PDA

View Full Version : P51 serie 4.03m



TheGozr
02-09-2006, 12:53 PM
Anything to say about this planes?

TheGozr
02-09-2006, 12:53 PM
Anything to say about this planes?

jds1978
02-09-2006, 01:07 PM
wobbles gone on my rig. .50 cal desynched

MWAHHAHAHAHAAA http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

LUFT11_Hoflich
02-09-2006, 01:35 PM
Quote:
wobbles gone on my rig. .50 cal desynched""

What whas that about the .50 cal was sync or desynched? whats the meaning for that? sorry for bad english

Enlighten me please!!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif
H¶f... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

CruiseTorpedo
02-09-2006, 01:36 PM
The change for the 50s means there will be a steady stream of tracers, no longer bursts of them. If you've flown the "p40 field mod" it had and still has the desynced 50s.

TheGozr
02-09-2006, 01:43 PM
P51 is not a threat anymore http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif i feels it has been castred?

BirdieNum-nums
02-09-2006, 02:00 PM
Huh? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif One says the P-51 is good, the other says it feels castrated, or shall we say, sans testicules? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

So is it good or what? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-mad.gif Desynched .50s will obviously help it, but I hope its handling has been upped a bit as it seemed rather deficient in several areas. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

Cheers,

Birdie Num-nums

anarchy52
02-09-2006, 02:00 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by TheGozr:
P51 is not a threat anymore http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif i feels it has been castred? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, I don't know who will ride a pony when they have tempest that beats it in everything at least under 4k. Roll, dive, zoom, firepower, toughness, even turn (which is a bit odd).

fordfan25
02-09-2006, 02:05 PM
more stable,but low speed stalls have been icreased by alot for me so far. cant hardly turn it at all below 200MPH with out fliping VERY violently. and please forgive my english...im a yank LOL

VMF-214_HaVoK
02-09-2006, 02:05 PM
Its been porked since 4.01 and still is.

jimDG
02-09-2006, 02:19 PM
walking a stream of tracer over a wing is very easy now, but it doesnt cut the wing. DM of all a/c is overmodelled http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

edgflyer
02-09-2006, 02:22 PM
Yeah, but is the flight model realy worse than before. I am work and havn't been able to try it out.

Xiolablu3
02-09-2006, 02:22 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VMF-214_HaVoK:
Its been porked since 4.01 and still is. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

What exactly is still wrong with it?



I find it much more stable now!!

After a quick flight in QMB the wobbles seem to be gone.

The 50 cals are in more of a stream too, but I am undecided if this is just a graphical change or they are actually desynched properly. I was having trouble hitting with them compared to the 2 50s on the Spit 9e. (50 cals are real sniper weapons on the Spitfire)

fordfan25
02-09-2006, 02:35 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by edgflyer:
Yeah, but is the flight model realy worse than before. I am work and havn't been able to try it out. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>i will say that with my controle's its turning is FAR worse than it has ever been. it is more stable now. what ever you do in a dog fiht now, do NOT use landing flaps thay act like dive breaks and will kill you 4 sure. as long as you NEVER try to dog fight anything other than a b17 you will be ok http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif.

fordfan25
02-09-2006, 02:36 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VMF-214_HaVoK:
Its been porked since 4.01 and still is. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

What exactly is still wrong with it?



I find it much more stable now!!

After a quick flight in QMB the wobbles seem to be gone.

The 50 cals are in more of a stream too, but I am undecided if this is just a graphical change or they are actually desynched properly. I was having trouble hitting with them compared to the 2 50s on the Spit 9e. (50 cals are real sniper weapons on the Spitfire) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>get going about 170 mph increase power and turn right,left or pull up you will figure it out http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

edgflyer
02-09-2006, 02:42 PM
Well, this is grim news. I hope that I can prove you wrong when I get a chance.

lbhskier37
02-09-2006, 02:48 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by fordfan25:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by edgflyer:
Yeah, but is the flight model realy worse than before. I am work and havn't been able to try it out. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>i will say that with my controle's its turning is FAR worse than it has ever been. it is more stable now. what ever you do in a dog fiht now, do NOT use landing flaps thay act like dive breaks and will kill you 4 sure. as long as you NEVER try to dog fight anything other than a b17 you will be ok http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif Landing flaps had a use in combat before? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

Tator_Totts
02-09-2006, 02:52 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">get going about 170 mph increase power and turn right,left or pull up you will figure it out </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yes that has been the show stopper for me.

