The 109 is too good

[Mogster]

3 hours ago, Hummingbird said:

I'm not sure the drawings there are totally to scale.

 

As far as I've been able to tell when comparing real life examples side by side the Mk.XIV ddefinitely had a bigger rudder than any previous marks, and for th Mk.22/24 it went even larger.

 

It was definitely a response to increased power though, something which I remember outlined in RAE reports.

It seems the changes in the later 22/24 mks were partly an attempt to make the Griffon Spit more compatible with paved runways. The common, sideways, full rudder and aileron takeoffs generated by the XIV while OK on grass and earth caused extreme tyre and landing gear stress on tarmac.

[Hulkbust44]

 
The Kurfurst was a tough bitch to smack in real life too, especially a later version with 2,000 HP on tap at 2.0 ata supercharger pressure (not modelled in DCS.)
 
It had other-worldly flight performance for its day and could out-fly just about anything the Allies could throw at it. It probably also enjoyed certain "benefits" such as a short engine life at full power, and short range due to other-worldly fuel consumption
 
AD

Engine life's not short, you just need the MW-50. But you MUST be at the very top range of the throttle for it to kick in. With it you can sit at emergency power for about 10 minutes, just keep an eye on the boost pressure. Without it, you've got a min before engine damage.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

a 109 vs an i16 is stupid easy. Keep energy high and boom and zoom. Don’t get into a turn fight with it. The i16 will never be close enough to shoot. 

It's almost like this happened in the Spanish civil war

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Oh pilot skill plays tremendous role here, When i compare 2 planes p-51 vs bf109 k4 i assume that pilots are at similar level.
But real combat is much much more complicated, thing like pilot burnout, fatigue, or many physicals or psychological factors may be involved.
So for simplification i assume that both pilots knows what they are doing.
K-4 has slight advantage in stall speed so with higher alt K-4 will gain over P-51 where IAS speeds are quite low.
 

109 is far superior at low speed. You get slow in a 51, you die. Doesn't help the Mustang that the K-4 has the power to outturn it sustained.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[grafspee]

2 hours ago, Hulkbust44 said:

109 is far superior at low speed. You get slow in a 51, you die. Doesn't help the Mustang that the K-4 has the power to outturn it sustained.

Exactly what i said, higher you go K-4 will gain advantage over P-51, at SL P-51 can do something but at 20k or higher is in deep trouble. 

Still i would not call it far superior, Far superior for me is Spitfire in turn fight with Fw190. K-4 and P-51 are much closer at low alt.

Edited March 12, 2021 by grafspee

[Hulkbust44]

Exactly what i said, higher you go K-4 will gain advantage over P-51, at SL P-51 can do something but at 20k or higher is in deep trouble. 
Still i would not call it far superior, Far superior for me is Spitfire in turn fight with Fw190. K-4 and P-51 are much closer at low alt.

I was saying low speed. Low speed high AoA the 51 is useless. I also think you've got it backwards. The Mustang has better performance at altitude. The K-4 is superior at sea level. The 109s are best between the deck and 6k. Above 6k the MW-50 system didn't increase manifold pressure and the 109s performance suffered.(this was also the maximum attitude that the dynamic supercharger was geared for.)
At very high altitude the 109 had superior turn performance.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[grafspee]

9 hours ago, Hulkbust44 said:

I was saying low speed. Low speed high AoA the 51 is useless. I also think you've got it backwards. The Mustang has better performance at altitude. The K-4 is superior at sea level. The 109s are best between the deck and 6k. Above 6k the MW-50 system didn't increase manifold pressure and the 109s performance suffered.(this was also the maximum attitude that the dynamic supercharger was geared for.)
At very high altitude the 109 had superior turn performance.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
 

you just saying contradictions, superior at low speed(K-4) and better performance(P-51) at altitude :P, since at altitude IAS are significant lower it is logical that K-4 gain advantage here if it is superior at low speed  

6k meters i think it is something more like 7.5k-8k,K-4's engine has different supercharger then previous 109s, so this is different story. So both K-4 and P-51 crit alt is the same. And K-4 will gain a lot over P-51 at high alt.

Mw50 does not increase MP, Mw50 allow for higher MP, but MP increase is done via boost regulator. Even above crit alt, MW50 still gives more power due to charge cooling.

At low alt P-51 can do instantaneous high G pulls which is quite handy vs K-4, but at high alt not any more. Overall at high alt P-51 gains nothing only looses against K-4 

Edited March 13, 2021 by grafspee

[Dragon1-1]

11 hours ago, grafspee said:

you just saying contradictions, superior at low speed(K-4) and better performance(P-51) at altitude

Better turn performance. It's not a contradiction. It's faster and more powerful down low, but it turns better up high. Every plane changes the way you fight in it when you change altitude.

