Actually I have been doing some research on the P-51 and too my somewhat surprise the real plane was not the best dogfighter out there. The game is looking more and more accurate. Its best virtue was range as an escort fighter while having excellent speed and decent maneuverability.

I read the actual flight manual and as many actual flight reports as I could find. The game's flight dynamics seem to match. The airplane had some real vices. The stall charactaristics ("spinning in") were not forgiving, especially if full of fuel and/or flying under 180 ias. Flick maneuvers were prohibited due to the tendancy to stall the opposite wing - which causes a spin just like in the game. At high altitude no aerobatics recommended. The airplane did not have a lot of power and did appear to lose energy quickly from what I read. It took a long time to reach cruising altitude and speed.

This graph gives a good idea what to expect. http://www.zenoswarbirdvideos.com/Im...51/P-51OLL.gif

If I am reading this correctly, the p-51 will power on stall at 200 ias if you pull a little more than 4gs, but it takes 8 g's to stall the airplane at ~250 ias. So keep it fast and you can use much more of the airplane's maneuvering envelope.

For range comparison, the La-5 only had about 40 mins of flight time, had wooden wings, and very low ammunition for its 2 cannons. Its a pure T&B fighter designed to provide air superiority at low altitude over a battlefield.

The p-51's virtues (aside from fuel economy/range) were handling at high speed, good diving speed, great visibility, and good guns. Life is good above 250 mph. Try to roll a spitfire in a high speed dive and you'll think the mustang is fantastic. The 50 cals have good ballistics and a high firing rate. If you learn where the convergence is, will light up your opponent instantly.

In arcade, the I-153 maybe the slowest but it can kill any fighter models given players similar skills. Just keep looking at your six though and make sure any enemy is nowhere less than a kilometer from you.

If I get an I153 on my tail in arcade I pull out to about 1.2 km then spin around and blast them head on with my spit. Works every time in my Spit due to the superior fire power. There is no point trying to out turn them. They are pretty fragile, a couple of decent bursts wit most real planes will take them down

same here. got into a game 1 on 1 with this jabroonie...in the lobby we both had G6s (1 vs 1 i like to play the same ac). once the game started within a minute he's on my tail out turning me like crazy. i thought this guy really knows his $#!T. after i respawned i see where he switched over to a 153 and started the game in a sneaky manner without me seeing the switch. so i simply dove away until i put sufficent distance between us and smoked him repeately in head ons. i refused to get into a dogfight where he could use his plane to its best ability. the only way he was able to take me out ( and, mind you, i am not that good ) was to taran ( ram ) me head on. the only time i like the 153 is CTA (or if its a biplane game). you can land that puppy on a dime and if you have good top cover...its an easy game.

Perhaps your opponent does not know his tactics. Basically when flying an I-153, you surely lose if you fight head on and you can't definitely chase other planes. The tactic to kill a 105 or spit is to avoid head on, do a quick turn and use the 3-sec window to blast 'em out of the virtual sky.

Thanks for the info. Great details. Very helpful information.

Hello I am new of this, for what I got about the crafts variants guide, it changes their camouflage and weaponry. About overall performances are still the same right?

that's about it. you can unlock different weight bombs and rockets but the guns stay the same for each variant. paint scheme is different for each model also...

In reguards to p51 I'm going to have to disagree with it not being s good dogfighter all following info is from the u.s air war collage

Kill ratio 11-1
4950 kills- nearly half of all us kills in Europe
Max speed 443mph
Climb rate 3320 feet per min
Turning radius is much better then 109 and a toss up with 190
190 does have a faster rate of roll though

Also both the military channel and the history channel named it the #1 fighter aircraft of ALL TIME in their count downs

In my opinion it's much better then in the game obviously I have never flown one but to listen to those who have it seems like a dominating force in the ww2 skies

Copy that, thank you a lot mate. ;)

A P-51 couldn't out turn a 109 or a 190 at the low speeds and altitude that the dogfights happen at in BoP. Problem in BoP with the Mustang is its too slow and loses energy far to easily in a turn. A mustang needs to stay fast to dogfight and BoP makes that very difficult. Even the speed gained from a dive bleeds off stupidly quickly by just flying straight and level. This is where the problem lies not in low speed turn radiuses.

Notice how they say the mustang uses it's tighter turning radius to it's advantage

http://m.youtube.com/index?desktop_u...?v=FXOCKEotmoU

Link isn't right or something. History channel programmes are not 100% acurate anyway (if that is what the video is)

Take a look at this forum thread about Il2 on PC http://www.warbirdsofprey.org/index.php?topic=7768.0
see the graphs to get an idea on how the Mustang could outperform a 109 and yet get stuck with its pants down when low and slow.

The later 109's were all about power, using brute force for performace. P-51s on the other hand were all about aerodynamics and low drag. Retaining as energy as much as posible. Birds of Prey dogfights award high power to weight ratio planes with draggy wings (thus high lift at low speed) far far more than an energy retention plane like the Mustang.

i get a kick out of these kinds of mathematical evaluations. its like quoting the statistics... you can make them work for you in just about any instance and prove what ever point you wish to contend. most of the times the planes they evaluate were not armored, fully armed for combat as designed, and carrying combat loads ( ammo, fuel, etc ) or were prototypes. when it comes down to matching things up on paper vs reality...shortly after that came the birth of the cliche "looked good on paper". many ac impressed engineers, designers, and buyers in blueprint from. but when the wheels came up and air went over the wings for the first time, the other famous cliche was spawned, " back to the drawing board". no one ever in their right mind tried to design an aircraft that was a dismal failure. but if you do a little research you will see where a vast amount never met the specs their designs boasted they would . some were salvaged by mods and upgrades others were scraped completely. i read one gentlemen's argument about turn radius and blah blah blah....all based on the 109s slats....of course if never dawned on him that pony jocks would dump 10 or 20 degrees of flaps at that speed...and all things were equal again ( and this data is missing in most of those graphs). i pretty much go with the "they who were there" evidence that many dismiss as biased. but these guys learned how to get the most out of their ac and found a few tricks ( designers and engineers never thought of ) to get a tad more and give them the edge when they needed it. here's a link to a ton of 51 pilot reports. scroll down thru the different headings...first is General Interest...then comments pertaining to: engine boost, dives, turns, use of combat flaps and finally the k-14 gunsite. i am sure somewhere someone will find ( and wish i could...i have looked) 109 pilots saying the same thing in reverse...but i have yet to see as many as this.

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.o...t-reports.html

Wow, cool link there bobby.

if you go the bottom of that page....there's a link to 47 jock reports as well. would love to find the same thing for RAF and LW pilots...god knows i have been looking.

:grin:Good airplanes are more important than superiority in numbers.

Is it possible to unlock the P-51 with red tip?