PDA

View Full Version : P-51 outturns Spitfire now



JtD
05-22-2004, 02:42 AM
Great News!

Since the P-51 low speed handling was oh-so undermodelled before, 1C decided to improve it a lot. Now you can turn a lightweight P-51D in 18 seconds continously. This will leave even the Spitfire in the dust, which turns slightly worse at 18.1. Also, while the Merlin in the Spitfire develops some heat with open/auto radiators, the P-51's Merlin doesn't even with radiator closed.

This is very nice, because it matches no historical reports that can be found on the subject and gives everyone with an inability in piloting, gunnery and tactics an excellent weapon.

Boy, I am pissed, the P-51 is totally screwed now.

JtD
05-22-2004, 02:42 AM
Great News!

Since the P-51 low speed handling was oh-so undermodelled before, 1C decided to improve it a lot. Now you can turn a lightweight P-51D in 18 seconds continously. This will leave even the Spitfire in the dust, which turns slightly worse at 18.1. Also, while the Merlin in the Spitfire develops some heat with open/auto radiators, the P-51's Merlin doesn't even with radiator closed.

This is very nice, because it matches no historical reports that can be found on the subject and gives everyone with an inability in piloting, gunnery and tactics an excellent weapon.

Boy, I am pissed, the P-51 is totally screwed now.

Hunde_3.JG51
05-22-2004, 02:47 AM
If it makes you feel any better I found that the P-51D with 50% fuel is capable of 598km/h at sea-level under Oleg's testing conditions. That is only about 5 km/h slower than FW-190D and FW-190A-9.

Wait a minute, that won't make you feel beter at all...

http://www.militaryartshop.com/prints/bailey/warwolf.jpg

Formerly Kyrule2
http://www.jg51.com/

VF-2_John_Banks
05-22-2004, 02:52 AM
I flew the P51B and D yesterday and can confirm it. They are agile as hell now and i can even outturn a 109F with the B. They don't even stall as easily as they used to. From all sources i know of, the P-51 wasn't the best turner down low. The laminar profile was optimized for high speed high alt flying, not T'n'Bin'. Feels a bit odd IMO.

kubanloewe
05-22-2004, 02:58 AM
who needs 50% fuel in a Pony when it flies 35min. with 100%Power at sealevel with 25% Fuel ? 109G only 13-15min.

and 660kmh TAS in 3000m in a P51 is not bad I think http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

http://home.arcor.de/kubanskiloewe/g14gutspruchsig.jpg
"Finde den Feind und schiesse ihn ab alles andere ist Unsinn"
Rittmeister Freiherr Manfred von Richthofen

kubanloewe
05-22-2004, 03:02 AM
before the Patch the P51B/C was a bit faster than the D Modells and now the D20 reaches 670kmh TAS in 3400m ?? LOL

http://home.arcor.de/kubanskiloewe/g14gutspruchsig.jpg
"Finde den Feind und schiesse ihn ab alles andere ist Unsinn"
Rittmeister Freiherr Manfred von Richthofen

LuftLuver
05-22-2004, 03:05 AM
I agree. Let's all go play LoMac.

http://www.internetcash.com/en/images/baby-crying.jpg

""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
"All your bases are belong to us."

VFA-195 Snacky
05-22-2004, 03:19 AM
Exactly! Knock of all the damn whining. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

http://www.x-plane.org/users/531seawolf/b_a_presidential_first.jpg
"Navy1, Call the Ball- Roger Ball."


**Opinions expressed are not those of UbiSoft or Eagle Dynamics**

Maj_Death
05-22-2004, 03:24 AM
We will knock off the whining when Oleg's crew releases believable flight models.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maj_Death here, Stab.I/JG1Death at HL

I build COOPs and DF maps. If you would like some of them you can get them atmy COOP page (http://www14.brinkster.com/triggerhappy770/default.htm)

I/JG1 Oesau is recruiting axis pilots who prefer to fly maximum realism. We accept both veterans and rookies. We fly in VEF2, VOW and may join other online wars in the future. Go to our forums at http://www.jg1-oesau.org/ for more details and to apply.
http://www.bestanimations.com/Humans/Skulls/Skull-06.gif

Kwiatos
05-22-2004, 03:51 AM
P -51 FM dont change in patch probably. Pony turn like hell at slow speed with AEP. Before AEP in version 1.2 slow speed handling of pony was more accurate - P-51 turn at slow speed between BF109 and Fw 190. Now in AEP (2.0, 2.1) P-51 at slow speed turn like BF.

BBB_Hyperion
05-22-2004, 04:16 AM
18 seconds wow would turn better as a standard la7 then ? and only 2 seconds over zero .) A great turnfighter and now 600 km/h on the deck same as ta152(which is questionable as well) also turntime is the same almost (what is correct for ta).

Regards,
Hyperion

Red_Storm
05-22-2004, 04:50 AM
Oleg said that he would use the best findable FM data for American planes, to counter all the "US-whining". You're now looking at a result of that. He's using US resources with the best possible performance data.

---
http://server6.uploadit.org/files/RedStorm-sig.JPG

SeaFireLIV
05-22-2004, 04:56 AM
There`s an old Aesop fable about what happens when you keep chopping and changing everything to please everyone..... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

Kurfurst__
05-22-2004, 05:13 AM
The most sad of all, that things like this just sc**w up the nicest prop sim totally...

Because who the HELL heard about a P-51D climbing at 4500 fpm, outturning Spitties and having the awfully forgiving stall characteristics like it does in V2.1 ?!!

It just sc**ws up the feeling of my goods against your bads, and the one who better employs these wins... turns the game into arcade and deprieves of it`s historical sense.

And I would say the same if 109s would start to do 200 deg/sec rolls at 500mph in the next patch...

http://www.x-plane.org/users/isegrim/fat-furred%20tigerB.jpg

"We've got the finest tanks in the world. We just love to see the German Royal Tiger come up on the field".
- Lt. Gen. George S. Patton, Jr. Febuary 1945.

"One day a Tiger Royal got within 150 yards of my tanks and knocked me out. Five of our tanks opened up on him at ranges of 200 to 600 yards and got 5 or 6 hits on the front of the Tiger. They all just glanced off and the Tiger backed off and got away. If we had a tank like that Tiger, we would all be home today."
- Sgt. Clyde D. Brunson, US Army, Tank Commander, February 1945

CaptainGelo
05-22-2004, 05:31 AM
its all made to please US guys,but they keep whinning that US planes undermodelt... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/52.gif

'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' '''
http://www.danasoft.com/sig/oleg86.jpg
'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' '''


plane is 2slow, guns are 2weak and DM suck?...Then click here (http://www.hmp16.com/hotstuff/downloads/Justin%20Timberlake%20-%20Cry%20Me%20A%20River.mp3) | Fear british army. (http://216.144.230.195/Videos/Medium_WMP8/British_Attack.wmv)

http://img23.photobucket.com/albums/v68/wolf4ever/Animation3.gif
"Big Bills suck, small Bills don't"<----WRONG!!!! all Bills suck http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Eagle_361st
05-22-2004, 06:28 AM
I see the goose stepping rally is going well.
http://home.comcast.net/~smconlon/wsb/media/245357/site1066.jpg

~S!
Eagle
Commanding Officer 361st vFG
www.361stvfg.com (http://www.361stvfg.com)
http://home.comcast.net/~smconlon/wsb/media/245357/site1079.jpg

Curly_109
05-22-2004, 06:36 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
There`s an old Aesop fable about what happens when you keep chopping and changing everything to please everyone..... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/11.gif

FA_Maddog
05-22-2004, 06:39 AM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Eagle_361st:
I see the goose stepping rally is going well.

~S!
Eagle
Commanding Officer 361st vFG


LMAO http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif I also see that they offer no proof to backup their claims.

Maple_Tiger
05-22-2004, 06:43 AM
You guys might want to take a look at the BF109K4.

It will out turn a spit fire and the P-51.


Sustained turn on the deck 190km/h with combat flaps. (50% fuel)

Spitfire sustained turn on the deck with combat flaps, 210km/h. (50% fuel)

P-51D20NA sustained turn with combat flaps, 230km/h. (25% fuel)



Before you say anything about the P-51D, you should take a look at the planes you fly. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif


Im sorry guys but the German planes are The Noob planes. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Capt. 361stMapleTiger.
http://img52.photobucket.com/albums/v158/Maple_Tiger/FBAA2.gif
Proud member of the FBAA and Nutty Philosohpy Club.

