Why I dislike IL-2 games..

[Zeroptimus]

Originally Posted by Soviet Ace

It's already known that in BoP, the P-51s and other planes are screwed up, but it seems you're following more of the legend and myth of the P-51 than actual statistics. In reality, the P-51 was not a low altitude fighter, and wasn't all the hype that it's given like on the History Channel and in books. If you fly it at high altitudes in 1946, you'll see that it handles like a gem and terrible slug at lower altitudes. I've never had any problems with '46 and the P-51s capabilities at high altitudes.

In the past, when I've played online, the people do seem to know at what altitudes their planes fly; and if they don't they get chewed up by everyone else. Specially since on '46, you do realize how bad your plane handles at the wrong altitudes.

And if you really have a problem with Russian planes, you should just do like you're supposed to do in a P-51, and that is to boom and zoom. Hit and Run tactics, are what make up the P-51s high kill rate. Turning and Burning, are what make up Russian tactics and fighters.

And for the matter of sitting in planes. I've had the honor at the last Planes of Fame Air Show to sit in both a P-47D, P-51D, Yak-3 (which was AWESOME!) and plenty of other planes. So it's not a matter of sitting in a plane, to suddenly understand how it handles. You have to read deep into the planes.

Soviet Ace, you do know that they've recently started producing Yak-3's with Allison engines for commercial sale, right? You know, just so you know...there's an air museum in Seattle about to purchase one, and I've been contemplating selling any firstborns I have for one.

[David603]

Originally Posted by Jack Morris

I think number 5. Just about explains it all, AT LOW ALTITUDE, I have never seen any dogfights on IL-2 that take place at about more that 5000ft. But why is also the Spitfire so Spinny? Maybe the Western planes are not as good but they certainly knocked down their performance a bit, I have the same problem with 1946, Get the flight 1 P-51 for FSX (Thats how a pony Handles!) Then fly the one on 46'.
Until you do that you will not see I am getting at, and don't call the Flight 1 addons Innacurate, they had access to two Real FLYING P-51's, that I had the fortune to sit in...
Regards,

Jack

I'm not sure how accurate Flight 1 P51 is (not into FSX), but its worth pointing out that taking flight characteristics from real P51's flying today can be rather misleading.

Almost all are substantially lighter than a WWII spec P51, which is a natural result of taking out the guns, armour, unwanted fuel tanks, and bulky WWII spec radio equipment. A number don't even have the original Packard Merlin engines, being fitted with the lighter Allison V-1720.

Several WWII test pilots noted that the P51 lost most of its original pleasant flying characteristics when the change was made from the lighter Allison engined P51A to the heavier Merlin engined P51B-D, so it follows that if you remove this added weight then you will get a plane with much improved handling.

That said, I am not defending how the P51D in Birds of Prey flies, because by the devs own admission they made a mistake with the fuel loads for the P51D when the game first came out, although this was fixed for the PS3 version with a patch.

[Robotic Pope]

Originally Posted by David603

I'm not sure how accurate Flight 1 P51 is (not into FSX), but its worth pointing out that taking flight characteristics from real P51's flying today can be rather misleading.

Almost all are substantially lighter than a WWII spec P51, which is a natural result of taking out the guns, armour, unwanted fuel tanks, and bulky WWII spec radio equipment. A number don't even have the original Packard Merlin engines, being fitted with the lighter Allison V-1720.

Several WWII test pilots noted that the P51 lost most of its original pleasant flying characteristics when the change was made from the lighter Allison engined P51A to the heavier Merlin engined P51B-D, so it follows that if you remove this added weight then you will get a plane with much improved handling.

That said, I am not defending how the P51D in Birds of Prey flies, because by the devs own admission they made a mistake with the fuel loads for the P51D when the game first came out, although this was fixed for the PS3 version with a patch.

A P-51B/C/D with an Allison engine? Ive never seen one. I'd need a photo to believe that one.

I'm sure you are right about the weight though, that armour plate behind the pilot alone must weigh a ton.

[Soviet Ace]

Originally Posted by Robotic Pope

A P-51B/C/D with an Allison engine? Ive never seen one. I'd need a photo to believe that one.

I'm sure you are right about the weight though, that armour plate behind the pilot alone must weigh a ton.

I'm pretty sure, that if you've ever seen a P-51 flying today, it's powered by an Allison... similar (if not the same) to the Allison that powers the Yak-3s of today.

[Robotic Pope]

Originally Posted by Soviet Ace

I'm pretty sure, that if you've ever seen a P-51 flying today, it's powered by an Allison... similar (if not the same) to the Allison that powers the Yak-3s of today.

Well I know the Allison engine needs an air intake above the engine as you can see on this Yak3 and P-51A. I have never seen a P-51D with this intake. Find me a photo of this, only then will I believe it. I can't find any info on the internet of a P-51D ever being "downgraded" in this way either. I'll add that all the P-51D's that I have heard have clearly sounded like Merlins.

[David603]

Originally Posted by Robotic Pope

A P-51B/C/D with an Allison engine? Ive never seen one. I'd need a photo to believe that one.

I'm sure you are right about the weight though, that armour plate behind the pilot alone must weigh a ton.

Using Allison V-1710s to substitute for rarer engines like the Merlin isn't just limited to Mustangs. Apart from the Yak-3's Soviet Ace mentioned, they have also been used in at least one Spitfire replica (new build but accurate apart from engine) and one of the Flug-Werke new build FW190D9's.

The V-1710 is relatively cheap and widely available, which makes maintenance and finding spare parts easier so it makes a good substitute.

[Balderz002]

Originally Posted by David603

although this was fixed for the PS3 version with a patch.

Not that bloody PS patch again! lol

But in reality, you can see better forward in a Yak-3, than a La-5FN

I play with the 3rd person external view, so I see plenty! lol

I wouldnt worry too much about using authentic engines in these warbirds, as the 262's flying around now dont exactly have period powerplants!

[Soviet Ace]

Originally Posted by Balderz002

I play with the 3rd person external view, so I see plenty! lol

I wouldnt worry too much about using authentic engines in these warbirds, as the 262's flying around now dont exactly have period powerplants!

Ugh, I dunno how people fly in 3rd person view, I get so disoriented and just can't seem to aim right when I try flying in that. So it's all cockpit for me.

And on another note, I checked last night on the Yak-3s and Yak-9s that they make, and they do share the same Allison engine as the P-51s and Spitfires flown today.

[olife]

the real dogfights between "west"propeller fighters and "east"propeller fighters:
june 1950-the f82g twin mustang " bucket o' bolt" destroy a north korean yak7u and 3 others f82 pilots destroy 3 north korean fighter(probably a yaks)

june 29th 1950-2 f-51mustang destroy 3 north korean il10

june 30th 1950-1 f51 mustang destroy 1 la7

april 21st 1951-4 north korean yak9 attack 2 f4u-4 corsair of vma 312:3 yak were destroy by us pilots and the last was damaged

in fact ,i think the qualities of the pilots are as primordial as the fly qualities of the planes...even if the north korean rookies pilots must be courageous and fly in the good planes ,they had not one chance to survive against the exelent us pilots(veterans of ww2)...who had a good planes too