USARStarkey

Yes. Default weather etc. No Wing Racks or stores. Although in the RL tests, there were wing racks. Not having them wouldn't make me any slower.

If you want some help on the Mustang I'd be willing to help. Just Private message me and we can set up a time and server.

That isn't all that close. You can just apply a percentage to it piecemeal like that dude. Given how closely match the planes were getting are going to be, every little difference matters. I mean at what point would we consider something a large difference? For example, if I was going only 420mph, that would be only 5%. But 20mph would be a huge difference in speed! 10mph may not be huge, but it is significant-especially when weighed against that fact that its competitors 190D and 109K have almost exactly the same top speed. 442(51) 441(109K) 442(190D) For example, let us assume that the the 190 we get is a more historical variant with 2100bhp and 1.8 ata. That would give us a top speed of about 430mph at 18000ft. Imagine if something similar happens and it only does 420. But the 109 comes into the game and for whatever reason achieves its estimated top speed of 441. The 109k is now the fastest plane in the game for exactly no reason what-so-ever beyond disproportionate FM errors. Granted, some error must be expected, but not to such a degree that it significantly effects the performance of the aircraft relative to each other. For planes that are this close to each other in performance, it is crucial that the performance deviation be marginal. Otherwise one or more planes will start to look significantly better than the other in the speed department. If the Mustang were clocking in at 450mph Id be saying the same thing. ultimately however it will depend on how the other planes are modeled. Maybe they will all max out around 430mph- who knows.

I already stated some time ago that you could hit 64-63 at 26000. They do not use different superchargers. Both planes use V-1650-7. There are almost no major performance differences between the different marks of D model Mustang, save for the dorsal fin. Most of the changes between D model mustangs are electrical or other misc nonsense. In addition, the P-51 in DCS is a later mark D, as it has the dorsal fin. And once AGAIN, the 440 at 24k is AN ESTIMATE NOT AT REAL LIFE TEST. This is not an incorrect MP gauge. At 24,000+ The best speed you can get is 430mph. That is 10mph short of 440. At 26,000, it drops to 429. Also, why in hell are you looking at the estimated performance at 26,000ft when in that test it reaches max speed at a lower alt. In case you haven't noticed, were talking about max speed and MP at critical altitude. Just to reiterate: "Just to throw this out there, this chart states even at 67" @ 26k, should be around 435. Its still fairly close to your tests...maybe the MAP gauge is reading incorrectly at altitude?" Nowhere on these charts does it show a plane using 67 inches at 26,000 and getting a speed of 435mph. And as to the differences in D model Mustangs. nope, no change in supercharger

You just proved your self wrong. You drew a line through 26,000ft, that doesn't even intersect the 440mph you sold boldly highlighted..... allow ME to try this again. The 440mph is slightly above 24,000ft. Not 26,000. It also isn't a real flight test. it is a CALCULATED ESTIMATE. the 442mph test DOES INTERSECT 26,000ft, which was the WHOLE POINT OF THIS POST. ON TOP OF THIS, You cannot get close to hitting 440mph at that altitude in DCS P-51. The best you can do at 24,000ish feet is 374knots, or 430mph. If I could hit 440mph at 24,000ft I wouldn't have even made this post. 440mph would be so close to IRL it would not matter. BUT YOU CANT. Check it out, I can do this too.

Currently the P-51 only gets to full MP of 67 inches at 24800ft. The manual rates it for full power to 28000ft. RL tests show 26000ft. Furthermore, the aircraft is too slow. Top speed occurs at around 24k and is 430mph. I should be getting something in the ballpark of 440.

First off, this chart is in MPH not knots. 435 knots would be 500mph!. It states 440mph for the calculated results and 442mph for the RL flight tests. There is no 435mph anywhere for a P-51D. Yes, the plane on the page you linked does 442mph....and is also the same plane shown in dark green on the chart. Just look at the chart man. the last value is 450mph not 440. The Previous listed value is 430mph. That means the line in the middle is 440mph. And it is MILES PER HOUR, not knots.

Paddle P-47 holds about 3200frpm. The thing alot of people don't notice about the P-47 with the paddle prop is that it holds it climb rate really well. It starts at 3200 and at 20,000 it it still holding 3000fpm. While that is not amazing or anything at first glance, what this means is that above 20k where the P-47 was supposed to rule the sky, It climb would be better than a 190 and about equal, or maybe just slightly worse than a 109. Not the Dora or K of course.

Dude you didn't read the chart right man. It says 440 or 442. It goes by 10s not 5s

I tried PMing yo-yo about it, but his message box is apparently too full. The good thing is that as it stand right now, I can run down the 190D even still. What concerns me is that the 109K will come blistering in at its estimated 441mph and be faster than everything else when in reality it should be equal. (P-51-442mph or 437) I realize there is some margin of error in FMs, but I would hate to see the relative-to-each-other performance get messed up as a result of this. Although technically, there are no surviving real-world flight tests of the 109K, so perhaps it wont be able to crack 440mph.

The other manuals are not suspect. Furthermore, hitman is looking at test for the V-1650-3, not the 7 which is where the 60.5 is coming from. You are looking at performance calculations, not tests. Report No. NA-46-130, are not actual flight tests, they are estimates. Once again, here are the actual real world tests:

High.

Nah, there isn't anything on kurfursts site that helps unfortunately. Also, i stopped using his site a long time ago when i realized that it serves no other purpose than to twist history by showing only part of a picture, or showing things very out of context.

How do i submit a bug report? If you mean a thread in the bug section I already did that and got no notice.