LeadSpitter_
05-22-2004, 06:52 AM
wahhhhh the crying luftwaffa whiners I cant wait till they fix the damn g2s arcadish fm, 190s move like 1000 lb 700hp aerobatics aircraft. So do yaks and spitfires.


I fly the german planes most and they can definatly outturn the p51, you people are just complete whiners now that the auto/manual prop pitch exploit was fixed, just shows you shouldnt be turn fighting in a 109 but bnzing and the 109s and 190s mantain energy better then they ever did.

You people wont be happy till all 109s fly like the yak.

I just had a 20 minute fight with a k4 in warclouds there is absolutly noway the mustang can out turn it, we met up at 7200m and were having a good fight then a ta152 jumped in so i dove down to 2000m and continued the fight with the k4, it wound up being a turn fight and he was definatly able to out turn me just slightly and i had full trim and landing flaps on, i started to stall first and his plane was able to hang in the air first

he said he was using 75 fuel and i had 25.

you luftwhiners are just made the exploit is gone with the 109s! the 190s are deadly as ever and do extremely well against russian british and us aircraft.

I cant believe you guys are talking about this. The german aircraft are still the best in the game, especially the dora and ta152 now


you people should fly all aircraft istead of just flying your favorite plane and never fly anything else.

The one thing I agree on is add compresibility to all aircraft or take it away from the few that have it.


now this thread is pure bs,

I suggest checking your rts settings it changed with the patch

heres what i use

[rts_joystick]
X=0 1 4 9 16 25 36 49 64 81 100 0
Y=0 1 4 9 16 25 36 49 64 81 100 0
Z=0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
RZ=0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0
FF=0
U=0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0
V=0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0
1X=0 25 50 75 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 10
1Y=0 25 50 75 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 10
1RZ=0 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 0
1U=0 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 0
1V=0 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 0
1RX=0 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 0

some of the best turners use 100 across the way jimmyjiro for example.

i see alot of you use filtering and slow 10 20 30 settings which is why your aircraft are not turning to the fullest.



lock like the .50 cal threads ivan

http://img14.photobucket.com/albums/v43/leadspitter/LSIG1.gif

[This message was edited by LeadSpitter_ on Sat May 22 2004 at 09:14 AM.]

VVS-Manuc
05-22-2004, 07:39 AM
lol...more and more "REALISTIC" FM's here...Arcade at it's best http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_mad.gif

JtD
05-22-2004, 07:46 AM
The P-51 FM was changed with 2.01. It now is faster and turns better.

I never made claims I couldn't support. I just couldn't imagine how blind some people apparently are to label everything that doesn't suit the limited picture of WW2 or IL-2 FB "whining", instead of doing some testing on their own and come back with an opinion. Obviously many prefer to stick with their arrogant, ignorant attitude.

This is track showing continued turning times of about 17.5 seconds for combat flaps and starting flaps on a P-51D. Sorry that turning isn't exactly level. I was in a hurry. I bet the majority won't downlaod this track anyway, because typing "whining" is much easier than actually downloading, starting the game, watching video, using a stop watch and so on.

http://mitglied.lycos.de/jaytdee/p51dturnsevenbetternow.trk

Please show me a track with a Spitfire Mk IX doing better.

Alternativly, show me a report that says the P-51 turns better than a Spitfire.

I can't believe there is any data showing less than 18 seconds turn for P-51's.

I am saying something about the P-51D, because this is a plane I want to fly. I am not dissing opponents. I don't care about opponents, I shoot them down. I care about my rides.

I am sorry I didn't have the time to test every other plane I fly. So far I can only believe they are overmodelled as well, but I don't KNOW.

If you have nothing to add to the subject, please shut up. My posts are not written for you.

Thank you.

Maple_Tiger
05-22-2004, 08:40 AM
I do have the time to test planes. I also don't just fly one plane.


Yes, i have a track.

Yes, all planes have a better sustained turn rate in 2.01.


I do have a track of the BF109K4 with 50% fuel, and a sustained turn 190km/h TAS.

I have another track with the SpitFire with 50% fule, and a sustained turn at 210km/h TAS.

And another track of the P-51D with 25% fuel, and a sustained turn at 230km/h TAS.



Your saying that the Pony is the plane you wan't to fly?


but yet all i see is Post's by JtD whining about the P-51D flight model. How it turns better then most planes and this and that.


Im sorry man, but your starting to sound like Huck.

Capt. 361stMapleTiger.
http://img52.photobucket.com/albums/v158/Maple_Tiger/FBAA2.gif
Proud member of the FBAA and Nutty Philosohpy Club.

jenikovtaw
05-22-2004, 09:43 AM
Now, do that in a 190A9!

http://www.theartofwarfare.net/ftp/graphics/sigs/EXT-jenikovtaw.jpg

VMF-214_HaVoK
05-22-2004, 09:52 AM
Why does so many people boast claims that the Mustang could not turn down low? It makes no sense at all that it could turn well at high alt in thin air and not as well if not better at low alt.
Not only that I have not heard or read one Mustang pilot make such claims. All of them felt the Mustang was superior to LW aircraft.

Earlier Mustangs performed very well at at low alt they were limited to high alt because of the engine. Once Merlin was installed that changed. People act as if the whole plane design was dramatically changed to perform at high alt.

So if you got some evidence that the Mustang could not turn with FWs or BFs post it now. And I mean real evidence.

=S=

http://www.flightjournal.com/fj/images/hellcat_head_short.jpg

www.vmf-214.net (http://www.vmf-214.net)
(The Original BlackSheep Squadron of IL-2/FB/AEP/PF)

Korolov
05-22-2004, 10:06 AM
Just where in the hell do all these pony gripes come from? Seems like we're getting a pony thread every week now. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

http://www.mechmodels.com/images/newsig1.jpg

Vipez-
05-22-2004, 10:14 AM
I hope the yank whiners are happy now then..

About the K-4.. i allways wondered how oleg made K-4 such a crappy turner, after all it had same weight as late 109Gs, with cleaner airframe and improved prop, and it was lowsier turner than G-14 and G-10.. I believe it should be best turner after 109F-4 and G-2 f..


__________________________


http://www.leosk.org/tiedostot/sig-pieni.jpg

LeadSpitter_
05-22-2004, 10:21 AM
I wonder why they are not crying about how good the 190d and ta152 http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif why because its a german plane.

They are great and see many people using them now.

I do agree the p51d has way to much elevator effect at high speed every single plane in this game should suffer from compressibility around 650kph, controls lock up and have to be trimmed to ease stick pressure.

There are many others that do too but its certainly not out turning the spitfire or g2

http://img14.photobucket.com/albums/v43/leadspitter/LSIG1.gif

VMF-214_HaVoK
05-22-2004, 10:22 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Korolov:
Just where in the hell do all these pony gripes come from? Seems like we're getting a pony thread every week now. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

http://www.mechmodels.com/images/newsig1.jpg <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Because people are dieing do to pilot error and blaming it on the Mustang being overmodeled which is ridiculous and the same people who complain about people complaining are getting there two cents in too.

Bottom line is that people in LW planes are dieing at the hands of a better pilot who just happens to be in a Mustang. IMO

=S=

http://www.flightjournal.com/fj/images/hellcat_head_short.jpg

www.vmf-214.net (http://www.vmf-214.net)
(The Original BlackSheep Squadron of IL-2/FB/AEP/PF)

VMF-214_HaVoK
05-22-2004, 10:27 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Vipez-:
I hope the yank whiners are happy now then..

About the K-4.. i allways wondered how oleg made K-4 such a crappy turner, after all it had same weight as late 109Gs, with cleaner airframe and improved prop, and it was lowsier turner than G-14 and G-10.. I believe it should be best turner after 109F-4 and G-2 f..


____________________________


http://www.leosk.org/tiedostot/sig-pieni.jpg <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

If you been around long enough like say original IL-2 then you would know that LW whiners far out# and exceed any type of US whining.

We finally get some justice and LW whiners cant take it because they are not happy unless they are killing undermodeled aircraft.

Take a look around HL. LW got rid of the VVS problem by pretty much eliminating them from all the big servers. Its US/Brit vs Ger in all the big well known servers. I wonder what they will do now....Ger vs Ger perhaps. Atleast that would stop there hippocritical behavior.

http://www.flightjournal.com/fj/images/hellcat_head_short.jpg

www.vmf-214.net (http://www.vmf-214.net)
(The Original BlackSheep Squadron of IL-2/FB/AEP/PF)

Kurfurst__
05-22-2004, 10:57 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Vipez-:
I hope the yank whiners are happy now then..

