Solty

Yep I agree, that is very early model that was quickly upgraded and applied the tail fin. I presume they would either go for D20 or D25. Either way we would loose some of the radio equipment and it's position would be changed, and the tail warning radar. There are minor differences between the two. Otherwise it will be the same airplane. Here is the P-51D history: http://www.mustangsmustangs.com/p-51/variants/p51d Here is development of the P-51D in a nutshell:

Thank you Racoon. That is great news. Much apreciated.:detective: Oh and I will allow myself to attach this link to my .50cal ammo research topic, maybe it can help with DM modeling in some way:book:: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=143224 I agree that Damage Model should be given to all airplanes at the same time to create the sense of integrity and do not bring unneeded gaps in value, good step. Thanks Racoon.:thumbup:

Here you go: http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2725334&postcount=12

Hello, I wanted to make a thread about the model that was announced some while ago by Racoon. When I've first heard about it, I've got excited. What can we expect from the new P-51D update? 1. Will it completely swap the current D30 model, or will it be an additional switch in the mission editor? (The current model would fit into the Pacific theatre that LN is developing quite nicely. Also there has been quite a lot work put into the tail warning radar simulation.) 2. What model will that be? I myself have proposed the D20 or D25 as they require the least amount of work (I also feel that anything earlier would not correspond with the German planes we have in the game) 3. Will the new model come with the correctly modeled G-Suit and uniform for the pilot from the period? 4. What engine power will the airplane have? 5. Will the model bring new and improved Damage Model into the game? 6. What is the priority. Is it going to be created after all other airplanes from WW2 are in the game? I am excited for the prospect of the new P-51D model.:pilotfly:

In this version, when one shoots down another airplane, and that player manages to stay "alive" as a pilot. He can wait it out and respawn, without giving the credit to the pilot that shot him down.:joystick: Not only is it unpleasant for a player to see that his "kill" is no longer his, but it is gamebraking, because it takes away points from one of the teams which leads to situations where one team could be winning, but it is not, because many of their kills were "denied" by the BUG. Some said it is to "reward" the player for successful crash landing, if that is the case, it is broken. I propose a different system: When one lands at the base, he gets points that are bonuses to targets destroyed. When one crashlands he will get half of the points for a normal landing, but the one that has shot him down will get points for a "kill" and aircraft destroyed counted. The only possible way that the kill would be denied, should be by landing on your team's airfield. At that point you are actually safe, and you are not a casualty to your team. :captain: I've wrote in the wrong section, please move it to the "release version" the issue is present in 1.5.4 stable version. Thank you.

I agree.

Yes indeed they used 130oct fuel because they were on 9th air force base., but as I said most 109s were not k4s (many 190A's, 109G's) and c39crazy pointed out that Mustang renown was only known due to numerical superiority. While during that time odds were in favour of Germans and dogfights developed.I will edit my previous post to make the two topics more clear. And pilot accounts say about dogfights that took place there. In fact they were suppose to hit the airfield itself and there was barely visible damage on the field.So the Germans did not in fact ignore the Americans. Pilot training is no excuse to me really. Germans were not well trained then true, but so were British pilots during BoB that sometimes had less than 7h on Spitfire/Hurricane. So were the soviets who flew only two flights before the battle. So this is not exclusive to the Germans, and yet it is never brought up when discussing German victories over pilots from UK and USSR during early war periods.

First of all. Your generalisation is very far from what history accounts say. The 109's on many ocasions were escorts to the heavier Fw190A which were attacking the bomber formations, while 109's engaged the escorts. Secondly, Germans on many ocassions, during bombing raids had numberical superiority. Not all fighters could be present at the same time to escort the bombers because not even the P-51 can stay with a slow bomber without using all of its fuel. While Germans massed their airplanes on the path of the bombers and were able to outnumber the escorts 2:1 or more(highest count was 10:1). Another aspect of it is that (as I have stated many times) most 109's during 1944 were either G6 and it's subvariants or G14 and its subvariants. While K4 started to show up at the end of 1944 and became prominent in 1945. At the same time main user of the P-51D Mustang in ETO (8th AAF) was using more powerfull engine settings to combat the new evolving German planes, like the 262. EDIT: No one claims that P-51D should have the upperhand against the 109 in 1v1 dogfight at equal energy states, with both pilots beeing very experienced(especially at low altitude and and low speed). But P-51 is all about speed and the 109K4 has closed the gap between them to such a degree that even running is nearly impossible. So the P-51 is nearly always fighting on 109's terms. And it shouldn't due to historical evidence. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The reputation the Mustang was built around it's combat effectivness. Greatest example of P-51's capability was the battle known as the "legend of the Y29" where 352nds FG clashed with JG11(skirmish developed during the operation bodenplatte). Zero mustangs were lost even though that Germans caught them taking off, while Germans lost 24 aircraft and allies lost one P-47.:book:

Is the large models scale on the server? I am not going to bother joining if spotting is still so hard. I value my eyesight more than that.

