PDA

View Full Version : Oleg, about the P-51?



XyZspineZyX
11-25-2003, 11:45 PM
Oleg,

You mentioned in another thread that you would be fixing things on the P-51 for the final 1.2 patch. Would you mind giving some more details about the changes that you will be making?

Secondly, is their any chance of getting a rocket loudout for the P-51?


Thanks

XyZspineZyX
11-25-2003, 11:45 PM
Oleg,

You mentioned in another thread that you would be fixing things on the P-51 for the final 1.2 patch. Would you mind giving some more details about the changes that you will be making?

Secondly, is their any chance of getting a rocket loudout for the P-51?


Thanks

XyZspineZyX
11-25-2003, 11:48 PM
please oleg, we need the 51 to turn as good as a LA7, have the climb rate of the K4 and top speed of a 262, thanks....

XyZspineZyX
11-25-2003, 11:59 PM
JG26_Red wrote:
- please oleg, we need the 51 to turn as good as a
- LA7, have the climb rate of the K4 and top speed of
- a 262, thanks....

Boring....

He did not ask for that at all.

XyZspineZyX
11-26-2003, 02:46 AM
"please oleg, we need the 51 to turn as good as a LA7, have the climb rate of the K4 and top speed of a 262, thanks...."

what an idiot. Some day God will take away your copy of FB and lay to dust any copies of FB you purchase!..

XyZspineZyX
11-26-2003, 05:31 AM
I truly don't know enough about aircraft specs to make a legitimate bug listing so if Oleg was happy with the current version of the P-51 then I would take his word for it. Since he already said that he was fixing the P-51 in at least some way, I am just curious what the changes will be.

As for the accusation that I might be whining about the FM, I have never written a single post complaining about the FM of a single plane in this game because I don't know enough about it to make a legitimate complaint based on facts. I would have to make complaints based on the "it doesn't feel right to me" criterium that a lot of people use and I refuse to do that.

The fact that this patch is taking longer than expected is good news from my perspective because I am crossing my fingers that Oleg took the requests for a rocket loudout to heart and is going to incorporate them.

XyZspineZyX
11-26-2003, 06:06 AM
Aside from the fact that it is a little slow and some of the features dont work manually like mixture and supercharger (not good for a high alt fighter) it is ok. I for one can wait for the patch to come out like i know it will. I am just still so happy to fly the thing. I do find it interesting though............

JG26_Red wrote:
please oleg, we need the 51 to turn as good as a LA7, have the climb rate of the K4 and top speed of a 262, thanks....

In spite of some of the things wrong with the Mustang...and there are things wrong with it. You dont see a whole lot of posts full of charts and stuff.....you know pages and pages and pages of crying whining stuff...charges of bias and the like. This apparently was what so many folks in here expected...but it hasnt happened yet. Hmmmmmmmmmmmm



<CENTER>http://www.world-wide-net.com/tuskegeeairmen/ta-1943.jpg <marquee><FONT COLOR="RED"><FONT SIZE="+1">"Straighten up.......Fly right..~S~"<FONT SIZE> </marquee> http://www.geocities.com/rt_bearcat

<CENTER><FONT COLOR="ORANGE">vflyer@comcast.net<FONT COLOR>
<Center><div style="width:200;color:red;font-size:18pt;filter:shadow Blur[color=red,strength=8)">99th Pursuit Squadron

XyZspineZyX
11-26-2003, 06:25 AM
Bearcat99 wrote:
- In spite of some of the things wrong with the
- Mustang...and there are things wrong with it. You
- dont see a whole lot of posts full of charts and
- stuff.....you know pages and pages and pages of
- crying whining stuff...charges of bias and the like.
- This apparently was what so many folks in here
- expected...but it hasnt happened yet. Hmmmmmmmmmmmm

Well, perhaps it is because the P51 flyers are a mature, civilized lot...

..and the fact that it won the war.../i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif


JG26_Red's answer is typical of a certain segment of the LW community that I believe is truely afraid of the introduction of aircraft that can challenge them at altitude. I'm sure we will hear the same comments aimed at the later Spitfires as well.

The party is over boys.......