About the K-4.. i allways wondered how oleg made K-4 such a crappy turner, after all it had same weight as late 109Gs, with cleaner airframe and improved prop, and it was lowsier turner than G-14 and G-10.. I believe it should be best turner after 109F-4 and G-2 f..
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The 109K were heavier than 109Gs, but not by much, it wouldn`t make difference. G-14 and G-10 was almost the same weight within 50 kilograms, that`s basically nothing. And with it`s cleaner lines and great power it should keep up speed very long in turns.

But the reason Bf 109 turns are so much porked is the far too premature loss of elevator autority. Above 500 the plane is virtually unmanouverable and turns 50% worser it should... I have a German testpaper of 109K turning. Goes from 650 km/h start and does a hard 5 G turn while keeping level (banks at 78 degrees). It tooks just 24 seconds at 6000m. In AEP, guess what, 36-38 seconds, because the elevator is modelled much worser at high speed.

http://www.x-plane.org/users/isegrim/fat-furred%20tigerB.jpg

"We've got the finest tanks in the world. We just love to see the German Royal Tiger come up on the field".
- Lt. Gen. George S. Patton, Jr. Febuary 1945.

"One day a Tiger Royal got within 150 yards of my tanks and knocked me out. Five of our tanks opened up on him at ranges of 200 to 600 yards and got 5 or 6 hits on the front of the Tiger. They all just glanced off and the Tiger backed off and got away. If we had a tank like that Tiger, we would all be home today."
- Sgt. Clyde D. Brunson, US Army, Tank Commander, February 1945

LeadSpitter_
05-22-2004, 11:00 AM
The LA5 7s,lagg mig p38 controls lockup just the same why not mention them too

http://img14.photobucket.com/albums/v43/leadspitter/LSIG1.gif

AdEridanus
05-22-2004, 11:12 AM
Huh. No matter what changes are made by patches, I still seem to enjoy this game immensely.

I guess it must be something wrong with me. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

AnaK774
05-22-2004, 11:22 AM
Guess u r not competitive enough, Ad http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

AKA LeOs.K_Anak

KGr.HH-Sunburst
05-22-2004, 11:28 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LeadSpitter_:
The LA5 7s,lagg mig p38 controls lockup just the same why not mention them too

http://img14.photobucket.com/albums/v43/leadspitter/LSIG1.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


the La7 is a by FAR a better high speed turner in FB then a K4
both untrimmed at 600kph the la7 turns hoola hoops around a K4

http://www.freewebs.com/fightingpumas/
http://img31.photobucket.com/albums/v94/sunburst/sigp51-D9.jpg
''All your Mustangs are belong to us''

Korolov
05-22-2004, 11:34 AM
Nothing can compete with a P-47 or a Fw-190 in the high speed regime - 'nuff said!

I'll let you guys sort out this pony business, but chances are, Oleg already knows of the errors, if any.

http://www.mechmodels.com/images/newsig1.jpg

KGr.HH-Sunburst
05-22-2004, 11:35 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by VMF-214_HaVoK
If you been around long enough like say original IL-2 then you would know that LW whiners far out# and exceed any type of US whining.

We finally get some justice and LW whiners cant take it because they are not happy unless they are killing undermodeled aircraft.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>



ROFLMAO you crack me up http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/59.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/88.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/88.gif

hahah allieds get some justice LOL yes your right mister, axis planes before 2.01 outturned outrunned outclimbed outrolled ALL OTHER ALLIED PLANES
not to mention E bleed the axis dont seem to have .heck even a FW never loses its speed in a sustained turn man what a noob planes
CRY ME A RIVER http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/53.gif

sorry for putting the words in your mouth
but some of you really got this illusion http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/51.gif

http://www.freewebs.com/fightingpumas/
http://img31.photobucket.com/albums/v94/sunburst/sigp51-D9.jpg
''All your Mustangs are belong to us''

VF-2_John_Banks
05-22-2004, 12:15 PM
LeadSplitter. I flew the P-51C against some guys of a German Squad, so they knew their planes very good. They couldn't outturn me in their G2! I had to turn aginst 2 of them. We turned for ages low over the deck and they never got me. One of them was pissed and wondered, why they can't outturn the Stang anymore. So they noticed that too. Maybe the K can outturn the STangs but the G2 and G6 can't and i think the F series has a hard time too.

Maj_Death
05-22-2004, 12:51 PM
The P-51 before AEP was well modeled, in AEP it was slightly "noobified" but still ok. Now it does not reflect the real performance in any way. Ironically the russian planes are actually decently modeled for a change. From now on I will no longer host western front missions and stick with the russian front until the P-51 and P-47 are given semi-realistic performance. I will also take a look at the Ta-152 as it might be severly overmodeled as well. I have flown the D9 early a bit, it hasn't changed much and still matches its listed performance.

FYI, the P-51D5NT now has a top speed in excess of 595km/h TAS at sea level, it is listed as going 580km/h TAS at sea level according to the object viewer and that is ideal factory performance. Perhaps Oleg modeled us a P-51H and just didn't change the name in the plane list.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maj_Death here, Stab.I/JG1Death at HL

I build COOPs and DF maps. If you would like some of them you can get them atmy COOP page (http://www14.brinkster.com/triggerhappy770/default.htm)

I/JG1 Oesau is recruiting axis pilots who prefer to fly maximum realism. We accept both veterans and rookies. We fly in VEF2, VOW and may join other online wars in the future. Go to our forums at http://www.jg1-oesau.org/ for more details and to apply.
http://www.bestanimations.com/Humans/Skulls/Skull-06.gif

Hunde_3.JG51
05-22-2004, 12:59 PM
For the record, I don't know much about 109 and I have never once said that is is overmodelled or undermodelled in any way. I don't fly it much so I don't know. My only comment was about P-51D speed at SL, which I made a post about in ORR. In this thread I didn't say that the speed was wrong, I simply asked if it was boosted on purpose as was done with Ta-152H. Sorry if many take this as goose-stepping and whining but that is your problem, not mine.

It is funny though how all of the "luftwhiner" labeling and percieved pro-German accusations are applied to all, though when it comes to validating said labeling it is how the 109 is overmodelled. Not too many threads going around about overmodelled 190A turn rates, climb, speed, etc. Never have been.

http://www.militaryartshop.com/prints/bailey/warwolf.jpg

Formerly Kyrule2
http://www.jg51.com/

JtD
05-22-2004, 01:26 PM
2 Maple Tiger:

What are the turn times you got for the planes you tested?
Isn't about 200kph a little slow for decent turning?

Actually I flew the P-51 to a large proportion of my small amount of online time. Had no troubles with it, just found it turned too well a low speeds.
As it is now, the P-51 is a plane for any mediocre pilot, no fun going around in that plane blowing up Ki's Bf's or FW's. Just feel sorry for them because they didn't stand a chance.
I am not whining. I am just pissed my fav US ride got ruined.

2 Havok:

If you'd just read the headline of the topic you'd that this time it's not about relative performacne between P-51 and Bf's but about P-51's vs. Spits. If you just spent a minute with google I am convinced you'll find reports all saying: The Spitfire outturned the P-51.
I can remember beeing shot down by a Mustang exactly once, I was in a P-40 that time. On the other hand a have plenty of kills with a P-51, yet I am complaining that it turns to well. Can you please explain me how this fits into your picture? Actually someone complaing about the plane he is flying?

2 Leadpitter:

Please give names instead of saying "they". This is not a conspiracy board.
Please send me a track where you turned better than 17.5 seconds continuosly in a Spitfire IX.
But than, since you had hardly anything meaingful to add up to this point, why don't you go back to HL and leave this thread alone?

2 AdEridanus:

I too enjoy the game. As long as I don't fly the P-51. That's why I am, well, was pissed after I had a look at the past patch P-51. ;-)

StellarRat
05-22-2004, 01:50 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Maj_Death:
We will knock off the whining when Oleg's crew releases believable flight models.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>The problem is getting everyone to agree what a "believable" flight model is for every plane. I wouldn't hold your breath.

Covino
05-22-2004, 02:27 PM
I tested Spit V vs. P-52D-5 (the one in the track above). I tested both using max power (WEP in P-51), no flaps, 25% fuel, no ammo, sea level, turning at the edge of stall (when white contrails form at end of wings through entire turn).
Spit V had an 18 second sustained turn rate. P-51 had a 20 second sustained turn rate. Spit has no combat or takeoff flaps but when the P-51 employs them, it can break 18 seconds (as shown in the track above).
If the Spit had takeoff flaps too, it would surely beat the P-51 again. Nothing extraordinary.

