P-51 outclassed?

[fastfreddie]

I don't think its going to be a blowout one way or the other. I've only done a few dogfights so far but didn't discover any huge advantage over the P51 other than climb rate and firepower. Turn times seemed similar which could change with human players using the P51s flaps. P51s had much better visibility (already hate the bar above the pilots head in FW190) and it also seemed to have a better gunsight.

[Sabredog]

For me the Dora seemed to be an absolute beast low down. The engine is easier to manage and harder to overheat. It seems to make more power than the Mustang, roll faster and climb better. The 'stangs could just about out turn me but they seemed to slow down faster so by making it an energy fight I was able to stay in control of things. Visibility was a bit of an issue and the inability to trim the aircraft makes it tiring to fly on longer missions but overall, I felt much more confident in the Dora.

 

This was on the dogs of war server.

[OutOnTheOP]

Let's not make DCS another MOBA game that needs tweaking and nerfing every unit to make them "competitive".. Let's make the units historically accurate and extremely difficult to master so that it is down to their pilots to win or lose.. So far, ED is spot on on their path...

 

72 or 75 inch boost is NOT nerfing or buffing. They are historical boost pressures that were authorized from the last quarter of 1944 on, when using the high-octane fuels.

 

It's no more "unfair buffing" than the FW190D9 getting the EZ42 sight.

Edited August 7, 2014 by OutOnTheOP

[OutOnTheOP]

Keep in mind, the AI P-51 is flying without the weight of it's .50 cal ammo, so it's around 300kg lighter than it should be. This will help it in some areas (turn, climb) and hinder it in others (dive acceleration, zoom climb).

 

EDIT: You can adjust weight in the mission editor btw.

 

Actually, that's a good point: a lot of people have commented how much easier time they had killing the AI P-51 with the Dora than they had killing the AI Dora with the P-51.... it makes me wonder how they set up the fuel in each? Because the P-51 carries a LOT more fuel than the Dora. If you both set them to the same percentage (say, 80%?), the Mustang is carrying potentially hundreds of kilograms of extra fuel weight. However, my experience was that when I set them both to the same fuel WEIGHT (IE, both carrying 300 kg of fuel), the Mustang outflies the AI Dora with almost boring ease.

 

If they're just going into a Quick Combat mission where both aircraft start at 80% of max fuel (which I believe was how the Mustang quick mission was set up, haven't checked the Dora yet), then when flying as the Mustang, you're comparatively too heavy and the AI Dora too light (which makes it hard when you're in the Mustang), whereas when flying the Dora, the AI would be comparatively too heavy in fuel weight (which makes it easier when you're in the Dora).

 

I have found that playing myself at 60% fuel in the Mustang, and the AI Dora at 80-90% is a good match-up: the Mustang is still carrying SIGNIFICANTLY more fuel, but it's a more realistic comparison when you consider that it's about how much the Mustang would likely have over the target on a long-range escort mission, while the Dora probably wouldn't have to go very far to get from airfield to intercept point.

Edited August 7, 2014 by OutOnTheOP

[Krupi]

I think to be fair P-51 should have now higher WEP/BOOST - 72 or 75 inch instead 67 inch.

 

D-9 in DCS got MW50 which make it one of the fastest D-9 version which was in service.

 

Dont have D-9 in DCS only P-51 but after few dogfigts i see noticable difference in power - D-9 is very fast. P-51 to be more competetive need rised WEP/BOOST system.

 

BTW i like how D-9 fly even if im only P-51 competitior. It looks for me that it is the first sim which make it like should be :)

 

I think BOS developers should learn how to make historical accurate planes.

 

And then someone will ask for the Dora 11 with the Jump 213E or the Ta 152 etc... ; )

[OutOnTheOP]

And then someone will ask for the Dora 11 with the Jump 213E or the Ta 152 etc... ; )

 

The difference is that the P-51D with 72 or 75 inches boost was a quite widely-seen thing from mid/late '44 on (and as I recall, didn't actually require any kind of modification, just the higher-grade fuels, and authorization to push the throttle forward!)

