Magic Flaps!!

[VAMPIRE 2?]

What is wrong with the P-51s flight model?

ack-ack

well one was the flaps which has been confirmed and already noted, maybe just not enough of an issue to be recognized or addressed just yet.

nothing negative about the power or thrust, I adjust fuel levels pertaining to the type of flying I would be preparing to do.

but there is speculation and I have also noticed a few things about the wing loading and how the lift is generated with the wing. the p-51 seems to suffer greatly at the altitudes it presumably is able to excel at. (this could be particularly a mix of thrust to weight and wing coding)  also when the flaps are deployed generally since the flaps are deploying on the underside of the wing there are two factors coming into play, first the one everyone knows, is an increase in lift of the aircraft as a whole. which we all know all too well. but the other factor that seems to be missing is the drag direction caused from the flaps. yes the planes slow down because of the the drag. NOTED.  but the drag on the under side of the wing should pull the nose in a downward fashion, while lifting the entire craft.    I have flown both a Cessna 152 "high wing" and a Piper Warrior II  "low wing" to verify how this should look and feel.  I realize that wwII planes are by no means similar to these two crafts I stated, but aerodynamics apply the same to all crafts.    Like I said before tho I'm not the expert here, just wanting to be informal of speculation, only in hopes to improve the realism of this AWESOME game!   I also come to realize that there are p-51 haters and lovers in the game,  I like the p-51, but I remain neutral on the opinion aspects. I just want my plane to perform IN COMPARISON at LEAST to the other crafts in the game. ie. if one plane flew xxx ft at xxx speed in wwII and it also dose in game... BUT the p-51 flew xxx alt at xxx speed, but not quite to that degree in-game.   make sense?

[dirtdart]

well one was the flaps which has been confirmed and already noted, maybe just not enough of an issue to be recognized or addressed just yet.

nothing negative about the power or thrust, I adjust fuel levels pertaining to the type of flying I would be preparing to do.

but there is speculation and I have also noticed a few things about the wing loading and how the lift is generated with the wing. the p-51 seems to suffer greatly at the altitudes it presumably is able to excel at. (this could be particularly a mix of thrust to weight and wing coding)  also when the flaps are deployed generally since the flaps are deploying on the underside of the wing there are two factors coming into play, first the one everyone knows, is an increase in lift of the aircraft as a whole. which we all know all too well. but the other factor that seems to be missing is the drag direction caused from the flaps. yes the planes slow down because of the the drag. NOTED.  but the drag on the under side of the wing should pull the nose in a downward fashion, while lifting the entire craft.    I have flown both a Cessna 152 "high wing" and a Piper Warrior II  "low wing" to verify how this should look and feel.  I realize that wwII planes are by no means similar to these two crafts I stated, but aerodynamics apply the same to all crafts.    Like I said before tho I'm not the expert here, just wanting to be informal of speculation, only in hopes to improve the realism of this AWESOME game!   I also come to realize that there are p-51 haters and lovers in the game,  I like the p-51, but I remain neutral on the opinion aspects. I just want my plane to perform IN COMPARISON at LEAST to the other crafts in the game. ie. if one plane flew xxx ft at xxx speed in wwII and it also dose in game... BUT the p-51 flew xxx alt at xxx speed, but not quite to that degree in-game.   make sense?

The challenge you will have is proving your point with tangible evidence.  I speak from the point of someone egged in the face many times over the years.  If you assert X, post your evidence which contradicts the existing flight model.  If you do not do this, no one will take your argument seriously and the BBs trolls will have a field day with you.  <S>

[VAMPIRE 2?]

It does not do 500 on the deck.  It does not have 4 x 20mms.  It will not outclimb a K4.  It will not out turn a zeke.  It will not out loop a P-38.  It will not fly 550 at 20k. 

Other than that, nothing.   

I really don't think my post was at all a complaint about the 51  just understand that I hear talk in the game, and I know that their are talkers and writers. I'm simply writing what I hear about the 51 in game so It will be noticed. I love the characteristics of the p-51 in game, I'm fine with no changes, but if there are realisms that can be adjusted, it would make the flight dynamics more realistic and enjoyable at the Simulation standpoint.  

[dirtdart]

I really don't think my post was at all a complaint about the 51  just understand that I hear talk in the game, and I know that their are talkers and writers. I'm simply writing what I hear about the 51 in game so It will be noticed. I love the characteristics of the p-51 in game, I'm fine with no changes, but if there are realisms that can be adjusted, it would make the flight dynamics more realistic and enjoyable at the Simulation standpoint.  

