Snapage

From my experience its shooting from behind that is the problem. I can take them down quickly from side/top/below but from behind they absorb so much fire. I made this video to show what I am talking about: It seems you have to shoot them so much that the rear section of the aircraft comes off. Anything less and they keep flying at the same speed as if they were undamaged. Yes, being at convergence range helps a lot. I agree that cannons are more effective but I do think that the .50s may be under performing a bit.

If the .50s in the P4D7 perform anything like the .50s in the P51D then they are not going to be very good.

So at no point between the time you start firing on an enemy plane and the time a part like the tail or wing comes off completely is there enough damage to effect lift and speed?

How could lots of bullets though the fuselage and wings not effect performance? Would you not have increased drag and a negative effect on the airfoil?

I know, I have made that video to help people who don't fly the must very often a good idea of what I am talking about. Hopefully it is helpful.

Here is a video which I show what I am talking about in regards to the effectiveness of the P51Ds guns on enemy aircraft, particularly from behind: You can see in the video there are several issues like no reduction in performance from damage and the smoke effect completely obstructs the view of the enemy plane. They only go down if you kill the pilot, shoot the engine from an large angle or shoot a part of the plane enough so that it completely comes. Because you cant really get direct hits on the engine or the pilot from behind you have to shoot them enough so the tail comes off.

Like others have said you want take off assist set to 0. It makes it much easier to control. Apart from that maybe set your curves to something that suits your HOTAS set up and double check your controls are mapped correctly, especially breaks and rudder.

Cheers for the info. Very i interesting. If the high G and speed performance is accurate then I have no problem with it. Maybe cockpit rattling or some kind of audible que to give you the impression of high speeds would be realistic and helpful. Regardless it's more of a nice to have not a need to have. I tested the WEP once yesterday and had no engine trouble so maybe it has been changed. I flew 4 minutes WEP and then at max continuous for one hour and 15 minutes without any failure. I don't know for sure though. I need to test it a few times It's very time consuming because it's so random. The gear up landing pilot death is easily reproduced. Just try landing with gear up. Sometimes you can pull it off without pilot death but you have to be super gentle. Landing in a grass field probably shows it even better. The FW190 also kind of suffers from it but not as bad. It could possibly effect all the aircraft but because the spits, and 109s flaps keep the fuselage off the ground for the most part it isn't so obvious. In regard to the damage model, a lot of people I know have done what you did and went to other Sims. I have tried out other SIMs to but for me after experiencing the flight models DCS has to offer it's hard to go elsewhere.

The only time it is not worth talking about is when we actually have it, it is finished and has no bugs. We have a long way to go.

You are talking as if there is no engine management in the game now. We already have detailed engine management. The kind of detail you are asking for is not worth the amount of time it would take to create. You say DCS is a FLIGHT SIM at it's core...... yes. That is what I am saying. Not many people want to waste time on the ground priming the engine, turning it over, priming it again etc. There are so many, more important fetures that would have a much larger impact on the game for ED to focus it's resources on. Like improving the spotting system, finishing the damage model, adding more assets to the asset pack. Finishing the FW190A8 and P47D. You act as if it is easy to build and implement modules and features. What you are asking for is unessesary detail in an already very detailed simulation. If it is the nuances of starting an engine that you are interested in perhaps car mechanic simulator is more you kind of thing.

The clue is in the name buddy, digital COMBAT simulator. It isn't digital engine simulator. The engines are modelled very well already with some issues needing to be addressed like the heating, WEP and other in flight characteristics that are much more important. The kind of detail you are asking for is not worth the amount of resources required to create given that people generally want to get off the ground and fly not play with starting an engine. There is a reason why there is an option on the jets to skip nav alignment. People don't want to sit on the ground waiting for the plane to be ready. They want to fly.

You basically want more engine failures because if there is one thing people pay to fly aircraft modules for, it is having to sit on the ground for 10minutes trying to start the engine and then having to wait another 5 minutes for the engine to warm up before you can take off. And if you dont want to sit there on the ground warming up the engine well to bad because your engine will fail if you don't. Yeah, that will be great on a multiplayer combat server where every time you are shot down or finish a flight you have to waste 15 minutes on the ground. So two flights is 30 minutes on the ground. That will attract people to this game over other Sims for sure because everyone has time to waste. Having to screw around with the engine every time you want to fly will get tedious, repetitive and frustrating.

I don't want to have to waste 10 minutes starting and warming up the engine for every flight. What is important is the flight characteristics. Please make a new thread if you want to change the subject. I want to focus on the things I have mentioned in this thread: The WEP being unreliable. Pilot death on crash landing. P51D guns effecivness. The control surfaces falling off without any indicatition apart from speed guage.

