some question of the P-51D.

[Silver_Dragon]

regards

 

I put several questions about the P- 51D , I would like to see if the ED team can answer me .

 

People have criticized me harshly this addon , making claims that the P- 51D is good for aerobatics , but fatal in combat. That modeling the AFM 's P- 51D Mustang DCS : World does not behave like the real plane in a combat situation , and that people of Duxford serves well to simulate a P- 51D in terms of acrobatics, but are not valid for serve as an example in war ( WW2 , Korea , etc).

 

There are the questions:

 

-What Conditions by realism and behavior has the P- 51D with its real counterpart ?

-Are you able to maneuver as the P- 51D real in a combat situation ?

-Have there been any external documentation or WW2 / Korea fighter pilots who have tested the P- 51D , and this behavior is faithful in actual combat operations of the Second World War and later ?

-Is there any improvement is proposed in the future to bring its operation and performance at a P- 51D Mustang DCS realistic World : WW2 ?

-some decorated pilot of ww2 has participated in the development of P-51D?

 

Sorry by my bad english

Edited December 3, 2013 by Silver_Dragon

[NineLine]

People have criticized me harshly this addon , making claims that the P- 51D is good for aerobatics , but fatal in combat. That modeling the AFM 's P- 51D Mustang DCS : World does not behave like the real plane in a combat situation , and that people of Duxford serves well to simulate a P- 51D in terms of acrobatics, but are not valid for serve as an example in war ( WW2 , Korea , etc).

 

Who was criticizing you, and on what basis is their opinion better in their minds than that of ED? Were they WWII or Korean War pilots? I mean I could probably guess who they were, but just wondering...

[gavagai]

Silver Dragon,

 

Yes, real life P-51 pilots have flown the DCS P-51, and they praise it.

 

My guess is that you are stalling a lot? You need to practice more. This simulator is not a "game," it is more like training for a real aircraft.

[Silver_Dragon]

I defend realism DCS: P-51D (I put information and news about DCS: W and addons to some spanish an other sim communities). but I need a definitive proof that DCS: P-51D is the same or similar in combat in a P-51D real. If possible, with names of a military pilots with confirming that the plane fly and fight like the real one. Only else, to show others (spanish sim community members) that they are wrong.

Edited December 3, 2013 by Silver_Dragon

[Der_Fred]

There's always going to be controversy, differences of opinion on any, and every aircraft. Every aircraft has it's pros and cons.

 

World War 1 and early World War 2 aircraft were designed for dogfighting, except for a few aircraft.. the ME109 which was more of a strike aircraft = hit and run. The Spitfire's design was that good that it could do both - minus the early carburetors of course.

 

The FW190 and P51.. were, I take a guess, the first real strike aircraft of WW2.Strike in the way that they had a lethal combination of fire power and speed, but were not designed for tight-turning dog fighting.

 

What it amounted to, as always, was using the aircraft's strengths against the opposing aircraft's weaknesses. A good pilot will do this.. a bad pilot will criticize your aircraft.

 

It's the pilot.. not the aircraft... as Oleg Maddox has always said.

:-)

[gavagai]

It's the pilot.. not the aircraft... as Oleg Maddox has always said.

:-)

 

If that were true there would be no need to introduce new aircraft. It's a tired saying that doesn't bear repeating.

[Fifi]

To me the best proof is this one: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=111388

No need for WW2 military pilots. Actual real P51 pilots is way enough.

[NineLine]

I defend realism DCS: P-51D (I put information and news about DCS: W and addons to some spanish an other sim communities). but I need a definitive proof that DCS: P-51D is the same or similar in combat in a P-51D real. If possible, with names of a military pilots with confirming that the plane fly and fight like the real one. Only else, to show others (spanish sim community members) that they are wrong.

 

I'm not sure why the pilots that have vouched for it wouldnt be enough, I dont think they have been heavily altered from their WWII roots for what they do now. I am not sure if any actual WWII pilots have tried it though, that would be interesting to hear, but there are many items out there to show its modeled with the utmost accuracy, anyone that needs convincing beyond that probably doesnt want to be.....

[Pman]

Just to backup Sithspawn here,

 

I have watched 7 real Mustang pilots including the Horsemen fly DCS-P51 and they havent been able to fault it (bar Dan with the rudder which is more a setting and our flimsy equipment compared to a real set of rudder pedals)

 

I cant imagine that many WW2 pilots who would be interested in it being quite frank.

 

Anyone who says that these guys' opinion isnt valid just isnt worth listening too really.

 

Show me someone MORE qualified to talk about the P-51 then the display pilots at Duxford or the Bremont Horsemen and I will listen to it.

