PDA

View Full Version : P-51 speed boost at SL in 4.0m.



Hunde_3.JG51
06-09-2005, 11:55 PM
Speed tests show that P-51B/C/D got a hefty speed boost in 4.0m, at least at SL.

Test (under Oleg's conditions):

Speeds in km/h at SL version 3.04m:

P-51C: 568
P-51B: 575
P-51D: 592

In version 4.0m

P-51B/C: 589
P-51D: 607

The P-51D is now faster than the FW-190A-8, A-9, and D-9 '44 at SL. The B/C is now faster than the A-6. Most other planes I tested, though there are many to go, have similar speeds as in 3.04, but the Mustang got a big boost.

*PLEASE NOTE I AM NOT SAYING THIS IS INCORRECT, JUST A HEADS UP AS I FOUND IT INTERESTING*

The Mustang III is insane, IIRC I was at/near 652km/h, it might have been higher!

Hristo_
06-10-2005, 12:09 AM
Good stuff.

Hetzer_II
06-10-2005, 02:26 AM
And the d9 is still to slow.. am im right?

TooCooL34
06-10-2005, 02:42 AM
Good. I'm a fan of P-51 and it is true Runstang now.
I think I would feel guilty when I run away. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

3.JG51_Stecher
06-10-2005, 03:07 AM
Originally posted by Hetzer_II:
And the d9 is still to slow.. am im right?

Every 190 is a bit slower than they were in 3.04.

FA_Whisky
06-10-2005, 03:40 AM
What map, time and power(throttle/rpm) settings?
What do you get for max speed without overheating for 5 minutes?
I can push it to 600kmph, but it will overheat fast.

Hetzer_II
06-10-2005, 03:47 AM
ahh yes... from where did i already know this awnser?

3.JG51_Stecher
06-10-2005, 04:34 AM
I believe official testing conditions are as follows: QMB - Crimea map, 1200, Clear conditions, Wind & Turbulence switched off (to prevent a tail/head wind), turn defense to None. I use 25% fuel to minimized its comparative affect on speeds, as some aircraft carry much more fuel than others, and default armament.

Results for maximum speed in level flight at sea level. All speeds are km/h TAS.

v3.04m

Fw 190A-4: 555
Fw 190A-5: 580
Fw 190A-6: 580
Fw 190A-8: 590
Fw 190A-9: 598
Fw 190D-9: 599
Fw 190D-9: 607

P-51B: 574
P-51C: 568
P-51D: 588

v4.00m

Fw 190A-4: 553
Fw 190A-5: 575
Fw 190A-6: 575
Fw 190A-8: 587
Fw 190A-9: 594
Fw 190D-9: 599
Fw 190D-9: 604

P-51B: 586
P-51C: 588
P-51D: 600
Mustang Mk. III: 652 (I think I saw sea water evaporating behind it. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif )

Hunde and I will do the entire WF ETO/MTO planeset when v4.01m is released, and may include maximum continuous as well.

FA_Whisky
06-10-2005, 05:01 AM
3.JG51_Stecher, thats at 110% throttle, wep and max rpm?

3.JG51_Stecher
06-10-2005, 05:21 AM
Yeah, balls out.

Hunde_3.JG51
06-10-2005, 07:18 AM
The disparity in my and Stecher's results was due to the fact that I had wind/turbulance on.

I believe the proper tests call for (which is what Stecher did except fuel load):

-Crimea map
-Noon
-Over water
-Wind off
-100% fuel
-Radiator closed
-Max throttle
-WEP enabled if available
-Default armament
-No AAA defense
-Proper trim

As Stecher said, we will test ALOT of planes when the official patch is released, but for now it is apparent the Mustang got a big boost at SL, and the D is faster than the '44 Dora.

Ironman69
06-10-2005, 08:32 AM
what is the Bf-109K4's speed now at SL in 4.0 as compared with 3.04?

