Convergence?

What is the gun convergence set at in P-51D?

I'm at work and can't tell you off the top of my head, but if you use the search function there's a massive thread discussing this question.

1000 feet was the standard with the introduction of the K-14, I believe. I think that is what is modeled.

If it isn't 1000 feet, then it'd be 300 yards. The latter is the figure I kept seeing back when I was doing heavy-duty research on the P-38.

it might even be as little as 250 yards.

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=102702

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=95689

Ah yes. Now I remember reading those posts. Got it.

It's a funny thing though when you're a fighter pilot in RL.

You go to your armorer Sargent and say to him...

'You know I don't seem to be able to kill at this range... and the bugger is getting away... But I'm sure I'd be able to down him at this range... what d'ya think'

Armorer Sargent: 'No problem sir..we'll set the guns'

And for the Grand Sake of me I cannot think why the Sargent would buck the 'Official DCS rules'... makes you think a bit.. doesn't it - At least the Russians had brains.

:)

It's a funny thing though when you're a fighter pilot in RL.

 

You go to your armorer Sargent and say to him...

 

'You know I don't seem to be able to kill at this range... and the bugger is getting away... But I'm sure I'd be able to down him at this range... what d'ya think'

 

Armorer Sargent: 'No problem sir..we'll set the guns'

 

And for the Grand Sake of me I cannot think why the Sargent would buck the 'Official DCS rules'... makes you think a bit.. doesn't it - At least the Russians had brains.

 

:)

I got a good laugh from this. Are you a RL fighter pilot from WW2? If not, how can you make a statement such as that? If so, I congratulate you on a very long life, but I am afraid the dementia is setting in. This is that same conversation that has been argued time and time again. Although we are all aware that several notable aces liked to fight up close, most had many near-death experiences from the dangers incurred by that tactic and they all witnessed other pilots die from debris and collisions with destroyed enemy aircraft. Now, many of the seasoned pilots did seem to resist and dislike the US Army mandate to set a fixed convergence later in the war. But I have read more than one account where pilots stated that the K-14 with the standard 1000' convergence made it TOO easy to kill. The "stupid" idea of standardizing fighting practices was intended to save lives and increase combat efficiency. I'm sure ED would be happy to allow you to tweak the convergence away from optimal spread but it appears that is not at the top of the to-do list.

The Russians lost close to 90,000 combat aircraft in WW2. If those are the brains you speak of, most didn't last very long.

Hmmmm!

You obviously missed the salt in my post.. and obviously are unaware of the countless 'field-mods' done during the war. Sure the standard official documentation exists.. but do you wish to deny other obvious documentation that has been linked already regarding this subject.

If it wasn't for the Russians.. we'd all be speaking German or Japanese.. don't you forget that :)

Hmmmm!

 

You obviously missed the salt in my post.. and obviously are unaware of the countless 'field-mods' done during the war. Sure the standard official documentation exists.. but do you wish to deny other obvious documentation that has been linked already regarding this subject.

 

If it wasn't for the Russians.. we'd all be speaking German or Japanese.. don't you forget that :)

You may be right, I might have missed the intent of your post.

But since you made the claim, I'd very much like for you to provide credible documentation of ANY post K-14 US Army "convergence field mods" made to the P-51D. I will even ignore the fact that you stated there were "countless" examples to choose from. P-51B mods do not count, obviously.

And that last statement must have had a high sodium content as well...

I have great respect for the many Russian pilots who gave their lives for the cause in the Second World War and I never said otherwise. My point, which you missed, was that they are not the best example when you are speaking of efficient use of aircraft and the disposable nature of which they treated their fighting force. I think you'd agree if you were forced to fly a biplane against a 100+ kill German ace. However, you are right about the fact that you could probably point the guns any way you wanted to.