had troubles the Luft Lovers are quick to dissregard that and tell you how the axis planes where just better. God love the double standard folks.. Becuae no one eles does! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

mnemeth1
10-29-2004, 09:59 AM
Those 51 pilots stating the plane can turn were probably facing 190's.

190's turn for shat as well - so by comparision the 51 would do quite well. But as far as comparing it to a 109 goes, the 51 is wayyy out classed in the turning arena (IRL).

Chuck_Older
10-29-2004, 10:09 AM
/sarcasm 'off'

Seriously-

"Turn" is in itelf a term which requires definition. Instantaneous? Sustained? At what speed? At what height? How much fuel is the P-51 carrying? Where is the fuel on the P-51? What model P-51?

Another thing to remember is that the 'safe' performance envelope is regularly exceeded in wartime, because combat is more dangerous than exceeding the 'safe' flight parameters.

Ever watch something like the Goodwood Festival of Speed? The old race cars seem to really loaf through the turns, right?

Well, they are slower than today's cars. But, also, they need to be driven fast to handle properly. There's no half measures in most of these cars. Nobody is going to risk their neck in a 3 million dollar vintage F1 car just so they can take a turn at 170 mph (which these cars can often do, Gurney's '67 Eagle-Weslake turned enough rpms to calculate out to 197 mph. That's in 1967!).

Same applies to current warbirds, even if (IF!) they are in combat trim, which they typically aren't.

Nobody's gonna really put these planes through their paces.

Historically, the P-51 had 'sufficient' manueverability to combat the Bf 109 at most speeds and altitudes. that doesn't mean the P-51 was a better turner. It also doesn't mean the P-51 couldn't turn.

/sarcasm back 'on'

LuftLuver
10-29-2004, 10:14 AM
Man, you guys are practically leaping into the Fb109 Fanboys' boats. This video has now passed over into Troll material.

http://www.smiley.cy.net/basspro/asprokremos_28102003_12pcs.jpg

Chuck_Older
10-29-2004, 10:25 AM
So if nobody gets all worked up, it's still fisherman's paradise? So I could post a big picture of a fisherman and then announce I've been reeling you all in for a year because my name's not really Chuck but I fooled all y'all? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

Cajun76
10-29-2004, 11:18 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chuck_Older:
because my name's not really Chuck
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>



...... What the he11 are you saying?

Obi_Kwiet
10-29-2004, 11:18 AM
So BnZ! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Chuck_Older
10-29-2004, 11:25 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Cajun76:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chuck_Older:
because my name's not really Chuck
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>



...... What the he11 are you saying? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif My name's not really Chuck

When I was here years ago, my real name wasn't BBB462CID, either. My real name's...Chris.

Shhhh. I want to see how many fish I can hook

S.taibanzai
10-29-2004, 11:31 AM
haha now you see it US whiners

told you never come here for answers http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

Chuck_Older
10-29-2004, 12:04 PM
Typical non-biased response above.

If you say anything other than "P-51 couldn't turn", you're a US whiner. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

If you really knew your history you'd...oh, nevermind. Who am I kidding?

I don't care what you think http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

WUAF_Badsight
10-29-2004, 12:24 PM
man i enjoy flying with the Butcher Brothers too !

tried to wing with Hyper many a time

Cajun76
10-29-2004, 12:24 PM
Hmm, interesting term, "US whiners"

Should I then say "Deutsch whiners" instead of Luftwhiners, refering to Deutschland instead of it's air force, as per your example?

You don't even know were I'm from. I could be German for all you know.

Why would you inject some sort of nationality bias into this discussion? Why not "USAAF whiners" or "Allied whiners" if you feel the need to call names.



Oh, and Chuck, if that is your real name, I was j/k. I know "Chuck" is short for "Charles" http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

Chuck_Older
10-29-2004, 03:58 PM
No really, my name isn't Chuck. It's Chris. I've just been a fan of LtCol Charles Older since I was about 7 years old.

I know you're one of the guys with a sense of humor, Cajun. I'm pretty thick skinned too, you can make fun of my 'name' all you like, it's just words on the PC screen, after all http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Capt.England
10-29-2004, 04:14 PM
P51 is over modelled...

So there http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gif

Chuck_Older
10-29-2004, 04:16 PM
Britain is overmodelled http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gif

LStarosta
10-29-2004, 04:23 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Cajun76:
You don't even know were I'm from. I could be German for all you know. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


We all know you're some crazy Ex-Canuck from Louisiana!!!

Korolov
10-29-2004, 05:18 PM
In all honesty, I haven't got a freaking clue as to why some of you can't outturn ponies with 109s in low speed turn fights. You flying with gunpods and a drop tank or something? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

javierib
10-29-2004, 07:35 PM
gunpods in a P51??...how???

Korolov
10-29-2004, 07:50 PM
Gunpods on the 109, dude.