Willey
06-10-2005, 09:34 AM
Interesing that the B/C now have the same speed, but are still below the D. I thought the B/C were faster than the D. Seems they removed the 1650-3 and put a 1650-7 in the B... sad, there's no difference anymore then, just like the late 109s http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

lrrp22
06-10-2005, 09:45 AM
Stecher,

In v3.4m, I was able to get ~585 kph@SL for the P-51B/C and 595 kph for the P-51D (Robban got 599, IIRC) at 100% fuel so I don't think there has been a change.

I can confirm 652 kph for the Mustang III. Give it a try around 18,000 ft... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif


Originally posted by 3.JG51_Stecher:
I believe official testing conditions are as follows: QMB - Crimea map, 1200, Clear conditions, Wind & Turbulence switched off (to prevent a tail/head wind), turn defense to None. I use 25% fuel to minimized its comparative affect on speeds, as some aircraft carry much more fuel than others, and default armament.

Results for maximum speed in level flight at sea level. All speeds are km/h TAS.

v3.04m

Fw 190A-4: 555
Fw 190A-5: 580
Fw 190A-6: 580
Fw 190A-8: 590
Fw 190A-9: 598
Fw 190D-9: 599
Fw 190D-9: 607

P-51B: 574
P-51C: 568
P-51D: 588

v4.00m

Fw 190A-4: 553
Fw 190A-5: 575
Fw 190A-6: 575
Fw 190A-8: 587
Fw 190A-9: 594
Fw 190D-9: 599
Fw 190D-9: 604

P-51B: 586
P-51C: 588
P-51D: 600
Mustang Mk. III: 652 (I think I saw sea water evaporating behind it. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif )

Hunde and I will do the entire WF ETO/MTO planeset when v4.01m is released, and may include maximum continuous as well.

lrrp22
06-10-2005, 10:04 AM
Willey

The P-51B/C's SL speeds are within ~5 kph of what you could expect form a clean V-1650-3 machine. Eglin AAF, Pax River and Boscombe Down all reached around 360 mph at SL with the V-1650-3 P-51B at 67" Hg, clean. NAA and the USAAF came in with 368 mph (592 kph) and 373 mph (600 kph) @ SL for clean P-51D's.


Originally posted by Willey:
Interesing that the B/C now have the same speed, but are still below the D. I thought the B/C were faster than the D. Seems they removed the 1650-3 and put a 1650-7 in the B... sad, there's no difference anymore then, just like the late 109s http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

robban75
06-10-2005, 10:50 AM
Originally posted by Hunde_3.JG51:
As Stecher said, we will test ALOT of planes when the official patch is released, but for now it is apparent the Mustang got a big boost at SL, and the D is faster than the '44 Dora.

The D-9 '44 should manage 621km/h at SL according to charts. The D-9 '45 612km/h.

Also, we need the A-5/A-6 with 1.65 ata boost well.

Bull_dog_
06-10-2005, 11:14 AM
And the "who has the fastest plane" quest continues!

I'm interested in historical match ups...I was happy to see a late P-51 to match up against Late model fw's and 109's! The Mustang has been slightly undersped for most of the game...most aircraft in the game are modelled to the potential/best case so I'm glad to see the Mustang sea level speed increased over all.

I could only muster about 580 out of the P-38L so relatively speaking, it is still the slow poke on the block!

I'm not entirely sure how fast they should be but I know the Mustang was the plane to beat for the latter part of the war for the axis...just got done reading an article about a sturmstaffel pilot who made the statement that if they met Mustangs, it was no contest...they were flying the heavily armored/30mm armed Fw190A-8's and had 109's for escort due to the mismatch.

Good stuff..I like the patch muchly so far!

OldMan____
06-10-2005, 12:20 PM
A most disgusting discover.

FW190A reduce speed with outer cannon removed is back . In 3.04 with and without external cannon they had same speed. Now there is a 30 kph difference.

So RACK is drag capable again. This may explain why all late FW lost speed.

OldMan____
06-10-2005, 12:23 PM
Originally posted by robban75:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Hunde_3.JG51:
As Stecher said, we will test ALOT of planes when the official patch is released, but for now it is apparent the Mustang got a big boost at SL, and the D is faster than the '44 Dora.

