otto

With respect man.I wrote p51 should get fuel upgrade.I wrote damage model for 109 is too hard. But it's not like p51 has only disadvantages and 109 only advantages. At 4.5 g ? Maybe if it was 8 i might have believed that. I undertood at the time from Yo-Yo's post it was a bug.My mistake. Real pilots talk about stifness at speed of 400km/h and over. Not 250-300. First video. P51 deflection shooting. TN9oHgP13BA Second video 1-2 cannon shells and 30 mg bullets vs your p51 VQKhMxtDUt4 Just 2 mg on 109 vs 51. d5Lu6IdMIT8 So it's possible to kill with 2 mg on the 109 from above but not with 6 of the 51 ? I flown p51 for years before the d9 and 109 were available so to a certain point i got bored of it. But i like the german planes more.Just like you like the 51 more. And i admit that .I's no secret. Now shot me one of your 109 kills. Because i want to have fun too. :D .

Come on.Even when controls were free there were other disadvantages that the 109 had like broken wings at 4-5 g and you were still posting how much better the 109 was. Than the 109 controls don't offer full deflection unless you fly at 250 km/h.But that's ok to you ? And it's not pressure you feel but a delay(It can't be modeled any other way so that's that .i understand the devs). Before the last update the mw50 tank was full all the time regardless how much fuel you used .The plane was not balanced and harder to fly on the edge of the stall.Now it's easier . @ 109 Is easier to get kills. In turnfights maybe.But that the 109 is overall better is an illusion very easy to prove wrong. If you energy fight than D9 and 51 can dive with 850km/h ,870 km/h .In the 109 the controls are useless at 600 km/h. It's only better if you turnfight and that's going to be negated by the spitfire9.And even if you turnfight it has only 60 shells for the cannon with horrible ballistic trajectory, half of those are HEI that don't do anything unless hit liquid(on on planes that use 30% starting fuel). Ps: I think a higher boosted p51 is a good thing.But 109 is soo much easier to fly than 51 is a mith that's busted after you learn energy fight skillfullly .

In a few months the spitfire 14 will be available and it's going to outperform all other piston planes. Also it's hard for me to believe that the 8th airforce mustangs that flew mostly hight altitude escort to Germany and back would fly with 30% starting fuel like most p51 pilots online.When you fly escort missions you consume more fuel because you need to weave and ,or fly slower as to keep the bombers in sight.So you gain advantages that are not historically accurate anyway.

I used to play the old il2 and many of the people i used to chat didn't have a really fast PC.Lots of people prefer to play CLoD because would need new hardware to play DCS. For the same reason i don't play DCS anymore .Too much stuttering .Maybe the stuttering would go away if i buy a new pc(but i can't afford that) .

My opinion is there is no way to know for sure. I'll have to try it out to know . And also personal preference counts.Someone might find it better, more realistic.Others not so much. Like when driving a motorsport competition car .Some tap the accelerator(bam bam bam) ,some press it smoothly .

If you played il2 1946 you would know that JG1 Barton and JG7 Leo flew mostly FW Anton on any map against any allied planes( spitfire 14, tempest ,the latest P51s D30).I would say they were pretty much death in motion.So if you think it's somehow a handicap to fly an Anton ... a

I would also like higher boosted allied planes.But a k4 with a 1.98ata is inferior to a me 262 and so is any other piston engine plane.There were over a thousand of them built which is significant for a small force like LW was at the end of the war. So that makes it stock option for LW .But that would make for a pretty unfair mach against mustang or spitfire. I don't think you can recreate 100 how things were historically .No developer would simulate fuel shortages, untrained pilots , insane numerical advantage and all this stuff.

I would have been so dissapointed if the 109 would not have mw50 or something.So i totally understand why people want higher rated fuels. But i've flown for a while without mw50. And now i'm flying only mustang :lol: .

Der Bundesrepublik war nicht so groß einige Jahre zuvor(die neue bundesländer). Wer weiß was die zukunft bringt.Ich meine nur wenn die menschen das möchten.

Im' sorry but you missed my point. My point is i can decrease saturation on y for p51 and 190 and use curves for better control. If i use a decrease for 109 as low as 5% i have much better control in turnfights fights but controll stiffening becomes impossible to deal with .And boom and zoom not an option unless i fly at 550 km/h which is too little. If i don't use that 5% i can't fly the plane in any kind of turnfight .But i can boom and zoom. I'm just looking to do both. If i fly the p51 i can drop it as much as 40 % and i still have full control over the plane in 855 km/h dives without any problem at all. In il2 bos you can't lower saturation .It's stuck at 100% .And that's what i think is fair . @People that talk about Drivers. If i can use a driver to improve the control of all planes but one. That does't make it fair for the people that play that plane .

How can anyone take this serously . It's perfect because you or your friend have flown the 109 in real life ? :D

Wouldn't the use of such software be considered a cheat for MP matches ?

Yes but some people claim that control stiffness for 109 should and was implemented because it's more realistic.So realism matters always or not at all. Stiff controls would not be a bad thing because muscle memory and such is a lot easier developed around pressure . That's why some modern fighter sticks don't move almost at all (French Rafale)but register pressure being applied to them.But the 109 controls have a delay. So not only that i can't lower saturation on Y to increase control for 109 .But i also can't use a curve either because the delay would get worse. So why can't the 109 pilots that have cheap sticks use this and p51 can ? Y saturation should be always 100 like in all other simulations.

+1

I don't think setting like this are realistic IMHO.There should be the option to choose a curve but not to decrease the saturation on y. If i fly the p51 with settings like this(never used such extreme like picture though) it give me and improved and unrealistic advantage IMO when flying on the dge of the stall .If you fly 109 you can't use this because of control stiffness at all. These are some of my kills with the 109 and 190 : So i'm not a beginner.

I think the reason you lose is because there is no 72" yet.

People need to wait and see how the spit will handle.In il2 46 spitfire 9 had every advantage theoretically over 109G6. But the spit was twitchier on the vertical and that made it harder to shoot . Also if it has it's controls delayed like the 109 had.It's hard to build a muscle memory around that.So that would matter more in my book than 25lbs boost. It only works for 5 minutes AFAIk and if someone booms you by surprise(which is how booming mostly works :) ) you'll probably have it off anyway.

But why do you choose to fly with 30% fuel then ? I fly with a full tank to boom better.

Difficult to say .I would keep the A10 too. You never know when you need it.

That's a nice shot !

If i didn't have mw50 i would ask for it too.But it's destroyed the engine so many times i use it rarely and lots of times i fly without. But it's great to have 72" option rather than not have it.Ads diversity to the game.

I'm just looking to find out more. Bulges on wings are irrelevant to roll rate.Aileron design,and force moment are more important. Fw 190 V1(prototype) roll rate was 162° per second at 410 km/h. Roll rate remained the about the same for all Fw 190 A (table 868 previous page) even if they had a lot more mass with wing cannons and such. Roll rate changed with d9 because of the shift of center of gravity .The changes were substantial compared to A model. Plane became more stable and rolled slower some say.Some, think it rolled same as Anton.

+1

Just how p-fiftyoners claim it's because they don't have 72 boost they get shot down when the fly at tree top altitude, turnfight 109s and do it poorly.

I spot targets against the ground with ease. Should have seen how it was before 1.5. Or the way it was b4 lods got improved by a few forum members.