P51D problem

[ozzy72]

As far as 'adjusting' config file to correct inherent problems with a plane, I suppose you could do this to correct all of the little 'foibles' of every aircraft in any Sim.

I find that half the enjoyment of Simming is getting to know the strengths and faults of each plane, and overcoming those problems presented, using the methods I've picked up through instruction and experience. (Much the same way the original pilots had to).
As far as I'm concerned, there is much satisfaction in finding I'm able to overcome a 'shortcoming ' in a plane and manage to defeat a superior enemy (in ability and machine), in an environment that the plane I'm flying is not supposed to perform well in. It gives me a thrill, even if I get the crap shot out of me and just make it back to base.  ;D

I know Warbird's suggestions are there for those that wish to go that way, and he's not referring to this sort of thing as a solution to all problems.

[ozzy72]

I'm with you on this Brensec, once the problems are resolved so the aircraft is true to real life, then its down to the skill of the pilot to fly around his aircrafts weaknesses and show his mettle

Ozzy

Ps. Nobody has ever taken me in the Spit, guess I know that kite just right

[Woodlouse2002]

Ps. Nobody has ever taken me in the Spit, guess I know that kite just right

Ozzy, I want to fight you in my Bf109e in CFS2.

[WarbirdJoc]

Well guys, IT's a free country (thanks in no small way to the likes of the P51) do what you like.  I just threw that in for those who feel the game doesn't do justice to the P51D.  I use to work for North American Aviation as an engineer and I don't believe the plane is as bad as the  game makes it out to be.  It has CG problems with the center tank, sure.  But the real P51D is quite flyable.

[Flamer]

Fully agree with the fact that the P-51 was and still is a good aircraft to fly, but, like all aircraft one has to be carefull with it until you know all of its vices and what you can and can't do with it. Laminar flow wing design and with a rear tank full you encounter a rear C.of G. with all associated problems.

[WarbirdJoc]

All you guys and blokes are pretty knowledgeable about the Spit and Stang and I always enjoy the healthy discussions in this Forum.  

Mitchell was a great aircraft designer.  However, he designed and developed the Spit as a racing aircraft over several years.  Fortunately for the Brits it was adopted as a fighter in time for the battle of Britain.  It was for the most part responsible for foiling Hitler's plans to invade England.  But it couldn't chase them all to way back to Berlin; the P51 with its up to 2000 mile range did.

As you know, the P51 went from drawing board to 1st flight in something like 120 days, not several years like the Spit.  A few of the egineers who worked on the P51 were still around when I was working for North American and told stories about sleeping at the plant working around the clock.  The P51 was a remarkable plane considering the requirerments and constraints.

I go to a lot of airshows and see more P51s than any other plane (except for the AT-6 Texan, also built by North American); A testiment to its greatness.  I've seen only a few Spits at air shows.  I suppose if I went to airshows in England the reverse might be true.

At any rate, the REAL P51Ds are still very popular among vintage aircraft pilots because they love to fly them, probably with the center tank removed!

Happy simming everyone!

[ozzy72]

Oh Dear, Warbird................Someone is coming to get you...lol

[WarbirdJoc]

Of course your right Brensec.  I knew that more Hurricanes were built and were responsible for shooting down more Germans then the Spits.  The Spit was a difficult plane to manufacture, especially the eliptical wing.  But the topic was focused on the P51 and the Spit and, my mistake, I didn't extend it to other planes like the Hurricane and P47,etc.

Picky, Picky......I'll be more careful in the future!!!

[ozzy72]

You'd better be WarbirdJoc, there are several loyalist groups around here who are fanatical about 'their kite', my signature and avatar show my group
But I still enjoying working on others too.

Ozzy

[Woodlouse2002]

[quote]Oh Dear, Warbird................Someone is coming to get you...lol

[PlaneFixer]

Test

[PlaneFixer]

Sorry for the test. I was surfing sim sites and happened on this topic. A little background on me is in order first. I have been an Aircraft Mech for over 20 years. My forte is aircraft sheetMetal. I have worked on jet fighters in the airforce and the Heavys. I have also worked for Pacific Fighters in Chino Ca (Now located in Idaho). Pacific fighters was and is a warbird refurbisher. One of the plaves we restored was Ed Shipley's P51D. He had the tank behind the seat removed to make the plane handle better. He also wanted room to cram a passenger back there. He,and the owner's of other Mustangs remove the rear tank so the plane handles better weather they put the small jump seat in it's place or not. The removel of the tank reduces the range so to overcome this problem, (Cant remember the name of the Company that made them)the pilots install a rubber bladder which fits neatly into empty and unused gun bays in the wing. just thought this might help some.

[ozzy72]

Interesting facts there PlaneFixer, do you have any pictures of this kite at all?

Ozzy

[PlaneFixer]

Ozzy I'm not sure if I took any pictures of Mr Shipley's plane or not. I know I did not take any pictures of the last Douglas SkyShark(wish I had) . you know when You work somewhere you rarly photograph it. I did however take pictrues of our competitors B-25's and think I too a few of Mr Saunders Seafury and some engine run-up on Dick Britea's F4u4-5. I would also on my lunch hour walk across the flightline to Planes of fame musem or go the other way to the Yankee musem. Both have really nice planes. I worked there in the early 90's So any photo's are archived and will have to be dug up. I thing I scanned in my slide of a B-25 engine start. If i figure out how to post pics I'll post that first[img]URL[/img]

[46th_Terror]

Just found this thread and good reading here. But just wanted to put my opinion in here. The real difference between the P-51 and the Spitfire is the wing. If you equalise the fuel load and the correct the COG problem of the P-51 it still wont be able to turn like the Spitfire. Also the spitfire wont be able to have the range of the mustang. Also thay both share basically the same engine.

I also did happen to see the show mentioned before. There were three catigories there.
1: best fighter
2: best ground attack
3: best bomber
The AC were rated against all ac in the catigory. Eg the P-51 was up agains the FA-18. the catagories were voted upon by leading Ac esperts from around the world including actual pilots of the ac, Designers and historical experts.