The D-9 '44 should manage 621km/h at SL according to charts. The D-9 '45 612km/h.

Also, we need the A-5/A-6 with 1.65 ata boost well. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

you need to think that 621kph test might have been made at higher temperatures (lower drag on fluids) and or dry air (also lower viscosity)

CHDT
06-10-2005, 12:40 PM
A most disgusting discover.

FW190A reduce speed with outer cannon removed is back . In 3.04 with and without external cannon they had same speed. Now there is a 30 kph difference.

So RACK is drag capable again. This may explain why all late FW lost speed.


If brute force does not solve your problem... you are not using enough!



Without the outer wing cannons, they should be faster and climb better. Why is it possible to have it right for the 190's!!!

p1ngu666
06-10-2005, 12:43 PM
tried fiddling with the prop pitch?
is sad tho, cos 190 was abit too slow before?

Hristo_
06-10-2005, 12:44 PM
People like Hunde, Stecher and Robban would make great beta testers.

OldMan____
06-10-2005, 12:57 PM
Originally posted by p1ngu666:
tried fiddling with the prop pitch?
is sad tho, cos 190 was abit too slow before?

In fact proppeler pitch has a new trick. You will reach a max speed with auto then a little bit more bu manual(but not so much more as used to be) and then if you get back to auto you will still acelerate further 3 or 4 kph.

But 190A6 makes only 547 kph on SL without outer cannon.. that is quite pathetic. With cannons it get to 578 by my test.

VMF-214_HaVoK
06-10-2005, 02:42 PM
590.6 is correct for the P-51D what do you have that says different? I can not speak for the B and C. What is the reported sea level speed for the A8 and A9.

VMF-214_HaVoK
06-10-2005, 02:43 PM
Originally posted by Hristo_:
People like Hunde, Stecher and Robban would make great beta testers.

All most all beta testers are biased towards LW planes as is. How many more you need?

VW-IceFire
06-10-2005, 03:56 PM
Originally posted by Willey:
Interesing that the B/C now have the same speed, but are still below the D. I thought the B/C were faster than the D. Seems they removed the 1650-3 and put a 1650-7 in the B... sad, there's no difference anymore then, just like the late 109s http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif
I was under the impression that the B/C were faster at a slightly higher altitude than the D model which was faster at a slightly lower altitude and better at sea level as well.

Badsight.
06-10-2005, 06:22 PM
Originally posted by VMF-214_HaVoK:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Hristo_:
People like Hunde, Stecher and Robban would make great beta testers.

All most all beta testers are biased towards LW planes as is. How many more you need? </div></BLOCKQUOTE> your joking right ?

your implying bias here also , Hunde, Stecher and Robban are some of the most accurate testers here at this board

Bull_dog_
06-10-2005, 06:41 PM
The speed of aircraft are in no way determined by beta testers. Oleg himself has complete control over flight models.

The pilot that wins a fight between a Fw and Mustang will likely begin the fight with a tactical advantage....in a draw, the Mustang wins...it did in real life too.

WWMaxGunz
06-10-2005, 06:59 PM
The Mustang wins? And here I've always thought it was the pilot.

Maple_Tiger
06-10-2005, 08:15 PM
Originally posted by 3.JG51_Stecher:
I believe official testing conditions are as follows: QMB - Crimea map, 1200, Clear conditions, Wind & Turbulence switched off (to prevent a tail/head wind), turn defense to None. I use 25% fuel to minimized its comparative affect on speeds, as some aircraft carry much more fuel than others, and default armament.

Results for maximum speed in level flight at sea level. All speeds are km/h TAS.

v3.04m

Fw 190A-4: 555
Fw 190A-5: 580
Fw 190A-6: 580
Fw 190A-8: 590
Fw 190A-9: 598
Fw 190D-9: 599
Fw 190D-9: 607

P-51B: 574
P-51C: 568
P-51D: 588

v4.00m

Fw 190A-4: 553
Fw 190A-5: 575
Fw 190A-6: 575
Fw 190A-8: 587
Fw 190A-9: 594
Fw 190D-9: 599
Fw 190D-9: 604

P-51B: 586
P-51C: 588
P-51D: 600
Mustang Mk. III: 652 (I think I saw sea water evaporating behind it. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif )

Hunde and I will do the entire WF ETO/MTO planeset when v4.01m is released, and may include maximum continuous as well.



