Spitfire better than P-51D for online matches?

[Solty]

SurwTE=Whisper;3011181]Well, 1st effect, as a 109, I won't turn & burn a P51 anymore, because that Spit in the vincinity is going to handle me nicely if I do so....

 

Assuming that the P51 will start a turning fight and stay alive long enough for the Spit to gain on the 109.

 

Sure that can work against bad players, but a good one will just increase the vertical separation. Not to mention 109s that currently rurnfight spits and win.

[Kurfürst]

Thing I do not see is why the 2nd P-51 cannot do the same thing instead of the Spitfire. I.e. teamwork. While he is busy shooting down the 1st P-51, his buddy can get him the sights. Using the same tactics.

[Solty]

Thing I do not see is why the 2nd P-51 cannot do the same thing instead of the Spitfire. I.e. teamwork. While he is busy shooting down the 1st P-51, his buddy can get him the sights. Using the same tactics.

 

Exactly.

[Krupi]

Well that is certainly harder with two p-51 as the 109 can just climb away from both of them while the spitfire can initially keep up with the 109

[Whisper]

Well, 1st effect, as a 109, I won't turn & burn a P51 anymore, because that Spit in the vincinity is going to handle me nicely if I do so....

 

Assuming that the P51 will start a turning fight and stay alive long enough for the Spit to gain on the 109.

 

Sure that can work against bad players, but a good one will just increase the vertical separation. Not to mention 109s that currently rurnfight spits and win.

 

That's not what I am saying....

Whatever I'm going to say, you're going to push for your agenda, so it's better we stop it here.

[Krupi]

That's not what I am saying....

Whatever I'm going to say, you're going to push for your agenda, so it's better we stop it here.

 

Unfortunately I think you are right :(

[Zimmerdylan]

People come to flight simulators with a particular mindset. Often, that mindset is "I wanna get into some action, and make as many kills in as little time as possible ... and if I go down in a blaze of glory that's fine, it's quicker to re-plane than land anyway". There's nothing wrong with that mindset, but it does lead to certain choices seeming better. If you fly with this mindset the Spitfire will seem a much better choice.

 

Alternatively you can come with the mindset of "I want to make kills yes, but most of all I want to bring the plane home afterwards. So why would I ever engage in a fight where I have to maneuver with the enemy? Maneuvering with the enemy is dangerous ... I want to reserve the right to fire for myself, I will give the enemy no opportunity to fire and reject every fight where they could". If you fly with this mindset, IMO you're more likely to choose the P-51.

 

That said, I do agree with Hiromachi about being envious about the armament. I really hope the new damage model brings a damage boost for the 50 cals, they really need it in my opinion.

 

 

I think that people go play C.O.D. or Battlefield with that mindset. At least half of the people that I know who fly the DCS servers are most definitely looking to get back to base safely. Myself included. Just look at all of the YouTube vids of dogfights. A majority of them come back and land afterward.

What I am saying, and I believe that a majority of others believe to be true is that I bring the P51 back a lot less often than I do the Axis planes. I cannot really speak to the Spitfire at this point because it's still early in it's development and has issues. Between the overheating and other issues, I don't fly it air to air all that often. But as it stands right now, I know the plane that will bring me home the safest is the 109. The plane that I will get torn apart in a majority of the time is the P51.

This may or may not be the case for others, but it's my experience. And judging by the number of folks not flying the P51 in the servers, ad the negative feedback I get about the P51 on TS, I would have to say that it's a pretty common scenario.

[Tomsk]

I think that people go play C.O.D. or Battlefield with that mindset. At least half of the people that I know who fly the DCS servers are most definitely looking to get back to base safely.

 

Sure some do, but I also see plenty of people online who dive into the bottom of every furball they can find. It's not conducive to survival, even in a plane that turns well. I also see people who aren't quite so reckless, but still get into engagements they shouldn't ... I get into engagements that I shouldn't, and I'm a fairly conservative player.

 

What I am saying, and I believe that a majority of others believe to be true is that I bring the P51 back a lot less often than I do the Axis planes. I cannot really speak to the Spitfire at this point because it's still early in it's development and has issues.

