Kwiatek

There is no stall shake vibration since 1.2.6 which was before these version. I wonder why after 2 another updates ED dont fix these problem. I would like to know why?

Yea shame that since force fedback bug with 1.2.6 it hasnt been fixed yet. ED what is a problem with these? I cant fly P-51 without my ff effects :(

I dont understand what is so diffucult to bring back shake stall from previous version? Force fedback work good up to 1.2.5 version. What is a problem to bring it back like before? We need wait to another update and get hope that it would be fixed but still not sure. Im dissapointment with these really.

Yes still shake stall was not fixed. I cant fly correctly P-51 and im not playing it casuse of these bug. I was hoped that it would be fixed with latetes update but it wasn't fixed. It would be nice if Ed would say something about it and when or if they plan to fix these problem??

I have question for developers what happend with force fedback effect like shake with stall buffet in P-51? These effect was up to 1.2.5 version and has gone with 1.2.6. I hoped that it will be back/fix with next update but after instaling new patch im really dissapointment casue nothing change. Im asking if developers are aware of these problem? I was not able to fly the same way like before with P-51 and i was quit to flying it beacuse of these bug. So i really want to know if it would be fixed or so?

HI! After update to 1.2.6 i lost my force fedback stall shake effect in P-51. Are any tips how to back it? Is ED aware of these problem and plan to fix it? Any thoughs?

Hmm at high speeds it work ok but at slowier speeds at WEP or even at 61 inches temperatures rise very quickly alhough still is airflow by radiator - plane still fly at speed ab. 150-200 mph which isnt soo slow. BTW Do you know what was happend with force fedback stall buffeting in P-51 with 1.2.6? Casue before it work good but now it was disabled?

Yea you right 1900 Ps is for 1.7 Ata. For standart version it was 1.55 Ata.

Manual for P-51D says that stall is preceded by airframe buffeting: " The aircraft is susceptible to high speed stalls, but not any more so than any other high speed aircraft. A buffeting of the tail section occurs about 5 to 10 MPH above the stall. All that is necessary to recover from a high speed stall is to release the back pressure on the stick and then recovery is almost instantaneous. Recovery from a normal stall is the same. The buffeting, however, occurs at about 3 to 5 miles per hour above the stall." " A stall occurs when the aircraft is unable to generate sufficient lift for controlled flight, usually on one of both wings. This results in a loss of control to various degrees, leading to a possible wing-over or an uncontrolled spin in the worst case. The P-51 stalling characteristics are generally mild and recoverable. In general, a stall is preceded by airframe buffeting. Stalling speeds vary greatly depending on the gross weight and the external loading of the aircraft. Lowering the flaps and landing gear reduces stall speeds considerably. Recovery from a stall on the P-51 is normal. In early onset, simply releasing the stick and rudder to drop the nose will recover control. If a wing-drop condition occurs, applying opposite rudder and releasing the stick will recover control." So i think there is some bug with FF effect in 1.2.6. and i want my stall shake effect back :)

Jumo 213A: ( both with MW50 and 1900 PS power curves) :

P-51 used 150 octan fuel and higher boost preasure during 1944-45 with no problems. But im afraid that in DCS P-51 with higher boost would blow its engine very quickly looking how quickly it blow engine with standart emergency power. I still think that there is something not right with cooling system in DCS P-51. BTW Fw 190 D-9 used also 1900 PS mod instead MW 50 instalation which also give better performacne then standart 1.65 Ata version. I think 1900 PS version would be the best choice for DCS as for standart boost P-51 competition. P-51 with higher boost performacne documents: http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/mustang/mustangtest.html

Yea i want also back stall shake back with my Evo Frorce. With my older 1.2.5 there was stall stick shake which gone with 1.2.6. Maby is any temporary solution to use some 1.2.5 files in 1.2.6 to bring back stall shake for stick? Any help?

Bf 109 Bf 109 Bf 109 Bf 109 .... .... .... .... Spitfire Mark IX P-47 I really want 109 ( the best chooice would be variable 109 G types) but K-4 would be also nice. It would be interested checked how could fly 109 in DCS World.

1900 PS is not bad solution. It doesnt requite aditional tank for MW50 and still performacne of D-9 is good. The best thing would be if we could get both version but still for me 1900 PS is also good.

