Tomsk

Thanks Starfire, that's really interesting. I knew the allies outnumbered the axis, but it's good to see some numbers on it.

Honestly, I'd like both :D As I've said before, I don't think this late in the war (the end of '44, early '45) is a good period to simulate. The massive allied advantage in numbers at this stage totally skews the situation, leading to very unfair fights with very ahistorical outcomes. Agree completely.

Sure some do, but I also see plenty of people online who dive into the bottom of every furball they can find. It's not conducive to survival, even in a plane that turns well. I also see people who aren't quite so reckless, but still get into engagements they shouldn't ... I get into engagements that I shouldn't, and I'm a fairly conservative player. For sure, it is a lot easier to do well as axis, no debate from me, I was just commenting on Spitfire vs P-51. Some people feel the Spitfire is more survivable, maybe that's true for their style. But personally, I find I'm ever aware that the doors can start closing very fast in the Spitfire. Doesn't dive well, isn't fast ... so if you get surrounded by higher or similar energy enemies you're unlikely to make it back home. But yeah, I also fly the 190 and it is a lot easier to do well in the 190 ... and to make it back home afterwards.

I enjoy flying the P-51, but it is an exercise in patience. Still sometimes you can have fun and do okay. I recently got bounced by a higher 109, and the fight proceeded with me sucking him into a rolling scissors at high-speed (which the 109 is bad at). He was forced to overshoot, and I rolled on his six for a neat kill. It feels so good when you do that in the P-51, knowing you're doing it with a whole bag of disadvantages :) I totally agree different people have different styles, and so like different planes. For me the key is that the Mustang is better at running for home. The Spit doesn't dive well, and it's slow on the deck anyway. When I fly German most of my Mustang kills are from players who never knew I was there. Most of my Spit kills are Spits that couldn't run, and so now are 4-vs-1 being boomed-and-zoomed from all angles in a damaged plane that seems to have run out of ammo. They always go down eventually.

People come to flight simulators with a particular mindset. Often, that mindset is "I wanna get into some action, and make as many kills in as little time as possible ... and if I go down in a blaze of glory that's fine, it's quicker to re-plane than land anyway". There's nothing wrong with that mindset, but it does lead to certain choices seeming better. If you fly with this mindset the Spitfire will seem a much better choice. Alternatively you can come with the mindset of "I want to make kills yes, but most of all I want to bring the plane home afterwards. So why would I ever engage in a fight where I have to maneuver with the enemy? Maneuvering with the enemy is dangerous ... I want to reserve the right to fire for myself, I will give the enemy no opportunity to fire and reject every fight where they could". If you fly with this mindset, IMO you're more likely to choose the P-51. That said, I do agree with Hiromachi about being envious about the armament. I really hope the new damage model brings a damage boost for the 50 cals, they really need it in my opinion.

The problem is the AI zooms much too well ... probably because it can never stall. So you get into a tangle with it, and you're at the same energy level. You get the AI to overshoot and see him pulling out in front of your guns. However, the AI responds by just going up and somehow you can't follow. Now normally this would be a terrible tactic to use after overshooting in a co-E fight, don't do this on a public server unless you have a large energy advantage. Why? Well because you can't zoom like that, you'll just stall out in front of the other person's guns and they'll fill you full of holes. However, when the AI does it, it cheats and so it works okay for it. It's actually really annoying. So many times I have won the scissors against an AI when the AI is in a superior turning plane (it's not easy but it is possible). I'm ready to take my shot, and it goes and pulls that nonsense. You simply can't follow it, and so he gets to turn in the vertical back round onto your tail again ... for yet more scissors practice. The absolute hardest is trying to dogfight the P-51 AI co-E in the 190 (I've not tried against the Spitfire yet). The AI pulls this "magic zoom" trick all the time, and the P-51 turns better than the 190 as well. When you can win that match up, every time, against the strongest AI. Well then you're skills are getting pretty good in my book.

So I'm a huge fan of being able to determine the terms of the fight, and I generally like fast aircraft that dive well for exactly this reason. However, how useful it is probably depends on your objective. If your objective is to go out and shoot down enemy fighters without being shot down, then yes, being able to dictate the terms is huge. You can choose to only take fights where you have the advantages. On the DCS dogfight servers this is therefore a huge bonus. However, suppose your are escorting bombers ... the fact you can run away from the fight is nice, but you'll leave your bombers completely vulnerable. Similarly, if you need to shoot down enemy bombers ... it's good you can run away from the fight, but that's not going to shoot any enemy bombers down. You could never lose a single fighter, and still effectively have been completely defeated in the air. For a great deal of missions you don't need to shoot the enemy's fighters down, if you can simply deny them the opportunity to act.

Absolutely, in my opinion teamwork (and energy) is the ultimate advantage. If you fly as a coordinated team, and secure an energy advantage then you can easily beat a disorganised group of pilots who fly with poor tactics. This is true even if the enemy are flying substantially better planes. Now I would love to see that!