TooCooL34
02-09-2006, 02:53 PM
Don't listen to naysayers who don't know how to fly.
P-51D is way better now.
Wooble has gone.
.50 cal tracers unsynced and brighter.
Short of engine power is old story.
Wing doesn't break easily like before.
Turning? time for 2 360deg turn is about 35sec. Anyone really need sPit-51? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif(109G-6a/s 34sec)
This is what I wanted to fly. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

edgflyer
02-09-2006, 02:57 PM
Like I said, I hope to prove them wrong. I am not one to worry whether or not I can out turn someone, more to fighting than turning. What I worry about is the nergy bleed problem that nobody ever talks about. I need to find out for myself.

fordfan25
02-09-2006, 03:01 PM
E bleeds in a turn VERY fast now. as far as leveling out after a dive or small or short easy turns i have no idea.

fordfan25
02-09-2006, 03:02 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by TooCooL34:
Don't listen to naysayers who don't know how to fly.
P-51D is way better now.
Wooble has gone.
.50 cal tracers unsynced and brighter.
Short of engine power is old story.
Wing doesn't break easily like before.
Turning? time for 2 360deg turn is about 35sec. Anyone really need sPit-51? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif(109G-6a/s 34sec)
This is what I wanted to fly. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

ask gibbage weather i know how to fly http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Covino
02-09-2006, 03:10 PM
p-51 finally realistic... much to the dismay of the pony riders.

Xiolablu3
02-09-2006, 03:13 PM
I only took it for a quick spin but found it much improved.

I took on a FW190A6 and a 109G2 on ace AI and beat them. I never spun out or anything like that. If I got into trouble I extended and came back.

TooCooL34
02-09-2006, 03:14 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by fordfan25:
ask gibbage weather i know how to fly http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I don't need to.
You certainly miss something, be sure. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif
Ask gibbage? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

edgflyer
02-09-2006, 03:18 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
I only took it for a quick spin but found it much improved.

I took on a FW190A6 and a 109G2 on ace AI and beat them. I never spun out or anything like that. If I got into trouble I extended and came back. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is what I am looking to hear. I can't wait to try it. I have been flying this plane almost exclusive since the AEP so if the snap stall seems to be gone then I can't wait to see.

fordfan25
02-09-2006, 03:51 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Covino:
p-51 finally realistic... much to the dismay of the pony riders. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>suuuuuuuure

fordfan25
02-09-2006, 03:52 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by TooCooL34:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by fordfan25:
ask gibbage weather i know how to fly http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I don't need to.
You certainly miss something, be sure. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif
Ask gibbage? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>hu? what did i miss?

Jetbuff
02-09-2006, 04:38 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by lbhskier37:
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif Landing flaps had a use in combat before? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
News to me too... I hardly use combat flaps! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Kocur_
02-09-2006, 05:27 PM
I spent a while in P-51D online today.

First short burst at Bf-109K4 crippled it, the second lit it up.
Did some turning and keeping reasonable speed and stick deflections - felt confident in it - UNLIKE 4.02!
Cought Do-335 in shallow dive and prolonged deck chase - with radiator closed early on and some serious overheat.

After that short flying - I certainly do prefer 4.03 P-51D over 4.02 one!

Grey_Mouser67
02-09-2006, 09:03 PM
The Mustang is a changed plane....

It is early to tell and only online fighting will be able to tell me how it really performs but it has its nasty slow speed stall/flip but the high speed accelarated stall has seem to have gone away.

It feels like it bleeds energy/mushes like the old Fw...which is probably accurate as long as it doesn't mush too easy. I fear that it will have a poor turn radius, but no way to tell yet. Its climb rate has been under acheiving for serveral patches and I don't think this was addressed...hopefully Target and some of the other climb testers will comment at some point.

I've only flown the D so far and I don't think any harm was done to the aircraft and it seems to handle better at speed....soon we will tell.

The wobbles are still there for me, but they are slightly dampened...I can notice the difference but still feels wobbly compared to other aircraft...it is better, but not great imho.

