My previous discussions of the P-51D in no way contradict the opinion I've stated here, and I don't appreciate the "ludicrous" descriptor--I don't typically make irrational arguments on this board do I? I've seen some of those comments in the discussions you allude to, but not from me. I think the engineering of the aircraft was probably some of the best in the war, regardless of platform or powerplant. Just because it doesn't fare well when compared with individual in-game metrics doesn't mean that the sum is a poor aircraft.
I don't have a problem with you, but I *do* consider the idea that the P-51 is the best unperked fighter rather ludicrous.
Poor aircraft? Mediocre is more more like it. It is mediocre by most metrics, has a rather low k/d for an aircraft of its speed, and in my experience has fewer options available to it for ACM than aircraft which have better turning, better e-building properties, and/or less unstable departure traits when slowed down. So...where is the thing that makes it the "best"?
BTW, In R/L I believe the P-51 was the BEST airframe of the war, because you could stick rather less engine in it than one would like for a fighter of its weight, stick enough fuel tankage in it to fly to Germany and back, and it STILL performed very well. You take the same airframe and redesign from the ground up for nothing but performance, adding as much horsepower and removing as much weight as possible, and it would be insane, as the P-51H showed.
Also, I think BnZ (the tactic 
) in-game is smart with some aircraft. Just because some guy in a Hurri II is baiting you on 200 doesn't mean that everyone subscribes to that theory. Is anyone going to criticize a Jug pilot for not turn-fighting a Zero?
I'm not running down doing what you need to do with vs another aircraft. I'm saying the vaunted top speed metric by itself is not the asset for a fighter some think it is, and besides the P-51 is *not* the fastest non-perker.
Lets look at Jug vs. Zero. The Jug can come in with an E advantage and use vertical tactics to try and gain a shot against the Zeke for a certain period of time until the E states inevitably equal. The Jug is not superior to the Zeke in thrust weight, or in E retention under Gs. That means the Jug will always eventually run out of E advantage if the maneuvering goes on long enough, and be very unlikely to build a usable E advantage over a Co-E Zeke or better Zeke, especially in a reasonable period of time. It can try extending abit and then climbing at a speed slightly greater than the Zeke can run level, but this would take a long time to build significant E and the Zeke will probably just climb abit himself instead of running level in a hopeless chase and gradually loosing relative E state. The Jug's best option is to drag and call for a clear.
Now insert the K-4 into the equation in the Jug's place. The K-4 turns better than the Jug, but not so much as to really be an issue when facing something as maneuverable as the Zeke. What gives the Kurt vastly more options is the fact that its thrust/weight means it can hold onto an E advantage longer, perhaps indefinitely, AND build a usable advantage much more quickly. Clearly, fighter for fighter, the K4 can stand on a much more equal footing with the Zeke than the Jug.
Energy tactics are less simple, direct, and intuitive than angles tactics. They exist almost entirely because of the need to fight more maneuverable aircraft or to keep E state as high as possible because of the threat of multiple bandits. If you need to use energy tactics against vastly more maneuverable bandit, it behooves you to have better thrust/weight (so you can hold on to an E advantage longer or BUILD an E advantage over the more maneuverable aircraft), excellent roll rate, and excellent firepower, so you can make the most of fleeting snapshots. The P-51D has mediocre climb, decent roll, and mediocre firepower. That BTW is why I consider the P-47N very close to being the equal of the P-51D...I find its roll rate and firepower (and in bad situations, its slow handling and toughness) very good compensations for the lack of non-WEP performance, both planes being used in essentially the same manner in the MA. I consider the D9 overall probably very slightly the P-51's superior in the MA for similar reasons, even though the D9 is one of the few planes the Pony does indeed tend to "own" in a 1v1 co-e "duel" between equal pilots.