Absolutely agree, a better top speed on paper is a long way from a magic win button. That's what makes air combat interesting for me, it's not just about stats, it's about how you use what you've got :) But at the moment it's noticeably harder for allies. Personally I'd love to see more balance there, whether I'm flying as allies or axis. Interestingly I think the 109 is the tougher match up for the P-51, but the 190 is the real pain for the Spitfire. If the 190 knows what he's doing, and spots you coming, you more or less will never get a good opportunity to kill him in a Spit. The P-51 can follow a 190's dive, but if a 190 really decides to dive and run the Spitfire more or less has to let him go.

I fly both axis and allied, and I have definitely found that flying axis is a lot easier. One reason is the axis planes are better. The P-51s biggest strength would normally be speed, but the 109 is faster at most altitudes and the 190 is faster down low. The poor hitting power of the 50 cals also makes BnZ tough (normally the best way to fly the 51) as you're unlikely to get one pass one kill, as you often can in the 190. You can make kills, and I do, but it's harder. The Spitfire is good in the dogfight, but a smart 109 or 190 pilot will refuse to do that and just out run you if in a poor position. The 190 is especially tough for the Spit as if it has altitude it can spiral dive for the deck and run at any time. The Spit just can't follow without breaking wings. Done that to so many spits when flying the 190. The other big issue is that axis players climb and allied ones generally don't. This means your choice is generally go low and get BnZed forever, or go high and face 3-vs-1 odds or worse. IMO this is probably a bigger problem than the performance differences. I don't know why it should be like this but whenever I fly axis there are lots of friendly planes up high with me. When I fly allied I'm often the only one up high. The allies could probably make up for their performance disadvantages by climbing high and working as a team .. but it doesn't seem to happen much.

I haven't shot down a lot of Spitfires yet. I have however seen plenty of cooked engines, and even more broken wings ... the Spitfire really isn't best suited to following the high speed manoeuvres you can pull in a 190 :)

Indeed, it's a constant speed propeller. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constant-speed_propeller Although it isn't directly linked to boost per se. Instead the governor just adjusts pitch to maintain a specific RPM based on a feedback process. However changing boost may well change various flight conditions which could affect RPM, the most significant of which is airspeed.

I've also experienced this a few times in the 190 ... flying along at quite a fairly modest RPM (2700 something like that). Regularly checking temps, they're all fine. And then suddenly bang, it's overheated and dead. No damage taken, no obvious reason why. My theory is that 2700 is above the normal long term operating range (2400) but it seems the engine doesn't get hot, it just somehow takes invisible internal damage that eventually causes it to fail.

Out of interest do any other planes have guns that can jam, or is it just the 190?

Ahh is that it. I've gotten too used the 50 cals in the P-51 ... they don't seem to mind firing a high G at all. Okay will bear that in mind in future and avoid firing under heavy G. Thanks :)

Hello, Has anyone else had problems with guns stopping working in the 190? I've been flying it a lot recently on public servers and I've been getting a lot of weapons failures. No damage taken, plenty of ammo left, they just stop working. Both the cannons and the machine guns seem to be affected, and it happens in about 50% of fly-outs I'd say. This is on 1.5 not had a chance to play on a public server in 2.0. Cheers Tomsk

I'm with PicksKing, in pretty much every aerial photo you can find the trees are darker than the grass. IMO the group that got this most right was Team Fusion in their Cliffs of Dover mod. They obviously went and found pictures of that part of the world and then worked to make the colours in the sim match. Getting the colours right can hugely improve the visual quality and immersion, at absolutely no framerate cost :)

I agree, player flyable light and medium bombers would make for more interesting scenarios. They were also much more significant than the 262. Also looking forward to the P-47D :)

:) I don't think anyone knows much TBH. ED have said it'll get an update to reflect European theatre use. I imagine that'll be a free update.

I think the issue is not the flight model per se but rather the competitiveness of the P-51. I've never flown a P-51 in real life so I can't really tell you if the flight model is accurate, but I can say I find the DCS P-51 an absolute joy to fly, one of my favourites. The general request is that the P-51 should be updated to reflect what was used in the European theatre in late 44 (since that's the period we seem to be modelling). That is 150 octane fuel and 72" (or perhaps even 75") manifold pressure. This would give the P-51 a noticeable speed boost and would probably move it to being faster than the 109 at most altitudes. I agree with this proposal as it is both historically plausible, and it should give an interesting balance. The 109 climbs and accelerates better (you'd expect that), and also turns better at slow speed. But the P-51 is faster (especially up high), and turns better at high speed. That said IMO the P-51 is underestimated. It's a great BnZ plane, and with an energy advantage it can be very effective :)

I haven't tried the 109 recently (will have to give it a go when I get home), but I don't necessarily find this surprising. The earlier 109s (as modelled in CloD and BoM) were much lighter. The K4 gained a lot of power over earlier 109s, and climbs and accelerates like crazy, but had about the same wing area as earlier models. I've read that the extra weight was known for not being kind on the handling, and the K4 was known for being a bit of a handful. The 190 (by contrast) was known for its well balanced handling, despite the high wing loading. None of which is saying you're wrong, something could be off ... but for me personally I'd expect the K4 to have somewhat tricky handling.

