Tomsk

Eeep, that probably works in DCS but would likely destroy your gear in real life ... *soo* much side loading :-) You'd normally crab in (as you have), but then transition to a slip just before landing (wing down into the wind, opposite rudder) to avoid destroying the gear. You end up landing with your wings not level (windward wheel touches first), but it's much safer :-)

I have also noticed that planes such as the 190 (and P-47, and other very strongly BnZ focused aircraft) often don't do as well in simulators as they did in real life. I think a huge part of the difference is whether you are flying to get kills, or flying to survive. If you want kills going towards the nearest enemy, and turning for all your are worth is probably the quickest way, and the 190 sucks at that. However, if survival is your goal the FW-190 D9 has some fantastic attributes. Real pilots valued speed hugely, speed meant if you didn't want to fight you could choose not to. The FW 190 D9 is really fast down on the deck. Even the (also really fast) P-51 can't catch it at WEP, and the D9 has a lot more WEP time available than any of its competition. It also dives incredibly well, and these attributes together make it almost impossible to catch if it has a few km's of altitude to play with. That said, if you do you want to go on the offensive and dogfight I've found they key is the roll rate and high-speed maneuverability. The 190 out rolls everything, and although it turns badly at slow speed it's an entirely different matter if you first dive to 650 kph. Here it beats everything, and the plane is probably the ultimate high-speed scissors machine. Not even other good high-speed scissors planes (such as the P-51 and P-47) are as good at it as the 190.

So could be this has already been answered, but I could finding the answer in the thread history. Will the new damage model also apply to the AI? Currently they are crazy tough, and fly as though damage doesn't effect them. I've previously shot off one horizontal stabilizer, one aileron, filled both wings with holes, shot the daylights out of the remaining elevator and had the engine trailing fuel and smoke ... didn't cramp the AI's style one bit.

The Spitfire LF Mk IX used the Merlin 66 engine, which had a Bendix-Stromberg injection carburettor. As I understand it this newer carburettor didn't have the same starvation problems under negative G that the older Spitfire engines had.

I do think the P-51 should get engine settings that match the time period, which seems to be late '44 or early '45 judging by the opposition it faces. I believe ED have said they'll do this after the Spitfire and Normandy map releases. Although IMO, people's biggest problems with the P-51 vs Bf109 matchup is that they don't use the P-51 to its strengths, and an extra 8" of manifold pressure at WEP isn't going to fix that :-)

Yup, very much so. Both the Bf109 and the P-51 are great aircraft, they each have strengths and weaknesses. IMO it's all about playing to your aircraft's strengths, and exploiting your enemy's weaknesses.

Honestly I think it's hard to know the absolute truth on relative performance of the Bf109K4 vs the Spit Mk XIV. It was a long time ago, and the data is somewhat conflicting. However, I do think the 109 K4 vs Spit Mk XIV is a good and interesting match-up - whatever the exact numbers. I do very much agree with Talisman. It was all a bit of a moot point by the end of 1944 / early 1945. The Luftwaffe was very much on the back foot and decidedly outnumbered. The difference in numbers doesn't tend to be replicated in multiplayer battles, so in some ways I would prefer to see earlier model 109s and 190s to match the P-51s and Spit Mk IXs. I say this as someone who enjoys flying both axis and allied fighters.

Yeah to me they are both "true" Spitfires. The Mk XIV is likely to be a monster: faster than the 109K4 at most altitudes, climbs faster across the board, turns better, rolls better, better visibility and the hispanos are very nice cannons. IMO if we want to play the historical accuracy game, the Spitfire LF Mk IX should be fighting the FW 190 A8 and Bf109 G6. The late war and rare Bf109 K4 and FW 190D9 should be facing the late war and rare Mk XIV ...

This is my top tip for smooth takeoffs in the 190, trim the nose heavy. At neutral trim it wants to takeoff too early and is prone to stalling. When you've done that the 190 is much more pleasant on takeoff, though still harder work than the P-51 IMO.