Enforcer572005
02-09-2006, 09:11 PM
but is the engine still made of glass? Can you actually take some damage now without the prop freezing from a single 7.92mm bullet?

Maybe now i can fly those 51 cmpns i wondered about.

ucanfly
02-09-2006, 10:02 PM
Wobble magnitude and period reduced for me in D model. Seems more controllable in 4.03. Tracers easier to see perhaps cus they are now a steady stream. Need to test more and compare with other a/c.

VW-IceFire
02-09-2006, 10:14 PM
I only briefly tested the Mustang in this patch but what I saw was extremely encouraging.

I flew a P-51D-20 against the new N1K-2J. Those AI put up a solid fight and I managed to down two of them for two Mustangs lost from the other section.

The massive wobble is gone! The aircraft responds much more like you would expect it to. Stall departure is still very nasty and I'm not sure if thats right or not but its harder to stall than before simply because the aircraft isn't wobbling on all 3 axis all the time.

The result is that I'm much more confident with the aircraft. If you keep it fast and happy it seems to do its thing again... And the .50cal makes things much easier to aim with.

VW-IceFire
02-09-2006, 10:14 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Enforcer572005:
but is the engine still made of glass? Can you actually take some damage now without the prop freezing from a single 7.92mm bullet?

Maybe now i can fly those 51 cmpns i wondered about. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Maybe just a fluke but I took a pair of Type99 20mm rounds in the engine during my test flight and it was still spinning...although it died about 6 minutes later. Thats what you'd expect.

jds1978
02-09-2006, 10:30 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">The result is that I'm much more confident with the aircraft. If you keep it fast and happy it seems to do its thing again... And the .50cal makes things much easier to aim with. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


thats my take as well

keep it fast and it performs great

fordfan25
02-09-2006, 11:54 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
I only took it for a quick spin but found it much improved.

I took on a FW190A6 and a 109G2 on ace AI and beat them. I never spun out or anything like that. If I got into trouble I extended and came back. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>taking on ace AI is no kinda beanch mark i can regulerly take out 4 ace AT 109ks in a p47 with ease. thats not a challenge

msalama
02-09-2006, 11:55 PM
Hmmm... just tried the D series in QMB - y'know, just some ground attack / strafing stuff w/ bombs... and yes, the stability IS improved a lot! I actually noticed to my surprise that it's a very accurate ground attack weapon at the moment, easier to manouvre than the Jug f.ex.

Yeah, my tiny thoughts only, but it _seems_ to be improved nevertheless at least in this regard...

Badsight.
02-10-2006, 12:26 AM
yet another Ford Fan thread !

going as per norm here Ford Fan : ))))

TC_Stele
02-10-2006, 01:04 AM
Took the Mk III for a spin online tonight and the snap stall is not as violent and is rare if handled well. The turns are sharper with the high speed maintained. The difference between 4.03 and 4.02 is very apparent, and the desynced guns are a bonus. Managed to get deflection shots all night while burning up zeros' wings.

I havnt tried the D yet.

GR142-Pipper
02-10-2006, 02:55 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by fordfan25:
E bleeds in a turn VERY fast now. as far as leveling out after a dive or small or short easy turns i have no idea. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>The P-51 was very weak in 4.01/4.02 and I agree that the energy bleed is as you say (lousy). The plane is more stable but just doesn't seem to have enough attributes left to make it viable for much of anything. Oh well, it doesn't surprise me.

GR142-Pipper

Bearcat99
02-10-2006, 06:13 AM
I wont say much more than this untill I can test this thing farther... and as most of you know I dont complain much...... and as always.. I will continue to fly the Mustang because I like it..... but do this... get in a P-51D in the QMB at 7500 meters... fly straight and level.... open up your throttle all the way.... set you pitch to whatever RPM you want..... go from 100 to say 75% if you like. Trim up, center the ball the whole 9. Even set your MP a little lower.. go to the redline... go a little above it... mix up the thottle pitch however you want to.... See if you can reach 350mph in straight and level flight. Now maybe if I had tried it for more than 15 minutes I might have gotten there.... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

danjama
02-10-2006, 06:18 AM
I hear ya Bear, lets just leave it at that...