/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif


<center><FONT color="red">[b]BlitzPig_EL</FONT>[B]<CENTER> http://old.jccc.net/~droberts/p40/images/p40home.gif
</img>.
"All men dream, but not equally. Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds, wake in the day that it was vanity:
but the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act on their dreams with open eyes, to make them possible. "
--T.E. Lawrence

XyZspineZyX
11-26-2003, 09:01 AM
Bearcat99 wrote:
- Aside from the fact that it is a little slow and
- some of the features dont work manually like mixture
- and supercharger (not good for a high alt fighter)
- it is ok. I for one can wait for the patch to come
- out like i know it will. I am just still so happy to
- fly the thing. I do find it interesting
- though............In spite of some of the things wrong
- with the Mustang...and there are things wrong with it.
- You dont see a whole lot of posts full of charts and
- stuff.....you know pages and pages and pages of
- crying whining stuff...charges of bias and the like.
- This apparently was what so many folks in here
- expected...but it hasnt happened yet. Hmmmmmmmmmmmm

I've been amazed at the whining that's gone on without even attempts at documentation. There have been plenty of aircraft FM's disputed in the past, but usually they have produced pages of "documents" supporting various opinions, the validity of which is, of course, argued over endlessly. With the Mustang, however, the only thing I've seen documented and also tested in game is the top speed at altitude, which is approx 20-30 km/h off (it should be noted that many aircraft do not have accurate performance at altitude).

I've also seen this manual mixture and supercharger "problem" paraded around here a lot lately. They are automatic. 109s and 190s have been this way since the beginning, I see absolutely no reason why the Mustang should be different.

I'd also like to hear why, exactly, automatic mixture and supercharger is "not good for a high alt fighter." Pilots during the war pretty much universally agreed that automatic controls are superior, because they reduce pilot workload when it is most crucial: during combat.

--AKD

http://www.flyingpug.com/pugline2.jpg

XyZspineZyX
11-26-2003, 10:48 AM
A.K.Davis wrote:
-
- Bearcat99 wrote:
-- Aside from the fact that it is a little slow and
-- some of the features dont work manually like mixture
-- and supercharger (not good for a high alt fighter)
[snip]
-
- I've been amazed at the whining that's gone on
- without even attempts at documentation. There have
[snip]
-
- I've also seen this manual mixture and supercharger
- "problem" paraded around here a lot lately. They
- are automatic. 109s and 190s have been this way
- since the beginning, I see absolutely no reason why
- the Mustang should be different.
-
- I'd also like to hear why, exactly, automatic
- mixture and supercharger is "not good for a high alt
- fighter." Pilots during the war pretty much
- universally agreed that automatic controls are
- superior, because they reduce pilot workload when it
- is most crucial: during combat.
-
---AKD
-
http://www.flyingpug.com/pugline2.jpg
-

AKD, I agree. That poster throws around the word "wrong" like he was an authority on the topic. Mostly, I think he is just a disapointed P-51 enthusiast.

I am not an authority, but I can at least read the copious amounts of material posted on the Internet--some of it is even useful. For instance, here is a source about maintenance crews of the USAAF 357th Fighter Group that I picked up from a thread in IL-2 General Discussion: "A View From the Flight Line" (http://www.cebudanderson.com/viewfromtheline.htm). Who better to explain the mechanical features of the P-51 than mechanics and crewchiefs?