 

Until then its just hot air from people who cant fly DCS P-51 therefore the sim is wrong as they are Ace pilots quite obviously

[Yob]

Just to backup Sithspawn here,

 

I have watched 7 real Mustang pilots including the Horsemen fly DCS-P51 and they havent been able to fault it (bar Dan with the rudder which is more a setting and our flimsy equipment compared to a real set of rudder pedals)

 

I cant imagine that many WW2 pilots who would be interested in it being quite frank.

 

Anyone who says that these guys' opinion isnt valid just isnt worth listening too really.

 

Show me someone MORE qualified to talk about the P-51 then the display pilots at Duxford or the Bremont Horsemen and I will listen to it.

 

Until then its just hot air from people who cant fly DCS P-51 therefore the sim is wrong as they are Ace pilots quite obviously

 

Well said..... :thumbup:

[cichlidfan]

It seems to me that these folks are trying to say that there is some fundamental difference between combat flying and aerobatic flying and for that reason the opinions offered are not valid with respect to the P-51's original purpose.

 

I don't see it, personally, but this appears to be the crux of the issue.

[Pman]

The only really difference is the rear fuel tank which in modern mustangs is not allowed to be used.

 

In most modern Mustangs it's been removed entirely and those that still have it are prohibited from using it as it makes the aircraft dangerously unstable.

 

Aside from that the aircraft will turn as it will turn, it flies as it will fly

Combat or aero makes no difference to the aerodynamic properties of the airframe

[cichlidfan]

Aside from that the aircraft will turn as it will turn, it flies as it will fly

Combat or aero makes no difference to the aerodynamic properties of the airframe

 

Exactly, but this 'difference' seems to be the issue, so convincing them that there is not a difference is the answer.

 

Most likely impossible, too! ;)

[Weta43]

But what are you saying ?

If real pilots say it's accurate enough to fly aerobatics as for the real thing, but PC pilots can't fly it in combat to save their (virtual) lives, surely there must be a difference between aerobatics and the what the PC combat pilots are trying to do*, otherwise the problem would just be a difference in skill level between the virtual aerobatics pilots and the virtual combat pilots...

 

I guess one test would be to see if the pilots that can't fly it in combat can fly it in the easier aerobatics role with any proficiency...

 

( * & I suspect there is... The real pilots flying acrobatics are trying to fly the plane as they would fly the real thing, and the PC pilots are trying the throw it around like they've always thrown aircraft around in PC sims.)

Edited December 4, 2013 by Weta43

[msalama]

People have criticized me harshly this addon

 

Taken into account the testimonials I've seen from folks who fly the Stang IRL I'd say these people are perhaps a tiny bit incompetent :huh: But that said nothing's ever perfect of course...

[VH-Rock]

This is great - I was unaware that real P-51s developed a second flight model for combat! (Where's the switch to swap from aerobatic to combat mode? I must have missed that one in the manual!)

[Oscar]

This is great - I was unaware that real P-51s developed a second flight model for combat! (Where's the switch to swap from aerobatic to combat mode? I must have missed that one in the manual!)

 

Yea, what he said...... I want that switch too......

[NineLine]

This is great - I was unaware that real P-51s developed a second flight model for combat! (Where's the switch to swap from aerobatic to combat mode? I must have missed that one in the manual!)

 

Well to play devils advocate here, I think the impression is that aerobatic performances in the P-51 are less aggressive that combat manoeuvres, I personally dont know if that is true, although I would image to a certain degree its true, that said, if it performs realistic in an aerobatic performance there is no reason what so every you couldnt get the same performance in combat manoeuvres as I think pman confirmed that the planes are not heavily altered from their WWII versions.

 

But to the OP, welcome to the flight sim world, so many experts with so many different opinions, if some believe ED's version isnt realistic, chances are you wont convince them.

[VH-Rock]

if some believe ED's version isnt realistic, chances are you wont convince them.

 

Too true - I'm afraid a lot of people are coming here from previous generation sims where you could be extremely violent with the stick and have little chance of stalling. From the conversations we've had with real P-51 pilots at Duxford over the last 12 months, they have all described the P-51 as a beautiful aircraft to fly but only (and this is the key clause) "as long as you stick within it's limits". I've seen reference to somebody who has flown DCS P-51 and the TF-51 and Stallion 51 in Florida and he mentioned the stall, saying that DCS in far more violent. In all reality, I just don't buy that. What he experienced at Stallion 51 was an almost, for lack of a better expression, a controlled stall. It certainly wasn't a high speed stall, pulling a lot of G, which you would experience in combat. I'm afraid, unless we find a way to integrate that seat of the pants feeling into sims, aircraft will always seem more "twitchy" - not to mention that the average PC stick is less than half the length of the real Mustang stick. Every pilot who tried DCS with us, that attempted the stall, said it was easier to deal with in the real aircraft because you can feel everything before it happens - Like riding a bike, you unknowingly make thousands of tiny adjustments as a matter of instinct. I don't fly combat, but I have had several mock dogfights with friends and we rarely stall - I do recall Roscoe Brown of the Tuskegee Airmen actually using the P-51's well known high speed stall to get an enemy of his 6 and shoot him down...

