I still say the 51 is undermodelled..

FSIC Messageboard

SDOE General

profile | register | preferences | faq | search

UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone!

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Author	Topic: I still say the 51 is undermodelled..
Stark Pilot	posted 03-13- 02:23 PM quote: 11-16-44 Nothern Italy- Returning from a mission, Voll spotted a Ju 52 and began the pursuit. While gaining on the Ju52, seven Fw 190's and five Me109's bounced him. He downed the Ju52 and began the fight with twelve enemy fighters! When it was over, he had bagged (2) FW 190 and (1) Me109 while damaging several others, "it was just a matter of shooting everything that passed in front of me". This made him the top scoring ace of the 15th AF with 21 kills. This was an account of Capt John Voll's last kills in WWII (he survived the war by the way). He was flying a 51D. Who wants to try this one on for size in SDOE? LOL - Even Tail would be toast in short order with our 51. -Stark IP: Logged
Whirlwind Pilot	posted 03-13- 02:31 PM Just imagine, going after a flight of Hitler Youth pilotted AC in a P51. Probably not that bad, but by '44, the Germans were doing the 'two week' air school program. The Ju52 pilot was probably better in a dogfight than the 109s and 190s. IP: Logged
Razer Pilot	posted 03-13- 03:20 PM I'm hoping the P51 will get a complete FM rework for 5.4.. right now the FM is just hacked to get it to fly good. It can be a lot better.. Razer IP: Logged
Spanky the Mad Dog Pilot	posted 03-13- 07:30 PM Spanky here... Boy a total rework would be great. BTW is it just me or is the P51 looking weird compared to some of the other planes with its painted on mufflers. For 10 extra polys we could have a much better looking plane. IP: Logged
Stark Pilot	posted 03-13- 08:19 PM Another little tidbit on the 51, showing just how good a plane it really was. Kill ratio. 19:1 Now, there werent that many Ace grade pilots in the 51, so the plane had to be part of it. Of course one of the biggest problems our 51 has is the online damage bug, but even offline they tend to be less than effective. -Stark IP: Logged
Spyder Pilot	posted 03-13- 08:35 PM I think the problem with the planes is the data is taken from technical manuals or the like when in reality most planes failed or exceeded their rated performance. Maybe the best way is to take into account the pilots views on their aircraft when they flew. For example, on paper the stirling bomber had a ceiling of 17,000ft, in reality the pilots couldn't get it past 12,000ft and were shot down in droves. A 109 might have high wingloading to a spitfire but it could turn with a spit when the slats popped out and the pilot was a pro. On paper it suggests it shouldn't. Of course, filtering pilot accounts from bias will be difficult but there ya go. I think the p51 is a good plane but by '44 there weren't a lot of pro's around for the luftwaffe and allies outnumbered them greatly. The P47 and P51B had been doing the hard work before then. :P ------------------ IP: Logged
Tailslide Pilot	posted 03-13- 09:42 PM Rattle and I did very well in our p51s last night its the fastest plane in the game aside from the 262. It's not the fastest climber or best turner so you have to use teamwork and drag your opponent around so your wingman can get a shot at him. TS [This message has been edited by Tailslide (edited 03-13-2000).] IP: Logged
Pang Pilot	posted 03-13- 10:25 PM The P51 is the only plane that still has the tweaked airfoil file, as well. If it were returned to original, the flaps would again help in a turnfight. (Jeez, is THAT a can of worms or what?) Pang IP: Logged
Pang Pilot	posted 03-13- 10:28 PM Oh, and I agree, the '51 would really benefit with some 3d mufflers, as the '38 would with a 3d turbocharger on each engine. Would take about 10 minutes for someone like SV or Pete, bethca. Pang IP: Logged
Ishmael Pilot	posted 03-13- 11:25 PM I like the speed of the 51 in this sim, but for some reason when I try to use what was it's main strength; turning quickly in the verticle, whether spilt-S or over the top turns, it wants to roll in another direction. "In a loop you have to pull over the top, as the nose won't want to fall through by itself."--"Pilot Training Manual for the Mustang." Yet even at 280 to 300mph and gentle on the stick in a spilt-S it wants to roll in another direction---its as though it don't have wings at times. Under "Flight Characteristics" the manual says, "The P51 is one of the sweetest-flying fighter planes ever built. It is very light on all controls and stable at all normal loadings." Also from what I've read, the prop had no tendancy to over run. I'm new to the sim, and I like that it's a challenge taking off and landing the 51. I realize anyone can get the manual and I bet doing the FMs is really difficult. It is the fastest 51 i've seen in a sim, and maybe I need to keep adjusting my stick. IP: Logged