It looks that AI P-51 has more skill then Fw 190D but i understand that Fw190D is new plane so AI need some time to get experience :P

Gavagai i dont ask you but RL P-51 pilots :) and what i read ( in manuals) P-51 give not bad stall warining ( buffeting) but i dont ask about it just about comparision between real P-51 and DCS P-51 accelerated stall in high angle of attack manouvers cause DCS P-51 get stall very early with stick movement ( for me it looks like DCS P-51 had very low critical angle of attack). So i wonder RL P-51 opinions about how close or how far DCS P-51 is from real thing in these.

I got 2 question: 1. Is real P-51 so prone to stall like DCS one? If they will try DCS P-51 i wonder how it feels compare to real one in high angle of attack manouvers? In DCS you could stall it with not too much stick movement - how it is compare with real one 2. Is real P-51 overheat so quickly at slow speeds manouvers and climbs at full ( military) power? In DCS P-51 could overhat in 2 vertical zooms from high speed till stall speed - how it is comparing to real one?

Hmm i cant find reason of accident probably my english is not so good. Could you wrote what was happend there in private message. S!

Respect for You friend. Sry to hear that he is gone. He surly was a great pilot. Salute! Could you tell what was the reason of these accident? Im also RL pilot and never would have such experience like him but also love warbirds and i fly aerobatic Zlin 526.

Well wartime P-51 had military equipment and full fuel load so take off power was nessesery ( 61 MP). Probably with less fuel load and without military load 46 MP could be used succesfully either. Dunno about go for 2 around could be that with landing speed 38 MP was enough to go away and give less prop effects to counter then with nominal power. I think more dangerous in such situation would be too quickly add power from idle to miliatry power. I think the key is the same like with take off run - in smoothly adding power even to full miliatary power. BTW i wonder if Your friend ( P-51 pilot) try DCS P-51? I wonder expecially his opinion about accelerated stall in turns and pull ups - if real P-51 was really so tricky like DCS one? Also about heating engine - i wonder if really at slow speed engine coolant and oil temperature could rise so quickly?

No no more LA7. Il2 casue i dont want any La for another 10 years. Bf 109, P-47, Spitfire yes but no more La7 I would like to see Bf109 G after Fw 190.

Yes im also wonder RL P-51 pilot opinion. For me as RL pilot (not P-51 yet :P ) but i fly aerobatic in Zlin 526F so i think DCS P-51 has get stall to early comparing to stick movement - which actually there is no need to much to get stall. Looking from extrernal view on G number during turn and speed it look exacly like in chart posted above ( i checked it and stall occurs at correct speed and G load) but just i think our stick movement/delfection dont corensponded well with these what should be happend with plane. So it would be good to have more longer stick deflection until stall come. And yes i got tweaked curves for pitch but still it doesnt feel right to me :)

I think that could be a more problem to fly our DCS P-51 then RL pilot could have with his P-51. I could imagine that in simulator with our "short stick" we could have more trouble with pitch movement then RL pilots. So even if critical angle of atack data are accurate in game it still could not mean that it would be realistic way. Im personaly think that in game P-51 got stall little too early comparing to stick movements. BTW i wonder what CAoA and clmax had P-51?

I will contact with Yo-Yo and send him my charts if he would need it :)

Probably it was initialy field mod instalation but i think later planes had these system in standart or were equimplent with MW 50 instalation. So i think there were operational both version - with 1900 PS modification and MW50. " The Junkers technical field service visited III./JG 54 monthly. In October the number of Fw 190 D-9s on strength with the Gruppe rose to 68. Of these, 53 had been converted to 1,900 h.p. and one was delivered by Focke-Wulf with the MW 50 system. The remaining 14 were in the process of being converted and completion was imminent. [...]In its November report, Junkers noted that all the aircraft of the three new Gruppe were being converted to 1,900 h.p. and that the work was significantly more difficult at frontline airfields where there were no hangers. By the end of December 1944 there were 183 Fw 190's in operation with the increased performance modification, and 60 more had been delivered with the MW 50 system and were at the point of entering service. * * Dietmar Hermann, Focke-Wulf Fw 190 "Long Nose", (Schiffer, Atglen, PA, 2003)" I got some German scan charts with both system used in D-9.