Snoop_Baron
10-29-2004, 08:00 PM
The 109 out turns he P51 at anything but high speeds in this game already. 109 models up to and including the G2 turn very well. The G2 which I have more stick time with than the other 109s can hang with and even out turn some Spit models. I think most people agree on this. But to go from there and saying that the P-51 Can't Turn! is a worthless exageration.

s!

fordfan25
10-29-2004, 08:07 PM
the p51 is not a good turner at low speeds for me. its more likely to flip on its back than actully turn. at med speeds its not to bad.high speeds it just as good as anything else seeing as you black out before it reaches its max turn rate.of course thats just how i find it in game.seeing as it was mostly designed for high alt.LONG range escort and high speed with out the need of a huge gas hog engine like alot of the radials it does pretty good. i wish the problem with this sim's high alt perfomnce could be corrected so we could get the same advantges that real life pilots had up there in the stang.As far as the guy who stated that amaricans think we had all the best stuff because we won the war.well that door swings both ways. seems like some of you over there think everything we had was no were near as good as what you had even though you lost. by the way we did have the best stuff lol http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif j/k guys http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif.Oww whats that in my mouth is that a ...it is, its a fishing hook ...what the ? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

IL2-chuter
10-30-2004, 02:30 AM
Me109G-6 vs. Mustang III in RAE tests.

"The Mustang possessed a clear speed advantage at all altitudes . . . . The Gustav offered a margnally better climb rate up to 20000 ft . . . . When dived and then pulled up into a climb there was little to choose . . . but the Mustang could steadily outdive the Bf109G-6 and had no difficulty in out-turning the Messerschmitt." Capt. Eric Brown

(All negative Mustang comments edited out http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif )

JaBo_HH-BlackSheep
10-30-2004, 04:03 AM
the G6 was the worst 109 compared to there counterparts.

the only thing that realy buggs me in game ist the fact that the G2 can hold it's own way better than an F4 in a turnfight no matter what the enemy plane is...

F4 should turn better than a G2, i think the G2 is to good or F4 to bad, or both (decrease the G2 by 30% increase the F4 by 30% something maybe)

Arms1
10-30-2004, 04:38 AM
for a guy that considers himself average in most a/c in this game the only 109g i can regularily outturn a 51 in is a g2, shame on me if i couldnt http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif that said i also find that all g models have a extremely nasty wingover stall that gives absolutely no warning when flying on the deck (anyone else notice this?) that said, when flying 51 vs 109 or any other a/c i experience almost zero energy loss in turn and if my attack is not set up properly all i have to do is climb, reaquire target, and set up again, these observations are probably moot with the release of pf for i have heard that there have been some changes in the 109 but have not flown it yet to see for myself. I've been a spitfire/mustang fanboy since i was five years old and its sad to say when flying online i would be embarrased to pile onto the red side like so many do bottom line for me is i find a kill while flying the 109 or 190 much more satisfying because i feel i have earned it! the p51 irl does not turn and should not retain energy the way it does when turning as modeled in this game

S.taibanzai
10-30-2004, 12:55 PM
Wel said Arms 1

very wel said

now you see how hard it is to acept the reality ??

to much for the Amis lovers

Aztek_Eagle
10-30-2004, 01:14 PM
well... didnt waste time in reading what you wrote...... just will g o and say what i know about the problems wiht the pt51 in the turns... problem was that they placed big internal fueltank in the fuselage begine the pilot to make it able to reach germany, and work as a good scort..... thing was that when it was full loaded wiht fuel the gravety point would be off balance, and if u were not carefull in a turn the p51 would just spin stall....... but the problem would be less afther the pilot would have use all the fuel on his internal tank, and it would not have much of a trouble over germany wiht the spin stall.... still the p51 is characterised by the spin stall if you were not carefull

Aztek_Eagle
10-30-2004, 01:17 PM
i can practicacly out manuver the p51 in most german aircraft...

tsisqua
10-30-2004, 01:39 PM
Every plane in this game can be flown successfuly. "The P-51 is Faster . . . " I heard the man say. Well, there is the advantage.

Even if the FM's are off from the real planes, you can still fly your fav plane in this game, and succeed as a V-pilot. That makes this sim worth it's weight in gold!!!! As for the LA winning the war: What? You mean that we weren't all told the same thing here in the West about the Mustang? I never knew what an LA was till I bought IL2!

Who knew that this game would be so distributed in the West? It was made to be a Russian simulation. Don't be so surprised that it isn't exactly like RL. It wasn't made for us in the beginning. It just wound up that way . . . and I am mighty happy with it.

Tsisqua
(just another fanboi)

CAP401
10-30-2004, 06:10 PM
This debate about the p51/Bf turn thing is actually, I believe some reincarnation of an old forgotten debate from hell:

I talk of course of the dreaded, feared,......

.50 cals debate!!!!!!!

NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

Chuck_Older
10-30-2004, 06:33 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by S.taibanzai:
Wel said Arms 1

very wel said

now you see how hard it is to acept the reality ??

to much for the Amis lovers <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

So because the P-51 in FB is "too good", that is the proof that the real P-51 "couldn't turn"?
Again, what model P-51, what altitude, what speed, etc, etc

fi-bluedragon
10-30-2004, 08:48 PM
One of the best interviews I have seen regarding the relative performances of a Mustang and Spitfire is on a video I bought from the Imperial War Museum in London. The video is all about the Mustang and Spit, their development and role in the war, and there are plenty of interviews from all sorts of people on it. The really interesting one is from a current pilot who flies both. He explained the differences really well. He said what people forget is that the Spit was developed and produced in the thirties, the Mustang in the forties. That is a long time in terms of aircraft development. He goes on to say that the Spitfire has no real vices and will out turn a Mustang, but the Mustang is much faster. What he also says is that people forget that the Spitfire airframe was designed to hold a moderate sized engine but by the end of the war it was actually housing an engine twice the power output than the original whereas the Mustang started off with a powerful engine. That change in engine size for the Spit had a huge effect on the handling of the plane.