This quote from that account clearly indicates that the second stage supercharger was automatic:
<blockquote>All four of the P-51 types, the B, C, D and K, were powered by the Damn Great Merlin, in US service the V-1650-7. A few of the early B models had the dash 3 engine, but those from B-15 and C-5 on had the -7. The heart of the Merlin's high altitude performance was its superb two-speed, two-stage internal supercharger...the V-1650-3 and-7 were identical except for the supercharger. the aneroid pressure switch on the dash 7 was adjusted to shift to high blower at approximately 14,500 feet, about 5,000 feet lower than the dash 3. Gear ratios were also altered. Dash 7 ratios were lowered, resulting in the impellers turning slightly slower. High blower ratios were slightly over 8:1 in the dash 3, approximately 7.4:1 in the dash 7. Critical altitude at which max horsepower was obtained under given conditions was lowered from 29,000 to 23,000-plus. Reasons for this change are unknown to me, but it did result in a lowered performance at high altitude, which most pilots did not like. None of this, of course, posed any problems for the mechanics, except possibly the aneroid switch, and in fact we did not know or care what blower ratios were as there was nothing we could do about them.</blockquote>
Another passage makes the automatic mixture argument less clear:
<blockquote>As soon as the cylinders began to fire, mixture control was moved to "Run." (All 8th AF P-51s had their carburetors modified to remove the Auto Lean, Auto Rich, and Full Rich mixture positions, which were replaced by one notch, Run. If pilots had been free to choose the fuel mixture, it would have been impossible to plan mission times with any accuracy, and many running on rich mixture would not have made it home.) Propeller was already at Full Increase, and throttle was set at 1,300 rpm for warmup.</blockquote>
So, the P-51 (no particular model/variant mentioned) was delivered to units with manual mixture setting controls, but were field changed (by USAAF 8th) so that they had only a single running setting! This field change is not quite an "auto" setting, but it does dampen the argument for those demanding P-51 manual mixture settings in IL2:FB. On the other hand, I have no knowlege of the standing orders for other USAAF commands, the RAF or the VVS on whether they modified their P-51s similarly. So, there could be wiggle room for someone stating that manual mixture control was an available feature--just not for the P-51s of the Mighty Eighth!.

* * *

Here's the link back to the General Discussion thread: http://forums.ubi.com/messages/message_view-topic.asp?name=us_il2sturmovik_gd&id=yvjbv

<center>http://www.bloggerheads.com/mash_quiz/images/mash_potter_anim.gif (http://www.bloggerheads.com/mash_quiz/)</center>
[EDIT: Sentence clarity]

Message Edited on 11/26/0310:08AM by rbstr44

XyZspineZyX
11-26-2003, 11:08 AM
A.K.Davis wrote:
- I've been amazed at the whining that's gone on
- without even attempts at documentation. There have
- been plenty of aircraft FM's disputed in the past,
- but usually they have produced pages of "documents"
- supporting various opinions, the validity of which
- is, of course, argued over endlessly. With the
- Mustang, however, the only thing I've seen
- documented and also tested in game is the top speed
- at altitude, which is approx 20-30 km/h off (it
- should be noted that many aircraft do not have
- accurate performance at altitude).
-
- I've also seen this manual mixture and supercharger
- "problem" paraded around here a lot lately. They
- are automatic. 109s and 190s have been this way
- since the beginning, I see absolutely no reason why
- the Mustang should be different.
-
- I'd also like to hear why, exactly, automatic
- mixture and supercharger is "not good for a high alt
- fighter." Pilots during the war pretty much
- universally agreed that automatic controls are
- superior, because they reduce pilot workload when it
- is most crucial: during combat.
-
---AKD


AKD, nice post. The P-51, as is in 1.2RC, is fine (IMO). It is the fastest aircraft above 8000m, and can turn on a dime up there. A skilled P-51 pilot can easily deal with Fw-190s and Bf-109 G/K series above 8000m, where the German aircraft lose performance quickly (or should I say, the performance gap INCREASES).

The P-51 is a great fighter, and I think it should be left as it is, except for the goofy wing tip stalls that occour with very little stick pressure (should be toned down, maybe a little?).

The P-51 is one of the best aircraft above 5000m. I don't like to say this, but instead of attempting to turn with VVS fighters on the deck (I have seen this way too much online), maybe you guys should learn how to fly it with Boom and Zoom/Engergy tactics. It is easy to fly and extremely effective when you use it correctly.

WUAF_CO_CRBNFRZ on HL

XyZspineZyX
11-26-2003, 12:18 PM
Well I hope that the airelon trim and automatic cowl flap are fixed in the final released.

XyZspineZyX
11-26-2003, 03:50 PM
A.K.Davis wrote:
- I've been amazed at the whining that's gone on
- without even attempts at documentation. There have
- been plenty of aircraft FM's disputed in the past,
- but usually they have produced pages of "documents"
- supporting various opinions, the validity of which
- is, of course, argued over endlessly. With the
- Mustang, however, the only thing I've seen
- documented and also tested in game is the top speed
- at altitude, which is approx 20-30 km/h off (it
- should be noted that many aircraft do not have
- accurate performance at altitude).
-
- I've also seen this manual mixture and supercharger
- "problem" paraded around here a lot lately. They
- are automatic. 109s and 190s have been this way
- since the beginning, I see absolutely no reason why
- the Mustang should be different.
-
- I'd also like to hear why, exactly, automatic
- mixture and supercharger is "not good for a high alt
- fighter." Pilots during the war pretty much
- universally agreed that automatic controls are
- superior, because they reduce pilot workload when it is most crucial: during combat.

