Jump to content

The "new" P-51D model. What can we expect?


Solty

Recommended Posts

The above discussion exceeds my limited historical knowledge but I find it very fascinating. While I consider Kurfurst vastly more knowledgeable than me on all things Messerschmitt, did he possibly mean the G-10 not G-14? I thought the G-10 also used the same DB-605 as the K-4 but was in fact slightly lighter.

 

From my own sim experience I find the P-51D lacking in the power department too. I do believe if 72" helps the P-51D in the airquake then I'm all for it.

 

To the Wikipedia I suppose....

 

Its not a case of if 72" helps airquake because we should already have it. The LW have the rare K4 and yet the mustang doesn't have the manifold pressure that was widely used during Normandy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 105
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • ED Team
Its not a case of if 72" helps airquake because we should already have it. The LW have the rare K4 and yet the mustang doesn't have the manifold pressure that was widely used during Normandy.

 

Which Yo-Yo has stated probably wouldnt help many MP fights right now anyways as it is as they dont take place at historical altitudes anyways, something people always leave out ;)

64Sig.png
Forum RulesMy YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug**

1146563203_makefg(6).png.82dab0a01be3a361522f3fff75916ba4.png  80141746_makefg(1).png.6fa028f2fe35222644e87c786da1fabb.png  28661714_makefg(2).png.b3816386a8f83b0cceab6cb43ae2477e.png  389390805_makefg(3).png.bca83a238dd2aaf235ea3ce2873b55bc.png  216757889_makefg(4).png.35cb826069cdae5c1a164a94deaff377.png  1359338181_makefg(5).png.e6135dea01fa097e5d841ee5fb3c2dc5.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which Yo-Yo has stated probably wouldnt help many MP fights right now anyways as it is as they dont take place at historical altitudes anyways, something people always leave out ;)

 

I don't want to help the airquake games, I want it because it was used in normandy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which Yo-Yo has stated probably wouldnt help many MP fights right now anyways as it is as they dont take place at historical altitudes anyways, something people always leave out ;)

 

The flip side of this is that more HP never hurts.

 

We would just have to pay even more attention to our temp gauge and I suspect the cries would go from give us 72" to give us a Merlin that can take 72" lol

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The flip side of this is that more HP never hurts.

 

We would just have to pay even more attention to our temp gauge and I suspect the cries would go from give us 72" to give us a Merlin that can take 72" lol

 

That's the real problem .I don't mind a 72" merlin .I don't mind a more reliable engine. But where do you draw the line ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its not just MAP that goes up, you get 44-1 fuel with it and it helps to keep temps in check.

 

Secondly, sorry, but 72'hg makes a big difference.

 

 

Well 67" was used by some planes over Normandy as well. So are you happy? Probably not. wink.gif

I love how you bring normandy each time. Germans had 0 K4 and 0 D9 over Normandy. Stop bringing it up as any benchmark.

 

It is a fuel and power setting. Of course there are planes with higher and lower power settings.

 

Can we take away MW50? Like for ever? Lets see how you fly with 1.45ata. music_whistling.gif


Edited by Solty

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]In 21st century there is only war and ponies.

 

My experience: Jane's attack squadron, IL2 for couple of years, War Thunder and DCS.

My channel:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCyAXX9rAX_Sqdc0IKJuv6dA

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Considering the LW have to choose from a K-4 109 or a FW D9, I do not see any reason why the P-51D shouldn't get a realistic "boost" to 72" with the high octane fuel..

__________________________________________________________

i7 3930k @ 4.7GHz | GTX 980 Ti | 16GB G.Skill 2133 Quad Channel | Samsung 850 EVO SSD | Win7 ProX64 | CH Fighterstick | CH Pro Pedals | CH Throttle | BenQ XL2730Z 1440p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Considering the LW have to choose from a K-4 109 or a FW D9, I do not see any reason why the P-51D shouldn't get a realistic "boost" to 72" with the high octane fuel..

 

I do not see either, as long as the thermal load increase from 72" and other side effects are modelled either. Preferably as a fuel switch, because I am not sure all P-51D module buyers, for example those just like to try the plane offline would suddenly want to deal with all the side effects because a handful of highly vocal posters do not feel that they are competitive enough online.

 

While we are at it, I do not see any reason why the 109K-4 shouldn't get a realistic "boost" to 1,98 ata with the high octane fuel either.

http://www.kurfurst.org - The Messerschmitt Bf 109 Performance Resource Site

 

Vezérünk a bátorság, Kísérőnk a szerencse!

-Motto of the RHAF 101st 'Puma' Home Air Defense Fighter Regiment

The Answer to the Ultimate Question of the K-4, the Universe, and Everything: Powerloading 550 HP / ton, 1593 having been made up to 31th March 1945, 314 K-4s were being operated in frontline service on 31 January 1945.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team

While we are at it, I do not see any reason why the 109K-4 shouldn't get a realistic "boost" to 1,98 ata with the high octane fuel either.