Codex1971
11-01-2004, 06:44 AM
Holly **** what have I unleashed....

I originally started this post not realising it was already in another thread so my apologies for that.

The Me109 v P-51 turn rate:
My take on this is simple; the men in the video fly these planes and I€ll bet my left nut they also fly them in mock combat as well. If they say the Me109G has a better turn rate and can out climb the P-51 then that€s gospel as far as I€m concerned. As for other variants of the 109 well I want to hear from pilots who fly them, but I will always believe anyone who flies these birds for real over anyone who tries to convince me with some chart or engineering data.

The German planes and pilots:
IMO the German pilots had the most advanced and highly engineered aircraft in the world at their disposal, even right up until Wars end, but they also had more combat experience than any other nation. At the beginning nothing could touch the Me109 E€s and F€s during the Russian Invasion, not even the I-16 was a match. This was not due to it€s manoeuvrability but in the pilot training. The Russian pilot was ordered to fly straight and level and never deviate from their target course, if they did they were shot when they returned by their own superiors. There€s no point in having a highly manoeuvrable aircraft if you€re ordered not to use it, but the Russians soon changed their tactics and they started pushing the Germans back. But even in 1943 the Germans were still kick€n butt, 16 Me109G2s were sent to a Finnish Squadron (HLeLv 34) to meet the new La-5 threat, by Wars end the squadron had shot down 100 La-5€s while incurring only 7 loses. Remember manoeuvrability is only one aspect of an aircrafts performance, the pilot makes up the rest. In 1944 the Luftwaffe took delivery of the Me262 which was the first jet ever to see combat, flown prodemantly by the top aces it had bugger all manoeuvrability compared to the prop planes but nothing could catch them during combat, it was only when they were at their most vulnerable, either landing or taking off, that they were hunted down.

The history:
It is clear from history that it was the German high command that ultimately cost the German€s the air war and not the pilots and/or planes. With dwindling fuel supplies and very few experienced pilots (pilots were never rotated, they flew till the war was over or they were killed), the German air force was as good as gone by the time the Allied forces landed in France in 1944, which was also thanks to the Allied bombing campaign. But if by 1944 the bombing campaign had failed and the playing field had of been level on D-Day, I€ll bet my other nut the Allies would not have even set one foot on the shores of Normandy.

TAGERT.
11-01-2004, 10:42 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Codex1971:
The history:
It is clear from history that it was the German high command that ultimately cost the German€s the air war and not the pilots and/or planes. With dwindling fuel supplies and very few experienced pilots (pilots were never rotated, they flew till the war was over or they were killed), the German air force was as good as gone by the time the Allied forces landed in France in 1944, which was also thanks to the Allied bombing campaign. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Dang.. And all this time I thought it was JUST the the allied bombing campaign that was causing the "dwindling fuel supplies" I didnt realise the German High Command was destroying them too.. And as for the "very few experienced pilots" again.. I didnt realise the German Hight Command was killing them too.. I thought they all died in combat with the Allieds?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Codex1971:
But if by 1944 the bombing campaign had failed and the playing field had of been level on D-Day, I€ll bet my other nut the Allies would not have even set one foot on the shores of Normandy. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Yes and if monkeys could fly out of my but I could rule the world too.

Codex1971
11-01-2004, 03:48 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by TAGERT.:
Dang.. And all this time I thought it was JUST the the allied bombing campaign that was causing the "dwindling fuel supplies" I didnt realise the German High Command was destroying them too.. And as for the "very few experienced pilots" again.. I didnt realise the German Hight Command was killing them too.. I thought they all died in combat with the Allieds? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

How observant dude...Sigh! It was the EGOs of the commanders that cost the Germans the war, the LACK of fore sight and the inability to LISTEN to it's pilots....just like some in here. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by TAGERT.:
Yes and if monkeys could fly out of my but I could rule the world too. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Just like Hitler used to think, how ironic http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Maple_Tiger
11-01-2004, 06:39 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Arms1:
for a guy that considers himself average in most a/c in this game the only 109g i can regularily outturn a 51 in is a g2, shame on me if i couldnt http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif that said i also find that all g models have a extremely nasty wingover stall that gives absolutely no warning when flying on the deck (anyone else notice this?) that said, when flying 51 vs 109 or any other a/c i experience almost zero energy loss in turn and if my attack is not set up properly all i have to do is climb, reaquire target, and set up again, these observations are probably moot with the release of pf for i have heard that there have been some changes in the 109 but have not flown it yet to see for myself. I've been a spitfire/mustang fanboy since i was five years old and its sad to say when flying online i would be embarrased to pile onto the red side like so many do bottom line for me is i find a kill while flying the 109 or 190 much more satisfying because i feel i have earned it! the p51 irl does not turn and should not retain energy the way it does when turning as modeled in this game <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>



So I guess the WW2 P-51 pilots that got into dog fights with BF109's, and won, were cheating?

h009291
11-01-2004, 07:07 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Korolov:
We can neither trust nor discredit pilot interviews. Thus, they remain unreliable at best and should not be used in place of real, hard technical data. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree 100% ... why would we trust anyone who actual flew these planes .. they didn't know nothing anyway http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

123-Wulf-JG123
11-01-2004, 07:50 PM
Nice to see the same old, same old, line up to defend the Ponies. To be honest I have no real idea if the 109/190 out turned the Pony in R/L flown by a pilot of similar experience,I strongly suspect those fanboys that say they know, have never actually flown a Pony, or any other aircraft for that matter, therefore, they are talking bollox, From what I have read I believe the Pony would easily out-turn 109/190s at high speed, but be in trouble below 300kmh. What I find sad is all the Pony fanboys who can not comprehend, and WILL not, that maybe a 109/190 flown by an experienced pilot, would hand an equivalent Pony pilot his butt. You guys are very sad, and very immature. Maybe you should go back to watching John Wayne films.
BTW those Pony pilots that won against LW pilots , good for them, if the pilots they beat were veteran skilled pilots, so much the better, having read pilot accounts,however, I suspect most of them (this was 44-45), were rookies. The pilots that didn't report their sucess were killed by the the veterans still flying even that late in the war.

