GrapeJam

It's true what they say that if one repeats his own lies enough, he'd start believing them himself.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Surely you could spare 15 minutes to make a video, instead of hours arguing on the forums?

Wouldn't be too hard for you to make a video of yourself stalling the 109, right?

Your statement seemed like the P51 as a whole is overrated. You seemed to have mistaken the radio antenna masts for the dorsal fin. The only valid argument is the gun sight and the tail radar, but the gun sight doesn't have much practical use in maneuvering combat and the tail radar is more of an annoyance than any actual help in this game. The first P51D flew in november 1943, the K4 and the D9 had the advantage of fighting right at home so they didn't have to take months to get delivered to combat units, unlike the P51D The P51As "were not good" and the G2 "would outdo the P51"? The P51A was a low altitude monster and was over 40mph faster than the G2 at SL with only slightly inferior rate of climb with the same amount of engine power. The P51D with historically accurate boost outclassed the G14 and G10 at everything except low speed maneuvering.

Always found it funny when people compare the D9 and the K4 to the 1 year older Mustang variant, instead of the contemporary F/G/J. The fact that the D, with historically accurate boost setting, was more than a match for the new K4 and D9 despite them being 1 year newer, and thus was considered sufficient and the F/G/J were not rushed into service, says something about the Mustang. Overrated? :lol:

I find it funny that DCS is a high fidelity sim where people play for the ultimate realistic experience, yet there're people here who only care about winning and epeen without giving a crap about how the plane should actually perform, it's sad.

I'm pretty sure when I pull weight I do not pull 30kg as fast as 10kg, if anything ED should have kept the old slowed stick movement plus a hard limit. Hitting the gym for 5 minutes give you all the evidences you need. And let's forget that your body is feeling several times heavier as you pull Gs.

Or can simply be explained that the speed gauge reading gets funny near compressibility.

The P51D could dive to mach 0.84 if needed.

Pretty sure, information on the BF 109G and FW190A are much accessible than the BF 109K and FW 190D, seeing as the G and the A are the most produced version after all.

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/mustang/mustangtest.html

PTO P51Ds were allowed to raise MP to 75"hg with F33 115/145 octane fuel.

I think people missed Solty's point. He's always meant that since the K4 and the D9 are historically inaccurate already, there's nothing wrong with the D25 with 72"hg setting fighting them over Normandy.

So? If the K4 and D9(with EZ 42 gunsight) are historically inaccurate already, what's wrong with the D25? And frankly half of the feature that was introduced with the D25 doesn't have any use in DCS, you're just gonna be anal about it to make cheap arguments out of it?

Is it historically accurate for the K4 and D9 to be flying over Normandy? No? Why're you applying that logic to the 72"hg Mustang then?