Which is better, P-51D-20NA, Fw-190A-8, or Ki-84Ia ? - Printable Version
+- All-Aircraft-Simulations (https://allaircraftsimulations.com)
+-- Forum: IL2 MODS Download & Discussion (https://allaircraftsimulations.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=267)
+--- Forum: IL-2 4.09m (https://allaircraftsimulations.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=348)
+---- Forum: IL2 MODS Discussion Section 4.09m (https://allaircraftsimulations.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=292)
+---- Thread: Which is better, P-51D-20NA, Fw-190A-8, or Ki-84Ia ? (/showthread.php?tid=68216)
+- All-Aircraft-Simulations (https://allaircraftsimulations.com)
+-- Forum: IL2 MODS Download & Discussion (https://allaircraftsimulations.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=267)
+--- Forum: IL-2 4.09m (https://allaircraftsimulations.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=348)
+---- Forum: IL2 MODS Discussion Section 4.09m (https://allaircraftsimulations.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=292)
+---- Thread: Which is better, P-51D-20NA, Fw-190A-8, or Ki-84Ia ? (/showthread.php?tid=68216)
- 78thFG_Doodle - 29.01.2010
This really comes down to the plane and the pilot on this one. The three are good performers, there's no doubting that. As most of you guys know me, I'll take the P-51 over anything.
Blue Skies, Happy Landings.
-Doodle
- BillSwagger - 29.01.2010
Saburo Sakai is quoted as saying the Zero was the best plane of the war, until he flew a Mustang.
Out of the 3, i'd probably put the P-51 at the top of my list for in game use. It holds it energy and speed well, for this game, and that feature alone lends itself to survivability. Other than (insert dead horse here), there are few draw backs to the Mustang if flown to its advantages.
I like the fire power of the 190, but i've often found that it bleeds a lot of speed by comparison. In a way, you almost need to rely on the heavy guns for the quick kill, or the tables could quickly turn in extended energy fights.
Bill
- HusarDerLuft - 29.01.2010
Alex T. Wrote:LOL I can't believe that after so many years of debate over this kind of silly question there's still someone wasting time over it!
It's not a matter of which plane is better, it's the pilot and his skills, together with the tactical situation, that make a difference.
The features of a plane are like a short blanket: you have to leave something uncovered. The skill of a pilot is learning these special features and use them to his advantage in combat.
A couple of years ago I introduced a good friend of mine to IL-2, we did a quick combat, he was flying a P-51D and I was flying a Cr.42!
He had moderate experience back then, while I had long experience both in the sim and in real life flying, so all I had to do was "dragging" him down to my level of fight, where the Cr.42 had an advantage (low speed high manouverability), and I shot him down. He made a serie of mistakes that brought the result, so what did I demonstrate, that a Cr.42 is better than a Mustang? Hardly.. It's skills and tactical situation, only that..
You can spend hours talking about the features of each single plane and compare them to the other, it's just theory..
In this case the difference in experience was too big, you were seasoned veteran, he was a noob - but when the pilots are equal .. the plane makes all the difference
- HH_Cipher - 29.01.2010
HusarDerLuft Wrote:but when the pilots are equal .. the plane makes all the difference
I like your thinking.
- Alex T. - 29.01.2010
HusarDerLuft Wrote:In this case the difference in experience was too big, you were seasoned veteran, he was a noob - but when the pilots are equal .. the plane makes all the difference
not true at all, two equally good pilots will use two planes that deliver similar or different performance in a special way: each of them will try to drag his opponent in his more favorable game. If I'm flying a FW190 vs a Spit, I won't go into a turning dogfight, but I'll keep it vertical.. u see what I mean? You can have a fantastic performer, but you need to be able to use it.
During the Korea war, experienced Seafury pilots managed to shoot down Mig jets, that's something quite good, as performance wise there's an abyss between the two.
So what you can ask here I think is "what is your favourite plane to fly in combat?" and not "which one is the best?": the first question is a subjective one which has a different answer for all of us, the second is an objective but senseless question. Do u see what I mean now?
- Guest - 30.01.2010
The best all around fighter of the Second World War would be the P-51B-15NA. It had superior speed, superior range, superior aramament, and was on par with maneuverability. Allow me to explain why by matching it with other planes.