Maple_Tiger
11-01-2004, 08:45 PM
"What I find sad is all the Pony fanboys who can not comprehend and WILL not, that maybe a 109/190 flown by an experienced pilot, would hand an equivalent Pony pilot his butt".



Very true. It mostly comes down to...pilot skill.

I can honestly say that I have had my but handed to me a number of times by FW's or BF109's. Usualy it would be my fault for trying to win in a slow turn fight against a BF109.

However, I have sometimes won in a turn fight against a BF109.

After months of flying, I have learned not to take anyplane into a turn fight. Even if you do win, you'r slow and have little E left. Being slow with no Energy is very dangerious.

JtD
11-01-2004, 11:11 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Maple_Tiger:
After months of flying, I have learned not to take anyplane into a turn fight. Even if you do win, you'r slow and have little E left. Being slow with no Energy is very dangerious. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

And the ability to fight this way is what made planes IRL a success or failure.

And that is what made the P-51 a huge success.

(Or the FW 190 two years earlier.)

Korolov
11-01-2004, 11:19 PM
I've taken Fw-190As, gotten into turnfights with La-7s and won. I've taken P-51s and gotten into turnfights with 109s and won.

The point? In almost all cases, I started out with a advantage or with more experience. It's all about how you fly a plane; the individual plane's abilities cannot be put to use by a pilot ill-trained to use them. This is why I don't believe most of you who claim the Pony outturns 109s - this is simply not the case given pilots of equal skill.

Taken from Ivan's sig:

"In combat potential, the Yak-3, La-7 and La-9 fighters were indisputably superior to the Bf-109s and Fw-190s. But, as they say, no matter how good the violin may be, much depends on the violinist. I always felt respect for an enemy pilot whose plane I failed to down."

Coming from a guy who nailed 62 aircraft to his credit, I think he's got quite a point there. Notice he doesn't say what or how the Yak, La, etc were superior to the 109s/190s, just that they are, *from his point of view.*

You have to keep that in perspective. In the end, since this is still a simulation based upon some serious software restrictions, you have to learn for yourself how to react to combat situations and issues. Learn how a specific plane and it's nemises flies, learn the strengths of both and only then will you find yourself able to master both sides over a person of lesser wisdom.

Lastly, on german technological "superiority"; your concensus is a bit flawed, to put it lightly. There were quite a few planes outside of the borders of germany that had technological or performance superiority over them. Some Russian, Italian, British and American planes come to mind. Oh, and there were quite a few Me-262s that were lost in actual combat - usually a result of being caught in a turn or in a dive. And what good is a front-line combat aircraft if it takes so **** long to get it into the air and onto the ground?

WTE_Galway
11-01-2004, 11:38 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Arms1:
for a guy that considers himself average in most a/c in this game the only 109g i can regularily outturn a 51 in is a g2, shame on me if i couldnt http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif that said i also find that all g models have a extremely nasty wingover stall that gives absolutely no warning when flying on the deck (anyone else notice this?) that said, when flying 51 vs 109 or any other a/c i experience almost zero energy loss in turn and if my attack is not set up properly all i have to do is climb, reaquire target, and set up again, these observations are probably moot with the release of pf for i have heard that there have been some changes in the 109 but have not flown it yet to see for myself. I've been a spitfire/mustang fanboy since i was five years old and its sad to say when flying online i would be embarrased to pile onto the red side like so many do bottom line for me is i find a kill while flying the 109 or 190 much more satisfying because i feel i have earned it! the p51 irl does not turn and should not retain energy the way it does when turning as modeled in this game <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>



Plenty of stall warnings in all G models with a MSFFB2 stick http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif


and if you want a plane that with equally skilled pilots would fly circles around a P51 and a bf109 give me a tempest, probably the most under-rated plane of the war

"The Messerschmitt Me 262's most dangerous opponent was the British Hawker Tempest - extremely fast at low altitudes, highly-manoeuvrable and heavily-armed." (Hubert Lange, Me262 pilot)

"Reaching Newchurch airfield at 480 mph I held "RB" down to 20 ft from the runway and then pulled her up to a 60 ? climb holding it as the speed dropped slowly off and the altimeter needle spun round the dial as if it were mad. At 7000 ft the speed was dropping below 180 mph and I rolled the Tempest lazily inverted, then allowed the nose to drop until the horizon, at first above my head, disappeared below (or rather above) the now inverted nose, the fields and woods steadied into the centre of the windscreen and then whirled around as I put the stick hard over and rolled around the vertical dive. Steadying again I pulled out over the tree tops at 500 mph, throttled back and pulled hard over towards the airfield in an over-the-vertical climbing turn, lowering the wheels and flaps in a roll as the speed dropped. What a magnificent aeroplane! They could have all their Spitfires and Mustangs!" ("My part of the sky", Roland Beamont)

Abbuzze
11-02-2004, 02:27 AM
Here something from Pilots who had the possibility to fly Spits, Ponys and.. a kind of 109 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Keep in mind this 109 was maybe the worst "109" that ever flow, the Avia S.199 with a Jumo bomber engine and 2x 20mm Gunpods that make this plane REAL slow...

