P-51 vs Bf-109 dogfight impressions

[KenobiOrder]

The 190 certainly seemed over-modelled when it came out, but I think that it's been quietly brought more into line with reality: it originally over-climbed by a LOT (like the 109 is now), had some 200 too many horsepower available, somewhat too low drag, and was much too resistant to damage.

 

Those seem to have been brought more in line with reason, and it now performs as specs and real-world flight testing indicates it should.

 

I think with any just-out-of-beta module, you need to give it a few months before deciding it's totally borked.

 

That said, I expect the fixes to be made QUIETLY, because, as you say, too many people would beech and moan that their pet ride was being "nerfed". But Eagle Dynamics does need to keep things reasonably realistic/ balanced (yes, you can do both at the same time!), or else the ALLIED players will walk away and find something else to play.

 

The current 190 still seems to be over-performing even after the patch. Climb-rate appears to still be about 25m/s instead of 21-22m/s. (down from 28-29m/s) Its resistance to damage has greatly improved as you said though.

 

As for catching 109s on the deck, I think that you can. Ive measured 363mph SL in the P-51 and 356mph in the K4 at 1.8ata. Regarding the turn at SL, the 109 is slightly (but decisively) better w/o flaps. With both planes max flaps I cant tell a difference.

[OutOnTheOP]

The current 190 still seems to be over-performing even after the patch. Climb-rate appears to still be about 25m/s instead of 21-22m/s. (down from 28-29m/s) Its resistance to damage has greatly improved as you said though.

 

As for catching 109s on the deck, I think that you can. Ive measured 363mph SL in the P-51 and 356mph in the K4 at 1.8ata. Regarding the turn at SL, the 109 is slightly (but decisively) better w/o flaps. With both planes max flaps I cant tell a difference.

 

Ok, I guess even the 190 isn't perfect yet, either. I haven't done exhaustive flight tests with it, I'm judging primarily off rather subjective measurements. IE, "do they regularly climb away from me in fights in a manner that denies me any shot whatsoever", to which the answer is "no"; they may over-climb, but not enough to keep me from killing 'em on the regular.

 

I do ABSOLUTELY know the damage model is better; I've gotten a number of pilot kills and engine kills with extremely short bursts that previously would have left the 190 flying on with nary a care (how frustrating it was, watching tracer flashes hitting the canopy in a high-deflection shot, and having that diamondtanium canopy deflect them all....)

 

Ouch, I wouldn't dare trying to fight at MAX flaps; too much drag. One notch, very occasionally two on the 'Stang.

[KenobiOrder]

Ok, I guess even the 190 isn't perfect yet, either. I haven't done exhaustive flight tests with it, I'm judging primarily off rather subjective measurements. IE, "do they regularly climb away from me in fights in a manner that denies me any shot whatsoever", to which the answer is "no"; they may over-climb, but not enough to keep me from killing 'em on the regular.

 

I do ABSOLUTELY know the damage model is better; I've gotten a number of pilot kills and engine kills with extremely short bursts that previously would have left the 190 flying on with nary a care (how frustrating it was, watching tracer flashes hitting the canopy in a high-deflection shot, and having that diamondtanium canopy deflect them all....)

 

Ouch, I wouldn't dare trying to fight at MAX flaps; too much drag. One notch, very occasionally two on the 'Stang.

 

Putting all the flaps down is probably the best thing you can do if your losing a sea level turn fight with a 109. I mean, if hes already getting around on you, conserving E isnt going to help. However, if you put down additional flaps and he doesnt, youll easily come around on a 109. If he also puts them down at least you will be equal enough to have a fair chance. Mind you, Im only suggesting this if your already committed to a low and slow duel.

[OutOnTheOP]

Putting all the flaps down is probably the best thing you can do if your losing a sea level turn fight with a 109. I mean, if hes already getting around on you, conserving E isnt going to help. However, if you put down additional flaps and he doesnt, youll easily come around on a 109. If he also puts them down at least you will be equal enough to have a fair chance. Mind you, Im only suggesting this if your already committed to a low and slow duel.

 

Ah, maybe there's the difference; I try not to let them get me that slow. I've blown up too many engines doing that :music_whistling:

[Hummingbird]

If the P-51 even comes close to turning as well as the 109 ingame then something is awfully wrong. The 109 has a major lift to weight & thrust to weight advantage in real life, the Mustang aint even close.