Yup, I can get the P-51D to reach 600 also - if I go into a very slight dive that is. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Then she will hold at 600.

Badsight.
06-10-2005, 08:26 PM
lol i remember you saying you couldnt get the J 38 over 11 K when 12,400 was possible Maple

Hunde_3.JG51
06-10-2005, 09:05 PM
Hmmm, I thought you were ok Havok, I guess I was wrong. Reread my original post and note what I typed in caps, this was put in exactly for defensive people like yourself and others. Buzzsaw, you can be a great guy at times (thanks for the A-5 manual I still have) and are very knowledgeable, but at others I just don't understand your thinking. There is no whining here and anyone with half of a brain can see this. It is an observation that is important for how some will fly, especially FW-190 drivers. I knew it would only be a matter of time until the "who says its wrong?" or "stop whining!" idiots would show up.

Please show me where I said it was wrong, or asked for any kind of change, if you can't then...

Thanks for nothing, its a shame you turned out to be like so many others http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif.

Icefire, I read the same that the P-51D had different (supercharger?) gearing or something like that which made it faster at low altitude than the B/C. Someone with good Mustang knowledge please feel free to comment.

Maple Tiger, all tests are done the same for ALL aircraft. When I test there is a dive to 3-7 meters, then I back down and settle to about 30kph slower speed than anticipated max (I know most at this point), then let the plane accelerate to max speed. There was a boost for Mustang, I am sure of it. The fact that it is now faster than the Dora is proof, feel free to try it yourself. AGAIN, I'M NOT SAYING THIS IS WRONG!

Irrp22, I got 592 for P-51D in 3.04, and 606 for FW-190D-9, now Mustang is faster.

To others, we will test again when full patch is out, with most planes and standard procedure. Those who want to read it and take something from it, fine. For those who don't please stay out of it and take your accusations somewhere else.

Hunde_3.JG51
06-10-2005, 09:23 PM
Ah, here it is (about P-51D):

"It would use the Packard-Merlin V-1650-7 engine, the same as late model P-51B's and C's. Lower supercharger gear ratios resulted in much better low altitude performance."

P-51 in Action, pg. 35.

Hunde_3.JG51
06-10-2005, 09:55 PM
P.S., thanks for the support Badsight and Hristo, much appreciated.


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

TAGERT.
06-10-2005, 10:01 PM
Originally posted by Hunde_3.JG51:
Speed tests show that P-51B/C/D got a hefty speed boost in 4.0m, at least at SL.

Test (under Oleg's conditions):

Speeds in km/h at SL version 3.04m:

P-51C: 568
P-51B: 575
P-51D: 592

In version 4.0m

P-51B/C: 589
P-51D: 607

The P-51D is now faster than the FW-190A-8, A-9, and D-9 '44 at SL. The B/C is now faster than the A-6. Most other planes I tested, though there are many to go, have similar speeds as in 3.04, but the Mustang got a big boost.

*PLEASE NOTE I AM NOT SAYING THIS IS INCORRECT, JUST A HEADS UP AS I FOUND IT INTERESTING*

The Mustang III is insane, IIRC I was at/near 652km/h, it might have been higher! It's about time!

Hristo_
06-10-2005, 11:49 PM
Hunde, Stecher, Robban and also Tigertalon took time and did accurate tests of plane or weapon performance. Not just once but many times before. They discovered interesting and useful information.

If that isn't worth a beta tester status, I don't know what is. At least it would help bring out a more polished product.

Oleg and Ivan, are you reading this ?

3.JG51_Stecher
06-11-2005, 04:28 AM
Originally posted by Ironman69:
what is the Bf-109K4's speed now at SL in 4.0 as compared with 3.04?