 

I think what we're seeing here is a great deal of people who are surprised at the amount of effort it takes to fly this aircraft correctly. Given time, when you've learned the aircrafts limits, she's fantastic. The mark of any good pilot is to exploit his aircraft's abilities to the maximum. I do however, think the AI could be playing a part in this with it's simplified flight model... If your opponent is less disadvantaged than you, he should run circles around you - especially if you're new to flying the Mustang. I would only judge the Mustangs combat abilities on human v human experiences at the minute until the AI situation is improved.

 

As a side note, what Pman said was correct. Most modern Mustangs have the rear fuel tank removed and a jump seat installed instead - Having fuel in the rear tank majorly affects the aircraft's CoG to the point that aerobatics was prohibited if you had fuel in there. There was an instance of a unit just receiving a new batch of Mustangs after flying Thunderbolts previously. One of the pilots took off, flew a roll over the field, lost control of the aircraft and crashed - The rest of the squadron didn't fly any aerobatics with fuel in the rear tanks after that.

 

Rock

Edited December 4, 2013 by VH-Rock

[NineLine]

Every pilot who tried DCS with us, that attempted the stall, said it was easier to deal with in the real aircraft because you can feel everything before it happens - Like riding a bike, you unknowingly make thousands of tiny adjustments as a matter of instinct.

 

Yup, this is important, you see it in sims like iRacing as well, you dont have that feeling of being in the seat and you lose a lot there.

[gavagai]

Everyone who wants to fly prop sims should have a force feedback joystick.

[Fifi]

And evry FFB stick should only render the force on ailerons/elevator. Not the guns and landing gear effects wich are unrealistic on a real stick imo.

[Whiplash]

Another difference between flight models is that some modern P-51's have removed the mock wing guns completely so there is a smooth leading edge. This effectively lowers the stall speed of the plane. I learned this from watching a youtube video of a retired Doctor taking a lucky kid up for a spin in his mustang. That was one of the points he mentioned, so take it for what its worth.

[NineLine]

Another difference between flight models is that some modern P-51's have removed the mock wing guns completely so there is a smooth leading edge. This effectively lowers the stall speed of the plane. I learned this from watching a youtube video of a retired Doctor taking a lucky kid up for a spin in his mustang. That was one of the points he mentioned, so take it for what its worth.

 

But also note that ED surely had all the wind tunnel testing for all this, no doubt including the effect of the guns installed in the wings, rockets loaded and/or drop tanks and bombs.... so all that should be covered... Pilots input is only part of the equation.

[Kwiatek]

Too true - I'm afraid a lot of people are coming here from previous generation sims where you could be extremely violent with the stick and have little chance of stalling. From the conversations we've had with real P-51 pilots at Duxford over the last 12 months, they have all described the P-51 as a beautiful aircraft to fly but only (and this is the key clause) "as long as you stick within it's limits". I've seen reference to somebody who has flown DCS P-51 and the TF-51 and Stallion 51 in Florida and he mentioned the stall, saying that DCS in far more violent. In all reality, I just don't buy that. What he experienced at Stallion 51 was an almost, for lack of a better expression, a controlled stall. It certainly wasn't a high speed stall, pulling a lot of G, which you would experience in combat. I'm afraid, unless we find a way to integrate that seat of the pants feeling into sims, aircraft will always seem more "twitchy" - not to mention that the average PC stick is less than half the length of the real Mustang stick. Every pilot who tried DCS with us, that attempted the stall, said it was easier to deal with in the real aircraft because you can feel everything before it happens

 

 

That why i think that in joystick movement corenspondend with stick movement DCS is not realistic. I think it is harder to fly P-51 DCS then real one because we got different sticks ( much shorter) then IRL which mean we have much shorter movements. I think DCS to be more real and realistic should unfortunately find better solution to simulate these things. Now for me it isn't.

 

Thats why DCS P-51 is more prone to stall which much shorter stick movements then RL plane probably.

 

I always said that.

 

 

BTW i wonder when ED would fix problem with force fedback shake stall effect which was disabled with 1.2.6 version? How long we would need to wait for these bug fix? I quit playing P-51 beacsue of these. Saw a few 1.2.6 updates since these bug but noone fix it.