grafspee

Cowl flaps half open, i though they should be full open. Check 12:00 overheated oil ?? 100 C am i see this right. In flight keep flaps lever in middle position, this way oil pump has lighter work.

Thing is WIP, only thing left to do is wait.

Yes, AI is not easy to beat. It requires quite a skill to do that

Maybe weight and size do matter here. This guy mastered this, so perfect, like on rails.

10:25 "The propeller RPM lever setting attempts to maintain constant propeller rotation speed, automatically altering things like engine throttle or propeller blade pitch to do so" yest very informative and true

I can only say that TF-51 performs noticeable better then combat loaded P-51, due to increased weight of P-51. But i can't say which one is better fighter. The best solution is to end up with both in your hangar Just pick one for now it takes time to master each of this planes.

Good point, it catch me all the time, i forgot to lift landing gear guard to rise up gear, or forgot to lift flaps guard to lower them, i do this things by mouse thanks to track ir, but those who don't have it, it is real pain in the a**.

Some clastic naval artillery would be nice indeed

HMS Exeter wasn't part of chasing party.

Ofc it is, when air goes through radiator it transfer heat from coolant in to air, transfer rate depends on mass air flow and difference between coolant temp and ambient air temp. Very high ambient temp will slower heat exchange, making radiator less effective.

Actually you don't need royal navy ships for that Graf Spee was scuttled by crew in naval port.

Yes you can do that, but at cost, linked throttle/boost lever reduce engine power, manual says somethin about 300hp which is quite. True you can set oil cooler, inter cooler wide open and you will be fine, but if you want to maximize P-47 performance you have to manually regulate those, cowl flaps needs least attention but if you end up in slow flight at high power you have to open them manually, then when speed increase close them. This is main difference between P-47 and P-51 from system automatization view. It is much easier to draw max performance from P-51 then from P-47.

Mixture and rpm i didnt mention because i assumed that we are talking about fighting in p47. After you set power in p47 you need to watch and guard MP it will change with speed and alt so you cant forget it, like in p51. If i set 64inch 2700rpm and i do loops i have to constantly adjusting throttle/boost lever to maximize power. Second thing which i forgot to mention that transition from cruise power to combat power is quite tricky, like you said it is easy to forget about mixture, p51 has automated mixture control another thing lifted off pilot's head.

@peachmonkey if you talk about P-47 or P-51 in detail in topic named "P-47 vs p-51", you are not hijack anything in my opinion, anything, even small detail limited to P-47 or P-51 is contribution to the topic anyway.

Red zone is 3050 rpm, 2700 rpm is designed for max dry/wet power, 52inch 2700rpm for dry and 64inch 2700rpm for wet. This looks logical for me, water injection lowers temp of ingestion air fuel mixture this increase effective anti detonation properties of AFM. This topic is not unknow for me, i remember P-51 being able to withstand 67 inch much longer at 2700rpm then 3000rpm which feels totally wrong for me, why enforce high rpm of the engine when lower rpm is sufficient to take boost, then engine/prop gearing ratio should be changed only.

Difference between 2700 and 2600 rpm is very small, it would impact engine life time only, probably. I was thinking about running engine 60 inch at 2000rpm :). Why engine seems to feel better at 2600rpm then at 2700rpm at high levels of MP is not obvious for me, both 2600 or 2700 should not make a big difference and for sure difference should not be in favor of lower rpm in case extreme MP levels. I personally use max rpm, and i managed to muse +64inch of boost, i think have run engine at 70 inch for good 1 min with no damage, but variables are so many, it is hard to establish test bench in DCS

Over boost happen when you draw too much MP for given rpm, with P-47 you can easily push 60 inch at very low rpm, at low rpm piston travels slower then at high rpm, ignition timing is unchanged, detonation wave travels at constant speed but at lower rpm piston travels slower so undetonated portion of air fule mixture is subjected to pressure and temp exceeding anti detonation properties of fuel thus creating secondary ignition, this induce extremes pressure and temps in combustion chamber which kills engine, this can not be detected by gauges in cockpit. Over boost can happen when altitude of plane is changed rapidly , for example in combat when you dive or climb rapidly, in case of P-47 pilot have to constantly watch boost to maintain desired MP, in case P-51 pilot just need to push throttle to the gate that is it. Simpler version, when you set max rpm in P-51 you can not over boost, if you set max rpm in P-47 you can over boost page from P-47 manual

over boost =/ over rev turbine 2700rpm is required for higher power, when i fly i can boost above 64 inch with no damage only thing you need to watch stuff

Oil cooler switch inter cooler switch, boost lever, throttle lever, cowl flaps, water injection switch, then you need to watch MP, heads temp, oil temp, carb temp all the time to not exceed limits, no automatic temp or boost regulators, you can over boost engine and kill it very fast. In other warbirds in DCS excluding I-16 every thing is automated. Ofc you can wide open all but this creates more drag and slows plane down so automated cooling is great deal.

Problem in p47 is that, to acquire max power, lots of switches and levers had to be moved and pilot has to monitor temps and regulate cooling in other warbirds one lever full on and that's it.

Not for me, after i fly spitfire i still remember how to fly P-51 or anything else. But still i see differences how to fly every warbird, every one is a bit different.

It is not full clickable cockpit which makes a challenge for ww2 team, the main challenge is effort put to recreate FM often with very limited data. Second thing probably most important is ww2 team size, which is small. Developing 5 planes at the same time will put extreme load on devs, only solution for this is to expand ww2 team

Guy who wrote manual probably missed part about 13" props, this happen quite often, for example DCS manual for P-51 has power/ fuel consumption charts for 1650-3 engine, our P-51D has v-1650-7 engine and DCS model is done for -7, probably same or similar situation here just a DCS manual error

Make sure that you dont deploy flaps and landing gear at the same time, also after you lower flaps put handle in neutral, if not when you pull landing gear handle flaps will retract due to pressure loss. I didn't encounter any problems with flaps when operated properly

At least if we could get updated sounds for Dora, right now even if i can fly it with aged 3D model, the sound engineering sounds very very old when i compare it to P-51 sounds or spitfire or K-4, i won't even mention new modules. For me Dora at current state is just meh.