Bearcat99
02-10-2006, 06:28 AM
I think if it took the P-51 that long to get to 350 mph in straight flight clean at that altitude.... we would have had a lot more dead airmen. I know we cant duplicate everything exactly.. but can we get close..... or at least not go backwards.

Hristo_
02-10-2006, 06:41 AM
IAS or TAS ?

350 mph IAS at 7500 m (24600 ft) equals to 518 mph TAS (a Me 262 territory).

jds1978
02-10-2006, 06:41 AM
at least we can shoot straight now (LOL)

Nigel_Woodman
02-10-2006, 07:12 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bearcat99:
I wont say much more than this untill I can test this thing farther... and as most of you know I dont complain much...... and as always.. I will continue to fly the Mustang because I like it..... but do this... get in a P-51D in the QMB at 7500 meters... fly straight and level.... open up your throttle all the way.... set you pitch to whatever RPM you want..... go from 100 to say 75% if you like. Trim up, center the ball the whole 9. Even set your MP a little lower.. go to the redline... go a little above it... mix up the thottle pitch however you want to.... See if you can reach 350mph in straight and level flight. Now maybe if I had tried it for more than 15 minutes I might have gotten there.... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The best I can get is 270 mph IAS. However, if IAS is converted to CAS, which I'm assuming is about a 5 to 10% gain, and CAS is converted to TAS, (assuming a standard atmosphere) I get a speed of 435.234 mph. This speed is almost precisely what is given in the P-51D specs.

The assumption I'm making is a 7% calibration correction, which would be typical. I don't have a P-51 pilot manual, but maybe someone does and can provide the precise figure.

Until then, I'm assuming the P-51 performance is pretty close to spec.

Hristo_
02-10-2006, 07:15 AM
If this was really a IAS/TAS confusion, it may speak a lot of other noted "anomalies" http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif.

ImpStarDuece
02-10-2006, 07:26 AM
Quick 4.03 cockpit-off speed check for the P-51D-5 gives me:

602 kph/374 mph on the deck (maybe 1 mph too slower than the best 67" Hg sea level speed I've seen)

708 kph/439 mph at 7,500 meters (which is about 3 mph too slow, but still almost perfect, considering I was right at the bottom of the 24-28,000 foot top speed band)

Usual caveats about personal accuracy apply

Tests conditions were:

Crimea map,
noon,
clear weather,
wind on,
100% fuel,
auto prop pitch,
radiators closed,
ran engine 1 minute past overheat.

Bearcat99
02-10-2006, 08:35 AM
The P-51 is porked

LilHorse
02-10-2006, 10:05 AM
I don't fly P-51s very much but I decided to take up a D last night online to see how it did. I think it's pretty dang good. Fast, stable, and certainly keeps its speed with smooth, easy inputs. I don't care how many pages the Bud Anderson thread went to. I still say you'd be crazy to dogfight in the Pony IRL, in the sim, or in your dreams. I have to agree with some of the others who advise to keep it fast. I don't see how it isn't gonna be a killer in 4.03.

horseback
02-10-2006, 10:09 AM
Spent about an hour and a half in the virtual skies last night after installing the patch. I did my usual familiarization flight routine, and the Mustang is definitely better behaved. The tail waggle when firing my guns is gone. I found that coordinating the rudder and aileron inputs made the changes of direction progressively smoother and more accurate as I got used to the new FM. The Turn & Bank 'ball' seems to be a bit more reliable now, too, albeit slow.

The Pony seems a bit faster as well, managing a consistant 300-310 IAS 'on the deck', as compared to the 4.02 version's 270-280 mph IAS, using 80% throttle and varying the Prop Pitch from 50%-65%.

The Corsair was not quite so well treated, IMO. The trim is still a bit hard to set, particularly for the elevator, and that barn door of a rudder needs a lot of care in application-it seems overeffective to me, even with the sensitivities down in the low teens for the first three settings. You may have to add a bit of extra yaw filtering for this bird.

There seems to me to be a bit of additional tail waggle when firing the Corsair's guns now, too. I'll have to fly it again in my saved 4.02 version for a more concise comparison.

The Spitfire Mk VIII seems about the same as its 4.02 version, and although the gunfire 'waggle' is a bit more subdued, it still seems excessive to me.