Tailslide Pilot	posted 03-14- 12:43 AM Hi Ishmael, I also find the p51 overly hard to loop.. the ground handling is a bit much for me when there's a wind too. It wasn't a completely docile plane though, you may be interested in this article about flying the p51 someone sent me.. Tracer? http://firelight.dynip.com/PLaneStats/p51/ TS ------------------ ________________________ TS Aircombat IP: Logged
Ishmael Pilot	posted 03-14- 02:48 AM Hi Tailslide, thx for posting that. I've never seen anything like that on the 51. I guess it was that difficult to fly, but makes you wonder how pilots transitioned so easily from the 47 to it; guess it was difficult to fly too. I had read that the bf109 was very hard to fly, but hadn't seen all that info on the 51. Now I know I need practice lol. [This message has been edited by Ishmael (edited 03-14-2000).] IP: Logged
Spanky the Mad Dog Pilot	posted 03-14- 03:30 AM Spanky here.. Hey Tail Me and Mad Dog also have problems looping the P51. Do you think maybe it has somthing to do with the gas tanks? I though you said somthing about adding them was helping ground handleing. Would adding the tanks in the correct place, help distribute the weight across the plane more? I'm not even sure if it had wing tanks but its an idea. IP: Logged
Michael Pilot	posted 03-14- 04:43 AM I originally posted the excert about flying the P-51, the one from "Flying the World's Great Aircraft." As for looping it, it helps if you put on some right rudder to counteract the torque as you start to go past vertical on the way up. I have to say I think the flight models are getting better all the time. I've noticed the planes that have a low mechanical advantage setting on the elevators are a lot easier to fly with a force back stick. The stick really stiffens up as speed increases and also the more you move the stick back. It becomes much more difficult to inadvertantly stall out of turns with that effect. Also, with the Spitfire I the stick will go beautifully slack just as the stall begins and you can prevent it snapping out of the turn by easing forward when you feel the slackness. The Emil seems to me to have too responsive an elevator and I found by putting the AirAd or whatever it's called to 0.15 you can get close to the severe elevator stiffness that the 109 was known for at high speed. IP: Logged
Whirlwind Pilot	posted 03-14- 09:51 AM Kill ratio 19:1... is that flying targets or ones on the ground? I wonder what the kill ratio for the 109 and 190 was, counting stationary aircraft. IP: Logged
Ishmael Pilot	posted 03-14- 10:34 AM "The USAAF lost 2520 in action in Europe, but claimed the destruction of 4950 enemy aircraft(almost all of them Lufftwaffe fighters), plus a further 4131 destroyed in ground strafing."---"The Illustrated Encyclopedia of 20th Century Weapons and Warfare." The 56th flying P47s got 674 kills in the air losing 128 47s. The 357th in 51s had 609 air kills and lost 18. I don't know how outnumbered the Germans were though---just interesting figures that I hope I remembered correctly. That's one reason I thought the 51 must have been easy to fly, because many new pilots ranked as aces flying it. I saw a interview with a bf109 pilot on the discovery channel, and he said he was 16 when he became a fighter pilot. IP: Logged
Tailslide Pilot	posted 03-14- 10:58 AM By late 43 the germans were outnumbered 6 to 1 in the air.. thats how you wind up with guys like Chuck Yeager getting 1/5 of a kill for a 262 TS IP: Logged
nealg Pilot	posted 03-14- 11:46 AM I, too, have found that a bit of right rudder in the loop helps to get it over and in position. At first, I couldn't get this one to loop at all - ah, the advantage of flying on a computer!! But I have to agree, on a personal basis with no grounding in technical knowledge, that there is still some things that probably need to be addressed. Those who have flown online with me know that I prefer the Spit, but I keep trying the Pony...much to the delight of those flying in opposition, hehehe!! I have heard comments that it needs to be able to extend a bit better...wasn't that it's biggest advantage? Also, it was much more stable as a ground attack plane than the flight characteristics would lead one to believe? Just a thought thrown out... ------------------ nealg=FC= IP: Logged
Tailslide Pilot	posted 03-14- 11:57 AM Neal.. if you are fighting 190's extend flying level or in a shallow dive. The 190 can climb or steep dive better than the p51. TS IP: Logged