In 3.04m it was 589, in 4.00m it is 585. (km/h TAS @SL)


Originally posted by lrrp22:
Stecher,

In v3.4m, I was able to get ~585 kph@SL for the P-51B/C and 595 kph for the P-51D (Robban got 599, IIRC) at 100% fuel so I don't think there has been a change.

Sounds like wind to me, unless something else in your setup was different. If not, I'd like to see how.


Originally posted by Bull_dog_:
I could only muster about 580 out of the P-38L so relatively speaking, it is still the slow poke on the block!

The new P-38L Late goes 589 km/h TAS @SL. A very nice improvement from the original P-38L going 563 km/h TAS @SL.

Hristo and Badsight, thanks for the comments guys.

CUJO_1970
06-11-2005, 02:18 PM
Originally posted by 3.JG51_Stecher:

v4.00m

Fw 190A-4: 553
Fw 190A-5: 575
Fw 190A-6: 575
Fw 190A-8: 587
Fw 190A-9: 594
Fw 190D-9: 599
Fw 190D-9: 604

Hunde and I will do the entire WF ETO/MTO planeset when v4.01m is released, and may include maximum continuous as well.


These are acceptable_sea level_ numbers for A-series FW190s fully armed and loaded with outer cannons, even if a tad on the slow side.

CUJO_1970
06-11-2005, 02:32 PM
IMO, we will never have FW190D-9s that do 612-621mph at sea level.

It is a myth that German a/c are modelled on only the best German data.

Can't say the same for Mustangs and P-38s http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

OldMan____
06-11-2005, 05:26 PM
Our Dora gets to 612.. just need to know how to get there.

The issue is at around 2k to 3k where all FW are quite slower than they should,

Hunde_3.JG51
06-11-2005, 10:37 PM
"Our Dora gets to 612.. just need to know how to get there."


Not sure what you are talking about Oldman, but under Oleg's conditions the '44 Dora is not getting to 612. I haven't tested in 4.0 but I don't think the '45 Dora is either. I used to get 611 with '45 Dora in 3.04, but that was with wind on which can add 5 or so km/h. If it is a matter of an exploit or messing with prop-pitch it is beside the point, that is not what is being discussed. We are talking about listed speeds vs. what is seen under Oleg's own testing conditions. The FW-190A has always been odd in that it had to use manual pitch and fast overheat to reach its indicated/listed speeds relative to other aircraft which can do it on auto. In short, when testing almost every aircraft goes over its listed speed by 5 to 12 or so km/h depending if wind is enabled or not, but the 190A always had to use manual prop-pitch and fast overheat to get speeds 5 to 12 km/h faster than listed whereas others did it on auto or with significantly less overheat. So in that sense the 190A's have always been about 5 to 10 km/h too slow and the manual pitch was just an exploit to get that back at the cost of overheating much faster.

Hunde_3.JG51
06-11-2005, 11:25 PM
Tested again under following conditions:

-Crimea map
-Noon
-Over water
-Wind off (previous results were with wind on)
-100% fuel
-Radiator closed
-Max throttle
-WEP enabled if available
-Default armament
-No AAA defense
-Proper trim
-All tests started in QMB as allies to a heading of approx 130
-Cockpit off to see TAS

Results in km/h:

FW-190D-9 '45: 602
P-51D: 597
FW-190D-9 '44: 596
FW-190A-9: 586 on auto, 592 with manual and fast overheat

So if you are getting the Dora up to 612, please send the bug report to Oleg and crew http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif.

As for the auto-maual-auto thing, it has always been there. But the 2km/h or so gained bleed off in a matter of seconds and slowly go back down to normal max speed achieved on auto.

To others, like I said we will test all aircraft when patch is final, but any way you look at it the P-51 clearly got a boost at SL as it out-runs the A-9 even when using manual (A-9 used to out-run the Mustang even on auto) and is as fast as the '44 Dora.

************Again, this may very well be correct************** but there was definitely a change that can effect a 190's ability to escape if needed.