Performance Comparison UP1.80-2.01 P-51D-20 - Printable Version

+- All-Aircraft-Simulations (https://allaircraftsimulations.com)
+-- Forum: Off Topic (https://allaircraftsimulations.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=275)
+--- Forum: IL2 FM Comparing Forum (https://allaircraftsimulations.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=281)
+--- Thread: Performance Comparison UP1.80-2.01 P-51D-20 (/showthread.php?tid=72364)

---

Performance Comparison UP1.80-2.01 P-51D-20 - ACE-OF-ACES - 07.12.2010

P-51D-20NA stock (Oleg)
P-51D-20NT UP1.80 (Kwiatek)
P-51D-20NT UP2.00 (Kwiatek)
P-51D-20NT UP2.01 (Kwiatek)

PURPOSE
To compare the performance difference between variants of the same plane or differences due to flight model differences and or changes between MOD PACKS. No attempt is made here to say how accurate the performance of each aircraft is with respect to their real world counterparts. This is purely a in-game plane to in-game plane comparison.

SUMMARY
The stock P-51D-20NA has as good if not better over-all performance than the UltraPack versions.

For the full individual reports with summary click on the following links
stock P-51D-20 vs. UP1.80
stock P-51D-20 vs. UP2.00
stock P-51D-20 vs. UP2.01

For the full group report click on the following links --> stock P-51D-20 vs UP versions

The following graphs show the relative performance for some of the key performance values.

Altitude vs. Rate of Climb


Altitude vs. True Airspeed


Sustained Turn Rate at 3,280ft flaps NONE


Sustained Turn Rate at 3,280ft flaps COMBAT


Sustained Turn Rate at 3,280ft flaps TAKE-OFF


Sustained Turn Rate at 3,280ft flaps LANDING


To see more analysis like this click on the following link --> www.flightsimtesting.com

---

Re: PLANE A (stock P-51D-20NA) vs. PLANE B (UP 2.0 P-51D-20N - sentinel - 08.12.2010

Please note that an increase in HP would not necessarily increase the turn rate. The rate of turn depends on the radius which in turn influences the circumference. The radius of the turn depends largely on the wing loading and to a much lesser extent the lift coeff of the wing. Even though you might be getting more thrust the radius would be affected little and therefore the RATE of turn would still be the same as any tighter would result in a stall of the wing......what would happen is that you might have a little more excess power which would mean that you could climb a little better in the turn but the angular rate would still depend on the stall speed at any particular speed and g, which in turn would still govern the radius and the minimum (stall) speed v radius and be governed by the wing loading overall. In short it is multifactoral with each factor affecting every other factor.
regards,
Pike.

---

Re: PLANE A (stock P-51D-20NA) vs. PLANE B (UP 2.0 P-51D-20N - Odinone - 08.12.2010

Hi
The diff between the two Virtual aircrafts are in detail documented here.
However which one are closest to the real one used during the WWII.
Are there other aircrafts in UP2.0, UP.2,1 performing less then stock Oleg variants. Just curious. :|

---

Re: PLANE A (stock P-51D-20NA) vs. PLANE B (UP 2.0 P-51D-20N - ACE-OF-ACES - 08.12.2010

sentinel Wrote:Please note that an increase in HP would not necessarily increase the turn rate. The rate of turn depends on the radius which in turn influences the circumference. The radius of the turn depends largely on the wing loading and to a much lesser extent the lift coeff of the wing. Even though you might be getting more thrust the radius would be affected little and therefore the RATE of turn would still be the same as any tighter would result in a stall of the wing......what would happen is that you might have a little more excess power which would mean that you could climb a little better in the turn but the angular rate would still depend on the stall speed at any particular speed and g, which in turn would still govern the radius and the minimum (stall) speed v radius and be governed by the wing loading overall. In short it is multifactoral with each factor affecting every other factor.
regards,
Pike.

Interesting..

Looking at the forces, i.e.



To provide a vertical component of lift sufficient to hold altitude in a level turn, an increase in the angle of attack is required. Since the drag of the airfoil is directly proportional to its angle of attack, induced drag will increase as the lift is increased. This, in turn, causes a loss of airspeed in proportion to the angle of bank; a small angle of bank results in a small reduction in airspeed and a large angle of bank results in a large reduction in airspeed. Additional thrust (power) must be applied to pre-vent a reduction in airspeed in level turns; the required amount of additional thrust is proportional to the angle of bank. Therefore take two planes with all things being equal except for one having more power/thurst, the plane with more excess power/thrust would be able to offset more of the drag.. Right?

---

Re: PLANE A (stock P-51D-20NA) vs. PLANE B (UP 2.0 P-51D-20N - ACE-OF-ACES - 08.12.2010

Odinone Wrote:The diff between the two Virtual aircrafts are in detail documented here.

Agreed 100%

Odinone Wrote:However which one are closest to the real one used during the WWII.

For that you will have to wait and see my REALISM RATING analysis, which I am working on. To do that I need to first obtain the real world data to compare to. Granted there is a lot of real world data out there on the Mustangs, just need time to digitize it. The real problem is to find real world data that exactly matches the in-game plane. Different variants can have significant differences in performance, which means I have to sit down and try and take into account the differences. That is the hardest part.

Odinone Wrote:Are there other aircrafts in UP2.0, UP.2,1 performing less then stock Oleg variants. Just curious. :|

I have not tested them all yet, what with hundreds of aircraft I may never get to them all, so I am starting with the ones that are the most popular to most people, and the ones that I am most interested in.

---

Re: PLANE A (stock P-51D-20NA) vs. PLANE B (UP 2.0 P-51D-20N - AcesHigh - 08.12.2010

Id like to see the "REALISM RATING analysis" on the Camel-Dr1 for CK when it comes out :lol:

---

Re: PLANE A (stock P-51D-20NA) vs. PLANE B (UP 2.0 P-51D-20N - ACE-OF-ACES - 08.12.2010

Sadly WWI data is even harder to come by than WWII data

---

Re: PLANE A (stock P-51D-20NA) vs. PLANE B (UP 2.0 P-51D-20N - Fireskull - 08.12.2010

ACE,


This seems to confirm what most of us have suspected about the P-51D-20 and no surprise to me, but thanks very much for posting your data.


Fireskull

---

Re: stock P-51D-20NA vs. UltraPack versions - Storebror - 14.12.2010

As a jug driver by preference (if at all I resort to leave my beloved 4-engine heavies beside and entrust my life to one single engine with this little bit of steel around) 'stangs are mostly a mystery to me, but one thing even my clumsy hands could feel is that they have suffered a lot from those FM changes. I'm wondering what the comparison result to real world data will be - maybe the jug driver club can score some new members? :mrgreen:

Best regards - Mike

---