[grafspee]

10 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:

Better turn performance. It's not a contradiction. It's faster and more powerful down low, but it turns better up high. Every plane changes the way you fight in it when you change altitude.

If P-51 turns worse then k-4 at alt how so it is better performance ? Maybe i know different definition of "better performance".

Already said gap between P-51 and K-4 become bigger with alt.

Every plane fly different at alt, and all warbirds which we have in DCS fly faster and turn worse at alt

 

Edited March 13, 2021 by grafspee

[amazingme]

'Turning' has two meanings.. sustained turn and instantaneous turn. The former depends (mostly) on the engine power which P-51 has at high alt and the K-4 lacks (above ~6000m).

[grafspee]

K-4 rocks 1.8 ATA up to 8km, so where exactly K-4 lacks the power ?

G-6 yes, crit alt was at 20k ft but K-4 is tow to two with P-51.

Edited March 13, 2021 by grafspee

[saburo_cz]

59 minutes ago, amazingme said:

the engine power which P-51 has at high alt and the K-4 lacks (above ~6000m).

Actually this is not true in DCS W.

 

Both engines have their power peak at altitude around 8300m for military/combat power, 61/3000 and 1,44/2600.

 

At this altitude the K-4 is slightly faster, but speed difference is nearly the same as a measure error.

Above that altitude, the Mustang loses speed faster, at 12000m the difference in speed is 30kph, and surprisingly the K-4 is the winner there...

 

Below 8000m altitude with this engines settings the Mustang is faster, but MW - On will change it. 

WEP for the Mustang will change nothing, only the Merlin`s life...

 

Edited March 13, 2021 by saburo_cz

[Hulkbust44]

Actually this is not true in DCS W.
 
Both engines have their power peak at altitude around 8300m for military/combat power, 61/3000 and 1,44/2600.
 
At this altitude the K-4 is slightly faster, but speed difference is nearly the same as a measure error.
Above that altitude, the Mustang loses speed faster, at 12000m the difference in speed is 30kph, and surprisingly the K-4 is the winner there...
 
Below 8000m altitude with this engines settings the Mustang is faster, but MW - On will change it. 
WEP for the Mustang will change nothing, only the Merlin`s life...
 

And these are for the DB-605DB motor in game? Because the Kürfurst also had a DC engine that was much more powerful.

With just the DB isn't the Dora faster? I know it is at lower alts.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[amazingme]

20 minutes ago, saburo_cz said:

Actually this is not true in DCS W.

 

Both engines have their power peak at altitude around 8300m for military/combat power, 61/3000 and 1,44/2600.

 

At this altitude the K-4 is slightly faster, but speed difference is nearly the same as a measure error.

Above that altitude, the Mustang loses speed faster, at 12000m the difference in speed is 30kph, and surprisingly the K-4 is the winner there...

 

Below 8000m altitude with this engines settings the Mustang is faster, but MW - On will change it. 

WEP for the Mustang will change nothing, only the Merlin`s life...

 

 

 You're probably referring to the max speed.. I'm talking about the engine power and the climb ability of the K-4 which is decreasing above 6000m. Good luck fighting against the P-51 above 8000m..

[grafspee]

6 minutes ago, amazingme said:

 You're probably referring to the max speed.. I'm talking about the engine power and the climb ability of the K-4 which is decreasing above 6000m. Good luck fighting against the P-51 above 8000m..

I was fighting P-51 at 30k in DCS. It is just easy against P-51.

Tell me what is happening above 6000 m in K-4, exactly what ? That it looses climb rate a lot more then P51?

 Climb ability is far better at any alt in K-4 then in P-51

Edited March 13, 2021 by grafspee

[amazingme]

You have to ask ED about that.. I'm just an observer.

[Hulkbust44]

I was fighting P-51 at 30k in DCS. It is just easy against P-51.
Tell me what is happening above 6000 m in K-4, exactly what ? That it looses climb rate a lot more then P51?
 Climb ability is far better at any alt in K-4 then in P-51

Yeah at 30k 109 has superior maneuverability and climb. The 51 is a much heavier aircraft and struggles in the very thin air. Now, fight a Jug up there and you're screwed.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[grafspee]

3 minutes ago, amazingme said:

You have to ask ED about that.. I'm just an observer.

In climb K-4 just blast P-51 clean off. I did plenty of climbs up to 42k ft and i can tell that K-4 i a lot faster in climb.