Mustangs
Sure, the P-51H-NA and the rest of the lightweight experiments were faster and had better maneuverability, but they never saw combat. Then there's the P-51D-NA and the P-51K-NT. The P-51D was a heavier version of the P-51B/C with a teardrop canopy and two extra .50cal guns. The early P-51K-NT was horrible due to the Aeroproducts prop. Later versions of the 51K saw speeds up to that of the lighter 51B/C, exceeding those of the 51D, but could not match the 51B for maneuverability due to its extra weight. The P-51B-15NA was often equipped with a Malcolm hood canopy and had a dorsal fin. This canopy actually gave it better visibility than the teardrop of the later Mustangs and the dorsal fin, along with the Merlin and it's lighter weight, gave it the best performance of any Mustang until the XP-51F-NA. I'll take the time now to explain why the 4x.50cal guns are superior to 6x.50cal guns and cannons. The .50cal has a faster rate of fire than any cannon. This makes it a good choice for a fight that involves quick twists and turns. Cannons allow you to hit hard and take down large planes, but they take more time to get off rounds meaning a good fighter will have slipped away if you're not a great shot. Sure, 6x.50cal guns can dispatch a fighter quickly, but they take up extra weight and drop the firing time. For very long range missions, the extra two guns of the later Mustangs were often removed. All you really need is the four guns. That brings up another good point. The P-51B-15NA was uncontested for top speed.
Thunderbolt
Okay, you have three basic types of Thunderbolts. You have the early types through the P-47D-RE which are catered towards ground attack. Then you've got the P-47M-RE which is an air superiority fighter and an interceptor. Finally, you have the P-47N-RE which is made to fly long range missions. While it can't take as much damage as the Thunderbolt, match the last two types for speed, or out gun them, the P-51B-15NA can fly circles around it.
Lightning
The Mustang had better high altitude performance and maneuverability. Case and point...
Butcher Birds
The Fw 190A series was designed to serve as interceptors. They had a heavy aramament that wasn't good for fighting, but they also had amazing maneuverability and a large radial engine that could take a lot of damage. They had short range. The Fw 190D series was much better at fighting. It was great match for the Mustang, except for the range.
Frank
In top conditions and with proper fuel, the Ki 84 was superior to the P-51D-20NA. It could fly circles around it, but had a harder time with the razor version.
Oh, and for the record, one F-51D-30NA killed a Russian flown Mig 15.
- Alex T. - 30.01.2010
I'm sorry Deac, but what a load of b..iased info!
Deac Wrote:The best all around fighter of the Second World War would be the P-51B-15NA. It had superior speed, superior range, superior aramament, and was on par with maneuverability. Allow me to explain why by matching it with other planes.
the B series had inferior visibility and inferior armament (just 4x .50 cal). As that was not enough, the way they were installed in the wing caused them to jam, especially under G-loads. The problem wasn't solved until the D series, with a rearranged M2 position and an extra weapon bay.
The only marginal advantage it had on the later mustangs was the barely superior top speed and better lateral stability (both due to the "razorback" design, which is still used nowadays in the customizations of Reno mustang racers). They both needed a vertical stabilizing fin though, to avoid the dreaded snap rolls, which happened with no warning because of the laminar flow wing.
Quote:MustangsAccording to a certain chap called Chuck Yeager, the P-51H was a bitch of a plane, it didn't "feel right" because the pushed the envelope too much, no wonder it never saw combat service.
Sure, the P-51H-NA and the rest of the lightweight experiments were faster and had better maneuverability, but they never saw combat.
Quote:Then there's the P-51D-NA and the P-51K-NT. The P-51D was a heavier version of the P-51B/C with a teardrop canopy and two extra .50cal guns.
wrong again. The P51B/C series empty weight was stated at 6985 lb vs the 7000 lb of the D series, which had two extra machineguns, but a lot less metal surface on the back! Also, the D series had a better Packard Merlin V-1650, which delivered more HP than the earlier series.
Quote:The early P-51K-NT was horrible due to the Aeroproducts prop. Later versions of the 51K saw speeds up to that of the lighter 51B/C, exceeding those of the 51D, but could not match the 51B for maneuverability due to its extra weight.wrong again, see above.
Quote:The P-51B-15NA was often equipped with a Malcolm hood canopy and had a dorsal fin. This canopy actually gave it better visibility than the teardrop of the later Mustangs and the dorsal fin, along with the Merlin and it's lighter weight, gave it the best performance of any Mustang until the XP-51F-NA.