It also seems that this mockdogfights are made with lowspeed...

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
Flying the Types: a Comparison

Gordon Levett compares the three combat aircraft flown by the 101:

In mock dog-fights, we concluded that the Messerschmitt could out-climb, out-dive and out-zoom the Spitfire and Mustang. The Spitfire could out-turn the Messerschmitt, the most important manoeuvre in air combat, and both could out-turn the Mustang. The Mustang was the fastest, the Messerschmitt the slowest, though there was not much in it. The Mustang had the best visibility, important for a fighter aircraft, the Messerschmitt the worst. The Spitfire cockpit fitted like a glove, the Messerschmitt like a strait-jacket, the Mustang like a too comfortable armchair. The Spitfire had two 20mm cannon and four .303 machine guns (sic, actually, the 101 Squadron Spits had two .50s, not four .303s), the Mustang six 12.7mm machine guns (a.k.a. .50 calibre), and the Messerschmitt two 20mm cannon and two 7.92mm machine guns (sic, actually two 13.1mm machine guns) synchronised to fire through the arc of the propeller.... Despite the pros and cons the Spitfire was everyone's first choice. (Levett 1994)
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

BigKahuna_GS
11-02-2004, 05:23 AM
S!

I have met Bud Anderson, Bob Goebel and Gunther Rall. All these pilots said the P51 could manuver quite well especially at high speed.

From Bud Anderson:

The Germans liked to roar through the bombers head-on, firing long bursts, and then roll and go down. They would circle around to get ahead of the bomber stream, groping for altitude, avoiding the escorts if possible, then reassemble and come through head-on again. When their fuel or ammunition was exhausted, they would land and refuel and take off again, flying mission after mission, for as long as there were bombers to shoot at. They seldom came after us. Normally, they would skirmish the escorts only out of necessity. We were an inconvenience, best avoided. It was the bombers they wanted, and the German pilots threw themselves at them smartly and bravely. It was our job to stop them.

It seemed we were always outnumbered. We had more fighters than they did, but what mattered was how many they could put up in one area. They would concentrate in huge numbers, by the hundreds at times. They would assemble way up ahead, pick a section of the bomber formation, and then come in head-on, their guns blazing, sometimes biting the bombers below us before we knew what was happening.

In the distance, a red and black smear marked the spot where a B-17 and its 10 men had been. Planes still bearing their bomb loads erupted and fell, trailing flame, streaking the sky, leaving gaps in the bomber formation that were quickly closed up.


Through our headsets we could hear the war, working its way back toward us, coming straight at us at hundreds of miles per hour. The adrenaline began gushing, and I scanned the sky frantically, trying to pick out the fly-speck against the horizon that might have been somebody coming to kill us, trying to see him before be saw me, looking, squinting, breathless . . .

Over the radio: "Here they come!"

They'd worked over the bombers up ahead and now it was our turn.

Things happen quickly. We get rid of our drop tanks, slam the power up, and make a sweeping left turn to engage. My flight of four Mustangs is on the outside of the turn, a wingman close behind to my left, my element leader and his wingman behind to my right, all in finger formation. Open your right hand, tuck the thumb under, put the fingers together, and check the fingernails. That's how we flew, and fought. Two shooters, and two men to cover their tails. The Luftwaffe flew that way, too. German ace Werner Molders is generally credited with inventing the tactic during the Spanish Civil War.

Being on the outside of the turn, we are vulnerable to attack from the rear. I look over my right shoulder and, sure enough, I see four dots above us, way back, no threat at the moment, but coming hard down the chute. I start to call out, but . . .

"Four bogeys, five o'clock high!" My element leader, Eddie Simpson, has already seen them. Bogeys are unknowns and bandits are hostile. Quickly, the dots close and take shape. They're hostile, all right. They're Messerschmitts.

We turn hard to the right, pulling up into a tight string formation, spoiling their angle, and we try to come around and go at them head on. The Me 109s change course, charge past, and continue on down, and we wheel and give chase. There are four of them, single-seat fighters, and they pull up, turn hard, and we begin turning with them. We are circling now, tighter and tighter, chasing each other's tails, and I'm sitting there wondering what the hell's happening. These guys want to hang around. Curious. I'm wondering why they aren't after the bombers, why they're messing with us, whether they're simply creating some kind of a diversion or what. I would fly 116 combat missions, engage the enemy perhaps 40 times, shoot down 16 fighters, share in the destruction of a bomber, destroy another fighter on the ground, have a couple of aerial probables, and over that span it would be us bouncing them far more often than not. This was a switch.

*****
We're flying tighter circles, gaining a little each turn, our throttles wide open, 30,000 feet up. The Mustang is a wonderful airplane, 37 feet wingtip to wingtip, just a little faster than the smaller German fighters, and also just a little more nimble. Suddenly the 109s, sensing things are not going well, roll out and run, turning east, flying level. Then one lifts up his nose and climbs away from the rest.
*****

http://www.cebudanderson.com/images/can'ttalk.jpg

We roll out and go after them. They're flying full power, the black smoke pouring out their exhaust stacks. I'm looking at the one who is climbing, wondering what he is up to, and I'm thinking that if we stay with the other three, this guy will wind up above us. I send Simpson up after him. He and his wingman break off. My wingman, John Skara, and I chase the other three fighters, throttles all the way forward, and I can see that we're gaining.