 

For sure, it is a lot easier to do well as axis, no debate from me, I was just commenting on Spitfire vs P-51. Some people feel the Spitfire is more survivable, maybe that's true for their style. But personally, I find I'm ever aware that the doors can start closing very fast in the Spitfire. Doesn't dive well, isn't fast ... so if you get surrounded by higher or similar energy enemies you're unlikely to make it back home.

 

But yeah, I also fly the 190 and it is a lot easier to do well in the 190 ... and to make it back home afterwards.

[Hiromachi]

Ha ! You guys just wait for that Tomorrowhawks VEAO is cooking in the backyard :)

 

I smell they will require rebranding to Pityhawks but we may actually have a fair ground attacker which can be protected by Spitfires and Mustangs.

 

And yes, in my humble opinion, chances of getting back in 109 or 190 seem quite higher than for P-51 or Spitfire.

[Kirk66]

Seems to me if people REALLY want fair fights, the Allied side should have P-51Hs, Spit 14s, P-47Ms, Tempest Vs, and even F4U-4s and Bearcats - Those are the Allied contemporaries of the Dora and Kurfust.

 

I hear a lot of whining - if you want a realistic fight, pit 2 Ks (one old pro and one total newby) against 12 experienced Mustangs and see what happens - that would be realistic.

 

If you just want to see who is the best pilot - then go cutthroat: 1 v 1 v 1 v 1 with the same plane; everybody else is a bad guy, "fight's on" at the merge, and last pilot flying wins! (We actually used to do that in F-4s - you learned real quick NOT TO TURN!).

 

Vulture

[Hiromachi]

@up

Not sure what it has to do with the topic but ok. Nobody asks around for whatever you mentioned so thats a totally missed point. When it comes to whining, well, its nothing unusual for the flight sim community, people were complaining 10 years ago on old Il-2 and people will be complaining in future since we all have different taste and preferences. And other side isnt saint at all, touch precious 109 or 190 and you may get version of "Nacht der langen Messer". Been there, seen that.

 

However if people raise a point about specific aircraft participating in specific operations, that is a valid thing. Adding Hellcat to Midway scenario or Yak-3 to 1941 Moscow defense wouldn't be realistic nor historical.

 

In regard to last part. It merely tells you who is best in your group at dogfighting. That might mean something here and there, but there are other factors that matter in virtual flying. Particularly when you try to fly in a group.

[Krupi]

Seems to me if people REALLY want fair fights, the Allied side should have P-51Hs, Spit 14s, P-47Ms, Tempest Vs, and even F4U-4s and Bearcats - Those are the Allied contemporaries of the Dora and Kurfust.

 

I hear a lot of whining - if you want a realistic fight, pit 2 Ks (one old pro and one total newby) against 12 experienced Mustangs and see what happens - that would be realistic.

 

If you just want to see who is the best pilot - then go cutthroat: 1 v 1 v 1 v 1 with the same plane; everybody else is a bad guy, "fight's on" at the merge, and last pilot flying wins! (We actually used to do that in F-4s - you learned real quick NOT TO TURN!).

 

Vulture

 

Personally & I think people wouldn't mind me speaking on behalf of the vast majority of the community if I say that what we want is not a FAIR fight, what we want is historically correct to a certain period of a theatre or aircraft line-up.

 

Dora, Kurfurst, Tempests and XIV are not common in the theatre we are getting however as we have been informed many times the aircraft we are getting were not decided by ED and they have to fulfil this commitment.

 

Honestly while I am looking forward to jumping in a Tempest, ME262 and XIV I would rather see the likes of a Fw 190A, Typhoon and 109G.

 

I would love a Typhoon even though it would be badly outclassed against even Antons and Gustavs never-mind Dora's and Kurfursts...

 

Simple put people want historical not fair.

 

Or at least I do :megalol:

Edited January 9, 2017 by Krupi

[TripRodriguez]

This all sounds really good actually guys! This much disagreement means that both are viable, albeit with different tactics and skillsets.

 

I'm hoping that with some dedication I can become a force to be reckoned with in the Allied aircraft.

 

Even more importantly some of the allied pilots in this thread don't feel like it's a lost cause to play online. I hope I'll find myself feeling the same way.