I am with ya man, however, some folks take these BBs a bit seriously.  Innuendo will not work.  If you want to stimulate discussion you have to start with facts.  A sad fact is that some of the guys in here have aviation libraries that would make the Smithsonian jealous.  So, it can be a very difficult subject to be successful in arguing.  Take a look at the arado 234 tail gun thread or the gondola gun on 109 threads.  The two arguments are... they were there at production so use them, or they were  removed at the field and never used.  Which one should HTC support?  Which one improves gameplay?  Both are subjective and it is very difficult to get a vote. 

[VAMPIRE 2?]

The challenge you will have is proving your point with tangible evidence.  I speak from the point of someone egged in the face many times over the years.  If you assert X, post your evidence which contradicts the existing flight model.  If you do not do this, no one will take your argument seriously and the BBs trolls will have a field day with you.  <S>

thank you for this input, NOTED  

If no one post facts here by the end of today, I will get the sources that prove OR throw my topic. like I said, my point was souley, informational and put there for the argument, I do realize that I will be bashed and hopefully by some encouraged.  

[JUGgler]

LLogan, JUGGler,,   I'm working hard at mastering my cartoon pony and Its capabilities! I will soon, and you will be the ones of many to see the results once they are accomplished! 
good or bad...

I enjoy working with the many veterans of AH and learning the skills they put forth to succeed in this cartoon simulation world.

Also I am not by any means an expert on "CARTOON" airplanes, but there is speculation, particularly with the p-51 (since that is what I fly, that is what I hear) from written sources of capability and performance that are not up to "PAR" in this simulated world. If I may ask that the pony be reassessed and have any, and hopefully subtle changes to make it perform closer to its documented charts.    as I said this is speculated and hearsay. so with the experts that are hear maybe they can clarify that it needs some adjustments or not would be fantastic and maybe then we can provide the dispute with Dale, or "Skuzzy."       

Lesson #6 Vampire- The pony will out "flat scissor" almost anything. As a JUG dweeb I am looking to get you "rolling" Then my BIG FAT RUDDER takes over and you die !! Keep it flat with "WELL TIMED" vertical and you will be fine  





Oh and stop the soft E merge, anyone with good control and timing will punish you endlessly for this!!  



Have fun



JUGgler

[VAMPIRE 2?]

I am with ya man, however, some folks take these BBs a bit seriously.  Innuendo will not work.  If you want to stimulate discussion you have to start with facts.  A sad fact is that some of the guys in here have aviation libraries that would make the Smithsonian jealous.  So, it can be a very difficult subject to be successful in arguing.  Take a look at the arado 234 tail gun thread or the gondola gun on 109 threads.  The two arguments are... they were there at production so use them, or they were  removed at the field and never used.  Which one should HTC support?  Which one improves gameplay?  Both are subjective and it is very difficult to get a vote. 

understandable.  but the 234 thread was probably brought up with the same good intentions I have with this post.  but what you mention with the guns, i did read that thread and saw the pictures, is an arguable point. where as flight dynamics are more along the lines of LAW.  I gather from that thread with the 234 is that the pilots OR squads that utilized that plane had the options for the rear guns and so should the pilots in AH. ?? no??  alot of AH pilots empty there armament in intentions of saving weight.

[Ack-Ack]

well one was the flaps which has been confirmed and already noted, maybe just not enough of an issue to be recognized or addressed just yet.

The issue with damaged flaps effects all planes, not just the P-51.

but there is speculation and I have also noticed a few things about the wing loading and how the lift is generated with the wing. the p-51 seems to suffer greatly at the altitudes it presumably is able to excel at. (this could be particularly a mix of thrust to weight and wing coding)  also when the flaps are deployed generally since the flaps are deploying on the underside of the wing there are two factors coming into play, first the one everyone knows, is an increase in lift of the aircraft as a whole. which we all know all too well. but the other factor that seems to be missing is the drag direction caused from the flaps. yes the planes slow down because of the the drag. NOTED.  but the drag on the under side of the wing should pull the nose in a downward fashion, while lifting the entire craft.    I have flown both a Cessna 152 "high wing" and a Piper Warrior II  "low wing" to verify how this should look and feel.  I realize that wwII planes are by no means similar to these two crafts I stated, but aerodynamics apply the same to all crafts.    Like I said before tho I'm not the expert here, just wanting to be informal of speculation, only in hopes to improve the realism of this AWESOME game!   I also come to realize that there are p-51 haters and lovers in the game,  I like the p-51, but I remain neutral on the opinion aspects. I just want my plane to perform IN COMPARISON at LEAST to the other crafts in the game. ie. if one plane flew xxx ft at xxx speed in wwII and it also dose in game... BUT the p-51 flew xxx alt at xxx speed, but not quite to that degree in-game.   make sense?

speculation isn't verifiable proof there is something wrong with the P-51's flight model.  If you do have verifiable data then you should present it to HTC for them to look at.  

ack-ack

[VAMPIRE 2?]