I close to within 250 yards of the nearest Messerschmitt--dead astern, 6 o'clock, no maneuvering, no nothing--and squeeze the trigger on the control stick between my knees gently. Bambambambambam! The sound is loud in the cockpit in spite of the wind shriek and engine roar. And the vibration of the Mustang's four. 50-caliber machine guns, two in each wing, weighing 60-odd pounds apiece, is pronounced. In fact, you had to be careful in dogfights when you were turning hard, flying on the brink of a stall, because the buck of the guns was enough to peel off a few critical miles per hour and make the Mustang simply stop flying. That could prove downright embarrassing.

But I'm going like hell now, and I can see the bullets tearing at the Messerschmitt's wing root and fuselage. The armor-piercing ammunition we used was also incendiary, and hits were easily visible, making a bright flash and puff. Now the 109's trailing smoke thickens, and it's something more than exhaust smoke. He slows, and then suddenly rolls over. But the plane doesn't fall. It continues on, upside down, straight and level! What the hell . . . ?

The pilot can't be dead. It takes considerable effort to fly one of these fighter planes upside down. You have to push hard on the controls. Flying upside down isn't easy. It isn't something that happens all by itself, or that you do accidentally. So what in the world is be doing?

Well. It's an academic question, because I haven't the time to wait and find out. I pour another burst into him, pieces start flying off, I see flame, and the 109 plummets and falls into a spin, belching smoke. My sixth kill.

The other two Messerschmitt pilots have pulled away now, and they're nervous. Their airplanes are twitching, the fliers obviously straining to look over their shoulders and see what is happening. As we take up the chase again, two against two now, the trailing 109 peels away and dives for home, and the leader pulls up into a sharp climbing turn to the left. This one can fly, and he obviously has no thought of running. I'm thinking this one could be trouble.

We turn inside him, my wingman and I, still at long range, and he pulls around harder, passing in front of us right-to-left at an impossible angle. I want to swing in behind him, but I'm going too fast, and figure I would only go skidding on past. A Mustang at speed simply can't make a square corner. And in a dogfight you don't want to surrender your airspeed. I decide to overshoot him and climb.

He reverses his turn, trying to fall in behind us. My wingman is vulnerable now. I tell Skara, "Break off!" and be peels away. The German goes after him, and I go after the German, closing on his tail before he can close on my wingman. He sees me coming and dives away with me after him, then makes a climbing left turn. I go screaming by, pull up, and he's reversing his turn--man, be can fly!--and he comes crawling right up behind me, close enough that I can see him distinctly. He's bringing his nose up for a shot, and I haul back on the stick and climb even harder. I keep going up, because I'm out of alternatives.

This is what I see all these years later. If I were the sort to be troubled with nightmares, this is what would shock me awake. I am in this steep climb, pulling the stick into my navel, making it steeper, steeper . . . and I am looking back down, over my shoulder, at this classic gray Me 109 with black crosses that is pulling up, too, steeper, steeper, the pilot trying to get his nose up just a little bit more and bring me into his sights.

There is nothing distinctive about the aircraft, no fancy markings, nothing to identify it as the plane of an ace, as one of the "dreaded yellow-noses" like you see in the movies. Some of them did that, I know, but I never saw one. And in any event, all of their aces weren't flamboyant types who splashed paint on their airplanes to show who they were. I suppose I could go look it up in the archives. There's the chance I could find him in some gruppe's log book, having flown on this particular day, in this particular place, a few miles northwest of the French town of Strasbourg that sits on the Rhine. There are fellows who've done that, gone back and looked up their opponents. I never have. I never saw any point.

He was someone who was trying to kill me, is all.

So I'm looking back, almost straight down now, and I can see this 20-millimeter cannon sticking through the middle of the fighter's propeller hub. In the theater of my memory, it is enormous. An elephant gun. And that isn't far wrong. It is a gun designed to bring down a bomber, one that fires shells as long as your hand, shells that explode and tear big holes in metal. It is the single most frightening thing I have seen in my life, then and now.

But I'm too busy to be frightened. Later on, you might sit back and perspire about it, maybe 40-50 years later, say, sitting on your porch 7,000 miles away, but while it is happening you are just too **** busy. And I am extremely busy up here, hanging by my propeller, going almost straight up, full emergency power, which a Mustang could do for only so long before losing speed, shuddering, stalling, and falling back down; and I am thinking that if the Mustang stalls before the Messerschmitt stalls, I have had it.

I look back, and I can see that he's shuddering, on the verge of a stall. He hasn't been able to get his nose up enough, hasn't been able to bring that big gun to bear. Almost, but not quite. I'm a fallen-down-dead man almost, but not quite. His nose begins dropping just as my airplane, too, begins shuddering. He stalls a second or two before I stall, drops away before I do.

Good old Mustang.

He is falling away now, and I flop the nose over and go after him hard. We are very high by this time, six miles and then some, and falling very, very fast. The Messerschmitt had a head start, plummeting out of my range, but I'm closing up quickly. Then he flattens out and comes around hard to the left and starts climbing again, as if he wants to come at me head on. Suddenly we're right back where we started.