No, the B series had a normal framed canopy, some received malcom hoods as replacements, but it wasn't standard issue. As for the dorsal fin, it was actually an oder dispatched by the Air Ministry, but it was subject to availability. Mustangs born with the malcom hood were C series. Again, there's no lighter weight to take into account, only a better streamlined fuselage.
Quote:I'll take the time now to explain why the 4x.50cal guns are superior to 6x.50cal guns and cannons. The .50cal has a faster rate of fire than any cannon. This makes it a good choice for a fight that involves quick twists and turns. Cannons allow you to hit hard and take down large planes, but they take more time to get off rounds meaning a good fighter will have slipped away if you're not a great shot. Sure, 6x.50cal guns can dispatch a fighter quickly, but they take up extra weight and drop the firing time.WHAT?!? Drop the firing time? What do you mean?!? 6 .50 caliber converging a 300yds delivered a WAY superior punch than 4, especially if installed with an awkward angle, which was meant to help the armourers loading the guns, but meant frequent jamming. You probably don't know that the machineguns on the B-C series had two different rates of fire, the inner ones having a higher rate than the outer ones.
Quote: For very long range missions, the extra two guns of the later Mustangs were often removed. All you really need is the four guns. That brings up another good point. The P-51B-15NA was uncontested for top speed.this is unheard of (probably because it would be stupid), can you please state your source of info? Again, the top speed of the B series was insignificantly superior to the D series.
Quote:Thunderbolt
Okay, you have three basic types of Thunderbolts. You have the early types through the P-47D-RE which are catered towards ground attack. Then you've got the P-47M-RE which is an air superiority fighter and an interceptor. Finally, you have the P-47N-RE which is made to fly long range missions. While it can't take as much damage as the Thunderbolt, match the last two types for speed, or out gun them, the P-51B-15NA can fly circles around it.
Lightning
The Mustang had better high altitude performance and maneuverability. Case and point...
so that's all you need in a plane? How about the 20mm cannon, or the double engine, or the superior load, or the tricycle landing gear??
Quote:Butcher Birdswhat an awesome sum for a plane that was probably the most advanced that saw combat service in WW2!!! Ever heard of Kommandoger
The Fw 190A series was designed to serve as interceptors. They had a heavy aramament that wasn't good for fighting, but they also had amazing maneuverability and a large radial engine that could take a lot of damage. They had short range. The Fw 190D series was much better at fighting. It was great match for the Mustang, except for the range.
- nzwilliam - 30.01.2010
Sigh, propaganda is a funny thing, sometimes it gets mistaken as historical fact :roll:
- Hughes - 30.01.2010
I hate to say it, but Deac is right on most accounts here.
"Control of the skies
As the war in Korea raged, Major Yingling began flying the P-51
Mustang. The single-seat prop fighter entered military service during
World War II and became highly successful as a bomber escort in raids
over Germany. The Mustang also served against Japanese air forces in
the Pacific and began the Korean Conflict as the fighter of choice.
Then the skies over Korea erupted with a new age in airpower as the new
Mikoyan Gurevich 15, or MiG-15, grabbed control of air supremacy in the
region. The MiG-15 was a modern-age jet fighter originally developed in
the Soviet Union, and one of the first jets to successfully use a
swept-wing design. China began receiving the jets in 1950, and it was
Chinese MiG-15s that seized control of the Korean skies during the
conflict. Its superior design, speed and powerful cannons outclassed
all other enemy fighters. Its presence caused a redeployment of United
Nations aircraft in Korea. The U.S. Air Force began utilizing the F-86
Sabres to combat the MiG threat.
As the MiG-15 was changing the skies of aerial warfare, Major Yingling
eventually landed with the 18th Fighter-Bomber Wing in Korea - the
last wing flying the P-51s in the war. Because of the MiG presence, all
of the previous P-51 units had been pulled out and replaced with jets
like the F-86 Sabre. By the end of the war, the Sabres racked up an
impressive 10-1 aerial kill ratio versus the MiG. The P-51's role was
also changed to focus on missions like providing downed pilot air cover
and bombing.
It was on a routine bombing mission that the major made history.
The flight of Miss Dee
One early morning in late May of 1952, then-1st Lt. Yingling climbed
into his P-51, "Miss Dee," - named after his wife - and
prepared for take off. At 8 a.m., a dozen Mustangs lifted off and began
their aerial trek north.