Haven't had a chance to get to the LW or Soviet birds yet; I think I'm going to do a detailed comparison to 4.02 FMs to a number of aircraft on both my Athlon/Nvidia machine and my P4/ATI machine this weekend. Starting Saturday morning -- Battlestar Galactica is on tonight.

Number 6 waits for no man...

cheers

horseback

lrrp22
02-10-2006, 10:12 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ImpStarDuece:
Quick 4.03 cockpit-off speed check for the P-51D-5 gives me:

602 kph/374 mph on the deck (maybe 1 mph too slower than the best 67" Hg sea level speed I've seen)
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yeah, but that was with wing racks and radiators partially open! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif However, while very legitimate, 375 mph at 67" Hg with racks is definitely at the absolute upper end of tested P-51 perofmance, as is the 442 mph at 26,000 ft. I think P-51D speed is modeled almost perfectly at this point.

LRRP

BTW, the Mustang III's speeds appear to have been corrected too. I topped out at around 720 kph at 7400m.

msalama
02-10-2006, 10:35 AM
My impression too, the D at least is much much better than it used to be! The Mussie ain't my main ride at all, but I of course had to check it out after all these whines about the previous version http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

BC: don't worry, happens to all of us http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Bearcat99
02-10-2006, 11:27 PM
After further review I take back all those hammers... the Mustang is porked... KIAS.... TAS.. its all moot.... the plane wont go above 400.... it turns like a pig.. cant catch jack... cant hit jack.... its porked. In some ways it has improved but in the ways that count... it is worse than in 4.02. More stable sure.. but if you cant catch anything. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

UCLANUPE
02-10-2006, 11:54 PM
It has never been good in this sim, but the current version is the worst yet. Putting it in missions is a liability. Sad but true. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif

fordfan25
02-11-2006, 12:09 AM
i agree. you cant run,dive,climb or turn. its high alt top speed is good but takes far to long to get there. i wish thay would worry less about puting in all these silly never flew or aonly a hand full ever built planes and get the DM/FM's on ALL planes a little closer. but what ever after 3+ years iv made up my mind and have given up to tell the truth. at least it did not take 3 more years to get 50's right http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif i think the only resone i keep playing as much as i do is because i injoy comeing here and talking to the majority of you guys ..... even you badsight http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

TheGozr
02-11-2006, 12:11 AM
Thx.

Xiolablu3
02-11-2006, 12:22 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by fordfan25:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
I only took it for a quick spin but found it much improved.

I took on a FW190A6 and a 109G2 on ace AI and beat them. I never spun out or anything like that. If I got into trouble I extended and came back. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>taking on ace AI is no kinda beanch mark i can regulerly take out 4 ace AT 109ks in a p47 with ease. thats not a challenge </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sorry that wasnt meant to sound like a chest beating exercise. I meant to add that I couldnt do that easily before 4.03, certainly not first time.

Bearcat99
02-11-2006, 01:03 AM
It has improved in some ways.... but E retention, acceleration.. which was already flawed IMO, speed... which effects stability and the guns are all porked now. I just hope that 1C has the time to correct this. I am not going to come at anyone with charts and all that jazz.. and I dont expect it to live up to every pilot's account of what he did in the war.. but as it is it wont live up to any of them. Not one.

GR142-Pipper
02-11-2006, 04:25 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bearcat99:
The P-51 is porked </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Agreed. While it was weak in 4.01/4.02, it's been reduced to complete junk now. No speed, no acceleration...nothing. What a shame. C'mon Maddox...you're capable of MUCH better.

GR142-Pipper

Brain32
02-11-2006, 04:52 AM
First patch night, I was at WarClouds and all I hear was P51 being praised, how good is his manouverbility, how it's stable, how it's fast.
I come to ubi after 2 days and it's porked again...

PBNA-Boosher
02-11-2006, 05:27 AM
My question:

What have you been doing with the plane? Maybe you need to alter your fighting style with it Bearcat. When I fly the P-51D I usually turn with my rudder, and possibly a 15-30 degree bank, but I don't pull back on the stick. I let the plane turn wide with itself.

I'll check out the 51B, C, D-5, and D-20NA and see what I think, but the issue here might just be a need for a change in combat tactics.

Kocur_
02-11-2006, 05:39 AM
From comparing results of my rough tests of SL acceleration I can tell that P-51D of 4.02 and 4.03 accelerate in above conditions equally.