The last time I checked WEP makes the engine fail at a random time. Does not matter how long you use it for, it can be 1 minutes 5 minutes or entire flight. The engine will fail at some point but it's random. When testing the longest I flew on WEP for before engine died was about 45 to 50 minutes, I was running low on fuel by then. I wish WEP could be used in a similar fasion to the FW190D9s WEP. The 190 can do 10 minutes of WEP max at a time. It would make sence to me after reading the P51D flight manual that the P51D WEP should be useable for 5 minutes at a time. The P51D manual says that WEP should only be used for 5 minutes at a time, that time in WEP needs to be recorded and after 5 hours of accumulated WEP time the engine needs a strip down inspection. If the engine can accumulate 5 hours of WEP the surely it shouldn't be breaking after just 5 minutes(Or even less atm).

It could have been fixed since I last tested it in august this year. I tested it then bacause the FW190D9 MW50/WEP was fixed and I thought maybe the P51D was changed as well(it wasn't though). There have been quite a few changes that have been made to WW2 aircraft including the P51D that have not been mentioned in the patch notes. Maybe I will have to test it again when I have time. I am also thinking that using WEP then landing, turning the engine off and leaving the plane sitting there for an hour or so and then coming back to see if engine starts would show that it still exists.

Do you fly often? What is your name in DCS? Do you fly the P51D much? Do you fly multiplayer? You talk as if you know better then everyone but I don't recognise your name.

Yeah, you can shoot them down while shooting at them from above or the side but they seem almost invulnerable from behind when running away. The only way to shoot the 109 down from behind seems to be by shooting the tail enough so that it comes off completely. Even from the side and top you need to hit the engine, get a pilot kill or shoot them enough in the same place to make that part come off completely, like a wing or the tail. It's not unusual to see a conga line of P51s shooting and chasing a smoking 109 back to their base. It's also not unusual to shoot up a 109 to the point that they are smoking and have them continue to fight, shoot someone down and then fly back to base. The P51D on the other hand loses its engine, even bursts into flames when hit from directly behind from other aircraft.

Good for you that your engine never breaks down, I don't know how because I have tested WEP in the P51D a ton of times trying to figure out how to use it without engine failure and so far I have found that you can't. Once you go WEP the engine will fail at some point. My guess is that you don't fly the P51D much or that you only fly for short periods of time(20 to 30mins) per flight. BTW you have to be at critical altitude for WEP to do anything.

Don't know who you are replying to, but I never asked for a faster P51D. I have mentioned a culmination of issues that really make the P51D frustrating to fly compared to the other aircraft. I don't want a faster P51D I would like WEP to be usable without engine failure though. I would also like to be able to do emergency gear up landings without the pilot dieing, the P51's guns to be more effective when shooting enemy planes from behind and some sort of indication that the plane is about to fall apart without having to stare at the gauges would be nice. German planes can absorb a lot of fire from the P51D from behind and still fly back to base damaged at a faster speed then the undamaged pursuing P51D. But the flip side is the P51D's engine is taken out upon taking any damage from pursuing German aircraft most of the time.

I don't understand what you mean by forcing the 109 to fly fast? A K4 can sit right on the ass of a P51 and stay there. There is nothing the P51 can do.

Does not matter how good they are, just keep your speed up and use the vertical until they are out of energy and then kill them. Once you are behind them there is nothing they can do, its only a matter of time until you shoot them down.

I fly all the planes except the FW190A8, I don't have it. The 109 is fun vs spitfires but to easy vs P51Ds. It's not rewarding shooting down P51Ds in the 109K4 because it's super easy. I like to out fly the other player not derp them down in a superior aircraft. I find I have a better chance in the I16 vs the K4 then I do in the P51D, no exaggeration.

Is it better? You will probably be shot down anyway after your engine stops because of WEP. Happened to me plenty. I just don't use WEP at all. It does more harm then good.

I am not asking for a faster P51D, I am expressing why I am finding it to be no fun to fly. I would be happy with the WEP being usable without engine failure and the guns to be effective vs the german planes when shooting them from behind. It is very frustrating when german planes can absorb so much fire from behind and escape while your engine is taken out immediately from one burst from the german planes. I have most of the aircraft, I fly all of them so I am not interested in one being better then everything else. But the P51D is very frustrating. I can tell when I am going too fast in the other planes, just not the P51D. I can also crash land in the other planes without the pilot dieing. I can also reliably shoot down enemy aircraft with the other planes. Just not the P51D, its guns dont do much from behind.

How do you run away when the enemy planes are faster then you? I have not said anything about surviving every fight. I have said that the P51D is not fun to fly(in combat). I have been flying the DCS mustang for four years now. I know all the tricks and they are not good enough. You are always at a massive dissadvantage vs the 109K4. WEP would probably be enough to allow you to get away from the K4 but you can't use it without engine failure so it kind of defeats the purpose.