Stark Pilot	posted 03-14- 02:35 PM Yeah, but even level or in a shallow dive the 190 can stay with the 51. The 51 regularly outran everything in Europe except the 262, which is part of the reason many pilots survived making mistakes - they could just outrun the enemy. Also from most everything I've read the 51 should out accelerate the 190, but it can hardly keep up in it's current iteration. Don't get me wrong, I love the way the 190 flies now, it feels right (yeah, like thats scientific) but the 51 was a match for the 190 in almost all respects - and ours right now isnt. Put me in a 190 offline (not my best plane by far) and I can drop four 51's with no problem. Put me in a 51 offline and 4 190's is serious trouble. Now, I'm not the greatest pilot around - but I'm much better than the AI. Last night I set up a 4 51's vs 4 190D's and let the AI duke it out - 5 out of 5 times the 190's crushed the 51's, dropped all the 51's and suffered no losses. Doesnt sound like an even fight to me. I guess I'm just saying that I would like to see the 51 get the OPP's treatment like the German fighters have - there is much room for improvement. I know, I know - if you don't like it go fix it yourself - and I am trying, but I am by no means an OP Guru and the folks in OPP could do a much better job than I. But I will still try. Also, some of my data say the 51D climbed to 20k in 6.8 minutes while the 190D climbed to 20k in 7.0 minutes... could be bad data though, not overly confident in the source. Anybody else have numbers on this? Maybe I'll just model a 51H and drop 190's like flies... -Stark IP: Logged
Tailslide Pilot	posted 03-14- 04:39 PM Are you talking about 5.3a ? The 190 is 20mph slower than 5.2 and I can easily outrun it with the p51.. ask wolfhound and spyder = ) TS IP: Logged
Tailslide Pilot	posted 03-14- 04:47 PM I did the 190A4 and Pang did the p51 so I only heavily researched the 190 but I'm including what I have.. Pang do you have any info still kicking around? TS FW190A-3 ========== WingSpan: 34ft, 5 1/2in Length : 29ft Height: 13ft Wing Area: 197 sq ft Engine: BMW801 Dg radial rated at 1700hp Loaded weight: 7,652lb Wing Loading: 39 lb/ sq. ft Maximum Speed: 399mph Service Ceiling: 33,800ft Rate of climb: c. 4,100 ft/min Range: 644 miles --- P51d ============== WingSpan: 37ft, 0in Length : 32ft,3 in Height: 13ft, 8 in Wing Area: 233 sq ft Engine: Rolls-Royce Merlin inline rated at 1,695 hp Loaded weight: 10,100lb Wing Loading: 43 lb/ sq. ft Maximum Speed: 437mph Service Ceiling: 40,000ft Rate of climb: c. 3,475 ft/min Range: 2080 miles North American P-51D Mustang / Mustang MkIV Powerplant: 1490-hp Packard Rolls-Royce Merlin V-1650-7 inline piston. Max Speed: 437 mph at 25,000 ft. Climb to 30,000 ft: 13.0 min. Service ceiling: 41,900 ft. Weight: 7,125 lb empty / Max take-off weight: 11,600 lb Dimensions: Span = 37 ft, Length = 32 ft, Height = 12 ft, Wing area = 233 sq ft ------------------ ________________________ TS Aircombat IP: Logged
Tailslide Pilot	posted 03-14- 05:40 PM I've noticed that climb rate usually (always?) corresponds to acceleration. TS IP: Logged
Stark Pilot	posted 03-14- 06:04 PM I'll check but I'm pretty sure I ran the dogfights last night with 5.3, but I'll admit it's possible that I didnt...I've only got 4 versions of FS installed right now...it gets complicated keeping track of which version I'm in and whats installed. I'll verify that I was using 5.3a and update as appropriate. I have outrun 190's in 5.3a, but not out accelerated them (which is what I meant to say earlier - not enough coffee in me I guess). From what I have on relative accelerations for the two planes the 51 was a much better performer in this area, anecdotal accounts report that you could just level off and open up the throttle and be out of guns range of the 190 in less than a minute. Right now the 51 is overall faster than the 190 but accelerates slower, meaning that the 190 can stay with you (or even briefly extend) until you reach a speed it cant maintain. But this is hard to test offline as you cant get the AI to open up the throttle and fly straight at the same time you do... and hard to test online because the 1 second lag makes it hard to tell what is lag and what is acceleration... sooooooo maybe it's just my perception Also, I just noticed I was looking at the wrong column on my climb stats above, the stated climb is for the P-51H not the D. The D climbed to 20,000 in 7.1 min, according to this book. I'd kill for a copy of the North American flight test records... Anybody know why the D variant was built in the largest numbers? If you look at the stats the C was actually a better performer than the D. Better climb, a tiny bit faster, greater range. Seems odd not have built it en mass. -Stark IP: Logged
