The Mustang (Il-2 version) is semi-accurate. According to real-life pilot accounts,the control inputs have to be gentle and smooth but swift enough to keep your lead on the enemy. The aircraft is demanding of finesse. She cannot be flown like one would fly a Hellcat or FW-190. It would be very interesting to see the P-51H modelled on Il-2.
I have to agree that our -51's are waaaaaaaay off in the flight modeling. Even the "new" ones, while somewhat better than the un-modded stockers, don't fly anything like a real Mustang. Then again it's not really supposed to be "just like" the real plane, is it, because it can't be. I would say that any of the planes in IL-2 probably do fairly well representing their particular strengths and weaknesses vis-a-vis the other planes modeled in the sim, and that I would say is precisely the intent. It does what it's supposed to in that regard. For example the Mustang's excellent long range cruise performance is well demonstrated in IL-2, as is the Mustang's requirement to keep the speed up at high altitude for efficient ram air recovery, or get left behind.
As for the handling, Mustangs handle really well regardless of the fuel state when compared to lots of airplanes....the LR-JET (s) with half-empty tip tanks come to mind....but for sure it ain't near as twitchy with the fuselage tank empty and you can bet its a better gun platform that way as well. Not that I'm an expert on all things Mustang, because I ain't. I've had a few opportunities to fly the damn thing over almost three decades of wishing I had gone to law school instead.
I will say that your control system is very important in IL-2. I started with a Logitech thingy that I was OK with. Then it broke. I replaced it with a Thrustmaster T-Flight HOTAS X. Ginormous difference. I can only imagine the next level of improvement one might enjoy with a complete HOTAS Cougar setup and rudder pedals/toe brakes. Can't justify the expense right now with this economy, but if my HOTAS X goes "Tango Uniform" I'll be making the upgrade.
If you want the most accurate flight modeling X-Plane is the way to go. With enough $$$$ you can build an FAA Certified simulator around X-Plane and give FAR 135 checkrides in the darn thing. Sounds too much like work to interest me much. However, those with the power to change things might do well to compare how our airplanes fly, as compared to the available models in X-Plane, and maybe tweak a little here and there to bring them as close as possible.
If you want to have fun shooting your buddies down then IL-2 is tops in my book, despite its flaws. And, the IL-2 community keeps making things better all the time. I wouldn't be surprised to find some real improvements in IL-2 flight modeling in the not too distant future, but....
Right now what I want is cannon, folding wings and arrester gear on the FJ-2/3 Fury. And a Beech 18 (C-45) would just make me vapor-lock. Love that airplane. If you can fly a Twin Beech you can fly a manhole cover.
Cheers!
mach-overspeed
I think that is half of my problem as well. I, for sure, have what I am now calling "109 driver syndrome". I expect a lot from my crate, and the 109 delivers. This being said, there is no greater feeling then following the enemy while flying a Mustang. He noses over to run, I pull in the pitch on the prob and i have him, now i just have to watch the pull out. I can't fly a spit to save myself either, and I believe the 109 has got to be the most hamfisted friendly fighter in game. The 51 requires a loving touch, and a little smack every now and again. Up high (25,000+) the 51 is in its element. Lets remember here, the P51 was designed to go far, fast, at high altitude. The requirements of war put it into a number of different circumstances, but mostly it did its intended mission, high alt. bomber escort. If you only use the 51 at alt, you will rule the skies. I've always joked that the P51 is the only fighter in IL2 where turning rate doesn't change the higher you go. The kicker is that every other plane does, try a good ole yank n bank at 30k in a 109, doesn't like it as much as at does at 10k.
P-51 as well as the IL-2 version of P-51 is really the great airplane! It has great speed, nice diving, good energy and long time boost-mode ability. The SPEED is main feature in airfight. Mustang has the REAL SPEED that is why you always stay alive if you act in right way. Driving Mustang you must stay fast, must be good shooter to hit enemy at first time and never NEVER do turnfight even if you guess that you have much energy (many times I did this mistake and always was down). Following these rules you always be successful with P-51 and never be down because fast plane gives you advantages to choose the way of fight. Manoeuvrability is nothing to speed and energy...