A lot of this is just instinct now. Things are happening too fast to think everything out. You steer with your right hand and feet. The right hand also triggers the guns. With your left, you work the throttle, and keep the airplane in trim, which is easier to do than describe.

Any airplane with a single propeller produces torque. The more horsepower you have, the more the prop will pull you off to one side. The Mustangs I flew used a 12-cylinder Packard Merlin engine that displaced 1,649 cubic inches. That is 10 times the size of the engine that powers an Indy car. It developed power enough that you never applied full power sitting still on the ground because it would pull the plane's tail up off the runway and the propeller would chew up the concrete. With so much power, you were continually making minor adjustments on the controls to keep the Mustang and its wing-mounted guns pointed straight.

There were three little palm-sized wheels you had to keep fiddling with. They trimmed you up for hands-off level flight. One was for the little trim tab on the tail's rudder, the vertical slab which moves the plane left or right. Another adjusted the tab on the tail's horizontal elevators that raise or lower the nose and help reduce the force you had to apply for hard turning. The third was for aileron trim, to keep your wings level, although you didn't have to fuss much with that one. Your left hand was down there a lot if you were changing speeds, as in combat . . . while at the same time you were making minor adjustments with your feet on the rudder pedals and your hand on the stick. At first it was awkward. But, with experience, it was something you did without thinking, like driving a car and twirling the radio dial.

It's a little unnerving to think about how many things you have to deal with all at once to fly combat.

So the Messerschmitt is coming around again, climbing hard to his left, and I've had about enough of this. My angle is a little bit better this time. So I roll the dice. Instead of cobbing it like before and sailing on by him, I decide to turn hard left inside him, knowing that if I lose speed and don't make it I probably won't get home. I pull back on the throttle slightly, put down 10 degrees of flaps, and haul back on the stick just as hard as I can. And the nose begins coming up and around, slowly, slowly. . .

Hot ****! I'm going to make it! I'm inside him, pulling my sights up to him. And the German pilot can see this. This time, it's the Messerschmitt that breaks away and goes zooming straight up, engine at maximum power, without much alternative. I come in with full power and follow him up, and the gap narrows swiftly. He is hanging by his prop, not quite vertically, and I am right there behind him, and it is terribly clear, having tested the theory less than a minute ago, that he is going to stall and fall away before I do.

I have him. He must know that I have him.

I bring my nose up, he comes into my sights, and from less than 300 yards I trigger a long, merciless burst from my Brownings. Every fifth bullet or so is a tracer, leaving a thin trail of smoke, marking the path of the bullet stream. The tracers race upward and find him. The bullets chew at the wing root, the cockpit, the engine, making bright little flashes. I hose the Messerschmitt down the way you'd hose down a campfire, methodically, from one end to the other, not wanting to make a mistake here. The 109 shakes like a retriever coming out of the water, throwing off pieces. He slows, almost stops, as if parked in the sky, his propeller just windmilling, and he begins smoking heavily.

My momentum carries me to him. I throttle back to ease my plane alongside, just off his right wing. Have I killed him? I do not particularly want to fight this man again. I am coming up even with the cockpit, and although I figure the less I know about him the better, I find myself looking in spite of myself. There is smoke in the cockpit. I can see that, nothing more. Another few feet. . . .

And then he falls away suddenly, left wing down, right wing rising up, obscuring my view. I am looking at the 109's sky blue belly, the wheel wells, twin radiators, grease marks, streaks from the guns, the black crosses. I am close enough to make out the rivets. The Messerschmitt is right there and then it is gone, just like that, rolling away and dropping its nose and falling (flying?) almost straight down, leaking coolant and trailing flame and smoke so black and thick that it has to be oil smoke. It simply plunges, heading straight for the deck. No spin, not even a wobble, no parachute, and now I am wondering. His ship seems a death ship--but is it?

Undecided, I peel off and begin chasing him down. Did I squander a chance here? Have I let him escape? He is diving hard enough to be shedding his wings, harder than anyone designed those airplanes to dive, 500 miles an hour and more, and if 109s will stall sooner than Mustangs going straight up, now I am worrying that maybe their wings stay on longer. At 25,000 feet I begin to grow nervous. I pull back on the throttle, ease out of the dive, and watch him go down. I have no more stomach for this kind of thing, not right now, not with this guy. Enough. Let him go and to hell with him.

Straight down be plunges, from as high as 35,000 feet, through this beautiful, crystal clear May morning toward the green-on-green checkerboard fields, leaving a wake of black smoke. From four miles straight up I watch as the Messerschmitt and the shadow it makes on the ground rush toward one another . . .

. . . and then, finally, silently, merge.

Eddie Simpson joins up with me. Both wingmen, too. Simpson, my old wingman and friend, had gotten the one who'd climbed out. We'd bagged three of the four. We were very excited. It had been a good day.

I had lived and my opponent had died. But it was a near thing. It could have been the other way around just as easily, and what probably made the difference was the airplane I flew. Made in America. I would live to see the day when people would try to tell me the United States can't make cars like some other folks do. What a laugh. ..."

Note: The above article is excerpted from the book To Fly and Fight: Memoirs of a Triple Ace by Col C. E. "Bud" Anderson with Joseph P. Hamelin.