 

Thank you all for the opinions, they were an interesting read and something I'm sure I'll be referring back to when I want to figure out what I'm doing wrong.

 

Trip

[BodyOrgan]

Personally I think it's just about learning the aircraft of choice. I used to come out with zero victories to many deaths in the P-51D, but I've been putting a lot of time in with it, and I'm starting to do quite well against average players, coming out ahead in many cases. Against the real aces I'm lucky to go one for one, but I still have so much to learn, and I feel like there's tons of potential I've yet to tap into.

 

I have to agree with some of the others about the Spitfire complementing the Mustang. As long as the Mustangs stay high, and watch the fight only dropping in for the occasional pass they'll be able to run down any German trying to flee in which they'll either kill them, or force them back into a turn fight with the Spitfires.

[Solty]

Personally & I think people wouldn't mind me speaking on behalf of the vast majority of the community if I say that what we want is not a FAIR fight, what we want is historically correct to a certain period of a theatre or aircraft line-up.

 

Dora, Kurfurst, Tempests and XIV are not common in the theatre we are getting however as we have been informed many times the aircraft we are getting were not decided by ED and they have to fulfil this commitment.

 

Honestly while I am looking forward to jumping in a Tempest, ME262 and XIV I would rather see the likes of a Fw 190A, Typhoon and 109G.

 

I would love a Typhoon even though it would be badly outclassed against even Antons and Gustavs never-mind Dora's and Kurfursts...

 

Simple put people want historical not fair.

 

Or at least I do :megalol:

 

Above all yes.

[Zimmerdylan]

@up

Not sure what it has to do with the topic but ok. Nobody asks around for whatever you mentioned so thats a totally missed point. When it comes to whining, well, its nothing unusual for the flight sim community, people were complaining 10 years ago on old Il-2 and people will be complaining in future since we all have different taste and preferences. And other side isnt saint at all, touch precious 109 or 190 and you may get version of "Nacht der langen Messer". Been there, seen that.

 

However if people raise a point about specific aircraft participating in specific operations, that is a valid thing. Adding Hellcat to Midway scenario or Yak-3 to 1941 Moscow defense wouldn't be realistic nor historical.

 

In regard to last part. It merely tells you who is best in your group at dogfighting. That might mean something here and there, but there are other factors that matter in virtual flying. Particularly when you try to fly in a group.

 

 

I do not see all that much whining going on in this thread. I personally am only driving home the point that the P51 is completely outclassed by the axis planes. That's not whining at all. It's just the facts. In DCS there has to be a strongest, and a weakest. The P51 is the weakest. I believe that many here feel that way.

I'm not asking ED to fix the issue because it doesn't need fixing. It is what it is. And for ED to make it the superior plane because of complaints would only create the void of another plane becoming the weak plane. And then people would complain about that. I personally have no issues with the P51 being what it is in DCS. Edit: I do have issue with the fact that you can run out of ammo trying to kill an enemy plane, even when your pounding them with lead. That's a bit much, and certainly should be corrected in my opinion. But I believe that many people know the Mustang as the heroic plane that won the skies of WWII for America from movies and documentaries and to have it be the way it's portrayed by DCS kind of berates that in their eyes. Whether it is true to history, I really could not say as I was not there. But I do know how it measures up in DCS. And there's nothing wrong with that. I just don't fly it. And if asked, I give my honest assessment of the plane. It's underpowered and does not perform as well as any of the other 3. That's all.

Edited January 10, 2017 by Zimmerdylan

[Tomsk]

Personally & I think people wouldn't mind me speaking on behalf of the vast majority of the community if I say that what we want is not a FAIR fight, what we want is historically correct to a certain period of a theatre or aircraft line-up.

 

Honestly, I'd like both :D As I've said before, I don't think this late in the war (the end of '44, early '45) is a good period to simulate. The massive allied advantage in numbers at this stage totally skews the situation, leading to very unfair fights with very ahistorical outcomes.

 

Honestly while I am looking forward to jumping in a Tempest, ME262 and XIV I would rather see the likes of a Fw 190A, Typhoon and 109G.

 

Agree completely.

