The P-51D Conundrum

[Soviet Ace]

Well I was just trying the P-51D Online, and I got my ass handed to me. Without a doubt I cannot fly it. It has got to be the worst plane to fly outside the smaller and lighter MC202 which according to what I've read and been told by my Grandfather, does not handle like it should either.

I flew it as high as possible, and still against the other planes I had problems. I went up against a MKIX Spit in Simulator, and he chewed me up. I even went up against a Me109E, just to see, and I got my ass handed to me.

Bottom line, the P51D needs some SERIOUS looking over, and overhaul. My friends grandfather who flew P51Ds and other variants in WW2 and Korea, even said that the plane handled terrible. He didn't play it, but my friend called me and showed it to his grandfather, and he (grandfather) was outraged.

I like the P51D a lot, I mean it was one of my favorite American fighters of WW2 in Europe. But with the way it handles, it doesn't work like it should. I say a total overhaul is in order Not really, but it does need some serious fixing.

[Lexandro]

I played a dude a week ago that was pretty damn good with the 'Stang on Arcade. He was using BnZ attacks, pure speed, and high angle manouvers to good effect. He got me a couple of times, and I him. It was a pretty intense match up, so Kudos to the guy especially as I was in my favourite Spitfire.

[mattmanB182]

Originally Posted by Lexandro

I played a dude a week ago that was pretty damn good with the 'Stang on Arcade. He was using BnZ attacks, pure speed, and high angle manouvers to good effect. He got me a couple of times, and I him. It was a pretty intense match up, so Kudos to the guy especially as I was in my favourite Spitfire.

I have also seen some gutsy people do well with the mustang. Just imagine how good these guys will be when the plane is fixed.

[Steyr_amr]

I always imagined it was something to do with the laminar flow wing (and high power to weight ratio of the P-51 particularly) inducing these stall/spins.

My thinking being boundary layer separation and therefore low speed instability occur much more readily and suddenly in aircraft with them. Compare to something like a Stuka or hurricane with a thick leading edge which can dance around all day, but not particularly fast nor frugal. Engineering is always a compromise.

The P-51 was designed for speed, e-retention and most importantly endurance, to babysit the bombers to Berlin and back.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, merely a layman here.

[Robotic Pope]

Originally Posted by Steyr_amr

I always imagined it was something to do with the laminar flow wing (and high power to weight ratio of the P-51 particularly) inducing these stall/spins.

My thinking being boundary layer separation and therefore low speed instability occur much more readily and suddenly in aircraft with them. Compare to something like a Stuka or hurricane with a thick leading edge which can dance around all day, but not particularly fast nor frugal. Engineering is always a compromise.

The P-51 was designed for speed, e-retention and most importantly endurance, to babysit the bombers to Berlin and back.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, merely a layman here.

Well the Mustang wasn't originaly designed as an escort fighter with endurance being all inportant. It just kinda happened with the addition of the Merlin engine. In fact the USAAF ignored the Mustang design until the Pearl Habour attack and then first started using them as low level recon planes (F6A's) and Dive bombers (A36 Invader's)

The Mustang was designed for the RAF as a high speed/low drag fighter and it failed in that respect and was rejected by RAF command It was moved on to the ACC(army co-op command) as recon/close support.

[SgtPappy]

Yes, generally something that has laminar flow wings as opposed to a conventional wing of similar properties and dimensions (except the laminar flow property of course) will generate less lift at the same given speed at the same, higher AoA.

But not always. Sooo many other factors involved too. But I'm thinking here that either
1) people aren't using the Mustang as an energy fighter, as they should almost never turn in the plane or
2) It really just IS that bad, AND people fit in also to #1.

[By-Tor]

Ive been reading about WW2 planes since I was a child, and playing WW2 flight sims for a long time , since Ien Warbirds came along and blew my mind.
Everything I've ever read about the P-51 in cambat has pointed to the fact that the FLAPS were everything in its being able to manuever in combat. I've read many acounts of pilots turning inside 109s (let alone 190s). The trick was deploying flaps(which were incremental). Flap use had to be done very judiciously, as they bled energy like mad. The trick was to only deploy them when pulling for angles at the proper moments and pulling lead for the shot.
Effective ACM is all about WHEN to pull G's, with regard to where in the RELATIVE circles you are with the enemy and what attitude your nose is in at the moment. Its not just about which circle has a smaller radius, but where in 3-D space these circles intersect, and the relative position of the circles on the horizontal vs. vertical plane.An energy fighter rolling out vertically can easily turn INSIDE a smaller horizontal radius. =eadg= was the master of this tactic in Warbirds and dominated the old dueling ladders using this tactic. Just pulling G's in an ongoing circle is ineffective in an energy fighter like the P-51. But accounts Ive read say that it could turn VERY tighly for a quarter or half-circle, but then you need to back off the stick, or E-bleed will slow you to doom level very quickly! Unfortunately, flaps are not available in realistic mode which I fly for the immersion factor of the 'target lock' view. I've spent years using the old static hat views and can use them well, but the visual immersion of seeing the smooth 'pan' is something I can't go back from now. Just beautiful to behold!
Hopefully the new P-51 fixes will help keep this fighter flying online. Be a shame to do without her beautifull lines
in my sights I've always been a 'knife-fighter' myself.

[tango2delta]

Originally Posted by By-Tor

Ive been reading about WW2 planes since I was a child, and playing WW2 flight sims for a long time , since Ien Warbirds came along and blew my mind.
Everything I've ever read about the P-51 in cambat has pointed to the fact that the FLAPS were everything in its being able to manuever in combat. I've read many acounts of pilots turning inside 109s (let alone 190s). The trick was deploying flaps(which were incremental). Flap use had to be done very judiciously, as they bled energy like mad. The trick was to only deploy them when pulling for angles at the proper moments and pulling lead for the shot.
Effective ACM ia all about WHEN to pull G's, with regard to where in the relative circles you are with the enemy and what attitude your nose is in at the moment. Just pulling G's in an ongoing circle is ineffective in an energy fighter like the P-51. But accounts Ive read say that it could turn VERY tighly for a quarter or half-circle, but then you need to back off the stick, or E-bleed will slow youto doom level very quickly! Unfortunately, flaps are not available in realistic mode which I fly for the immersion factor of the 'target lock' view. Ive spent years using the old static hat views and can use them well, but the visual immersion of seeing the smooth 'pan' is something I cant go back from now. Just beautiful to behold.
Hopefully the new P-51 fixes will help keep this fighter flying online. Be a shame to do without her beautifull lines
in my sights I've always been a 'knife-fighter' myself.

You are right, the flaps are a must. Thats why i only fly simulation becouse you have to work them flaps, we need moor flap options, i find my self lowering the gear to get full flaps at low speed turn fights and then retract the wheels in the P-51B/D. But it would help a lot to go in to battle with less fuel like in IL-2 1946 MP.