[Narushima]

Thing is, I'm not sure increasing the boost would actually help the P-51 in this match. It'd only make the Merlin die sooner. D-9 has too much endurance for the P-51 to afford a slugging match.

[NineLine]

The difference is that the P-51D with 72 or 75 inches boost was a quite widely-seen thing from mid/late '44 on (and as I recall, didn't actually require any kind of modification, just the higher-grade fuels, and authorization to push the throttle forward!)

 

And as I said before, fuels will be looked at down the road.

[OutOnTheOP]

And as I said before, fuels will be looked at down the road.

 

Oh, I know. And I'm not saying the better fuels are MUSTS, anyway... just that while it could be used to affect game balance, it would be historically justifiable, rather than a "tweak" in MOBA-style-artificial-game-balancing as was implied a few posts back.

[OutOnTheOP]

Thing is, I'm not sure increasing the boost would actually help the P-51 in this match. It'd only make the Merlin die sooner. D-9 has too much endurance for the P-51 to afford a slugging match.

 

I'm not really sure it'd make a ton of difference, either. Frankly, while both are "energy fighters", in this particular match-up, it basically seems to come down to the FW190 being the better energy fighter, and the Mustang being the better angles fighter. ...which is a weird place for the Mustang pilot to be, but it's kind of nice, because it means the 'stang pilots get the opportunity to practice angles tactics against the FW, and energy tactics against, say, the Bf109, Spitfire, or (assuming there are some coming down the pike) pretty much any of the Russian or Japanese WW2 birds.

[JMasterFlash]

Well, I have a few dogfights under my belt tonight, AI only. Unfortunately, the AI starts trying to go vertical as soon as you get behind them, so it turns into an easy kill for flying the Dora. The main thing for me was that I found the p-51 much easier to aim once I have aspect on my opponent. I had a much better hit ratio, and actually down the Dora sooner, despite having bigger guns on the Dora. The p-51 seems like you feel the plane much more when you fly it.

[Kwiatek]

And as I said before, fuels will be looked at down the road.

 

It would be really nice.

 

Casue now we got early version P-51 with standart boost +67 inch vs late version D-9 with MW 50 modification.

 

In 1944 initialy D-9 got only 1.55 Ata ( 1750 HP) then later were some modification - 1900 PS (1.7 Ata) mod and MW 50 2100 HP ( 1.8 Ata)

[Sabredog]

The main problem I had with the Dora was actually closing too fast on the Mustang to get many shots on target and then being unable to turn with it. A couple of times I found myself overshooting, getting into scissors and then entering a spin as we tried to get on each others tail. The best technique for me in the end was to keep the energy high, then use boom and zoom tactics. Also, getting below the Mustang and making him to climb is a good way to force an easy kill. Just don't try to out turn him...

[PE_Tigar]

The main thing for me was that I found the p-51 much easier to aim once I have aspect on my opponent. I had a much better hit ratio, and actually down the Dora sooner, despite having bigger guns on the Dora. The p-51 seems like you feel the plane much more when you fly it.

 

Gyro gunsight my friend, they didn't call it "ace maker" for nothing...

[MiloMorai]

Has anyone tried combat over 20,000ft?

[USARStarkey]

I'm not really sure it'd make a ton of difference, either. Frankly, while both are "energy fighters", in this particular match-up, it basically seems to come down to the FW190 being the better energy fighter, and the Mustang being the better angles fighter. ...which is a weird place for the Mustang pilot to be, but it's kind of nice, because it means the 'stang pilots get the opportunity to practice angles tactics against the FW, and energy tactics against, say, the Bf109, Spitfire, or (assuming there are some coming down the pike) pretty much any of the Russian or Japanese WW2 birds.

 

It would make a huge difference. A Mustang at 72-inches is a plane that can climb right with the 190, and the 190s 5mph speed advantage down low also goes away.