P-51 Tournament Friday 6PM EST TIME. what You'll Need: Yourself, Your Pony, and Your Joystick. What You'll Do: Take all Comers. 3 Dog Fight Stages: 5000 Ft Merge 1st Set of Brackets, and until we get to only two level of bracket lol. 15,000ft Merge 2nd Stage of Brackets 38,000ft Merge Final Matches Rules: After the First Merge, you are weapons Free. No Shooting till after first merge. All Aircraft Rigged With 25% Fuel, 100% ammo. 1st Place Gets a free dcs module of choice TO SIGN UP, POST WITH YOUR IN GAME SCREEN NAME, AND THE PAINT JOB YOU WANT ON YOUR PLANE. I WILL PUT OUT THE VENTRILO INFO TOMORROW.

Hitman you are misunderstanding how this works. Also, Can we please be back on track this is more about MP. That being said, a constant speed prop allows the pilot to set a desired RPM. The prop governor then adjusts the prop pitch dynamically to maintain that RPM at whatever the throttle is set to. IE: The RPM remains the same regardless of throttle setting by adjusting the pitch to be less aggressive. The governor will automatically adjust pitch to be as aggressive as the throttle setting allows. For Example, Mil power in the P-51 is 61in 3000rpm. WEP is 67in aslo at 3000rpm. So why does the plane go faster? because at the same rpm the 67in allows for a more aggressive pitch and therefore more thrust. There is no pitch control in a P-51, only a rpm setting and throttle setting.

Yep you understand my issue precisely now NoJoe. RPMS are at 3000, Throttle is to max, and Im at the specified critical altitude of 26000 or 28000ft. RAM is on. I even tried screwing with the carburetor just to see what would happen and as you might expect, it caused me to lose performance if i turned ram off or use hot air. So yeah, I don't know what is causing this. IMO this is a big bug however. a 2000ft or 4000ft difference in critical altitude is not a small one. It is almost certainly the reason that I cannot achieve historical speeds as a result of not getting more power up at 26,000 where there would be less drag etc. Right now I'm stuck at 63 inches and 430mph. I should be getting 67inches and somewhere in the area of 437-442. I would hardly go any slower anyhow. How do we go about getting the attention of the people who could fix this?

If I adjust the Propeller RPM to 2900 or 2800, the max MP drops even if I don't touch the throttle. It doesn't allow me to run 67 or even 61 inches at any RPM less than 3000 at that altitude. I'm not sure I understand what it is you want me to do. To No Joe: I'm not sure what Yo-Yo is on about, but he is dead wrong that the engine wont give better performance higher than 5000ft. MP pressure was maintained by the engine in two stages, High and Low blower and could maintain the Max MP to much higher altitudes than 5000ft. Even DCS models this, as I can currently hold 67inches up to 24,000. Here is the proof:

3000 rpm is 3000rpm. As soon as I decrease the rpm, the prop governor for the constant speed prop automatically increases he prop pitch to maximum obtainable and as a result, the MP drop.

There is a black knob labeled "P", but that it RPM control. Is that what you mean? If so, the best power setting for speed or power in general is 3000rpm.

Where is the pitch control. I mean, I know the plane can adjust pitch, but I thought that only the prop governor had control of it as a function of RPM/Power.

I don't think you can manually adjust the prop pitch in the mustang since it has a constant speed propeller. Max Power at 26k was 67inches MP. The DCS manual places it even higher at 28000ft! Here is what the manual states: War Emergency= 67inches MP @ 3000RPM @ 28,800ft @ High Blower/ Mixture set to Run/AR. Alas though, I cant seem to make it hit 67 inches at any alt above 24,000ft, which is much closer to the WEP critical altitude for Non-Ram, of 23,200ft.

No I am not. The 434 was at 30k or 6000 higher than expected. I provided two speeds because i was NOT cherry picking. 430mph at 26000 was never a reported speed. Furthermore, the issue is more with the fact that I cannot achieve max power. The speeds I am achieving are exactly what was achieved at military power in the Mustang according to the tests. Not war emergency, which I cannot seem to attain at either the RL or Game specified altitudes. If I could actually achieve WEP, and then got to 435 or 445 or whatever....then we wouldn't have an issue. You quoted only part of this thread, did you actually read the rest? If not, Ill reiterate: This is about power achieved more than it is speed attained. Could you be any more patronizing dude? You just waltz in here and tell us to "save our passion for the stuff that really matters..." Geez...condescending much? I DO think that this matters. The upcoming aircraft were getting are very close to each other in top speed at critical altitude. 51-442 109-441 190-442. A slight error, much less one of 10MPH is a big deal when it is that close IMO. Especially when were talking about MP here, not just top speed.

No Dice. I am becoming increasingly convinced this is a bug of some sort. Wish we could get a dev to look at it

I voted for the P-51 because I think it is going to really surprise people. It is as fast as usual and dives really well and has its well-known E-retention etc. The thing I think will startle most sim -jocks is that in this game it also TURNS quite nicely once you learn to ride its stall. It turns particularly well when its loaded with a comparable fuel load to lighter interceptors. I can get sustained 20sec turns at 68% fuel and at 25% I can manage 18.96 seconds. That is far better than other sims rate the Mustang. Aces high by comparison give the 51 a 21 second turn time at 25% fuel at sea level. The AI Dora doesn't even come close to being able to turn with you, which is probably why the AI stick to the vertical, which you can do just as well if you stay fast and don't get stuck in a slow speed sustained climb with the thing :) Also, Just posting my 2 cents. I don't want this to be a debate so if you post don't start making direct responses to other people if your intent is to be contentious.