 

It's in the plans for different fuel types for both sides as an option in the future last I heard. But this thread is about the New P-51D model. So lets stay on that subject.

64Sig.png
Forum RulesMy YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug**

1146563203_makefg(6).png.82dab0a01be3a361522f3fff75916ba4.png  80141746_makefg(1).png.6fa028f2fe35222644e87c786da1fabb.png  28661714_makefg(2).png.b3816386a8f83b0cceab6cb43ae2477e.png  389390805_makefg(3).png.bca83a238dd2aaf235ea3ce2873b55bc.png  216757889_makefg(4).png.35cb826069cdae5c1a164a94deaff377.png  1359338181_makefg(5).png.e6135dea01fa097e5d841ee5fb3c2dc5.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do not see either, as long as the thermal load increase from 72" and other side effects are modelled either. Preferably as a fuel switch, because I am not sure all P-51D module buyers, for example those just like to try the plane offline would suddenly want to deal with all the side effects because a handful of highly vocal posters do not feel that they are competitive enough online.

 

While we are at it, I do not see any reason why the 109K-4 shouldn't get a realistic "boost" to 1,98 ata with the high octane fuel either.

 

I'd hope the option of using the "original" DCS P-51D would still be there after the introduction of the new Mustang. I hadn't even considered the alternative reality before now.

 

I think you'd be surprised by how big that "handful" of online Mustang pilots is and the number of people posting on the forum is far from representative of the actual population. As far as people wanting to casually fly the P-51, I doubt they'd even notice the MP increase.


Edited by Merlin-27

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

[Dogs of War] WWII COMBAT SERVER | P-51D - FW190-D9 - Me109-K4

Visit Our Website & Forum to Get More Info & Team Speak Access

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd hope the option of using the "original" DCS P-51D would still be there after the introduction of the new Mustang. I hadn't even considered the alternative reality before now.

 

I think you'd be surprised by how big that "handful" of online Mustang pilots is and the number of people posting on the forum is far from representative of the actual population. As far as people wanting to casually fly the P-51, I doubt they'd even notice the MP increase.

Yes, option to have 67'hg boost should still be there, if anyone wants to make a mission with 9th AAF FG's.

 

We have to remember that Pacific theater is coming up from Leatherneck who are developing F4U-1D and that will be a perfect place for the 67'hg Mustang too.

 

BTW, 72'hg with lower grade fuel 100oct would be deadly to the engine, but with 150oct 44-1fuel the overheating will not be as big of a problem as Kurfurst makes it out to be.

 

BTW, Merlin, you are flying without WEP anyway, so it won't affect you too much :)

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]In 21st century there is only war and ponies.

 

My experience: Jane's attack squadron, IL2 for couple of years, War Thunder and DCS.

My channel:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCyAXX9rAX_Sqdc0IKJuv6dA

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Can we take away MW50? Like for ever? Lets see how you fly with 1.45ata. music_whistling.gif

 

Looks ike this:

 

 

 

Certainly in first one it's quite obvious i didn't use it.Also MIn 1.12 look at the mw50 indicator.Min

3.50 Look how far i dropped the flaps to slow down don't think the mw50 was usefull on that one also.

 

 

Around the time i got this kills i've flown at least 80% of the time without it.The flight model was different at the time and i flown without it for lots of reasons:

-because plane was a little lighter without it and i was under the impression that it makes the plane easier fly on the edge of the stall that way.

-the propeller torque was huge with mw50 on and it made the plane more difficult to handle when doing hammerhead turns, when flying on the edge of the stall ,etc .

-I wanted to see if boost or no boost would make a difference.

-It was fun .

 

With current flight model it's useful to have mw50,yes . I could deny that but i'm being honest .

 

I also think it's fair to say the fact that you don't have 72" boost available is balanced by the fact that you use far less fuel than an 8th airforce p51 use on an average mission.I could also take far less fuel because i don't need 100% for any mission on any server(because distances are short) and make my 109 far lighter also.So it's all relative.


Edited by otto
Link to comment
Share on other sites

... We have to remember that Pacific theater is coming up from Leatherneck...

 

 

Wait, what??!? How have I not heard about this yet? Links? Info??

i7-9700k overclocked to 4.9ghz, RTX 2070 Super, 32GB RAM, M.2 NVMe drive, HP Reverb G2 version 2, CH Fighterstick, Pro Throttle, Pro Pedals, and a Logitech Throttle Quadrant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, option to have 67'hg boost should still be there, if anyone wants to make a mission with 9th AAF FG's.

 

We have to remember that Pacific theater is coming up from Leatherneck who are developing F4U-1D and that will be a perfect place for the 67'hg Mustang too.

 

BTW, 72'hg with lower grade fuel 100oct would be deadly to the engine, but with 150oct 44-1fuel the overheating will not be as big of a problem as Kurfurst makes it out to be.