HellToupee
05-22-2004, 05:19 PM
even the spit XIV shoulds till outturn the p51b, exploiting the mk IXs turn advantage is very difficult even g6s can keep with it untill you employ landing flaps.

http://lamppost.mine.nu/ahclan/files/sigs/spitwhiners1.jpg

calculus_kid
05-22-2004, 06:47 PM
leadspitter_ what are these rts settings and how do i do it
cc

LeadSpitter_
05-22-2004, 07:41 PM
You can put them manually in by opening the config.ini in your il2 fb dir with notepad or word.

You can do it from in game also by going to input and adjusting the sensativities.

Just rename the config.ini to config1.ini to make a backup first

http://img14.photobucket.com/albums/v43/leadspitter/LSIG1.gif

EPP-Gibbs
05-22-2004, 09:28 PM
Well, something isn't right....all the relevant stuff I've read says the P51 wasn't a pariticularly good turnfighter, and that the Spitfire definitely was.

The problem we have is that very few people left really know through experience, and we have to rely on data from different sources that bear no relation to each other, with non standardised testing criteria.

To be honest, an 17 year old schoolboy raving on about this flight model, or that 60 year old aircraft being definitely right or wrong is to me similar to a Mississippi based frog telling me about life in Peking.

It's all a bit like the RAF pilot saying he loved the Spitfire, it was a great A/C, and the LW pilot saying....I flew ze captured Zpit...it voz rubbish, and vice versa.

...each to their own...and all open to interpretation.

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/steve.djurovich/Sig4.jpg
"If I had all the money I'd spent on drink..I'd spend it on drink!"

[This message was edited by EPP-Gibbs on Sun May 23 2004 at 01:34 AM.]

initjust
05-22-2004, 09:58 PM
A little off topic in this thread but several posts have referenced air speed in terms of True Air Speed (TAS).

TAS = IAS (Indicated Air Speed) adjusted for air density (altitude, humidity, temperature).

Since IL2, FB or AEP (I presume) make no attempt to model changing air density at altitude TAS really has no significance and you should simply refer to IAS in any discussion regarding air speed.

faustnik
05-22-2004, 10:25 PM
Wierd. I was easily outrunning P-51Ds on the deck in my Dora with the patch. I also got a maneuver kill on a P-51B in my A6 in a scissors move. We better check into this carefully before crying foul to 1C.

http://pages.sbcglobal.net/mdegnan/_images/FaustSig
www.7Jg77.com (http://www.7jg77.com)
CWoS FB forum. More Cheese, Less Whine. (http://www.acompletewasteofspace.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=25)

pourshot
05-23-2004, 01:06 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by initjust:
A little off topic in this thread but several posts have referenced air speed in terms of True Air Speed (TAS).

TAS = IAS (Indicated Air Speed) adjusted for air density (altitude, humidity, temperature).

Since IL2, FB or AEP (I presume) make no attempt to model changing air density at altitude TAS really has no significance and you should simply refer to IAS in any discussion regarding air speed.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Just fly without cockpit you will find speed is in TAS so it is modeled

http://members.optusnet.com.au/~andycarroll68/mybaby.jpeg.JPG
Ride It Like Ya Stole It

Aaron_GT
05-23-2004, 02:25 AM
"FYI, the P-51D5NT now has a top speed in excess of 595km/h TAS at sea level, it is listed as going 580km/h TAS at sea level according to the object viewer and that is ideal factory performance. Perhaps Oleg modeled us a P-51H and just didn't change the name in the plane list."

It seems for 67" boost (the P51B we have in FB
has 67" boost) 365mph would be correct. 595km/h is about 370 mph, so for a P51B it would be about right. The P51D at 67" boost should be very slightly slower, but I am not sure what boost the D-5 in FB runs at.

If the speed at SL is now within 5mph, that is good, but if the other aspects are now off (the climb rate, if Kurfurst is correct and the figures come from the game and not IL2 Compare) that is not good. We need all planes modelled accurately with no bias according to national origin.

Skalgrim
05-23-2004, 02:34 AM
spain g10 with 3150kg and 1680ps has
initial climb 28m/sec

g10 in fb with 3250kg 1800ps has better powerloading



.

[This message was edited by Skalgrim on Sun May 23 2004 at 03:08 AM.]

VFA-195 Snacky
05-23-2004, 06:08 AM
This is actually becomming pretty entertaining. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/52.gif


http://www.x-plane.org/users/531seawolf/b_a_presidential_first.jpg
"Navy1, Call the Ball- Roger Ball."


**Opinions expressed are not those of UbiSoft or Eagle Dynamics**

[This message was edited by Snacky1 on Sun May 23 2004 at 05:19 AM.]

Maple_Tiger
05-23-2004, 06:33 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Maj_Death:
The P-51 before AEP was well modeled, in AEP it was slightly "noobified" but still ok. Now it does not reflect the real performance in any way. Ironically the russian planes are actually decently modeled for a change. From now on I will no longer host western front missions and stick with the russian front until the P-51 and P-47 are given semi-realistic performance. I will also take a look at the Ta-152 as it might be severly overmodeled as well. I have flown the D9 early a bit, it hasn't changed much and still matches its listed performance.

FYI, the P-51D5NT now has a top speed in excess of 595km/h TAS at sea level, it is listed as going 580km/h TAS at sea level according to the object viewer and that is ideal factory performance. Perhaps Oleg modeled us a P-51H and just didn't change the name in the plane list.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maj_Death here, Stab.I/JG1Death at HL

I build COOPs and DF maps. If you would like some of them you can get them athttp://www14.brinkster.com/triggerhappy770/default.htm

I/JG1 Oesau is recruiting axis pilots who prefer to fly maximum realism. We accept both veterans and rookies. We fly in VEF2, VOW and may join other online wars in the future. Go to our forums at http://www.jg1-oesau.org/ for more details and to apply.
http://www.bestanimations.com/Humans/Skulls/Skull-06.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>



Im not surprised that you forgot to mention that the FWD9/44, BF10910, and BF109K4 are also 5 km/h too fast. Another one sided post. Another one of Hucks relativs. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Capt. 361stMapleTiger.
http://img52.photobucket.com/albums/v158/Maple_Tiger/FBAA2.gif
Proud member of the FBAA and Nutty Philosohpy Club.

robban75
05-23-2004, 06:45 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Aaron_GT:
"FYI, the P-51D5NT now has a top speed in excess of 595km/h TAS at sea level, it is listed as going 580km/h TAS at sea level according to the object viewer and that is ideal factory performance. Perhaps Oleg modeled us a P-51H and just didn't change the name in the plane list."

It seems for 67" boost (the P51B we have in FB
has 67" boost) 365mph would be correct. 595km/h is about 370 mph, so for a P51B it would be about right. The P51D at 67" boost should be very slightly slower, but I am not sure what boost the D-5 in FB runs at.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

In the P-51's defence, a German report in Dietmar Hermans book on the Ta 152(I think), lists the P-51 SL topspeed to be 600km/h. If this was with 67" boost I don't know, but Oleg seem to think so. Then again, most planes in FB are 5-10km/h too fast compared to the IL2compare, apart from the Fw 190D-9 '45 and La-7.

http://members.chello.se/unni/D-9.JPG

When it comes to aircombat, I'd rather be lucky than good any day!

Lav69
05-23-2004, 06:48 AM
I saw a documentary yesterday on the history channel about the air war in the Pacific. They made a point to mention how agile the Mustang was at low and high speeds. How many of you have actually flown these planes you claim to be so knowledgable about and another thing if you don't like it then go play some other sim.

_______________
I'm fixin to.

NN_EnigmuS
05-23-2004, 07:09 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Kurfurst__:

The 109K were heavier than 109Gs, but not by much, it wouldn`t make difference. G-14 and G-10 was almost the same weight within 50 kilograms, that`s basically nothing. And with it`s cleaner lines and great power it should keep up speed very long in turns.

