I have no case to prove.
Uh, yeah you do. Your first line of attack was an attempt to dismiss these performance charts because the man who compiled them is allegedly biased. You can't take that back. Now prove it, or at least show that it is vaguely plausible.
You're the one accusing (if ever so subtly) Hitech Creation of being biased against American planes. Posting Mr. Williams' charts proves nothing, especially since they do not say what you think they say.
Subtle?
Subtle?!?!?! I take exception to that, I'm never subtle about anything.
I can't know for sure the motivations, but here is my best
guess to what is happening. Once again, I'll use the P-51 as my example. The P-51 is consistently one of the most common if not THE most common aircraft in the LW MAs tour after tour. This is in spite of the fact, that the P-51 is rather mediocre in performance under typical MA conditions compared to many aircraft, including the 109 Kurt. One of the best exponents of the P-51 in the game, Steve, has said as much on many occasions. You can't beat people out of the cockpit of P-51s with a stick apparently.
Meanwhile, despite the fact that the 190 D9 and 109 K-4 are arguably both superior in the MA, they haven't eclipsed the Mustang. What is the purpose of giving rare, high-performing, late-war monsters like the Dora and Kurt ENYs of 15 and
20 respectively except to get more people flying them?
Imagine the nauseatingly incessant sea of P-51s you would see if they performed even a little better. The situation might reach the point where perking the P-51 was unavoidable. But that is not a great option. What percentage of fresh noobs would let their accounts slide if the first thing that happened when they logged in was try to take the P-51D for a spin and "You don't have enough perks for that model" popped up?
Posting Mr. Williams' charts proves nothing, especially since they do not say what you think they say. All the charts you've posted gives performance figures comparable to those in AH for the relevant aircraft.
And by "relevant aircraft" I mean the aircraft specific to AH: P-51B with V-1650-3 engine at 67" map and wing racks. P-51D with V-1650-7 engine at 67" map and wing racks. The RAF versions sometimes used different map settings and were kitted out differently and are thus irrelevant. The higher map settings of 72" and 75" need 100/150 octane fuel which is not modelled in AH and are thus irrelevant.
I posted a whole chart showing P-51 performance variants at 67"....
Second, as Anax said
"So far as I know, the German aircraft that had MW-50 boost do get C3 fuel in AH simply because that was the only fuel they could use (96 octane I think)."Given that, how is it fair to NOT have American planes running on 100/150? Which side do you think was more able to produce large amounts of high-quality fuel in 1945?
And if mid-war G2s can run around at the iffy 1.42 ata, why are P-47Ds not allowed to pull 70'' MAP on emergency power? If Johnson, Gabreski, et al. are to be believed, adjusting them to do so was near ubiquitous in the ETO.
Finally, the very choice of what model is presented in-game can be VERY telling if one chooses to use the most basic or lowest performing variant on one hand, and a rare model running on high-grade fuel under the best possible conditions on the other.