Lesson #6 Vampire- The pony will out "flat scissor" almost anything. As a JUG dweeb I am looking to get you "rolling" Then my BIG FAT RUDDER takes over and you die !! Keep it flat with "WELL TIMED" vertical and you will be fine  





Oh and stop the soft E merge, anyone with good control and timing will punish you endlessly for this!!  



Have fun



JUGgler

I thank you for that excelent lesson,  My bigest failure in flight IMO, is getting my opponent to fly on MY terms.  like you said I'm to soft.   funny, I think it's a physiological thing cause I'm the same way in real life. I get "defensive- mechanisms" activating when people get tough or intimidating. some of you should have a full understand of what this means, I think it falls under "rhetoric"

[dirtdart]

Jugler we need to hook up in the DA bud.  I had a tight fight with a Muppet 47M in a pony the other day.  Your comments make me want to try that combination in a bit more controlled environment.  I was trying something a bit different and your rudder comments triggered some thoughts. 

[VAMPIRE 2?]

The issue with damaged flaps effects all planes, not just the P-51.

speculation isn't verifiable proof there is something wrong with the P-51's flight model.  If you do have verifiable data then you should present it to HTC for them to look at.  

ack-ack

ok I'll see what I can dig up, even if it proves me or "us" wrong, I will post here or in a new thread. I'm now a full time student so I SHOULD be able to have the access to some type of documentation  retaining to flight dynamics hopefully with the p-51 in mind.
thank you ack-ack  

[Motherland]

Aerodynamics is extremely complex, this is something you'll have to keep in mind. Here's an interesting discussion on the wings of the P51.
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,296622.15.html

Of course, the P51 is one of the more discussed aircraft due to its seeming lack of performance compared to post war propaganda.

[The Fugitive]

well one was the flaps which has been confirmed and already noted, maybe just not enough of an issue to be recognized or addressed just yet.

nothing negative about the power or thrust, I adjust fuel levels pertaining to the type of flying I would be preparing to do.

but there is speculation and I have also noticed a few things about the wing loading and how the lift is generated with the wing. the p-51 seems to suffer greatly at the altitudes it presumably is able to excel at. (this could be particularly a mix of thrust to weight and wing coding)  also when the flaps are deployed generally since the flaps are deploying on the underside of the wing there are two factors coming into play, first the one everyone knows, is an increase in lift of the aircraft as a whole. which we all know all too well. but the other factor that seems to be missing is the drag direction caused from the flaps. yes the planes slow down because of the the drag. NOTED.  but the drag on the under side of the wing should pull the nose in a downward fashion, while lifting the entire craft.    I have flown both a Cessna 152 "high wing" and a Piper Warrior II  "low wing" to verify how this should look and feel.  I realize that wwII planes are by no means similar to these two crafts I stated, but aerodynamics apply the same to all crafts.    Like I said before tho I'm not the expert here, just wanting to be informal of speculation, only in hopes to improve the realism of this AWESOME game!   I also come to realize that there are p-51 haters and lovers in the game,  I like the p-51, but I remain neutral on the opinion aspects. I just want my plane to perform IN COMPARISON at LEAST to the other crafts in the game. ie. if one plane flew xxx ft at xxx speed in wwII and it also dose in game... BUT the p-51 flew xxx alt at xxx speed, but not quite to that degree in-game.   make sense?

...and keep in mind, while you have flown the planes you stated above, Hitech has flown a P-51 

[skribetm]

...and keep in mind, while you have flown the planes you stated above, Hitech has flown a P-51 

yeah but he needs to try one that has flaps shot off! 

[VAMPIRE 2?]

...and keep in mind, while you have flown the planes you stated above, Hitech has flown a P-51 

so he should know all to well what happens when the flaps are lowered, I could  be wrong or the coding may be contradictory rendering it out of the question. as for the flaps shot off tho, they have been stated as damaged and stuck in position. could a textile be put in place for the the damaged flap? verses changing the flight characteristics? 

also the altitude performance; now that the 29 is here I thought this should reemerge since the 51 should be a good candidate in forming up to protect the b-29 ???? at those speeds and altitudes, should it not be up there with it????