But the reason Bf 109 turns are so much porked is the far too premature loss of elevator autority. Above 500 the plane is virtually unmanouverable and turns 50% worser it should... I have a German testpaper of 109K turning. Goes from 650 km/h start and does a hard 5 G turn while keeping level (banks at 78 degrees). It tooks just 24 seconds at 6000m. In AEP, guess what, 36-38 seconds, because the elevator is modelled much worser at high speed.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

can you please send this to oleg at il2beta@1c.ru the late war 109 handling at high speed made him very bad against those mustang,it seems you're flying a tb3 when reach 500km/h,hope they fix that.

http://www.nnavirex.com/public/enigmus.gif

Maple_Tiger
05-23-2004, 07:15 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JtD:
2 Maple Tiger:

What are the turn times you got for the planes you tested?
Isn't about 200kph a little slow for decent turning?

Actually I flew the P-51 to a large proportion of my small amount of online time. Had no troubles with it, just found it turned too well a low speeds.
As it is now, the P-51 is a plane for any mediocre pilot, no fun going around in that plane blowing up Ki's Bf's or FW's. Just feel sorry for them because they didn't stand a chance.
I am not whining. I am just pissed my fav US ride got ruined.

2 Havok:

If you'd just read the headline of the topic you'd that this time it's not about relative performacne between P-51 and Bf's but about P-51's vs. Spits. If you just spent a minute with google I am convinced you'll find reports all saying: The Spitfire outturned the P-51.
I can remember beeing shot down by a Mustang exactly once, I was in a P-40 that time. On the other hand a have plenty of kills with a P-51, yet I am complaining that it turns to well. Can you please explain me how this fits into your picture? Actually someone complaing about the plane he is flying?

2 Leadpitter:

Please give names instead of saying "they". This is not a conspiracy board.
Please send me a track where you turned better than 17.5 seconds continuosly in a Spitfire IX.
But than, since you had hardly anything meaingful to add up to this point, why don't you go back to HL and leave this thread alone?

2 AdEridanus:

I too enjoy the game. As long as I don't fly the P-51. That's why I am, well, was pissed after I had a look at the past patch P-51. ;-)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>



If your doing turn testing, then you should use atleast 50% fuel. I could be wrong, but i think they tested the P-51 with about 75% fuel.

As i have said before, with only 25% fuel, the P-51 will turn better then what is listed in any chart.

Capt. 361stMapleTiger.
http://img52.photobucket.com/albums/v158/Maple_Tiger/FBAA2.gif
Proud member of the FBAA and Nutty Philosohpy Club.

Curly_109
05-23-2004, 07:17 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by EvilBen:
I tested Spit V vs. P-52D-5 (the one in the track above). I tested both using max power (WEP in P-51), no flaps, 25% fuel, no ammo, sea level, turning at the edge of stall (when white contrails form at end of wings through entire turn).
Spit V had an 18 second sustained turn rate. P-51 had a 20 second sustained turn rate. Spit has no combat or takeoff flaps but when the P-51 employs them, it can break 18 seconds (as shown in the track above).
If the Spit had takeoff flaps too, it would surely beat the P-51 again. Nothing extraordinary.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

There is answer to topic qt(if it is actually a qt). No way that P51 can outturn Spit....

3ra_DSLam
05-23-2004, 07:36 AM
Kurfurst, P51 climbs seems OK according to my tests(at least at 100% fuel and combat/climb settings). See this thread. Correct if I'm wrong, I also suspected it was overmodelled but made some investiagtions:

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=400102&f=23110283&m=214100524

http://www.sarriacity.net/dslam/imagenes/DSLam2.jpg

initjust
05-23-2004, 10:24 AM
Pourshot,

You said; "Just fly without cockpit you will find speed is in TAS so it is modeled"

This is interesting. What do you base this on and can you tell me what 1C used as a model for the changing air density?

Did they use the International Standard Atmosphere values and is the atmosphere in IL2 modeled on an ISA Standard Day?

The reason I ask is because it is critcal to know how it is modeled in order to know what the relationship between IAS and TAS is.

This becomes important when you are trying to navigate or fly a timing route. It is important because your actual speed over ground (or water) will depend on the relationship between IAS and TAS so you need to know what factor to use when calculating TAS from IAS.

For example, the "rule of thumb" is 2% p/1000' of altitude. This would equate to a TAS (TAS = speed over ground in no wind conditions) of 240 with an IAS of 200 at 10,000' and TAS of 280 with an IAS of 200 at 20,000'.

Is there a chart or something available somewhere showing how this is modeled in IL2?

LeadSpitter_
05-23-2004, 01:07 PM
how about a lock on this oen ivan, we cant discuss real issues how about any whine post gets locked

http://img14.photobucket.com/albums/v43/leadspitter/LSIG1.gif

VF-2_John_Banks
05-23-2004, 02:07 PM
I noticed a slight bug on the P-51 3D model. When the gear is extended, the outter bay doors are bleeding through the wings with one of their edges.

JG52_Meyer
05-23-2004, 03:10 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LeadSpitter_:
how about a lock on this oen ivan, we cant discuss real issues how about any whine post gets locked

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, let's hide the evidence
http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Eagle_361st
05-23-2004, 05:23 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Maj_Death:
The P-51 before AEP was well modeled, in AEP it was slightly "noobified" but still ok. Now it does not reflect the real performance in any way. Ironically the russian planes are actually decently modeled for a change. From now on I will no longer host western front missions and stick with the russian front until the P-51 and P-47 are given semi-realistic performance. I will also take a look at the Ta-152 as it might be severly overmodeled as well. I have flown the D9 early a bit, it hasn't changed much and still matches its listed performance.

FYI, the P-51D5NT now has a top speed in excess of 595km/h TAS at sea level, it is listed as going 580km/h TAS at sea level according to the object viewer and that is ideal factory performance. Perhaps Oleg modeled us a P-51H and just didn't change the name in the plane list.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maj_Death here, Stab.I/JG1Death at HL

I build COOPs and DF maps. If you would like some of them you can get them athttp://www14.brinkster.com/triggerhappy770/default.htm

I/JG1 Oesau is recruiting axis pilots who prefer to fly maximum realism. We accept both veterans and rookies. We fly in VEF2, VOW and may join other online wars in the future. Go to our forums at http://www.jg1-oesau.org/ for more details and to apply.
http://www.bestanimations.com/Humans/Skulls/Skull-06.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Are you going to seriously try and say the p-47 is overmodelled in any way? LMFAO @ you! The P-47 is just now modelled to where it should be. It's performance numbers actually match what they are supposed to be. Don't be scared that the P-47 is now the fighter it should have been all along.

~S!
Eagle
Commanding Officer 361st vFG
www.361stvfg.com (http://www.361stvfg.com)
http://home.comcast.net/~smconlon/wsb/media/245357/site1079.jpg

ElAurens
05-23-2004, 05:41 PM
All I know is that the Curtiss Hawk 75(P36) and P40 could both outturn the Spitfire and Bf 109 below 15,000ft.

http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

_____________________________

http://www.blitzpigs.com/forum/images/avatars/Curtiss_logo.gif

BlitzPig_EL

LeadSpitter_
05-23-2004, 08:43 PM
lock this thread we cant even disucss real issues like the .50 cal.

109g2 can outturn the p51
spitfire can out turn the 109g2
109g2 can out turn the p40 now in 2.1
spitfire can turn inside the mustang easy except at speeds of 650kmph

blitzpig_el
All I know is that the Curtiss Hawk 75(P36) and P40 could both outturn the Spitfire and Bf 109 below 15,000ft.

Yup, the h75 was an amazing turn fighter so, everything i ever read on the 109 never says anything about its turning ability with the exception of the emil vs spitfire. the spit was a better turning aircraft the emil relied on its alt advantage and climbing ability.

whats interesting is compair the p40b vs the ki27 and a5m2 zero http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

http://img14.photobucket.com/albums/v43/leadspitter/LSIG1.gif

Jetbuff
05-23-2004, 10:08 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Maple_Tiger:
You guys might want to take a look at the BF109K4.

It will out turn a spit fire and the P-51.


Sustained turn on the deck 190km/h with combat flaps. (50% fuel)

Spitfire sustained turn on the deck with combat flaps, 210km/h. (50% fuel)

P-51D20NA sustained turn with combat flaps, 230km/h. (25% fuel)

Before you say anything about the P-51D, you should take a look at the planes you fly. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Browsing through and was caught of-guard by this one... WTF has the speed of a sustained turn got to do with proving which plane turns better? Turn-rate is proportional to airspeed (through G). If anything, these numbers support that the P-51 is the best turner of the 3. I don't see the point if you're trying to prove otherwise.

http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/blink.gif

http://members.rogers.com/teemaz/sig.jpg

JtD
05-24-2004, 02:08 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LeadSpitter_:
lock this thread we cant even disucss real issues like the .50 cal.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Please ban Leadspitter from this thread as he keeps on trolling.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
109g2 can outturn the p51
spitfire can out turn the 109g2
109g2 can out turn the p40 now in 2.1<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Do you have anything, maybe even a track, to support the noise you make?