The things I mentioned were..the speed which IS off,, I dont need documentation. It is obvious if you fly the thing. As far as the mix and supercharger... I prefer manual...thats my opinion. IMO the 109s should have the option to do it.


rbstr44 wrote:

AKD, I agree. That poster throws around the word "wrong" like he was an authority on the topic. Mostly, I think he is just a disapointed P-51 enthusiast.


Nope I am no authority by a longshot. I fly the P-51 because I like it but it should be a bit faster than it is. especially at altitude. Disapointed? Only slightly....even as it is it's the best virtual P-51 out so how disapointed can I be? /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif





<CENTER>http://www.world-wide-net.com/tuskegeeairmen/ta-1943.jpg <marquee><FONT COLOR="RED"><FONT SIZE="+1">"Straighten up.......Fly right..~S~"<FONT SIZE> </marquee> http://www.geocities.com/rt_bearcat

<CENTER><FONT COLOR="ORANGE">vflyer@comcast.net<FONT COLOR>
<Center><div style="width:200;color:red;font-size:18pt;filter:shadow Blur[color=red,strength=8)">99th Pursuit Squadron

Message Edited on 11/26/0309:51AM by Bearcat99

XyZspineZyX
11-26-2003, 04:43 PM
indeed, he don't seem disapointed at all... Looks like an happy whiner...

<center><img src=http://hoarmurath.free.fr/images/sighoar.jpg></center>

XyZspineZyX
11-26-2003, 05:00 PM
I vaguely remember reading something about the blower case on the Merlin parting company with the heads if the engine was at (or near?) full throttle when it changed speeds. If this can be confirmed that would be pretty cool to model. Of course, that may have been the reason the gearing was changed on the later models.

It would be fun to be looking back at a P-51 or Spitfire climbing towards your 109 when suddenly the cowling blows off and the engine begins to lose the magic smoke that makes all engines and electrical components function correctly.



-WhtBoy.

XyZspineZyX
11-26-2003, 05:05 PM
P-51 is in very good shape...I'm hoping for the low speed control authority to be upped slightly but that minor point aside hopefully whatever Oleg is fixing is good news and that it will be modeled as well as possible is great. I'm enjoying the RC01 version so hopefully I'll enjoy the finished version as well!

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/temp_sig.jpg
"Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few." - Winston Churchill

XyZspineZyX
11-27-2003, 12:23 AM
Bump for Oleg

XyZspineZyX
11-27-2003, 01:59 AM
Actually I think the P-51 is modelled pretty well also. It does seem a tad too slow at altitude, but otherwise I have no problem with any ACE AI German plane. I can easily deal with any Fw-190, including late Ds. They have nothing on the P-51D except in a prolonged flat run, and at best that's just a wash. I can certainly outturn them at any speed. The Bf-109 is more problematic at low speeds, but even at high speeds it no much to worry about.

Right now the biggest problem I see with the P-51 is the discrepancy between speed bar and in-cockpit air speed indicator. The plane performs VERY consistently to historical data if you use the in-cockpit air speed indicator as your tool.

The biggest problem with the P-51D is:

1) The P-47D-27 rolls too slow
2) So does the P-40 E and M

/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Regards,

SkyChimp

http://members.cox.net/rowlandparks/siglight.jpg

XyZspineZyX
11-27-2003, 02:09 AM
-
- JG26_Red's answer is typical of a certain segment of
- the LW community that I believe is truely afraid of
- the introduction of aircraft that can challenge them
- at altitude. I'm sure we will hear the same
- comments aimed at the later Spitfires as well.
-
- The party is over boys.......
-

Contrary to popular belief this LW pilot actually is enjoying the addition of the P51 online. No longer does combat usually take place at sub 1.5k but now up high from 4k to 7k where it's fun. The only thing I don't enjoy is the current modelling of the FW190D as it seems a little sluggish in climb and speed. The A series are great though and the A9 seems to be the steed of choice in bringing down P51's (-:

Me, I still like my 109G6AS but I have to watch how much feul I enter a fight with cause my only option against the new craft is to try T n B fighting of wich the AS is capable of with a light fuel loading.