[OutOnTheOP]

If the P-51 even comes close to turning as well as the 109 ingame then something is awfully wrong. The 109 has a major lift to weight & thrust to weight advantage in real life, the Mustang aint even close.

 

Yes, yes, Hummingbird, we know, you think it should have laser death rays and fly at 0.5 c. We get it. Never mind that you ignore major factors like, oh, I dunno, drag.

 

The fact remains that historical evidence and firsthand reports from both sides *and* modern airshow pilots indicates that the P-51D will indeed out-turn the Bf109 at high speeds.

 

Sorry you don't have a magical win machine. Deal with it.

[WildBillKelsoe]

is there a blind spot for AI 109s? I'd love to sneak up on him and tear him to pieces for a change...

[OutOnTheOP]

is there a blind spot for AI 109s? I'd love to sneak up on him and tear him to pieces for a change...

 

I don't think so... they seem to turn in and start the fight with me every time. I actually think the AI 109 is the hardest aircraft to fight right now, by a long shot; harder even than human-piloted ones.

 

...and the AI Mustang is totally useless against it. I've seen AI Kurfurst go like 1v6 against AI Mustangs and just dominate the fight, because the AI Mustangs are too stupid to use good tactics, and just keep climbing and turning, bleeding off all their speed fruitlessly chasing the Kurfurst.

[KenobiOrder]

If the P-51 even comes close to turning as well as the 109 ingame then something is awfully wrong. The 109 has a major lift to weight & thrust to weight advantage in real life, the Mustang aint even close.

 

Except that in every sim previous to DCS except vanilla Il2 (which was rubbish) the P-51D is usually about a second or so behind 109s, and a second faster than 190s, roughly.

[Hummingbird]

Yes, yes, Hummingbird, we know, you think it should have laser death rays and fly at 0.5 c. We get it. Never mind that you ignore major factors like, oh, I dunno, drag.

 

The fact remains that historical evidence and firsthand reports from both sides *and* modern airshow pilots indicates that the P-51D will indeed out-turn the Bf109 at high speeds.

 

Sorry you don't have a magical win machine. Deal with it.

 

I deal with reality, I suggest you do the same.

[GriffonBR]

Well, at least, the Mustang AI does something that no other aircraft can do.:lol:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AXcnejiTFsw

[GrapeJam]

I deal with reality, I suggest you do the same.

"My reality" you meant? Because pretty much everybody disagree with you, even in post war test of 190D9(albeit flown at 1750hp, but with much reduced weight of 8500lbs), the D9 was described as having a poor turn radius.

[Crumpp]

Radius of turn is not rate of turn.

[WildBillKelsoe]

Well, at least, the Mustang AI does something that no other aircraft can do.:lol:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AXcnejiTFsw

 

 

I bet he can do the red tails routine too.. :megalol:

 

This brought a smile on my face, thanks for sharing :D

[GrapeJam]

Radius of turn is not rate of turn.

He implied that D9's airfoil clmax is higher and thus should have superior instantaneous turn as well.

[Teapot]

I've been reading this thread with some interest.

One thing that concerns me is the suggestion that there should be *game balancing* ... DCS is not (or wasn't to my knowledge) abut *game balancing*.

 

By all means argue the point about the numbers and physics, but please don't float the idea about *game balancing* ... that is pure weevil and that thought meme should be banished for all eternity! ;).

 

I'm sure that YoYo (and DCS) will be better swayed by proof.

[OutOnTheOP]

There should not be *artificial* game balancing. There SHOULD be game *balance*.

 

These are two very different things.

 

For example: if the FW190D9 was found to be performing poorly against P-51D, and Eagle Dynamics decided to just arbitrarily give the FW190D9 an extra 200 horsepower above it's real value, that would be *artificial* game balance.

 

However, if Eagle Dynamics is deciding which aircraft to model to pair with the FW190D9, they could choose to create completely accurate renditions of, say, a 1941-era P-40 Warhawk, or a late-'44 P-51D. Both the P-40 and P-51D could be modelled 100% true-to-life, but obviously, the P-51D would be a better match, "game balance" wise. By selecting to make the P-51D, it is better balance, without sacrificing realism.

 

The same is true of upgrades to an airframe, production lots, field modifications, and (the contentious issue of) fuel quality and type.

 

They can choose to model the P-51D with, or without, 44-1 fuel (150 grade): either way is representative of reality, and in fact both were used *simultaneously*. So it gives Eagle Dynamics some room to "balance", without breaking realism.

