P51D engine power underperforming

[Reflected]

I personally feel like a lot of the problems with the current DCS P-51 vs 109 matchup regardless of engine ratings or altitudes fought stem from the damage models or lack of them. From other sims I've played from the German perspective, the radiators are a real weak point being so prominent on the wings of the 109. All it took was a lucky nick from a .303 from a spit or hurricane and then your time in that airframe is down to ~5mins max depending on how you ran the engine or the severity of the leak. Unfortunately DCS doesn't have this right now, you get the white smoke but it's just for decoration it seems at the moment.

 

I mean online with all that lead flying from the P51 guns, it's very probable to nab both radiators with a mid to long range shot. If that really mattered you wouldn't see P51's dumping half their load into a 109 to knock off a wing/tail, catch it on fire, or kill the pilot which seem to be the majority of the way planes go down aside from the ever present prop governor going.

 

If the damage model was up to par with the complexity of the flight models I think a lot of the turning and burning you have to do as a Mustang driver would be cut down a lot to nab a 109. As it stands now, the 109 has all the performance advantages with very few of the design compromises. I mean it's a small airframe, if you hit it with 6 fifty cals for 2 seconds you are going to hit something vital. That something vital is most likely going to make it combat ineffective pretty soon or at least for the pilot to make a choice to disengage or troubleshoot in a dogfight.

 

The armament for fighter on fighter action is definitely in favor of the Mustang along with the high speed maneuverability. The 109 enjoys quite a few other performance advantages along with very effective radiators that don't take damage unless the pilot of hamfisted in Engine Management, I haven't flown the latest patch but also to what I recall their guns don't overheat. So you have quite a few unique design features with none of the compromises they entail. Same with the Mustang, it's radiator is quite exposed to ground fire, but it's pretty rare if ever that I've experienced an airframe loss to that. It's either the radiator motor goes or the prop governor goes.

 

So to compare the two planes at this state isn't a very historical or realistic one at all unless you do it sans weapons.

 

Well said. The lack of detailed DM is the biggest problem in this matchup.

[Solty]

I personally feel like a lot of the problems with the current DCS P-51 vs 109 matchup regardless of engine ratings or altitudes fought stem from the damage models or lack of them. From other sims I've played from the German perspective, the radiators are a real weak point being so prominent on the wings of the 109. All it took was a lucky nick from a .303 from a spit or hurricane and then your time in that airframe is down to ~5mins max depending on how you ran the engine or the severity of the leak. Unfortunately DCS doesn't have this right now, you get the white smoke but it's just for decoration it seems at the moment.

 

I mean online with all that lead flying from the P51 guns, it's very probable to nab both radiators with a mid to long range shot. If that really mattered you wouldn't see P51's dumping half their load into a 109 to knock off a wing/tail, catch it on fire, or kill the pilot which seem to be the majority of the way planes go down aside from the ever present prop governor going.

 

If the damage model was up to par with the complexity of the flight models I think a lot of the turning and burning you have to do as a Mustang driver would be cut down a lot to nab a 109. As it stands now, the 109 has all the performance advantages with very few of the design compromises. I mean it's a small airframe, if you hit it with 6 fifty cals for 2 seconds you are going to hit something vital. That something vital is most likely going to make it combat ineffective pretty soon or at least for the pilot to make a choice to disengage or troubleshoot in a dogfight.

 

The armament for fighter on fighter action is definitely in favor of the Mustang along with the high speed maneuverability. The 109 enjoys quite a few other performance advantages along with very effective radiators that don't take damage unless the pilot of hamfisted in Engine Management, I haven't flown the latest patch but also to what I recall their guns don't overheat. So you have quite a few unique design features with none of the compromises they entail. Same with the Mustang, it's radiator is quite exposed to ground fire, but it's pretty rare if ever that I've experienced an airframe loss to that. It's either the radiator motor goes or the prop governor goes.

 

So to compare the two planes at this state isn't a very historical or realistic one at all unless you do it sans weapons.

I agree.

[SnowTiger]

I also absolutely agree.

With a more detailed and/or accurate damage model, it might not take a full loadout to shoot down a smoking 109 or 190.

 

Plus when something is smoking, usually that is relatively critical and probably only a matter of time before something fails (reducing overall effectiveness in the dogfight ? maybe). If it's streaming fuel, then it should run out of fuel in "X" amount of time/miles.

 

A few things could make the fight seem a bit more balanced.

As long as it doesn't just mess something else up during the process !!