Everyone is of course entitled to their opinion. But personally I like what the P-51 (and P-47) offer. As long as I have a bit of altitude under me, I can disengage from a 109 at will. If I don't like the fight, I just leave. The 109 has no such luxury, if I hold an energy advantage over him then I decide the fight. If he takes damage he has to stay and fight, if he's low on fuel he has to stay and fight, if my friends turn up to turn this into a many-vs-one he has to stay and fight. For me the ability to choose when I want to fight and when I don't is the ultimate advantage. It was the ultimate advantage in real life too, but it's not much appreciated in simulators where people want to fight even at a huge disadvantage.

Well I'm mostly a P-51 pilot and I still think skill is the deciding factor. I also don't think the 109 is superior ... The 109 K4 is a formidable plane. It is slightly faster than a P-51 when they are both at WEP, although not on military power, the P-51 is faster there. It climbs better, and it turns a bit better at slow speeds. However, the P-51 dives better, is much more maneuverable at high speeds and rolls a bit better. IMO that's a nice collection of traits to have, you can build a great game plan with that collection of traits. Climb to a reasonable altitude, if you meet a lower 109 then BnZ them, the P-51 is really good at that. Join with a friend of two to make that be a really bad day for the 109 below you. If you meet a co-E or slightly higher energy 109 then you can often sucker them into blowing a lot of their energy in the merge. That works most of the time. Otherwise treat as below ... If you meet a higher 109 you have some choices. First if it all goes wrong you can dive for the deck and run away, a 109 will not catch a P-51 in a dive. Also the P-51 holds excess speed much better than 109, even if the 109 is in theory a few mph faster in the long run the P-51 will be long gone by the time it matters. Secondly if they are foolish enough to follow you into a 400mph+ dive then they have made a big mistake. The P-51 handles beautifully at 400mph ... the 109 really does not. My personal favourite is a rolling scissors, the 109 will have huge overshoot problems because it is not at all maneuverable at those kinds of speeds. Use the roll rate advantage to avoid any shot opportunities the 109 might have, and use the turn advantage (at high speeds) to force an overshoot ... then nail them. If they don't follow you into your dive then wave them bye-bye ... they'll not catch you. The P-47 is a bit slower at low altitudes, but is king-of-the-hill above 25,000ft ... nothing can catch it up there. It also dives and zooms like a dream, controls wonderfully at high speeds, and has a really nice weapons package with tons of ammo. It is a fantastic plane for BnZ, and is an absolute monster at high-altitude where it has the traits to dominate since it is faster, out-climbs, out-dives and out-maneuvers virtually everything at all speeds. A P-47 cruising at around 30,000ft can BnZ (somewhat) lower enemies with impunity as it is almost untouchable up there. So yes, the 109 K4 is much better dogfighter than a P-51 or P-47 .. but dogfighting is not the only way to fight.

Absolutely, it all comes down to pilot skill at the end of the day. Each of the planes have their own strengths and weaknesses, and so it usually ends up coming down to who can best exploit their strengths and expose their opponent's weaknesses. That said I'm a big fan of the BnZ style, it allows a good opportunity for attacking the enemy with little risk to oneself. Working in a pair can be especially effective, as soon as your opponent dodges one attack the next plane is already diving in looking for the shot. Also whilst it's true that a 109 can even out the energy situation if well flown, if the P-51 pilot feels like they've lost the advantage they can simply dive away. A 109 won't usually catch a co-E P-51 in a shallow dive, the P-51 simply dives better. Also as long the P-51 has altitude he can force the fight into a high-speed contest, something the 109 is not good at. Definitely not, I'm a big fan of the Dora. Great high speed handling, dives very well, awesome weaponry, terrifying roll rate, and currently the fastest plane (at WEP) on the deck. Definitely not to be underestimated! Honestly I think a well flown Me262 should be more or less untouchable, it's just simply too fast for most planes to catch. Even diving from a substantial altitude advantage most piston planes would have a hard time getting into a firing position. Which is why I expect most servers won't allow it to be used much, it would just be too dominant.

