A2A P51 Mustang AccuSim is out!

[Chock 17,769]

@ John re the Mustang:

 

The P-51 has a propensity to swing left on take off in real life as the speed builds, this is mentioned in the Pilot's Notes for it (the real ones), but it is not unknown for aircraft to swing the other way on commencing the take off roll as the airflow hits the tail when powering up, especially if one does not use the proper technique. The correct technique for taking off in a P-51 Mustang is to taxi forward with the stick all the way back for a few yards on a low throttle setting in order to lock the tailwheel, and then open the throttle up, but still hold the tail down in order to prevent a swing, and use the rudder to counter anything the tailwheel is not preventing, since when locked, the tailwheel can still move six degrees either side of central. You unlock the tailwheel by pushing the stick forward past the centre position some way.

 

The P-51 actually takes off quicker if you keep the tail down a bit rather than riding it level on the main wheels in the typical taildragger fashion, and if you want the engine setting for that; 46 inches of boost for a normal take off is okay. Contrary to popular belief, the P-51 is not a rocket ship when it is loaded with fuel, it actually has to be flown fairly carefully when all the tanks are full, in fact, the Pilot's Notes state that: 'When fuselage tank is filled, flying must be restricted to straight and level and no manoeuvers other than very gentle turns should be attempted until at least 48 US Gallons (40 Imp) have been consumed'

 

Also contrary to popular belief, the P-40 was actually a very good fighter indeed when deployed to best advantage, being really very manoeuverable with good visibility for a non-blown canopy design, and it was only the fact that it was not capable at altitude against the bf109 and Fw190 which was against its wider use in Europe - against bombers and even fighters at low and medium altitude it was fairly deadly, with only the Ju-88 proving a tough opponent owing to that bomber's speed and high ceiling. So it tended to get used as an army cooperation aircraft in Europe and more often as a fighter in Africa, where the Ju-87 was often its adversary owing to the propensity of AFVs in use in the desert. If you read my Avsim review of the older A2A P-40, there is a comprehensive analysis of its roll rate, with timings and pics, and it was fairly close to the real thing, and surprisingly nimble at that, although the high altitude performance of the P-51 variants with the Merlin, and its long range meant it was a better long-range escort than the P-40 of course.

 

If you want flying speeds for the Mustang incidentally:

 

safe climb out speed from take off: 150

 

go around: 140

 

best climb speed to 30,000: 160

 

best climb from 30,000 to 35,000: 155

 

best climb from 35,000 to 40,000: 150

 

best climb above 40,000: 145

 

combat: full throttle, supercharger set to AUTO, rpm 3,000 (don't keep it at this for more than five minutes if you can help it)

 

VNe (dive): 505

 

maximum range speed: 185

 

flaps 20 approach: 120

 

full flaps approach: 105

 

no flaps approach: 120

 

approach with full fuselage tank: 140

 

stall with flaps and gear up: 90

 

stall with flaps 20 gear down: 80

 

stall with full flaps and gear down: 75

 

Al

[CoolP 283]

Amazing post, Alan. Still thinking about getting the Mustang, being a lover of the Spitfire and her handling. The P-40 is a way more sedate thing, which acts as a small downside for me to be honest.

 

So could I expect the Mustang to be as agile as my beloved Spit?

[Chock 17,769]

Nope, as you probably know already, a P-51D Mustang could ever be as agile as an early mark Spitfire, since the Mark I/IISpit was a lightweight point defence fighter and the D variant Mustang was a long range escort fighter. Although in fairness to the Mustang, it is fairly close to the Spitfire in many respects once it has burned off some of its fuel.

 

But of course that means the P-51 does have the massive advantage in range which that fuel confers, and in FS that means that you can fly the P-51 all over the place non-stop, whereas you are going to have to land that Spit a lot to do some touring around. If you had to fight your way about over the FS skies, or use something like Just Flight's Airshow Pilot, you'd probably prefer the Spit to the Mustang, but if you want to tour about and still be able to fling it about, then the Mustang is what you want, so it is probably a better FS aeroplane in practical terms, as it was in real life - i.e, a better all-rounder than the Spit, which was more of a specialist. Or as Chuck Yeager put it: 'The P-51 could do for six hours what the Spitfire could do for 45 minutes'.

 

Having said that, if you go multiplayer in a Spitfire versus a Mustang, pilot skills being equal, you will be the one who comes down on a runway. Unless of course someone shows up in the A2A P-47, in which case he will probably dive vertically out of the sun and shoot you both down LOL

 

Al

[CoolP 283]

Thanks, Alan.

The P-51 could do for six hours what the Spitfire could do for 45 minutes

Good one from the man himself.

[Sizel 4]

I bought this yesterday and although i usually stay away from these war planes and don't normally have any interest in them i somehow was tempted by this. I have to say i'm impressed and along with AccuSim it really is something.

I have AccuFeel installed but this is my first AccuSim product and A2A have done a superb job on this in my opinion. So im looking forward to flying this one some more and checking out all the detail and what AccuSim has to offer.

 

REXE and this A2A release has made my week a good one :good:

[Phantom88 3,287]

It's incredible,The best addition I've made to FSX to date.

[Chock 17,769]

A2A P-51D with AccuSim versus WarbirdSim P-51D:

 

With the A2A Mustang having been released this week, and the WarbirdSim one on offer for at Flight Sim Deal Of The Day (until tomorrow, so be quick), I thought I would do a quick comparison.

 

The A2A bird and the WarbirdSim one are both similarly priced if one adds the cost of the AccuSim add-on for the A2A bird, being both around 45 Dollars. Without AccuSim, the A2A one is 29.99 Dollars, and the presently discounted WarbirdSim one is 19.97 Dollars, so again they are relatively close on pricing, but for that money you are getting the full WarbirdSim version at ten bucks less, so it is the bargain of the two.