Since this is one of my favourite topics: P-51D Pros: Dives well, handles nicely at high speeds, good performance at altitude, rolls well (especially at high speeds), good ammo load, best range & endurance, fantastic visibility from cockpit, very fast on cruise, IMO easiest plane to land and take-off, IMO best handling on ground with nice wide gear. Cons: Not a great climber, not a great turner at slow speed (better than 190 but otherwise bad), 50 cals not as effective as cannons IMO, twitchy stall characteristics. Style: Mixed, I mostly use BnZ or for high-speed scissor fighting, but can also turn with some things especially at high speed. Loves altitude. Avoid climbing fights, lengthy turning contests or getting caught low and slow. Can out turn the 190, but can struggle a little in the defensive against the 109 since the 109 turns better at slow speeds, climbs better and is faster on WEP (tip: focus on high-speed turning contests such as rolling scissors whilst diving). Spitfire Mk IX Pros: Best turner, climbs and accelerates well (not quite as well as 109 but nearly), cannons are very effective, very forgiving to fly (doesn't stall easily) Cons: Slow, doesn't handle well at high speeds, worst at rolling (especially at high speed), .303s are not very effective, twitchy handling on the ground due to narrow gear, cockpit visibility is okay but not as good as P-51 & 190. Style: Energy fighting using the turn rate as an ace in the hole, can also turn fight but bleeds energy fast. Doesn't like diving fights, limited BnZ potential but can with small energy gaps. That turn rate is a great defensive tool, but you can easily get stuck fighting fights you don't want to be in due to slow speed and poor dive. Bf 109 K4 Pros: Very fast on WEP especially at altitude, great WEP duration, amazing climb/acceleration, reasonable turner when at the right speeds, reasonable roll rate at the right speeds. Cons: Kind of "wallows" at slow speeds, has control stiffening issues at high speeds, 30mm cannon is overkill for fighter work and is hard to aim with limited ammo, not the best diver, cockpit visibility isn't great, narrow gear is tricky on the ground and in landings / take-offs. Style: Energy fighting, used to get used a lot for turn fighting but the Spit is better at that now. Anything with vertical manoeuvres and climbing is good. Doesn't like high speed fighting, can BnZ if the energy gap isn't too large. FW 190D Pros: Very fast down low (below 5Km) especially on WEP, great WEP duration, great high speed handling, amazing roll rate at most speeds, dives and zooms very well, best weapons IMO, great ammo load, very good cockpit visibility, wide gear not bad for landings and ground handling. Cons: Turns like a brick at slow speeds, not the best climber, not great performance at altitude, tricky handling at slow speeds. A little tricky on take-off. Style: Mostly BnZ, although also loves high-speed scissors (especially flat scissors). Avoid being slow like the plague, avoid very high altitudes. If in trouble dive away at WEP, nothing is likely to catch you. NOTES You can try the TF-51 (unarmed P-51) for free, which can give a good introduction to the P-51 and of DCS Warbirds in general. If your friends don't have much Warbird experience they should know there's quite a learning curve just for flying the things (never mind combat). High performance tail draggers are lots of fun, but they are a lot harder to fly than modern jets (although jets are vastly more complex in terms of avionics etc.). I would generally recommend getting good at the non-combat stuff in the TF-51, since it's free and probably the easiest Warbird to learn in. Then choose the plane you want to learn next and buy that.

I am also very much of the "pilot skill is by far the most important factor" school. I personally think going heavy on the engine management is a little overrated. IMO the gains are small compared to a turn made at the wrong time, or in slightly the wrong direction. Missing a shot you shouldn't have missed. Pulling too hard when you didn't need to, blowing your energy and stalling all over the sky. Reacting to your opponent incorrectly, or simply too slowly. Energy is key, but WWII planes build energy slowly compared to how much they have when they enter a fight. What matters most is how you use the energy you've got. Do you use it wisely, do you hoard it like a miser or do you blow it all for a low probability shot that you then miss anyway?

If you post a video mia I'm happy to take a look, otherwise it's hard to give advice without seeing what's going wrong.

Planes will stall if you pull too hard. You absolutely can dogfight in the P-51, it's particularly adept at high-speed scissors, but you do have to be gentle with it. The plane stalling is it telling you "I can't turn that fast right now", the P-51 has quite an abrupt stall so it can catch you off guard quite easily. The plane can turn in a loop all day (well until it runs out of fuel) but it can only turn so hard ... On a practical note you might want to reduce the sensitivity on the elevators a bit, makes it a bit easier to not pull too much.