 

As far as Temps go:

 

"Climbs were made to thirty thousand feet at the standard, and at the test war emergency ratings. Climbs at seventy-five inches Hg. required about one minute less than was required when climbing at sixty seven inches Hg. All engine temperatures were normal during climb at the increased power."

 

 

 

Power improvement over the 1720bhp produced at 67"

 

Edited August 7, 2014 by USARStarkey

[effte]

Has anyone tried combat over 20,000ft?

 

And on the fourth page of the thread, the crucial question was finally asked...

 

If you post results of practical tests, be sure to include the altitude used as it is (should be, at least) of huge importance.

[USARStarkey]

And on the fourth page of the thread, the crucial question was finally asked...

 

If you post results of practical tests, be sure to include the altitude used as it is (should be, at least) of huge importance.

 

I have done some combat over 20k. Starting at around 17-18K, the climb advantage of the 190 seems to go away, or at least be greatly lessened. over 22k, the Mustang becomes alot faster, and just walks away at 30k. Turn goes from being a slight advantage on the deck to being a enormous one. None of this is from testing, just my experience in a few dogfights.

[ff4life4]

I have done some combat over 20k. Starting at around 17-18K, the climb advantage of the 190 seems to go away, or at least be greatly lessened. over 22k, the Mustang becomes alot faster, and just walks away at 30k. Turn goes from being a slight advantage on the deck to being a enormous one. None of this is from testing, just my experience in a few dogfights.

 

Thanks for the imput. I really believe it will be interesting when the P51s are escourting B17s at high altitude. If the Fw-190s have a misison to intercept, I think it could be quite interesting at the higher altitudes. If the P51s mission is to protect the bombers, then the Dora's may not be able to lead the P51s down into a low fight where it has the advantage

[USARStarkey]

Thanks for the imput. I really believe it will be interesting when the P51s are escourting B17s at high altitude. If the Fw-190s have a misison to intercept, I think it could be quite interesting at the higher altitudes. If the P51s mission is to protect the bombers, then the Dora's may not be able to lead the P51s down into a low fight where it has the advantage

 

 

Even without the bombers, he who has the advantage up high has the overall advantage in most cases. This is because you can always start up high and dive on opponents who are low. The Every nation in the war was on the receiving end of this at some point. The Japanese got mauled as a result of this. The p-47 was a success only because of it, and the Russians would have gotten hit a lot worse had they not outnumbered the Germans so much. Using boom and zoom from alto Russian planes didn't like , some 190 and 109 groups racked up greater than 20 to 1 kdr's.

Now I know your thinking, but wait can't I just fly too low and force them to come down to fight? No. Not in organized many vs many fights. Fighters often flew in high medium and low cover for this reason. The bulk stays at med and high and some go low to bnz while the upper covers prevent. Co alt or voicing threats from being a problem.

[Krupi]

Which is exactly why the P-51 doesn't need a boost, the P-51 pilots just need to learn to stay high :P

[USARStarkey]

But I thought we were going for historical authenticity over balance? :)

[NineLine]

But I thought we were going for historical authenticity over balance? :)

 

We are, stay high and cover those bombers.... soon as we get them :)

[USARStarkey]

Also, right now you can't do it very we'll for two reasons: non- edge visibility makes it far too hard to spot people below you. Second, people are generally too lazy to climb, and there are no servers with 15k air starts or something. Thirdly(yeah I know not 2) no one is operating in stacks, which is partially due to it being too hard to keep track of planes farther away that 1km. Or below you

[USARStarkey]

To sith: you know what I meant. The bomber escort wasn't the only thing going on by the time the Dora entered service. Time period reflected is ultra late 44 and 51s had 75in as of mid 44. The Dora we have has 1.8 ata mw50 boost which wasn't introduced with the initial models. I'm fine with having a late war Dora with a late Dora boost, but the pony should have its corresponding improvements as well. same goes for the thunderbolt and the spit. Just telling everyone to stay high or die is just deflecting discussion about an obvious case of disproportionate boost mods. Not to mention I can't stay high right now since nobody is up there and you can't see a thing