For more details about "Bud" Anderson and his book, check here: http://www.cebudanderson.com/


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Bud" Anderson explains mystery of P-51 personal name - 'Old Crow': "I tell my Baptist friends that it is named after the smartest bird that flies in the sky, the Crow, but my drinking buddies all know that it was named after that good old Kentucky straight bourbon whiskey of the same name. Now, my wife Ellie, of 54 plus years likes to kid around at times and will say 'Most guys name their plane after their wife or sweet heart, what must people thinks is going on here?'"



_____

BigKahuna_GS
11-02-2004, 05:34 AM
S!

Bud Anderson's P51 "Old Crow" :


http://www.cebudanderson.com/images/can'ttalk.jpg



___

JG77Von_Hess
11-02-2004, 06:13 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif Yes some good pilot qvotes there Kahuna, just be carefull not to let single- sided statements like this become religion for you. You cant bend flight physics to your liking just because the seem to smell bad.

After all the disussion Religion/Science is a bad one. Like still trying to claim that its Thor running his cart that causes thunder and lightning. (Lamainar flow wings dont like to turn, Slats are high lift devises)

If you are interrested in how planes behave in their various forms and shapes I can strongly recommend reading this book: The Advanced Pilots flight manuel edd.4 By William K. Kershner.

Regards.

VH.

Cajun76
11-02-2004, 06:28 AM
I would simply love to see a list of people here that have said the Pony should outturn a 109 at low speed. I haven't seen it yet, maybe I missed it.

There has been quite a bit of consensus about the Pony turning better at high speed.

The Germans in particualr had some fine a/c. Each one had their strong points. To say they were superior to every other a/c is stretching it though. The Allies had good a/c too, and often the battle was not about who had a few more meters per second climb or who could roll faster, it was who spotted each other first and tactics/training.

There seem to be some that think German planes were universally superior to Allied designs, that the Allies couldn't quite match or exceed the German ones. An example that seems to disprove this is my favorite, the P-47.

First deployed to the ETO in the beginning of 1943, P-47C's went operational in March. Opposing them was the Western LW, at the height of their power and experience. At that time they ruled the skies over Europe. In May, P-47D's started to arrive in theater, and these were the most heavily produced models. At the same time, mid 1943, Republic was expirementing with the XP-47J and XP-47M.

The Mustang began arriving in force in the beginning of 1944, and became ready in numbers by March.

Between these two dates, about 1 year, the P-47 carried the bulk of operations against the LW for the USAAF. Often, they were outnumbered by German interceptors, who would come up en masse to engage the bombers and escorts. It was during this time that the Jug scored most of it's A2A victories, since after the arrival of the Mustang, most P-47s were sent to the tactical fighter-bomber role.

The Jugs combat record is impressive. It killed 4.6 enemy planes to every Jug lost. Only 0.7% of Jugs were lost in combat, including ground pounding. Most of the Jugs A2A kills occured at the height of LW power, over the enemies turf.

XP-47J's and/or XP-47M's could have been put into service much earlier, if at all in the case of the XP-47J. The XP-47M wasn't ordered into production until the V-1 threat appeared, June 1944, even though Republic had been testing and flying it since mid 1943.

A fighter with the kind of numbers the P-47M offered should have been jumped on if the regular P-47D's in service were completely overmatched during this critical, tide turning time in the Western air war.

It is my contention that these hotrodded P-47's were not needed to deal with the foes they encountered. 'Regular' P-47's were more than adequate to the planes they faced in R/L, no matter what some numbers state about performance posted on a web forum 60+ years later say. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Cajun76
11-02-2004, 06:38 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JG77Von_Hess:
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif Yes some good pilot qvotes there Kahuna, just be carefull not to let single- sided statements like this become religion for you. You cant bend flight physics to your liking just because the seem to smell bad.

After all the disussion Religion/Science is a bad one. Like still trying to claim that its Thor running his cart that causes thunder and lightning. (Lamainar flow wings dont like to turn, Slats are high lift devises)

If you are interrested in how planes behave in their various forms and shapes I can strongly recommend reading this book: The Advanced Pilots flight manuel edd.4 By William K. Kershner.

Regards.

VH. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Now, which is it? I've heard the same people that talk about the lack of turning for laminar flow wings also say the P-51 didn't have true laminar flow wings, and that they weren't really part of its success. I'm not saying you said this, VH, but it's funny how some will use opposite arguments for and against the wings on the P-51, based on whatever they're trying to disprove. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Keep in ming, low speed turns are generally the ones that produce high AoA. No one here that I know of is disputing that the 109 could turn tighter than a P-51 at low speeds. At high speeds, the AoA is much lower, and there's nothing stopping a P-51 from being a better high speed turner. The 109s slat don't work all the time, you know. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Please keep in mind, I'm not a Pony fan, it has taken a lot of the glory the P-47 richly deserves. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

JG77Von_Hess
11-02-2004, 07:05 AM
((Lamainar flow wings dont like to turn, Slats are high lift devises)

Im refering to what the 2 Pilots in the Video says. They do fly the planes they are talkin about and we dont!

And Keep in mind that the E Bleed would bring u down to those speeds in less the 360- is it enough for the pony to get a shot off or will the ME109 pull away and start gaining on the Pony but then again perhaps we have altitude enough to gain a favaruable speed now etc Bla Bla..... NO NO...

And yes i do know how slats work
They would open in cases of interrupted air flow over the leading edge of the wing, at slow speeds in a plain stall in a spin in a high aoa turn in the turbulence trailing bombers high altitude... etc.

And yes the Jug does desereve love http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Regards.

VH