Stark Pilot	posted 03-14- 06:16 PM Climb and acceleration are not always tightly linked. The 51's climb was limited by it's lift abilities as opposed to engine power. It had more power than it really knew what to do with - and in level flight it could accelerate very fast. The 190 had more lift capability than the 51 and suffered from higher drag in level flight than the 51 (which benifited from that nifty laminar flow wing) and so was less able to accelerate (not meaning that it didnt accelerate well, it certainly did - just not as well). For a contemporary example look at modern gliders - they can climb (while being towed or in a thermal) at an amazing rate but they dont accelerate (even in a dive) worth beans. Of course another modern example is current day fighters...where climb is directly proportional to thrust as we now have planes with a better than 1:1 thrust to weight ratio - can we say rocket??? -Stark IP: Logged
Tailslide Pilot	posted 03-14- 07:15 PM Planes that climb better have propellers that are shaped to paddle air very well at slower speeds and accelerate well at slow speeds compared to planes that have the same power engine but don't climb as well is what I meant, sorry should have been more clear. Just an observation from tinkering around with planes and observing how they compare with acceleration in other sims. The p51's weight works for it in a shallow dive but I've read the 190 was better in steep dives I may be wrong on that though... If you can find things like this in SDOE that don't correspond to real life we need to track them down we're on to the finer points in the FM's now. TS [This message has been edited by Tailslide (edited 03-14-2000).] [This message has been edited by Tailslide (edited 03-14-2000).] IP: Logged
Pang Pilot	posted 03-14- 09:10 PM All the info I was using was from the Opaero board, I believe; if that's still up. How about if I reset the coefficient of moment on the 51foil and start from there? Honestly I had forgotten that we experimented with the flaps pitch, and it's plagueing me with the P80b as well. Pang IP: Logged
VonKugel Cadet	posted 03-15- 11:03 AM N-Italy 44? A single P51 against 12 german fighters??? Both 109 and 190??? What a lovely fairytale. p51 killratio 19:1?????? By the d-day allies had a air-superiority of more than 25 fighters against a single german one.There simply werent enough german fighters for that statistic.Deffinitely american propaganda. IP: Logged
jedi Pilot	posted 03-15- 11:37 AM VK-- All that stat means is that for every P-51 downed by a German fighter, 19 German fighters were downed by P-51s. Given that by the time the 51 was in combat, the LW was heavily outnumbered and prohibited from engaging fighters, I suspect that a LW fighter kill was a relatively rare event, while almost EVERY LW fighter shot down was by either a P-51 or a bomber. Also, since it's probably based on post-war recapitulation of combat reports, it may be inaccurate, but it's hardly propaganda. The US govt "propaganda machine" is universally inept and is usually unmasked within days if not hours by the frothing-at-the-mouth US media It would be interesting to be able to verify the kill ratios for all the countries. From what I've read, every squadron and every fighter in existence for every country during the war had a kill ratio of better than 1-to-1. That's obviously not possible. The Japanese apparently did not even keep such records, and separating the "true" German records (probably found in supply and manufacturing accounts rather than anything the military put out) from the bogus Nazi stuff would be a pretty tough task I would think. However, I would also question a 19-to-1 for the Mustang. Everything I've ever seen said 16-to-1 for the Hellcat was the top air-to-air kill ratio for US aircraft. ------------------ --jedi-- IP: Logged
VonKugel Cadet	posted 03-15- 12:05 PM never heard of flag-waveing americans?US propaganda machine is going stronger than ever.The fact that its people doesnt even recognize it deeds speaks volumes about its efficiency! IP: Logged
Tailslide Pilot	posted 03-15- 12:28 PM The germans were probably the most conservative at scoring kills, requiring gun camera footage AND and observer to confirm. The brits were a bit less conservative and the americans the least.. if three b17s shot at a fighter and it went down they would all claim kills and it would wind up being recorded as three planes downed. Closterman's bio had some interesting glimpses of this. One bombing raid half the operational german fighters had been claimed shot down and the british balked at accepting the claims as fact. TS IP: Logged
jedi Pilot	posted 03-15- 01:32 PM Hehe OK, whatever BTW, one of the ways you lose a war is to have a lot more of your planes shot down than the enemy does. This would tend to create air-to-air kill ratios in favor of the side that wins. And that's about all the hooks I'll be sampling today. ------------------ --jedi-- IP: Logged

All times are CT (US)	next newest topic \| next oldest topic
Administrative Options: Close Topic \| Archive/Move \| Delete Topic
	Hop to:

Contact Us | Fighter Squadron Information Center