 

That said, if we're talking about choices for "balance", ED seemed to go just hog-wild on the Dora, because they gave it every bell and whistle ever mounted on *a* Dora, in a combination that I'm not certain was ever together on *any* Dora (in particular, I take issue with the gyro sight).

[GGTharos]

ED models aircraft from documentation for the given aircraft.

 

They are not modeling them based on how they perform against each other in the game.

[OutOnTheOP]

ED models aircraft from documentation for the given aircraft.

 

They are not modeling them based on how they perform against each other in the game.

 

My point is that they can do BOTH. There is plenty of documentation out there regarding the performance of the Merlin (and the P-51D mounting it) with 44-1 fuel.

[KenobiOrder]

My point is that they can do BOTH. There is plenty of documentation out there regarding the performance of the Merlin (and the P-51D mounting it) with 44-1 fuel.

 

44-1 should most certainly be done, but things like this should ONLY be done when they are historically justified. For example, you shouldn't put a SPIT 9 up against a K4 109 or D9 FW190 unless you give it the higher boost it would have had, or simply do a Spit 14. You also shouldnt do a P-51 without 150 grade vs a K4 either. So if ED does some balancing it needs to have a historical basis. If ED were doing a Early pacific WW2 theatre it would be pretty silly if they added Hellcats and Corsairs simply because the Zero was too OP in 1942.

[OutOnTheOP]

44-1 should most certainly be done, but things like this should ONLY be done when they are historically justified. For example, you shouldn't put a SPIT 9 up against a K4 109 or D9 FW190 unless you give it the higher boost it would have had, or simply do a Spit 14. You also shouldnt do a P-51 without 150 grade vs a K4 either. So if ED does some balancing it needs to have a historical basis. If ED were doing a Early pacific WW2 theatre it would be pretty silly if they added Hellcats and Corsairs simply because the Zero was too OP in 1942.

 

...I feel like we are making the same argument

[KenobiOrder]

:thumbup:

...I feel like we are making the same argument

[HeadHunter52]

Both you guys get my vote.

 

I want my 150 fuel.....

And WEP to produce speeds that are greater than tested MIL.

[Teapot]

44-1 should most certainly be done, but things like this should ONLY be done when they are historically justified. For example, you shouldn't put a SPIT 9 up against a K4 109 or D9 FW190 unless you give it the higher boost it would have had, or simply do a Spit 14......

 

Actually ... because it's a sandbox sim, DCS can (and do) model any aircraft they feel that they have sufficient data to reproduce an accurate simulation.

 

The *game* and utilisation of mission resources is left to the player. If a plane fairs poorly in a specific context (say in a 1 v 1 engagement) it may not be the interpretation of available technical data that's the issue but maybe it's the historical context in which these machines fought that needs to be investigated.

[Solty]

Actually ... because it's a sandbox sim, DCS can (and do) model any aircraft they feel that they have sufficient data to reproduce an accurate simulation.

 

The *game* and utilisation of mission resources is left to the player. If a plane fairs poorly in a specific context (say in a 1 v 1 engagement) it may not be the interpretation of available technical data that's the issue but maybe it's the historical context in which these machines fought that needs to be investigated.

And this is where I would tell you that historical context of current matchup is not accurate. We have disscussed it many times before. Germans just have very late 1944 planes against mid 1944 P-51D that runs with 1943 power setting.

 

Was it possible that those planes would fight each other? Yes.

Was it common? No.

 

It doesn't mean we can't beat the 109K4, but it means that P-51D deserves its higher power setting in the current matchup. If you are good (or your enemy is very bad) you can win against a 109K4 in a Hawker Hurricane. But that doesn't mean that it is balanced.

 

Also, K4 is still not finished and has its little unrealistic advantages over the mustang and as it seems the P-51 is a little bit underperforming with its max speed.

-----------

I want to tell everyone though. Always take 35-40% fuel on take off in the mustang. Our missions are short range and taking 68% of fuel will make you easier to kill.

 

What I have noticed is that 35% fuel Mustang is capable of matching the 109 in turns. K4 is the heaviest out of all 109 models that entered mass production.

 

From what I have noticed that much of fuel is still around 40min of fuel and most of German players take 70% fuel but some don't bother and take 100%. So this low fuel ammount can give you at least a better chance against German planes in terms of maneuvrablity.