Spitfire VS P-51

[Blinky]

Hello all

I wish to get into the WWII planes, I like to do air to air but mostly enjoy ground pounding. I am leaning towards the spitfire due to the 20mm guns for ground attack but have read many negative comments about it, however these comments a very old.

so should I go with the P-51 instead?

[CommandDork]

Both are actually quite great modules, dont know of any negatives about them.

My recommendation is the P51 to start, then Spitfire. For me, the Mustang is easier to start, take off with, and land.

Only has machine guns as standard, but six of them. Add in rockets and bombs and you can take on ground targets.

The Spitfire is a beauty and there's two Mark's for it, the elliptical wing and clipped version. Nothing wrong with either one at all - just a bit more to learn about it if you're a Yank.

[Maki Nishikino]

Originally posted by CommandDork:

...just a bit more to learn about it if you're a Yank.

How is this even relevant? If anything it comes off as offensive, you're making assumptions.

[Troll Norris]

Spitfire is everything but slow. Excelent in maneuver fight. Weak in energy fight.

[Vanhala]

If you want to do ground pounding, I'd suggest P-51, since Spit has quite a low ammo for cannons. It has bombs, though. It's tricky to handle on ground, but the best in air!

[Troll Norris]

Originally posted by Vanhala:

If you want to do ground pounding, I'd suggest P-51, since Spit has quite a low ammo for cannons. It has bombs, though. It's tricky to handle on ground, but the best in air!

Spitfire is IMO too slow. But those are also words of real WWII pilots. The actual oponents in DCS are fast against Spitfire which is huge advantage. So spitfire can maneuver as much as the pilot wants, but the 109 or dora will just BnZ.

[Vanhala]

Originally posted by Troll Norris:

Originally posted by Vanhala:

If you want to do ground pounding, I'd suggest P-51, since Spit has quite a low ammo for cannons. It has bombs, though. It's tricky to handle on ground, but the best in air!

Spitfire is IMO too slow. But those are also words of real WWII pilots. The actual oponents in DCS are fast against Spitfire which is huge advantage. So spitfire can maneuver as much as the pilot wants, but the 109 or dora will just BnZ.

Well yes as fighter the Mk.IX is in disadvantage. I was talking about it's handling, which is very nice, and to me the best through the entire flight envelope. If you want to do competitive fighter piloting you have to get your opponent to bleed their energy. Last moment evasions to have them overshoot are pissing them off, which is all good for a Spit pilot.

[God´s Mom]

personally I would get the P-51 because it is a lot more capeable in the ground strike area (rockets and bombs). Addítionally it is way easier to taxi and the systems are more automated and easier to get into.
Feel free to try the free tf-51 to get al feel how it handles and check if you like it.
Maybe consider waiting for Ápril 1-2 where you can test the Spitfire for free and on April 3-4 you can test the P-51 for free.

[Blinky]

Originally posted by God´s Mom:

personally I would get the P-51 because it is a lot more capeable in the ground strike area (rockets and bombs). Addítionally it is way easier to taxi and the systems are more automated and easier to get into.
Feel free to try the free tf-51 to get al feel how it handles and check if you like it.
Maybe consider waiting for Ápril 1-2 where you can test the Spitfire for free and on April 3-4 you can test the P-51 for free.

Good point I will do that

[CommandDork]

Lol, this DCS crowd can be a touchy bunch.

After hours in one country's aircraft, other instrument panels can take longer to learn. Things are arranged differently, gauges are different. Sometimes there is a language barrier with how things are labeled. Speed/altitude conversions are different.

Sheesh.

[Vanhala]

Originally posted by CommandDork:

Lol, this DCS crowd can be a touchy bunch.

After hours in one country's aircraft, other instrument panels can take longer to learn. Things are arranged differently, gauges are different. Sometimes there is a language barrier with how things are labeled. Speed/altitude conversions are different.

Sheesh.

I'm sorry but this feels a bit out of context to me. Would you mind opening it up a bit what you mean?

[Troll Norris]

Did you have to ask?

[Vanhala]

Originally posted by Troll Norris:

Did you have to ask?

I honestly don't get the point of stating "Lol, this DCS crowd can be a touchy bunch" and then going chit-chat about difficulties of transitioning from one type into another, when the original question was, which one to get.

DCS playerbase is a group of "snowflakes" going upset about many things, I don't disagree.

[Maki Nishikino]

Originally posted by Vanhala:

Originally posted by Troll Norris:

Did you have to ask?

I honestly don't get the point of stating "Lol, this DCS crowd can be a touchy bunch" and then going chit-chat about difficulties of transitioning from one type into another, when the original question was, which one to get.

DCS playerbase is a group of "snowflakes" going upset about many things, I don't disagree.

They're talking about my comment which to be quite frank I feel is valid.

[Vanhala]

Originally posted by Maki Nishikino:

They're talking about my comment which to be quite frank I feel is valid.

Roger, thanks. Now that you said it I get that. I ain't native in English and got an IQ of a leather boot, so....

[Maki Nishikino]

Originally posted by Vanhala:

Originally posted by Maki Nishikino:

They're talking about my comment which to be quite frank I feel is valid.

Roger, thanks. Now that you said it I get that. I ain't native in English and got an IQ of a leather boot, so....

No worries.