My thoughts anyway.

XyZspineZyX
11-27-2003, 06:03 AM
i know nothing about what the 51 is/was really like, but i have to ask....

was the 51 so slow on the deck? right now it is the slowest of all late-war AC down low.

was that really the case?


S!

uhoh7

XyZspineZyX
11-27-2003, 06:48 AM
Looks like elAurens hasnt played year 1941 too much , well flown Mig3ud will give hard time for 109F models at altitude.

XyZspineZyX
11-27-2003, 08:05 AM
alarmer wrote:
- Looks like elAurens hasnt played year 1941 too much


Played it a lot....

In my experience a well flown 109 will easily down the Mig 3 flaming torch.../i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Unless you are speaking of AI in single play.

The AI 109 is a joke.....

<center><FONT color="red">[b]BlitzPig_EL</FONT>[B]<CENTER> http://old.jccc.net/~droberts/p40/images/p40home.gif
</img>.
"All men dream, but not equally. Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds, wake in the day that it was vanity:
but the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act on their dreams with open eyes, to make them possible. "
--T.E. Lawrence

XyZspineZyX
11-27-2003, 02:40 PM
Bearcat99 wrote:
-
[snip]
-
- rbstr44 wrote:
-
- AKD, I agree. That poster throws around the word
- "wrong" like he was an authority on the topic.
- Mostly, I think he is just a disapointed P-51
- enthusiast.
-
-
- Nope I am no authority by a longshot. I fly the P-51
- because I like it but it should be a bit faster than
- it is. especially at altitude. Disapointed? Only
- slightly....even as it is it's the best virtual P-51
- out so how disapointed can I be? /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif
-
-

You are certainly not the only one expressing a little displeasure with some aspect of the P-51 performance. I guess I have trouble with the word "wrong" used in the context of describing a facet of the simulation which is also "the best virtual P-51". It just seems to be a contradiction whenever someone mentions both in the same post. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif You Mustang enthusiasts need to control your emotions a little more. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

"Wrong" would be...the throttle does not work, and the engine does not start, and the wing falls off when the first 7.62mm round hits. "Wrong" is like calling the half-full water glass..."dry". /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif So, that's my beef with the emotionally-charged vogue words that appear in the forums.

Anyway, Bearcat, you are usually one of the more upbeat/positive posters in these forums so I am certainly picking on you a little bit to make my point, I admit. Still, IMO, if a feature did not exist historically, then it does not belong in the sim--period. The jury is still out about P-51 mixture control.


<center>http://www.bloggerheads.com/mash_quiz/images/mash_potter_anim.gif (http://www.bloggerheads.com/mash_quiz/)</center>

Message Edited on 11/27/0302:09PM by rbstr44

XyZspineZyX
11-28-2003, 11:21 PM
Bump for Oleg and the original question.

XyZspineZyX
11-28-2003, 11:49 PM
A little more speed wouldn't hurt my feelings none. Otherwise quite happy with it.

XyZspineZyX
11-29-2003, 02:18 AM
" FW190D as it seems a little sluggish in climb and speed."

What????

You flying the same sim as me?

The FW190D is a dream.

S!
609IAP_Recon

Forgotten Skies Virtual War
Forum: http://fogwar.luftwaffe.net/forums/index.php
Website: http://www.forgottenskies.com
Visit 609IAP at http://takeoff.to/609IAP

http://www.leeboats.com/609/sig/609_recon3.jpg

Agnus Dei, Qui Tollis peccata mundi, Miserere nobis. Dona nobis pacem

XyZspineZyX
11-29-2003, 03:22 AM
Same here...D9 climbs like nothing else...well maybe the 109 K-4 has it beat by a little bit but not by much. Try with MW50 enabled and manual prop control.

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/temp_sig.jpg
"Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few." - Winston Churchill