Realy though, we don't even have the Spitfire's trailer yet. So I wouldn't be too enthusiastic. If we can learn something from the past we should get a teaser trailer, then a proper trailer with pre-order and then after a month or more a release... So it is probably going to be released closer to autumn I am afraid :(

Show us how you do it.:smilewink:

Can you test P51 too? Maybe the physics engine changed a bit.

Either illusion or it is going to be fun.:joystick: I hope someone can tell us if it is true or not.

Sound mods are a problem within WW2 community. Some players used diveplane's sound mod which made engines in external much louder than in cockpit sound. That way they were able spot and identify the bandit without even looking at him, because they've heard where he was from 2km. I don't think Huey sound is so bad, because it is just transport chopper, but I presume it won't be possible to run it on most servers :( I made a .50cal tracer and sound mods for myself. I have prepared myself for the goodbye long ago.

The patch came out! I just flew my P-51D. New engine sound and other sounds like wind/buffet seem to be more pronounced! Also FINALY we have wing tip trails! One thing. I flew the standard Fw190vP51 mission and I have noticed different field textures. The map has been updated? It seems more colorful now. Or is it just my imagination?

THX. Sith. Exactly, I agree with you. We, virtual "pilots" do not have the ability to "feel" the airplane during flight, because we sit in our homes. Therfore the sound substitutes our ability to feel, by our ability to hear. I think of it as an necessity. Just as the blackout and redout graphics effects are for us, because we do not feel the G's sitting in our chairs :book: EDIT: The patch just came out (1.5.4) and there are diffinte changes to sounds. Especially the engine sound and I think that wind sound is more pronounced during flight.

No, tracers have smoke trails, it is just so barely visible in my game. You just have to look waaaay closer to see it :P. I run vanilla game, no mods.

You know that I was talking about bringing it up to a standard. I fly WW2 99% of the time here and 90% of that time at multiplayer. [ame] [/ame] DCS has improved smoke, especially for missle trails and 30mm cannon like the A-10's avenger. They look very well. But .50cal effects are just poor. Tracers are barely visible, even at late evening they are not satisfying. When you hit an aluminum of the Bf109/Fw190 there should be sparks. What we have is a puff of brown smoke with some fire inside it. Check this video for real life example of how .50cal should spark on the aluminum aircraft's cover. https://youtu.be/PLxI6kW7bFU?t=40s Tracers in DCS are barely visible right after they leave the barrel, and then disapear and then appear at very far distances for some reason This is how tracers should look like: https://youtu.be/PLxI6kW7bFU?t=10m12s Fire effect is quite poor as well, it seems very flat and low quality. Also, it's placement is mind boggling. Why would Me109's wing Burn when shot off? Or why a wingtip of the P-51 burns for that matter? Same thing goes for the "fuel leaks" that do not actually leak, just look as if they do, but again... why is the 190 leaking fuel from it's wings? Its placement is not correct and is annoying at best. I am talking about version 1.5.3

Well, maybe because it is still beta and many of us are waiting for stable release. But I have to say. I love sound in games, so if they changed sounds as you say I am very happy :D Also, more improvment to Multiplayer the better. I hope that means less of jittering as well. I hated those moments when you are behind a 109, and he jumps into hyperspace on the orbit leaving a white trail behind him and then you find him behind you xD Yay for 1.5.4 :3

I think it is good that people ask for more stuff. It makes Devs think of how to expand their game in the future.

If I wanted any airplane for that role it would be the P-61 :). But realy though, night fighters are usless without bombers though. So not before the first bomber :P.

I would like to see new tracers, hit effects (sparks, chunks, , muzzle flashes, light glint on cannopies), smoke, leaks of liquids etc. Raindrops are way farther on that list. Rain or a storm, is not a good time to fly anyway.

Agreed. I am actually flying with auto only and if you keep temps in check, you won't get an engine failure ever again.

Is it with beta or stable version? I have stable and did not notice a single thing.

Yay! My vids will look 20% again :). Realy though, I missed that super hard. Waiting for the stable version :pilotfly: