Solty

Hey! It was fun guys. :) Congrats to the winners. PS. I watched the stream. The landing gear was a glitch when I fought Saburo. But I did try to drop my gear (I don't know if I managed to do that, it might have been damaged at that point and not deploy...) when my prop-govenor was hit after DarkRaiders attacked me on my way back. I think it must have been a glitch when I fought Saburo. Anyway, great fight people. Thx to the organizers for a great ride :D

Can you check other ww2 planes?

You are definitely not used to 250ft of range. That is just 76m. You probably mean 250meters or yards right? Not to mention that by changing the gunsight you do not change your convergence. So your effective range is still around 1000ft. I myself set the gyro at 1000ft and 190's wing span. I know the 109 is smaller and that why I know when to shoot. And at close range it's just a bit of a reference.

Very early prototype was a taildragger. The production Me262 had tricycle landing gear.

Yes please. And maybe info about new .50cal ammo? :)

I am saying that relative performance between the Spit mk1 and 109e3 is very close, while 109k and 51 are somewhat different.. Spit has a small advantage in turn and is a bit faster on average, while 109 is a better diver. But otherwise they are very close. 109K is a much better climber than Mustang, turns better, has better low speed manoeuvrability. Mustang has better high speed manoeuvrability and dives better. Sure a pure and well executed b&z approach or a sneak attack is going to be effective, but that doesn't mean your maneuvering will be the same when it is not going as planned. One is an interceptor, the other is ASF. One has elliptical wing and the other has laminar flow wing. What works for a spit against a 109 won't work for mustang. So a good 109 pilot will drag the fight to a low speed where its manoeuvrability and acceleration will make short work of the Mustang. If he did that against the Spitfire he would be doomed.

Spitfire Mk1 and Mustang Mk IV are completely different aircraft with completely different approaches. You cannot even compare them they are that different. Not to mention 109E3 vs K4. Good DM vs Bad.

Actually was it stated which version we will get?

I agree with OP. It is a far better system because it actually changes how you move the stick at home. I think it was implemented only for 109 and I hoped they would do that for every plane. But apparently they had different plans :(

At least it will be more indicative of the relative performance between the Mustang and the 109. And enable p51 players more option when in combat.

- Solty - Polish - Poland, Gliwice - Lonewolf - ---------- - North American P-51D

- Solty - Polish - Poland, Gliwice - Lonewolf - ---------- - North American P-51D

If it is as good as they make us think, it will be a big game changer for the allies. HMGs and MGs will finaly hit with kinetic energy able to penetrate puncture and set afire planes knocking out planes from combat even if they can still fly, they won't be able to keep flying for long forcing them to run. I really wonder if the hail of fire from a P47 can slap a 109 around. It was reported to be able to tip over train wagons from the side. :) 109 will probably suffer a bit from lower MG131 effectiveness, but Mk108 will stay the same or becomes more powerful when it hits something like a wing root or tail. But we are already used to getting one-shoted so that will make little difference for us. 190 will loose mg131 effectiveness but MG151 might become more leathal with shots to wing tips and control surfaces. What ammo is going to be modeled? Minengeshoss or APHE, HEIT?

To me the HE charge of the MG131 is over performing because of the current DM that counts each shell as if it does the same amount of damage with every hit on one main big part, such as back of the feuselage, it does higher damage than AP, so HP of the section drops quicker. With current DM it just a DPS race and higher DMG per shot + higher ROF give the MG131 an edge. Add the fact that the shotgun pattern makes .50s hit the overall plane and not one part makes them even weaker.

I realy hope they will resolve this issue and get that Ju-87 out. Good luck :)

To me DCS has very forgiving flight characteristics overall. This 109 lost both of its wings and still flies. Source: DefaultFace. https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3028809&postcount=91

I think that ED could easily go for something like B25 or Ju88. I also think we need twin engine fighters and attackers. Such as Me410, A20 or Mosquito. IMHO they have to make some dedicated ground pounders. Without them, the game is going to remain an unbalanced air-quake.

I actually have a friend that finds flying a fighter boring and useless. Work of a fighter revolves around the bomber. They escort bombers and they intercept bombers, they win air superioty so the bomber can get through or to make it impossible for enemy bombers/groundpounders to attack their troops.Those are primary tasks of a fighter. Without the bomber, there is little purpose to a fighter.

It would also be nice if the bombs did any actual damage. Currently one has to drop a 500lbs bomb nearly directly on a truck with laser precision to do any damage. The funniest thing is that as much as .50cal is underperforming in Air to Air, it is able to blow up a truck with a single bullet.

Is that so?:pilotfly:

For some reason it seems in DCS, it is very hard to get the P51 to its promised value. Even at SL the plane can't reach its max speed unless you manually close the radiator. It seems that the Merlin engine overheats way too easily We have to remember that real life tests were made with automatic radiator control. When I have time I will try do my own tests again and post the results.

Just check how many axis threads, in other games happen about "stalinwood", USSR OP, Russian bias, flaps OP, etc. Based only on assumptions while our Mustang case always revives around historically correct fuel and engine power.

Mustangs came in October 1943 in form of P-51B. In spring 1944 Mustang P-51D arrived.

So you want Spitfires to escort Mustangs? How? They can't keep up and any adversary that comes with speed cannot be chased off. The only good spits can do is be a target for LW, so maybe they leave 51s alone but that can also be done by other mustangs. Sure, mustang is more capable at ground attack, but that doesn't mean Spitfire is automatically better at air to air. People think Spit is a better fighter just because it turns better, while it has inferior roll, speed, dive, energy retention, zoom. The reason why Mustangs tend to die is because people try to flat turn only against 109s. I have also seen some 190s trying to turn with Spitfires. Sometimes it can pay off. But mostly in a heavier airplane it is a death sentence. Turning is a natural need of a player to do something, and it can win battles. But it is not the only way. Ever heard of tactics like B&Z, Drag and Bag. Maneuvers such as. scissors, rolling scissors, high yoyo, immelman, defensive spiral, etc.

I said I wouldn't, because I assumed there is significant difference between Merlin 65 and 66, such as between DB 601 and 605, but it seems those engines are a lot more similar which nullifies my first comment on the validity of Merlin 65 as a example for 66 series. :) Tldr I was wrong about Merlin 65l. It was 1800ps. A slight difference, but a difference non the less :3