Numbers would be a great start, since they'd give a hint you actually did some work on the subject.

Continous turning times I tested show:

17.5 P-51D
17.5 P-40M
17.8 Spitfire IXe
18.0 109 G-2
All on very low fuel load. If there is any advantage towards any plane, it is towards P-51 and P-40. Whatever sources you draw your conlusions from: They suck.

On the other hand you are completely right: The G-2 can easily outturn a P-51. If the Mustangs engine was knocked out before.

TooCooL34
05-24-2004, 02:21 AM
This BS still going on? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/blink.gif

Test pilot is ace pilot in real.
But in sim, test pilot is just a moron.
What the f**k with turn time when every plane has its own corner speed and handling? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_razz.gif
I'll enjoy my flight during your test time and kick your P-51 in my G-2 anytime when we meet in online. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/59.gif

Gunner_361st
05-24-2004, 09:27 AM
None of this arguing happens with early war planes.

Maybe I should be grateful. Yeah, I think I should.

The funny thing is, I never really noticed too drastic a difference about the turning circle of the P-51, P-47, BF-109 or FW-190. Considering their all very fast late-war energy fighters, you would imagine you wouldn't hear people complaining about such things.

But hey, its not my problem if people like to fly these 4 late war monsters like Japanese Zeroes. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Major Gunner of the 361st vFG

http://home.comcast.net/~smconlon/wsb/media/245357/site1087.jpg

LilHorse
05-24-2004, 10:31 AM
Please people. PLLLLLLEEEEEEAAAAASSSSSE!

Anybody, and I mean anybody, who's bothered to look into the characteristics of the P-51 beyond it's RAH-RAH legend knows that low and slow means stall in the Mustang. They know that at low speeds both a Bf-109 and a Spit V (and probably even a IX) will outturn a P-51. It was never meant to turn fight and it wasn't designed that way. The Mustang's great performance trait was it's excellent handling at high speed, where planes like the 109 or Spit would start to get sluggish in handling the Stang would shine. That's what made it a great a/c in the war, because turn fighting was an anachronism and anybody who engaged in it (particularly in a Mustang when it had the great characteristics mentioned above) would have been a fool. If the Mustang is outturning these planes at low speeds in this sim then there is something amiss with it's modeling.

Oh, and saying that information from a History Channel documentary constitutes some kind of proof is laughable. If you guys only knew the amount of mis-information in TV docs. about these planes you'd be astounded.

jtasker
05-24-2004, 11:00 AM
Not sure what Mustang you're talking about.. I've had no problem beating them up pretty badly online in a 109G6AS.. At lower the speeds the 109 eats the P51 alive.. before and after the patch..

And, ,if you are having trouble out turning 109's in the Spitfire V, then you have some serious pilot skill issues, its not the game http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Maple_Tiger
05-24-2004, 12:02 PM
I think the whineners should lurn to fly first, then come back here. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

If you can't out turn a P-51 at low speeds using the BF109, then you must be a noob. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Capt. 361stMapleTiger.
http://img52.photobucket.com/albums/v158/Maple_Tiger/FBAA2.gif
Proud member of the FBAA and Nutty Philosohpy Club.

quiet_man
05-24-2004, 02:26 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Maple_Tiger:
I think the whineners should lurn to fly first, then come back here. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

If you can't out turn a P-51 at low speeds using the BF109, then you must be a noob. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

looking at IL2Compare the P51C turns like SpitIX and 109G6AS/G10/G14 below 300kph, it out turns the 109K4 at this speeds. The P51D is slightly worse but still out turns a 109K4.

around 325kph the 109G6AS/G10/G14 out turn the P51, but 350kph and higher the P51 outturns any 109

maybe you should learn to fly the P51?

Regards,
quiet_man

LilHorse
05-24-2004, 03:08 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by quiet_man:
around 325kph the 109G6AS/G10/G14 out turn the P51, but 350kph and higher the P51 outturns any 109
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

350kph is still pretty dang slow (only 220mph). If a P-51 is outturning a 109 at that speed in this sim then there's something wrong. I could see the P-51 really starting to out perform the 109 at say 500kph (315mph). But anything under 250mph and the Mustang would be S.O.L. in a turn fight. It would bleed off E very quickly and be a sitting duck.

quiet_man
05-25-2004, 02:19 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LilHorse:
350kph is still pretty dang slow (only 220mph). If a P-51 is outturning a 109 at that speed in this sim then there's something wrong. I could see the P-51 really starting to out perform the 109 at say 500kph (315mph). But anything under 250mph and the Mustang would be S.O.L. in a turn fight. It would bleed off E very quickly and be a sitting duck.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

maybe thats the point why some people think the P51 turns to well?

for an speed optimized fighter I would have awaited something like the 190, good a high speed but a drop of at some point when speed gets to low.

At the moment the P51 turns very good at any speed, not the best but very good

it misses character

Has anyone real data to compare?

Regards,
quiet_man

LuftLuver
05-25-2004, 04:04 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by TooCooL34:
...and kick your P-51 in my G-2 anytime when we meet in online. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sorry friend, but personally my win/loss ratio against the G2 is quite, quite good. As in I look forward to finding you online wearing a G2. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/784.gif

""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
"All your bases are belong to us."

alarmer
05-25-2004, 05:10 PM
Bashing somebody and calling them a whiner is allways easy.

These guys have quite good backup with tracks and tests. And then some guys are just plainly calling em whiners without any proof at all.

Why is it that everytime somebody says a negative thing about planes FM he is painted as a whiner?? Some people just want realistic FM. Just happens to be that Allied side flyers dont seem to be intrested too much on testing Axis equipment. Atleast thats the way it seems to me.

Stachl
05-25-2004, 06:27 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by VMF-214_HaVoK:
Why does so many people boast claims that the Mustang could not turn down low? It makes no sense at all that it could turn well at high alt in thin air and not as well if not better at low alt.
Not only that I have not heard or read one Mustang pilot make such claims. All of them felt the Mustang was superior to LW aircraft.

Earlier Mustangs performed very well at at low alt they were limited to high alt because of the engine. Once Merlin was installed that changed. People act as if the whole plane design was dramatically changed to perform at high alt.

So if you got some evidence that the Mustang could not turn with FWs or BFs post it now. And I mean real evidence.

=S=

http://www.flightjournal.com/fj/images/hellcat_head_short.jpg

http://www.vmf-214.net
(The Original BlackSheep Squadron of IL-2/FB/AEP/PF)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well I posted this once before (before the 2.1 patch) and I'll do it again just for you HaVoK since you wanted proof. The late Mark Hanna was considered and expert pilot and flew many Warbirds. Is his opinion worth anything to you?

The December 1999 issue of 'Flight Journal' ran an article concerning the then just restored Bf-109 G-10 'Black 2'. This plane was restored by Hans Dittes and is owned by 'The Old Flying Machine Co. The flight test was done by the late Mark Hanna and what really makes this article interesting, and pertinent to this discussion, is that they actually carried out a couple of mock dogfights against both a Spitfire and a P-51D.

On page 32 under 'Contemporary Comparisons' Mark Hanna writes:

"First, let me say that all my comments are based on operations below 10,000 feet and at power settings not exceeding 40 inches and 2,600 rpm. I like the airplane, and with familiarity, I think it will give most of the Allied fighters I have flown a hard time--particularly in a close, hard-turning, low-speed dogfight. It will definitely out-maneuver a P-51 in this type of fight because the roll rate and slow-speed characteristics are much better. The Spitfire, on the other hand, is more of a problem for the 109, and I feel it is a superior close-in fighter. Having said that, the aircraft are sufficiently closely matched that pilot ability would probably be the deciding factor. At higher speeds, the P-51 is definitely superior, and provided the Mustang kept its energy up and refused to dogfight, it would be relatively safe against the 109."

I highly recommend this issue of Flight Journal to anyone interested in this discussion. After reading it, I would have to conclude that the current FM in AEP does not represent the true low speed handling of the P-51D. Hopefully this is being addressed in the new upcoming patch.
________
Again, I realize there are many debatable FMs in this new 2.1 patch (U.S., Russian, and German). I have only posted this per the request of VMF-214_HaVoK as I think this modern flight test answers quite a few questions concerning the P-51.