[amazingme]

5 minutes ago, grafspee said:

In climb K-4 just blast P-51 clean off. I did plenty of climbs up to 42k ft and i can tell that K-4 i a lot faster in climb.

At 10000m there is no boost for MW-50 to be useful, as it begins to drop ~8000m. What are you talking about?

[Hulkbust44]

In climb K-4 just blast P-51 clean off. I did plenty of climbs up to 42k ft and i can tell that K-4 i a lot faster in climb.

It shouldn't be that drastic of a difference.
Oh, DCS Mustang doesn't have 150oct fuel does it?

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

At 10000m there is no boost for MW-50 to be useful, as it begins to drop ~8000m. What are you talking about?

No manifold pressure increase, but it mantains the cool property. You've got twice the WEP time a 51 does.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[grafspee]

8 minutes ago, amazingme said:

At 10000m there is no boost for MW-50 to be useful, as it begins to drop ~8000m. What are you talking about?

Both k-4 and P-51 loose boost above 8000m at 12000m p-51 is boosting something around 30" iirc.

MW-50 cools inlet charge it give some HP still.

 

6 minutes ago, Hulkbust44 said:

It shouldn't be that drastic of a difference.
Oh, DCS Mustang doesn't have 150oct fuel does it?


 

150 grade fuel only impact performance below crit alt, so at alt above 8000m it will change nothing, i will say more that 72" crit alt for P-51 will be lower then 8k m, maybe 7.5 or 7. at 8000m boost will drop anyway so 150 fule change nothing up high.

But 150 fuel will help P-51 at SL for sure

Edited March 13, 2021 by grafspee

[amazingme]

14 minutes ago, Hulkbust44 said:

[...]

No manifold pressure increase, but it mantains the cool property. You've got twice the WEP time a 51 does.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
 

 That's just good engineering vs not so good engineering

[grafspee]

Just remember that MW50 does not increase ATA directly, it only allow for higher ATA. ATA increase is done via boost regulator.

[grafspee]

17 minutes ago, amazingme said:

 That's just good engineering vs not so good engineering

That is why i hope for P-51H some day with wet WEP 80"  or 90" with 150 grade fuel.

Edited March 13, 2021 by grafspee

[Hulkbust44]

That is why i hope for P-51H some day with wet WEP 80"  or 90" with 150 grade fuel.

Only if I get a TA-152

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[Aluminum Donkey]

On 3/1/2021 at 2:02 AM, GR00VYJERRY said:

When I fly the 109 WITH mw50 I hardly every get shot down unless I am surprised and don’t see it coming or if I am playing with some friends and they are flying the 109 as well. Likewise, trying to shoot one down with any of the allied planes is quite a task. Best bet is to fly the mustang and hope to god the person flying the 109 doesn’t just want to turn into a rocket and climb into outer space. I love flying it for the same reasons i hate flying against it. I feel like it is too good but if that is the way the bird flew in real life then so be it. 

 

In real life, the 109K had ~100 HP more than the P-51D, and weighed more than a ton less. Of course it will out-perform the Mustang, and should be able to do so in its sleep

 

The Kurfurst was a top-performing fighter, despite being a dated design with some handling issues and impossibly stiff flight controls at high speeds. It's power-to-weight ratio made it a booger to fly against, and especially the 2000 HP version (not modelled in DCS) was able to out-fly just about anything the Allied countries in the war were able to throw at it.

 

AD

[grafspee]

9 hours ago, Aluminum Donkey said:

 

In real life, the 109K had ~100 HP more than the P-51D, and weighed more than a ton less. Of course it will out-perform the Mustang, and should be able to do so in its sleep

 

The Kurfurst was a top-performing fighter, despite being a dated design with some handling issues and impossibly stiff flight controls at high speeds. It's power-to-weight ratio made it a booger to fly against, and especially the 2000 HP version (not modelled in DCS) was able to out-fly just about anything the Allied countries in the war were able to throw at it.

 

AD

Until Griffon powered Spitfires become available  unfortunately not modeled in DCS 

P-51D is rated about 1490hp at SL at 61inch and K-4 is rated 1850hp so difference in power is much higher then 100hp. I know that P-51 can go up to 67, but engine failure risk is very high, so most pilots don't use it at all. 

At 20k P-51D about 1500hp at 67" and k-4 1600hp

Don't know the power of K-4 at 30k but i assume that P-51 outpace K-4 at 30k in power departament.

K-4 with mw50 RIPS

Edited June 11, 2021 by grafspee