 

But, how different are they? Well, the answer is, in some ways not much, but in other ways quite a bit. To elaborate:

 

The WarbirdSim P-51 is very nicely detailed, and I actually prefer its exterior modeling and texturing to the A2A P-51, but inside the VC, I think the A2A one just slightly edges into being my preference, so, honours are pretty even on visuals, although more on this later.

 

Within the normal flight envelope, they both fly in a very similar way, although the WarbirdSim one is much more sensitive in pitch at low speeds right after take off. I think that is an attempt to simulate the notorious stick load reversal phenomenon which the P-51 exhibits at high fuel loads, so it is something of a subjective preference if you want that kind of thing and where the main difference lies, is in the subtleties of handling at different weights. Overall, I think the A2A P-51 does this more realistically, for example, you have to maintain a high speed on approach with full fuel on board in the A2A bird or you will undershoot or stall, and in the WarbirdSim P-51, you don't have to worry about that so much, so if you like flying 'by the book'; then the A2A bird is probably a little bit better in that respect even though the WarbirdSim one does not completely eschew such details, although for whizzing around the skies and aeros at suitable weights, there's really not much to separate them.

 

Sounds are certainly important when we are talking about a Packard Merlin, and again this is something where honours are fairly even. The A2A's complex engine modeling means that sounds are somewhat more dynamic in relation to exactly where you have the RPM, mixture and throttle set, and you are therefore more likely to get coughing and spluttering in all the right places, but having said that, taxying the WarbirdSim one about does give your ears a real audio treat, so it's not that far behind in the sound department even without the miracle of AccuSim, and I do actually like the audio on the WarbirdSim P-51 very much indeed.

 

Other enhancements are also something of an equal split too: The more complex treatment of the engine in the A2A bird means you get some convincing touches on occasion, for example, coasting the A2A bird down on approach without remembering to clear the plugs with an occasional burst of throttle, means that you will get a lag on pick up as the engine has to burn the oil off the plugs before it reaches an efficient burn, and you'll get the oily blue smoke out of the exhaust stubs to remind you that you could be managing things better. There's none of that stuff on the WarbirdSim one, but having said that, it does make use of the better engine modeling capabilities of FSX Acceleration, so in spite of the less complex engine parameters it runs, it is entirely possible to wreck the engine with sloppy operation, so it is not as if you don't also have to treat it with some care where the engine is concerned.

 

As far as nice little visual touches are concerned, there are in fact more of these on the WarbirdSim P-51D, such as the addition of field mods on various versions in the package; examples being the addition of a modified Spitfire rear view mirror being added to the canopy frame, as was common in the European theatre of operations, and the additional position lights which some USAF P-51s sported in one or two fighter groups.

 

What is very apparent in both the A2A and the WarbirdSim P-51Ds, is that they are both quite clearly very well researched and are both quite clearly labours of love. and if you want to know which one I'd pick, then the answer is, both of them, since the relative pros and cons of them both means I could never dismiss one of them completely. I guess anyone who knows me from Avsim will also know that I'm a big fan of what A2A does, but if I tell you that I have both the WarbirdSim P-51B/C, and the WarbirdSim P-51D, then it will probably demonstrate that I have a lot of time for what WarbirdSim does too.Ether way, if you like the P-51, you'd not be disappointed.

 

Some pictures:

 

A2A external:

 

 

WarbirdSim external:

 

 

A2A in flight:

 

 

WarbirdSim in flight:

 

 

A2A throttle quadrant:

 

 

WarbirdSim throttle quadrant:

 

 

A2A VC on finals:

 

 

WarbirdSim VC on finals:

 

 

Al

[Sizel 4]

Thanks for the comparison review Alan.

 

I was wondering myself on the differences between the two having flicked through PC pilots review a few issues ago of Warbirdsims effort. Having limited experience on A2A's release and none on Warbirdsims, that was some useful info you posted. From your pics i can see the what you mean by the external/internal textering/modelling.

[CoolP 283]

I wonder how many folks actually buy the planes without Accusim. Just asking out of interest since A2A always offers Accusim as an optional part. I'd guess that most people will go for the full package, which makes perfect sense of course.

 

Did they ever state a rough percentage somewhere?

[Chock 17,769]

I guess the time to ask would have been yesterday when they were on the TS meeting at Digital Theme Park. I was otherwise engaged and couldn't join in on that, which was a shame since I had a few questions.

 

Al

[CoolP 283]

Would have made sense, right you are.

[tf51d 284]

I guess the time to ask would have been yesterday when they were on the TS meeting at Digital Theme Park. I was otherwise engaged and couldn't join in on that, which was a shame since I had a few questions.

 

Al

 

I tried to get on that one too. It was my first time using Teamspeak, so I tried to get my headset setup a half hour early. When I connected though my mic wasn't working, and evidently the REX conference was still going on, which I might have disrupted, because all I heard was someone in the background calling my handle if I wanted something, and the program barking "You were rude" at me. I couldn't respond so I disconnected at that point. So if I disrupted the REX conference I do apologize.

[molleh 451]

I purchased the A2A P-51 a couple of nights ago. In short, it's jaw dropping :D Once you experience things like the gauge needles hunting when the Merlin coughs and sputters, it makes you wonder how you ever lived without such details.

[tf51d 284]

I hope they come out with an expansion package with the other variants, like the B, C, H, (and please, please, please) the TF-51D!!

[molleh 451]

I agree. I much prefer the looks of the B/C over the bubble canopy D personally :)

 

I hope they come out with an expansion package with the other variants, like the B, C, H, (and please, please, please) the TF-51D!!