But I have serious doubts of more general nature. The main 'thing' about Mustang is its low drag, which resulted in exceeding Spitfires horizontal speed by 50kmh+ with the same engine. Acceleration depends on weight/power ratio of course. Naturally P-51 with max fuel load would be far heavier than Spit, yet they didnt always have all that fuel there. So I wonder what would we get if we took data on weights: of Spitfire with full internal load and P-51 with minimal load and detailed data on RR Merlin and Packard V-1650 outputs at certain alts and tried to assess their acceleration in such conditions and then compared it to in-game results. We surely have some experts on P-51, Spitfire and aeorodynamics in these boards!

Badsight.
02-11-2006, 07:01 AM
WW2 planes are horribly draggy

their wings stick straight out sideways into the airflow - they have huge fans on the nose right in the path of the airflow

weight matters when it comes to accelleration , but moreso for the airplanes , which are already ripping thru the air at 250 kmh+ . . . . . is Drag

& the Mustang was low drag

Kocur_
02-11-2006, 07:27 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Badsight.:

weight matters when it comes to accelleration , but moreso for the airplanes , which are already ripping thru the air at 250 kmh+ . . . . . is Drag

& the Mustang was low drag </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yup, thats what I mean. We would need Spitfire with the same power as a P-51 and make their weights as close to each other as possible, i.e. loading Spit fully (internally) and make P-51 as light as possible. Which might be quite close, as according to my data (and P-51 experts would present better surely) P-51B empty weight was 3150kg, while early Spitfire IX t/o weight was 3380kg IIUC data from here (http://www.spitfireperformance.com/ab197.html). That would leave enough margin to fuel P-51 for test and keep weights of both planes equal. In above conditions P-51, having considerably lower drag (http://www.anycities.com/user/j22/j22/aero.htm) than Spitfire should beat it easy in acceleration at any speed! What I mean is to determine if P-51 is or is not porked in terms of acceleration per se in the game.

Slickun
02-11-2006, 07:42 AM
We know the P-51's acceleration rate.

In America's Hundred Thousand, by Dean, there is a nice chart showing the accelerations of many US types.

It can be figured very easily if one knows the atmospheric pressure, weight, thrust, and drag of the airplane in question. The drag is the hard one, I'm not sure the drag coefficient of every WW2 plane is known. We DO know the P-51's.

Basically the P-51D at 67" hg accelerated very well for a US type, about the same as a P-47M and P-38J, slightly less.

Mustangs at higher boosts benefitted greatly because of their low drag. Th P-51D at 80 or 81" hg accelerated better than the P-38L at 1725 hp, and the Mustang III at 81" hg better than that.

From almost 4 fps/ps to over 5 fps/ps, depending on boost and model.

All the above figured at sealevel, and 250 mph starting speed.

Bottom line is that the Pony accelerated very well compared to other allied types.

OldMan____
02-11-2006, 07:50 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kocur_:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Badsight.:

weight matters when it comes to accelleration , but moreso for the airplanes , which are already ripping thru the air at 250 kmh+ . . . . . is Drag

& the Mustang was low drag </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yup, thats what I mean. We would need Spitfire with the same power as a P-51 and make their weights as close to each other as possible, i.e. loading Spit fully (internally) and make P-51 as light as possible. Which might be quite close, as according to my data (and P-51 experts would present better surely) P-51B empty weight was 3150kg, while early Spitfire IX t/o weight was 3380kg IIUC data from here (http://www.spitfireperformance.com/ab197.html). That would leave enough margin to fuel P-51 for test and keep weights of both planes equal. In above conditions P-51, having considerably lower drag (http://www.anycities.com/user/j22/j22/aero.htm) than Spitfire should beat it easy in acceleration at any speed! What I mean is to determine if P-51 is or is not porked in terms of acceleration per se in the game. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Or maybe both P51 is worse than it shoudl and Spit is better than it should.

Kocur_
02-11-2006, 08:21 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Slickun:
We know the P-51's acceleration rate.

In America's Hundred Thousand, by Dean, there is a nice chart showing the accelerations of many US types.

It can be figured very easily if one knows the atmospheric pressure, weight, thrust, and drag of the airplane in question. The drag is the hard one, I'm not sure the drag coefficient of every WW2 plane is known. We DO know the P-51's.