[Solty]

Honestly, I'd like both :D As I've said before, I don't think this late in the war (the end of '44, early '45) is a good period to simulate. The massive allied advantage in numbers at this stage totally skews the situation, leading to very unfair fights with very ahistorical outcomes.

 

 

 

Agree completely.

Well, it is best when you have close oponents, but if you have a conflict like 1941 IJN vs USN A6M2 vs F4F3 it makes for a very historical matchup, but also heavily favouring the Japanese, at the same time it is interesting and I would love to play the F4F. But I know it is close to real conditions.

 

P-51D vs K4 is also a historically correct matchup, but it feels wrong because unlike the A6M2, the K4 is not the standard 109 for the 1944 period and thus creates unrest.

Edited January 11, 2017 by Solty

[Whisper]

I've read suggestion about limiting K4 in some missions to not have MW50 enabled (I didn't know it was possible) to try to simulate some G models. I don't know how accurate that would be regarding said models, but that may be worth a try if satisfactory.

Probably unapplicable to public play, but more for WWII BlueFlag versions and the likes :)

[HeadHunter52]

Well that is certainly harder with two p-51 as the 109 can just climb away from both of them while the spitfire can initially keep up with the 109

 

That's what I'm finding. With my energy up, I seem to stick to the 109 like a bumper sticker for a short bit. My aim sucks, or they'd be DEAD. I loe those cannons.

 

So, with bad aim, the fight eventually comes back to me where I then proceed to break the wings off and I'm gone again.

[HeadHunter52]

Seems to me if people REALLY want fair fights, the Allied side should have P-51Hs, Spit 14s, P-47Ms, Tempest Vs, and even F4U-4s and Bearcats - Those are the Allied contemporaries of the Dora and Kurfust.

 

I hear a lot of whining - if you want a realistic fight, pit 2 Ks (one old pro and one total newby) against 12 experienced Mustangs and see what happens - that would be realistic.

 

Vulture

 

*sigh* I'd just be happy with the fuel and ammo we're supposed to have in the Mustang. The ammo? Yo-yo told me that it couldn't be sim'd until the damage model is fixed, and that wouldn't be until the Normandy map comes out. Whether we get the fuel or ammo is still up for grabs. I suspect we'll get the map and the rest will be "two weeks." I really like how well the Stang flies, but she's a fat, under-powered target. Themz jus the facts. Without teamwork, as she sits now, she's just meat for the grinder.

[DefaultFace]

Pretty sure the new fuel has already been confirmed. And a whole new mustang.....

 

Hate to break it to ya but I'm pretty sure the main downside of the P-51 is not the fuel it uses. Try out the TF-51 in a mock fight and see for yourself...

[Tomsk]

Hate to break it to ya but I'm pretty sure the main downside of the P-51 is not the fuel it uses. Try out the TF-51 in a mock fight and see for yourself...

 

The higher octane fuel should allow the plane to running higher manifold pressures, which will increase acceleration and climb a little, but the main thing is that it'll increase the top-speed. Which is very useful in a BnZ style plane such as the P-51. However, as you point out it won't do much for the turn rate ... but then turn rate is not the only way to play :)

[DefaultFace]

Sure but I doubt that the extra 200HP and corresponding speed difference will make a hugely noticeable difference. Those who bnz now with enough energy advantage will still survive the ordeal, those who don't won't. The only place I could even imagine that it would make a noticeable difference would be in a chase on the deck.

 

When we get the new fuel I doubt people will stop saying 'Mustang sucks ED screwed it up etc etc'

 

That and theoretically multiple fuel types will be available for all AC. That means 109s with C3 fuel and 2000HP instead of 1850. Assuming it is something set in the mission editor it then depends on who is designing the mission.

[Hermit713]

In my experience ( and it is only 1 -2 months total) with WWII PLANES ON DCS.

The spitfire is very slow but can out turn any fighter in D.C.'s as of now.

I have not done any online WWII fights yet, but against AI the p51 rules at high altitude to mid, and doesn't suffer any of the reliability issues the spitfire and especially the 109. It seems I have to constantly worry about the engine seizing at any time ( and other times it runs flawlessly)

Depends on the single mission I choose?