Regards,
Stachl

Maple_Tiger
05-25-2004, 08:46 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by quiet_man:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Maple_Tiger:
I think the whineners should lurn to fly first, then come back here. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

If you can't out turn a P-51 at low speeds using the BF109, then you must be a noob. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

looking at IL2Compare the P51C turns like SpitIX and 109G6AS/G10/G14 below 300kph, it out turns the 109K4 at this speeds. The P51D is slightly worse but still out turns a 109K4.

around 325kph the 109G6AS/G10/G14 out turn the P51, but 350kph and higher the P51 outturns any 109

maybe you should learn to fly the P51?

Regards,
quiet_man<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>



Some of us do fly other planes. Some of us know what other planes can and can not do.


I can out turn P-51's in BF109's. Not too hard. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Just don't take any more then 50% fuelhttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

It basicaly comes down to how much wheight or fuel each plane has.


I have spent close to 3 hours in total, turn testing, using differant amounts of fuel, and differant BF109 veriants.

oh, and the BF109K4 will out turn the P-51D. Depends on fuel loadhttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Im not going to argue with you. Just giving you a tip. It's obvious you need one.

Capt. 361stMapleTiger.
http://img52.photobucket.com/albums/v158/Maple_Tiger/FBAA2.gif
Proud member of the FBAA and Nutty Philosohpy Club.

Maple_Tiger
05-25-2004, 08:51 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Stachl:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by VMF-214_HaVoK:
Why does so many people boast claims that the Mustang could not turn down low? It makes no sense at all that it could turn well at high alt in thin air and not as well if not better at low alt.
Not only that I have not heard or read one Mustang pilot make such claims. All of them felt the Mustang was superior to LW aircraft.

Earlier Mustangs performed very well at at low alt they were limited to high alt because of the engine. Once Merlin was installed that changed. People act as if the whole plane design was dramatically changed to perform at high alt.

So if you got some evidence that the Mustang could not turn with FWs or BFs post it now. And I mean real evidence.

=S=

http://www.flightjournal.com/fj/images/hellcat_head_short.jpg

http://www.vmf-214.net
(The Original BlackSheep Squadron of IL-2/FB/AEP/PF)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well I posted this once before (before the 2.1 patch) and I'll do it again just for you HaVoK since you wanted proof. The late Mark Hanna was considered and expert pilot and flew many Warbirds. Is his opinion worth anything to you?

The December 1999 issue of 'Flight Journal' ran an article concerning the then just restored Bf-109 G-10 'Black 2'. This plane was restored by Hans Dittes and is owned by 'The Old Flying Machine Co. The flight test was done by the late Mark Hanna and what really makes this article interesting, and pertinent to this discussion, is that they actually carried out a couple of mock dogfights against both a Spitfire and a P-51D.

On page 32 under 'Contemporary Comparisons' Mark Hanna writes:

"First, let me say that all my comments are based on operations below 10,000 feet and at power settings not exceeding 40 inches and 2,600 rpm. I like the airplane, and with familiarity, I think it will give most of the Allied fighters I have flown a hard time--particularly in a close, hard-turning, low-speed dogfight. It will definitely out-maneuver a P-51 in this type of fight because the roll rate and slow-speed characteristics are much better. The Spitfire, on the other hand, is more of a problem for the 109, and I feel it is a superior close-in fighter. Having said that, the aircraft are sufficiently closely matched that pilot ability would probably be the deciding factor. At higher speeds, the P-51 is definitely superior, and provided the Mustang kept its energy up and refused to dogfight, it would be relatively safe against the 109."

I highly recommend this issue of Flight Journal to anyone interested in this discussion. After reading it, I would have to conclude that the current FM in AEP does not represent the true low speed handling of the P-51D. Hopefully this is being addressed in the new upcoming patch.
________
Again, I realize there are many debatable FMs in this new 2.1 patch (U.S., Russian, and German). I have only posted this per the request of VMF-214_HaVoK as I think this modern flight test answers quite a few questions concerning the P-51.


Regards,
Stachl<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>



and how much fuel did the P-51 have? If had 50%, then yes it would have a very hard time. I bet at 25 to 20% it would give the 109 a run for it's money. Depends on how good each pilot is though. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Capt. 361stMapleTiger.
http://img52.photobucket.com/albums/v158/Maple_Tiger/FBAA2.gif
Proud member of the FBAA and Nutty Philosohpy Club.

LeadSpitter_
05-25-2004, 09:08 PM
how is this thread still open there is now way the p51 is out turning the spitfire in tight turns.

maybe you should ***** about the p39 and p63 becuase they are out turning the spits

http://img14.photobucket.com/albums/v43/leadspitter/LSIG1.gif

biggs222
05-25-2004, 09:18 PM
no its the just the Spit turn rate that porked...
ive tried evertime to outturn even just slightly, the G6s but can only manage to barely keep even in a sustained turn. its unbelievable...
in EVERY documentaion ive read the Spit mkIX was said to have easily out turn the G's... i cant believe this....i want to see olegs reasons for making the spit turnrate the way it is

THIS NEEDS TO BE FIXED

Stachl
05-25-2004, 10:11 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Maple_Tiger:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Stachl:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by VMF-214_HaVoK:
Why does so many people boast claims that the Mustang could not turn down low? It makes no sense at all that it could turn well at high alt in thin air and not as well if not better at low alt.
Not only that I have not heard or read one Mustang pilot make such claims. All of them felt the Mustang was superior to LW aircraft.

Earlier Mustangs performed very well at at low alt they were limited to high alt because of the engine. Once Merlin was installed that changed. People act as if the whole plane design was dramatically changed to perform at high alt.

So if you got some evidence that the Mustang could not turn with FWs or BFs post it now. And I mean real evidence.

=S=

http://www.flightjournal.com/fj/images/hellcat_head_short.jpg

http://www.vmf-214.net
(The Original BlackSheep Squadron of IL-2/FB/AEP/PF)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well I posted this once before (before the 2.1 patch) and I'll do it again just for you HaVoK since you wanted proof. The late Mark Hanna was considered and expert pilot and flew many Warbirds. Is his opinion worth anything to you?

The December 1999 issue of 'Flight Journal' ran an article concerning the then just restored Bf-109 G-10 'Black 2'. This plane was restored by Hans Dittes and is owned by 'The Old Flying Machine Co. The flight test was done by the late Mark Hanna and what really makes this article interesting, and pertinent to this discussion, is that they actually carried out a couple of mock dogfights against both a Spitfire and a P-51D.

On page 32 under 'Contemporary Comparisons' Mark Hanna writes:

"First, let me say that all my comments are based on operations below 10,000 feet and at power settings not exceeding 40 inches and 2,600 rpm. I like the airplane, and with familiarity, I think it will give most of the Allied fighters I have flown a hard time--particularly in a close, hard-turning, low-speed dogfight. It will definitely out-maneuver a P-51 in this type of fight because the roll rate and slow-speed characteristics are much better. The Spitfire, on the other hand, is more of a problem for the 109, and I feel it is a superior close-in fighter. Having said that, the aircraft are sufficiently closely matched that pilot ability would probably be the deciding factor. At higher speeds, the P-51 is definitely superior, and provided the Mustang kept its energy up and refused to dogfight, it would be relatively safe against the 109."

I highly recommend this issue of Flight Journal to anyone interested in this discussion. After reading it, I would have to conclude that the current FM in AEP does not represent the true low speed handling of the P-51D. Hopefully this is being addressed in the new upcoming patch.
________
Again, I realize there are many debatable FMs in this new 2.1 patch (U.S., Russian, and German). I have only posted this per the request of VMF-214_HaVoK as I think this modern flight test answers quite a few questions concerning the P-51.


Regards,
Stachl<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>



and how much fuel did the P-51 have? If had 50%, then yes it would have a very hard time. I bet at 25 to 20% it would give the 109 a run for it's money. Depends on how good each pilot is though. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Capt. 361stMapleTiger.
http://img52.photobucket.com/albums/v158/Maple_Tiger/FBAA2.gif
Proud member of the FBAA and Nutty Philosohpy Club.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't know Maple they didn't say, but I would tend to think that their relative fuel states were probably pretty close since afterall they were just testing them, not going on a combat mission. I also have a tape of part of this test between the G-10 and the Spit and WOW do they sound and look great! It's also amazing when you're watching the two of them together how much smaller the 109 was. It's quite striking.