Why would the P-47/P-51 not engage if they have a large energy advantage over the 109/Dora? In that situation the P-47/P-51 can boom and zoom the 109/Dora with virtually no risk to themselves (if done properly). This is what the P-47 and P-51 (and the Dora) were made for: booming and zooming a lower energy opponent. They can also disengage at any time, unlike the lower energy 109/Dora who cannot disengage, even if they hold a top-speed advantage. It really doesn't matter if your plane would be out-performed at a given altitude if you hold a large energy advantage over your opponent. No sustained climb rate can match a zoom climb, and no top-speed advantage can match the speed gained in a dive. Energy is king.

Out of interest, does anyone know what the difference in top-speed would be at 72" compared to 67"?

Yes that one is a real classic, and works surprisingly often. It's basically a magic win button against the AI, but plenty of people fall for it also. The other good ones are turning a top speed advantage into an energy advantage by shallow climbing, again there are counters but most people don't realise they are being suckered. Also the trick of blowing through a merge until gaining enough separation to reverse is good. He judges it by distance (since labels), but I've found counting time works pretty well if you know the relative performance of the planes in question. It's all really good "strategic energy fighting" stuff, which so often gets overlooked in DCS, which in general has a fairly dogfighting focused community. This tactic (different WarThunder RB guy) is also pure genius:

A Spitfire with an energy advantage is a scary thing. You can't outrun it, because they have an energy advantage. Can't out climb for the same reason: zoom climb beats sustained. Can't out turn. Can't out roll the clipped wing variant. Something like a 190 can dive for the deck and if the 190 has enough altitude then the Spitfire can't follow. Or a 190 can sucker the Spit into a high speed contest, where the 190 has an advantage. But not so with a 109, which can't really dive any better than a Spit, and doesn't tolerate high speeds well. The 109 is a monster if it has the energy advantage, or even co-E, but without that it's likely to be on the back foot.

Ohh that's promising :-) would be awesome to be able to do bomber escort missions.

According to the newsletters, the Normandy map release will include "period units". Does anyone happen to know if that will include period AI aircraft, such as AI bombers?

I'm a huge fan of the P-47, probably my favourite WWII aircraft. I've been really enjoying this guy's warthunder videos on using the P-47 effectively. It's warthunder, and not even the most realistic mode but a lot of the energy fighting stuff works well in DCS. I've had great success applying it in the P-51 against the Dora, which the P-51 can energy fight at altitude. Anyhow thought people might enjoy :-)

Sounds good, just a note that the mail link in your previous post is wrong, I'm guessing it should be P51Sundays@yahoo.com :-)

Indeed. So much is made of differences between planes, and having a better plane helps for sure, but my experience has been that it's not usually the deciding factor. Maybe everyone who flies in DCS is top-tier "experten", but my experience in War Thunder has been that the differences in skill are much larger than differences between planes. I'm one of the better pilots in the sim mode of War Thunder, I usually expect to come top of the board, and the people I fly against are not all clueless. None the less, a while ago I flew some duels against a former squadmate of mine ... he wiped the floor with me, every time. He did it in the FW-190 A5, when I was in a Spit IX. He had no energy advantage, he just out fought me in the dogfight. The Spit should be much better at that game than the FW-190, and the 190 in WT is notoriously unforgiving, but he was just better than me ... and so I lost. It was quite humbling, and since then I've thought less about what plane I'm flying ... and more about how I can fly it better.

I could be interested! I won't necessarily be free every Sunday at 3pm EST, but definitely will be free for some of them.

Little_D's method looks very similar to mine: fairly steep on final, flare out and hold the nose at a set attitude, leave a little bit of power on and just let the plane float down onto the runway when it's ready. I often keep that 1500 rpm right until the wheels are safely on the ground. It's a very fail safe way to do it: it's tolerant to flaring a bit too high (it'll just take longer to float down), it's tolerant to having a bit too much speed (you'll just use more runway). If you hold the right attitude it won't stall out on you (you'll just descend) and if you leave a bit of power on you wont sink too fast into the deck. There are ways of landing that use slightly less runway, but any sane three-point landing is usually fairly short. I don't worry about a "2/3 breakpoint" and such like, but then I use a FFB stick and at those kind of slow speeds the stick is comfortable and very light across the whole range.

Because it's a Spitfire!

Hmm not yet it seems