Basically the P-51D at 67" hg accelerated very well for a US type, about the same as a P-47M and P-38J, slightly less.

Mustangs at higher boosts benefitted greatly because of their low drag. Th P-51D at 80 or 81" hg accelerated better than the P-38L at 1725 hp, and the Mustang III at 81" hg better than that.

From almost 4 fps/ps to over 5 fps/ps, depending on boost and model.

All the above figured at sealevel, and 250 mph starting speed.

Bottom line is that the Pony accelerated very well compared to other allied types. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Great that this data is available, but well, RL data and this game not always meet. Also I suppose those tests were made with full load - which is far less than norm on servers. Moreover its more about relative performance of different planes in the game.

So does anybody have data on power outputs of P-51 Merlins vs. those in Spitfire(s)IX, hopefully at the same alts?

Skyraider3D
02-11-2006, 08:57 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by anarchy52:
Well, I don't know who will ride a pony when they have tempest that beats it in everything at least under 4k. Roll, dive, zoom, firepower, toughness, even turn (which is a bit odd). </div></BLOCKQUOTE>I had great fun with the Mustang Mk.III yesterday. It outspeeds anything on the deck. The .50 cals are annoyingly ineffective but you can get the occasional pilot kill with it. 25% fuel is enough for a long, long combat http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Grey_Mouser67
02-11-2006, 09:32 AM
The real Mustang was a plane that was...

fast...flew 440 give or take at 25,000 ft give or take

Smooth...had great handling qualities, however it did require trimming and at slow speed had a bit of a snap stall.

Low Drag...best in class...best of any WWII aircraft probably...it could retain its speed better than any and had less parasitic drag so as speed increased, drag did not increase like in other aircraft.

Innovative Radiator: It had an automatic radiator...its top speeds were acheived with radiator in "auto"...no need to close it. It did not suffer from the same penalties.

Good turner...not great, but wingloading similar to a 109 and great at high speed, good at medium and not so good at low...but not bad either.

Climb...climbed at 3600 fpm at sea level...current Mustang is undermodelled by about 300 fmp....not its best asset....but it retained its climb rate at high altitude..and above 20,000 ft., it could outclimb most Luftwaffe aircraft of the era.

Visability...bubble cockpit...best in class bar none...a veritable fishbowl...does not translate in this game with the overgrown pilot armor.

Roll rate/controls: light and effective and from a relative standpoint, stayed that way as speed increased...its roll rate and elevator effectiveness were very, very good at high speed...

Guns: A whole debate, but in real life, they were very effective, easy to aim and pilots liked them.

Dive: The Mustang was best in class...even better than the Jug. The only aircraft that could compete was the Tempest. Low drag is what allows its dive speed and when it levels out, due to low drag, it decelarates slower than any aircraft.

Accelaration...already written about...good, not great!


The bottom line is that the Mustang had very few combat deficiencies...it was good in most categories and great in terms of drag, high speed manuevering, top speed, altitude performance, visability , dive performance...this was enough to allow it to dominate the skies. Until the in game Mustang fits this description reasonably closely, I doubt the debate will stop.

Sounds like we have opportunities in e bleed, accelaration, dive performance, drag and radiator management.

fordfan25
02-11-2006, 10:45 AM
i checked out its E bleed after diveing. the FW a8 lose's E slower when leveled out.

gkll
02-11-2006, 10:48 AM
I am not sure that people should expect too much from the pony in terms of 'e-retention'. The whole plane is optimized aero wise for low straightline drag, best in class? Could be... however, this does not necessarily translate to good 'turning drag'.

The wing profile (so called 'laminar flow') is optimized for low high speed drag, however it means lower speed lift is compromised, add to this the wing loading and you have a ship which will go like a bat in straight lines, but which will need a lot of AOA to pull g's at low to moderate speeds. This AOA will put the drag up very rapidly. So a few hard turns and you burn a lot of e....

Spit by comparison has those big fat draggy rads.... straightline they hurt. Big wing area and conventional (non-'laminar flow')profile also adds straightline high speed drag. And indeed the pony is significantly faster in a straightline. However in a turn the big planform, low wing loading, lighter total mass, and conventional wing profile seem to create (for the spit that is) a 'best in class' lift over drag relationship, at least at speeds over 300 or so. Elliptical wings also help (a bit) in this arena (hard turning with significant AOA.... spit wings seen head on look like nice pointy little diamonds...)