 

BTW, Merlin, you are flying without WEP anyway, so it won't affect you too much :)

 

Good to know you have memorized my flying preferences, Solty :smilewink: I'm a stubborn guy and set in my ways, using WEP every mission + the use of rear radar break the immersion for me. I know, probably sounds stupid to most but that's beauty of being able to fly "your way" right?

 

And yes... hopefully you wont have to watch to make sure the ground crew fills your tanks with the correct fuel.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

[Dogs of War] WWII COMBAT SERVER | P-51D - FW190-D9 - Me109-K4

Visit Our Website & Forum to Get More Info & Team Speak Access

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks ike this:

 

 

 

Certainly in first one it's quite obvious i didn't use it.Also MIn 1.12 look at the mw50 indicator.Min

3.50 Look how far i dropped the flaps to slow down don't think the mw50 was usefull on that one also.

 

 

Around the time i got this kills i've flown at least 80% of the time without it.The flight model was different at the time and i flown without it for lots of reasons:

-because plane was a little lighter without it and i was under the impression that it makes the plane easier fly on the edge of the stall that way.

-the propeller torque was huge with mw50 on and it made the plane more difficult to handle when doing hammerhead turns, when flying on the edge of the stall ,etc .

-I wanted to see if boost or no boost would make a difference.

-It was fun .

 

With current flight model it's useful to have mw50,yes . I could deny that but i'm being honest .

 

I also think it's fair to say the fact that you don't have 72" boost available is balanced by the fact that you use far less fuel than an 8th airforce p51 use on an average mission.I could also take far less fuel because i don't need 100% for any mission on any server(because distances are short) and make my 109 far lighter also.So it's all relative.

 

Dangit!! How do you see those A/C from that distance?!? I can never see anything from that far away :mad:

When you hit the wrong button on take-off

hwl7xqL.gif

System Specs.

Spoiler
System board: MSI X670E ACE Memory: 64GB DDR5-6000 G.Skill Ripjaw System disk: Crucial P5 M.2 2TB
CPU: AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D PSU: Corsair HX1200 PSU Monitor: ASUS MG279Q, 27"
CPU cooling: Noctua NH-D15S Graphics card: MSI RTX 3090Ti SuprimX VR: Oculus Rift CV1
 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dangit!! How do you see those A/C from that distance?!? I can never see anything from that far away :mad:

 

I can tell you from experience that the larger the monitor the better. I switched from a 55" tv to a 22" monitor and I feel completely blind now. If there is a secret I'd like to know it :). I'm not trying to answer for Otto but that would be the only way I could have spotted anything at those distances.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dangit!! How do you see those A/C from that distance?!? I can never see anything from that far away :mad:

 

Apart from the fact that i can see really well in real life also:

 

-Mostly trial and error with AA settings,colors ,contrast + lots and lots of practice and patience.I don't go to lower altitude because i want to get into a fight quickly .

-My monitor has great colors ,great contrast, 4k etc.30 inch .It's really pricey but i got one with 3 small schratches on the surface for a cheap price. The bad part is my pc is not that great and i can't even think about using 4k.With 4k i can see even better.

-P51s are bigger than 109 and the list goes on.

-I tried playing Il2 recently and i can't spot anything .Takes time to get used to it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dangit!! How do you see those A/C from that distance?!? I can never see anything from that far away :mad:

 

Apart from the fact that i can see really well in real life also:

 

-Mostly trial and error with AA settings,colors ,contrast + lots and lots of practice and patience.I don't go to lower altitude because i want to get into a fight quickly .

-My monitor has great colors ,great contrast, 4k etc.30 inch .It's really pricey but i got one with 3 small schratches on the surface for a cheap price. The bad part is my pc is not that great and i can't even think about using 4k.With 4k i can see even better.

-P51s are bigger than 109 and the list goes on.

-I tried playing Il2 recently and i can't spot anything .Takes time to get used to it.

 

I also lost track of my target lots and lots of times.+This is edited footage just shows my successes .

 

@Integrals 22 is too small.But 55 i would say is far too big .Use something in between but look for great colors, contrast,blacks, monitors for photo editing and such .


Edited by otto
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dangit!! How do you see those A/C from that distance?!? I can never see anything from that far away :mad:

 

Apart from the fact that i can see really well in real life also:

 

-Mostly trial and error with AA settings,colors ,contrast + lots and lots of practice and patience.I don't go to lower altitude because i want to get into a fight quickly .

-My monitor has great colors ,great contrast, 4k etc.30 inch .It's really pricey but i got one with 3 small schratches on the surface for a cheap price. The bad part is my pc is not that great and i can't even think about using 4k.With 4k i can see even better.

-P51s are bigger than 109 and the list goes on.

-I tried playing Il2 recently and i can't spot anything .Takes time to get used to it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...