After two hours at 14,000 feet, the fighters reached their target -
the rail lines below the Yalu River, which separates North Korea and
China. Major Yingling had never been this deep in enemy territory
before.
According to the major, they usually dive bombed their targets from
4,000 to 5,000 feet at speeds of more than 300 miles per hour. This run
was different, and as "Miss Dee" roared downward, his speedometer
raced up to 400 miles per hour.
Keeping a critical eye on his speed, he swooped in and Miss Dee dropped
her 500-pound bomb payload over the target. Fire and smoke erupted
across the ground. The major quickly scanned his speed indicator before
jerking his head around to visually confirm the target's hit as he
began cruising skyward.
As he swung his gaze back forward, he noticed a "specter" in the
sky ahead of him. A second later the specter materialized. It was a
MiG-15 and they were flying straight at each other - head-on like two
aerial gunslingers.
A shockwave washed over Major Yinging and he breathed, "Oh my God."
His training kicked in and his steely grip pulled "Miss Dee's"
sights up onto the MiG. Still head-to-head, he squeezed the trigger and
sent a burst of cannon fire toward the enemy fighter - tracer rounds
slicing through the MiG's airframe.
Making a quick acrobatic maneuver, "Miss Dee" barely screamed past
the MiG at 5,000 feet, so close that the major could see the
"ruddy" face of the pilot. He quickly peeled away and ran south.
Major Yingling's wingman saw the MiG pilot bail out of his crippled
aircraft - confirming the aerial kill.
As quickly as it started, it was over. The whole dog fight lasted a few
seconds. Mustangs don't shoot down MiGs - he had done the
impossible.
"It felt like sheer elation," he said. "It was the highlight of
my career."
After Major Yingling returned from the mission, recognition of his
victory was slow coming. In fact, he said 5th Air Force didn't
recognize the aerial kill for two months. Officials took the gun camera
film and evaluated it, because common knowledge said that Mustangs
don't shoot down MiGs. They assumed it must have been one of the
F-86s, but they were cruising high above at 16,000 feet.
Once the kill was confirmed, his aerial victory was still kept quiet.
It was decided that this would be bad publicity for the "MiG
Killers" - the F-86s, the major said. Also, the intelligence
community wanted him to stay quiet about the "ruddy" faced pilot
he'd seen. The Chinese were supposedly the only air force flying the
MiGs over Korea, but Chinese pilots don't have "ruddy" faces.
Russian pilots do - which would have been volatile information about
Russia's support during the conflict.
Nonetheless, Major Yingling's quick-thinking combat skills eventually
resulted in him being awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross for his
one and only aerial kill."
- Guest - 30.01.2010
Thanks for backing me up on a side comment...
Alex, have you ever bothered to read on the Mustang? Go get a freakin book on it and read up on it before you come around with your attitude. You don't sound harsh, just foolish.
- Alex T. - 30.01.2010
@ Huges: thanks for the detailed report,but I didn't say that a Mustang didn't shoot down a Mig..what else is right about Deac's statements??
@ Deac: I happen to know a lot about the P-51,and not just because of the literature that I have read during the years,but because of my interest in the Mustang technical side, which brought me in contact with several owners/mechanics and experts.
Just mention the sources of your delirious statements,or at least try to justify/explain them,Im really curious to hear what you have to say,especially about the armament bit!
You'll see that even the sources u can find on the Internet contradict what u say.My impression is that you don't know much about the topic pal,u just gave us your (wrong) opinion..
- Alex T. - 02.02.2010
Deac, I take it you are still looking for your info on your Haynes manuals, right? :roll:
- P/O W. 'Moggy' Cattermole - 02.02.2010
gents, just a reminder to keep it civil and all, have your little well informed debate sans any nastyness etc please.
regards,
Mog
- Alex T. - 02.02.2010
P/O W. 'Moggy' Cattermole Wrote:gents, just a reminder to keep it civil and all, have your little well informed debate sans any nastyness etc please.
regards,
Mog
'course mate, no worries, just wondering why if the B/C version of the Mustang was so good, the Americans bothered making an inferior version :wink:
- Monguse - 04.02.2010
Deac and Hughes or Jeckel and Hyde
You normally write emails and notes to yourself right along answering them?