Maybe don't expect too much out of the pony in low to moderate turn speeds. It is best in class for straightline drag, not turning drag. Same factors will tell against pony in climb rates, they are typically achieved at low speeds, below the ponies optimum lift over drag range.

I don't know about the other factors being discussed, but have been mulling over the spit and comparing it to some other birds, as a spit fanboy I would like to believe (have come to believe...)that the lift over drag relationship of spit is best in class for a significant 'dog fighting' speed range, hence the oft complained about 'spit e retention'. Pony was designed with other priorities, and shows it.

GR142-Pipper
02-11-2006, 12:03 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Grey_Mouser67:
Low Drag...best in class...best of any WWII aircraft probably...it could retain its speed better than any and had less parasitic drag so as speed increased, drag did not increase like in other aircraft. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Small point of clarification. Drag due to speed increase is called induced drag (caused by increased lift). Parasitic drag is that caused by hanging things off of the aircraft (to wit: bombs, racks, etc.). Good post Grey_Mauser and I agree with your comments.

GR142-Pipper

Bearcat99
02-11-2006, 12:10 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Grey_Mouser67:
The real Mustang was a plane that was...

fast...flew 440 give or take at 25,000 ft give or take

Smooth...had great handling qualities, however it did require trimming and at slow speed had a bit of a snap stall.

Low Drag...best in class...best of any WWII aircraft probably...it could retain its speed better than any and had less parasitic drag so as speed increased, drag did not increase like in other aircraft.

Innovative Radiator: It had an automatic radiator...its top speeds were acheived with radiator in "auto"...no need to close it. It did not suffer from the same penalties.

Good turner...not great, but wingloading similar to a 109 and great at high speed, good at medium and not so good at low...but not bad either.

Climb...climbed at 3600 fpm at sea level...current Mustang is undermodelled by about 300 fmp....not its best asset....but it retained its climb rate at high altitude..and above 20,000 ft., it could outclimb most Luftwaffe aircraft of the era.

Visability...bubble cockpit...best in class bar none...a veritable fishbowl...does not translate in this game with the overgrown pilot armor.

Roll rate/controls: light and effective and from a relative standpoint, stayed that way as speed increased...its roll rate and elevator effectiveness were very, very good at high speed...

Guns: A whole debate, but in real life, they were very effective, easy to aim and pilots liked them.

Dive: The Mustang was best in class...even better than the Jug. The only aircraft that could compete was the Tempest. Low drag is what allows its dive speed and when it levels out, due to low drag, it decelarates slower than any aircraft.

Accelaration...already written about...good, not great!


The bottom line is that the Mustang had very few combat deficiencies...it was good in most categories and great in terms of drag, high speed manuevering, top speed, altitude performance, visability , dive performance...this was enough to allow it to dominate the skies. Until the in game Mustang fits this description reasonably closely, I doubt the debate will stop.

Sounds like we have opportunities in e bleed, accelaration, dive performance, drag and radiator management. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not to mention the guns....
I would like nothing more than to eat my words..... and as most of you klnow I have no problems at all admitting when I am wrong. In this case I dont think I am.


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by PBNA-Boosher:
My question:
What have you been doing with the plane? Maybe you need to alter your fighting style with it Bearcat. When I fly the P-51D I usually turn with my rudder, and possibly a 15-30 degree bank, but I don't pull back on the stick. I let the plane turn wide with itself.

I'll check out the 51B, C, D-5, and D-20NA and see what I think, but the issue here might just be a need for a change in combat tactics. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes but the D was no slouch. I am in an ongoing labor to try to find a sweet spot if any.. but I havent found one yet.

Slickun
02-11-2006, 01:54 PM
What E retention are we talking about? Zoom climb? Retaining speed after a dive?

If so, why oh why wouldn't a heavier plane with less drag zoom and keep excess speed after a dive better than a lighter and draggier plane?

Keeping energy after or during turning/maneuvering is a bit different story.

Oh yea, Mouser. Nice post. All those things are also attributes that were found to be important in shooting down planes in WW2. Low speed turning was not.