Tschüs,

Stachl

LeadSpitter_
05-25-2004, 10:22 PM
I have many videos of marc hannas flying at airshows and in movies. Dont forget the aircraft had the same ammount of fuel. His father ray still flies today and marc is definatly a legend for getting to fly so many warbirds and has inspired so many to keep them in flying condition. His memory will live on just like the wwii pilots for hundreds of years

most the spit pilots are using 50-75 fuel and the mustangs are using 25 and the spits are still out turning the stang low alt in turn fights.

Compair the spitfire to the p39 and whine about that, it has more crediability

http://img14.photobucket.com/albums/v43/leadspitter/LSIG1.gif

SKY_BOSS
05-25-2004, 10:34 PM
What do you do?
Ya change one thing and Bob is not happy.
Ya change another thing and Joe is not happy.
We are go'n to hear B*tch'n till the end of time on this forum. I remember when I myself use to B*tch about FM's not so long ago.

Oleg don't swet it.
You will never please them all


PS Thanx for the best damn flight sim out there. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

http://members.cox.net/ironwarlock/skynew.jpg

LeadSpitter_
05-25-2004, 11:16 PM
skyboss is right, now only if we had nice high alt weather fx multiple cloud layers and full world terrain like fs2004, this sim would be truely ground breaking

http://img14.photobucket.com/albums/v43/leadspitter/LSIG1.gif

Hawg-dawg
05-26-2004, 12:38 AM
http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/34.gifAmazing http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/35.gif

Hey........ did I spell amazing right ?

AKA Bad-MF(Mongral Fighter).... Member... Kelly Johnsons SKUNK WORKS
Pay Up Sucka..... Fatboys Forever

biggs222
05-26-2004, 12:48 AM
Lead dont get all offended, we arnet saying the P51 should be toned down... we are saying that the spit is soooo off that even the P51 can even out turn it in low speeds.

what really matters is that the 109G's are outturning the mkIX which is WRONG period. the Spit needs to be able to turn better end of story.

either the Spit FM is correct and the 109Gs are over modeled or the Spit Fm is undermodeled. one or the other. i think its the latter of the two.

Zayets
05-26-2004, 01:26 AM
Oleg,could you please make the Jug turning like the Mustang now?Please...

Zayets out
----|------------|-----------|----
| --/ - \-- |
-|---------| o |--------|-
/\ _ /\
[]/ \[]

alarmer
05-26-2004, 02:42 AM
Its all about balance.

From the beginning of Il2 during all the patching all the planes have been fixed, changed and tuned. At the same time the game engine has been tweaked.

It is no suprise to me that stuff like this happens when there is just too many nations, too many people to satisfy and too many planes fly.

I really like il2 and have been playing it from the start, I still have respect for people who are trying to make it better. Personally have lost hope in the department of strong plane personalities, historical tactics and muzzle flashes http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/mockface.gif

Maybe people should stick with the beta teams email and not these forums, too many nationalities trying to hang on tight to their plane FM:s no matter if its realistic just as long as it can beat the others in online http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/51.gif

Waiting for BoB with great expectations http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

ElAurens
05-26-2004, 05:00 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by SKY_BOSS:

PS Thanx for the best damn flight sim out there. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree totally Sky Boss.

_____________________________

http://www.blitzpigs.com/forum/images/avatars/Curtiss_logo.gif

BlitzPig_EL

LilHorse
05-26-2004, 08:45 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by alarmer:
It is no suprise to me that stuff like this happens when there is just too many nations, too many people to satisfy and too many planes fly.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Which is why I wish this sim had stuck to it's original format of being an Eastern Front sim. We'd have had a smaller number of a/c which could have been developed more accurately.

Yeah, yeah, I understand the economics of it all. But c'mon. Japanese a/c being added? Western a/c other than the Lend-Lease planes that were either never on the Eastern Front or were only there in insignificant numbers? Believe me, I love all these planes. But if that's what you want why not push for the developement of a new sim? "Well, we get all these other planes free!" Sure, but what good is that when their flight models don't measure up to what they were. Then what are you flying? You're flying a cartoon of your favorite plane whose only tie to reality is that it just happens to look like the plane it's named after.

Oh, well. It's too late now. The box has been opened. It's still the best sim out there, no doubt. But I bet the developers never wished these headaches on themselves. I sure hope they've made their money's worth.

quiet_man
05-26-2004, 02:01 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Maple_Tiger:
I can out turn P-51's in BF109's. Not too hard. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Just don't take any more then 50% fuelhttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

It basicaly comes down to how much wheight or fuel each plane has.


I have spent close to 3 hours in total, turn testing, using differant amounts of fuel, and differant BF109 veriants.

oh, and the BF109K4 will out turn the P-51D. Depends on fuel loadhttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Im not going to argue with you. Just giving you a tip. It's obvious you need one.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

no problem, I already had my share of discussions on this board.

I know the effect of fuel load, but thanks for your tip.

Very seldom I fly late war planes, downing an Il2 with an 109F2 is much more interesting than with an 190A9 and I like flying Biplanes http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
so I can only tell you what IL2Compare say's and it show's similar turn rates for the 109K4 and the P51D without and an clear advantage for the P51D with combat flaps, for the whole speed range 200-550 kph.

I'm not an expert for both planes, I belive you I you say that with low fuel the 109 turns better than the P51, but is this historical correct?

Maybe we will never know.

regards,
quiet_man

Steaky_361st
05-30-2004, 03:33 PM
Man if you guys put half as much effort into learning new techniques and becoming a better pilot as you put in whining in this forum....

Steaky

Maple_Tiger
05-31-2004, 04:56 AM
I'm not an expert for both planes, I belive you I you say that with low fuel the 109 turns better than the P51, but is this historical correct?


To some extent, sure. I mean, the plane or anyplane would have less wing loading. Like your self, i am no expert either.

There some cool pilot acounts that would sugest that the P-51 could hold its own in a turn fight/stall fight. Then again, it would come down to who knows there aircraft more or who has more experians.

Who realy knows..

Capt. 361stMapleTiger.
http://img52.photobucket.com/albums/v158/Maple_Tiger/FBAA2.gif
Proud member of the FBAA and Nutty Philosohpy Club.

Heavy_Weather
05-31-2004, 06:50 AM
all your bases are belong to us http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/mockface.gif

"To fly a combat mission is not a trip under the moon. Every attack, every bombing is a dance with death."
- Serafima Amsova-Taranenko: Noggle, Ann (1994): A Dance with Death.

Bremspropeller
05-31-2004, 07:52 AM
It's pretty interesting that people label JtD as "Luftwhiner" since is initial statement was "the P-51 turn too well in comparison to the Spit".


So should I fly the Spit with german markings in future ?


The Block-20 is a bit über since it turns too well at low speeds and climbs like a rocket (still with 100% fuel).

The Spit indeed turns too bad - you even don't have trouble outturning the AI with a G-6.
So increase the Spit's turnrate and decrease the Mustangs low-speed handling to a realistic degree.



@ Maple: Referring to the fight P-51 vs. 109, it depends pretty much on the speed and weight of both planes.
At high speeds the Mustang has all the advantage because it could be controlled better along the pitch axis (stick-forces were not as high as with the 109).
At low speeds, the 109 rather takes the edge - it could climb and accelerate much better.


http://www.ccbirding.com/thw/id/peregrine2--hwi.JPG
Da B&Z bird !

http://www.virtual-jabog32.de
http://www.jg68.de.vu

LuftLuver
05-31-2004, 08:06 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by alarmer:
Its all about balance.

From the beginning of Il2 during all the patching all the planes have been fixed, changed and tuned. At the same time the game engine has been tweaked.

It is no suprise to me that stuff like this happens when there is just too many nations, too many people to satisfy and too many planes fly.

I really like il2 and have been playing it from the start, I still have respect for people who are trying to make it better. Personally have lost hope in the department of strong plane personalities, historical tactics and muzzle flashes http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/mockface.gif

Maybe people should stick with the beta teams email and not these forums, too many nationalities trying to hang on tight to their plane FM:s no matter if its realistic just as long as it can beat the others in online http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/51.gif

Waiting for BoB with great expectations http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

One of the better posts in quite awhile. Well spoken. Everybody wants to think the best of their country's aircraft, no matter if they are being honest about the plane's actual performance. I will say the Brit's beloved Spitfire is getting a bad shake with the crummy turn rate currently in the patch.

We will see...

""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
"All your bases are belong to us."