So P-51 is the outstanding WWII airplane!
With respect to combat reports, you also have to take into account the fact that nobody is thinking straight in the heat of the moment, that memory is relative, reports are made by humans, and therefore no combat report can ever be 100% accurate. If it is a report of a kill we will most likely never get the other side of the story. Eyewitness reports can be subjected to the same scrutiny, as can kill confirmations. A P-51 pilot who claims he has out-turned his opponent doesn't give us any other reference points. What was his starting speed? Opponent's starting speed? How high was the engagement? The Bf-109 pilot or even A6M pilot who got shot down may not have known his aircraft very well, and could have been making rather easy turns for a P-51 to follow. A pilot's report might substitute terms, such as 'turn' for a banking high yo-yo.
Seeing how subjective these things can be, I'd say the FM modelers, both Maddox and Modders, did a pretty damn good job.
That said, I remember one dogfight server where a group of us were flying P-51's over Okinawa against Ki-84's. We treated the 4000 m mark like it was hard ground and did pretty well for ourselves. It was pretty much all zooming and booming and energy fighting. Barely any turning, save for a few tight hammerheads, was involved. We were also using wing tactics.
Plenty of accounts where mustang driver bested a 109 in a turn fight even when at an altitude disadvantage and at low altitude. May be limitations of sim or FM is off, but to say that this sim proves anything about real world Mustang performance vs. other planes is really stretching credulity and taking waaaay too much on faith. Maybe the other planes are a little too optimistic too, whereas the Mustang may be more realistic. This FM tweaking seems a bit too subjective, which means a lot is being shortcutted in the game engine. Still - its the best that I have tried.
My problem with the P-51 is not its handling, I've pretty well gotten that down pat. What I can't do is keep my guns in the right spot for more than half a second. With the 109 (my primary fighter) this isn't a problem because a.) I can hold my guns on target longer and b.) you only need one or two shots to hit to down a target. With American fighters, you have to spend at least a whole second's worth of ammunition on the target to have any significant effect, or get a lucky shot in the controls/pilot/engine. The gyro just makes it worse (for me anyways), and the K-14 gunsight's ring is too small to be used without the gyro.
And that is why I fly the P-51B when I fly the P-51 at all. I just do better with it. That being said, I do infinitely better in a M.108-equipped, C3-fueled Bf.109 G-10. :twisted:
As a separate note, I've noticed that the P-47 accelerates much faster than its contemporary P-51 in a straight line and in a dive, while having roughly equivalent climb performance. Hell, when I fly a P-51, I always seem to have a hard time catching anything in a climb, even the supposed energy-bleeding 109s.
I suggest to try new P-51 in UP 2.0N or UP 2.01. They are really lovley planes with their known strengths and weekness. No wonderufull planes but in good hand there are very safe and deadly planes.
They are very fasty both in low level and higher alts, very good controls at medium to high speed, very fast dive.
Still P-51 dont climb as good as 109 and are worse then 109 in slow speed turn fight but these is their RL weekness. It handled better at high speed and turn better then 109 also in turn fight is little better then Fw 190.
I like these planes very much. New P-51 in UP are more stable in aming then stock ones and also dont loose so easy their wings at higher speed manouvers ( rolls).
And here is a opinion made some time ago from pilot who flew P-51 IRL :
"OK, I just did a couple of test flights in the P-51D-30. I flew the UP version and the HSFX version on the same maps and the same missions. I had the following observations:
I like the overall handling characteristics of the UP version better. It has a more solid feel at high speed, less wobbling, tracks a straight line more easily and more like a real airplane. It also has better low speed handling, again just flies better with less wobbling and wondering around.
I liked the stall and spin characteristics of the HSFX version better. It was a little less wicked and recovered a little better from incipient spins. The P-51 had a sudden stall and spin as is often reported, but it wasn
[quote="Kwiatek"]f I had to pick one or the other I
