If you say so, thanks!
gib
The key word is “handful”. The matchmaker has no context for this, so with all the people buying the soviet mustang it’ll almost be as if they’re mass produced.
1 Like
And? I don’t really have an issue with it. There’s no real difference compared to other limited-production or one-off vehicles like the XP-50 and La-200, which are widely used in the game as if they were mass-produced. This is intentional. Gaijin and the game don’t really factor in real-world production numbers, so it’s irrelevant in the context of gameplay design.
2 Likes
Believe it or not some of us care about realism, but I can see why that can be forgone in favor of gameplay. However irrelevant it is in gameplay design does not mean it remains relevant in gameplay, though. It’s quite annoying to consistently die to good, powerful fighters in large swaths that you know barely, or in the case of the ho-ri production, never existed. Especially in a game branded as “realistic”
1 Like
the advertising blurb this very day…
In War Thunder, aircraft, attack helicopters, ground forces and naval vessels collaborate in realistic competitive battles.
Realistic Battles and Simulator Battles, on the other hand, are tailored to those who wish for maximum historical accuracy.
snigger…
1 Like
Realism doesn’t always equate to 100% historical accuracy, especially not in the way you’re implying, with restrictions on prototype or limited-production vehicles. Last time I checked, the actual goal of the game is to simulate how each vehicle behaves as realistically as possible within gameplay mechanics, not to recreate exact historical deployment numbers.
To be blunt, this game likely isn’t aiming to be what you’re expecting. It’s not trying to match the level of historical fidelity found in sims like IL-2 Great Battles.
I get where you’re coming from. I’ve felt that way before, too, but I’ve adapted to it over time. It’s never been a major issue for me.
Maximum historical accuracy… this word has lost its meaning when describing the Air Realistic Battles long after Air RB started throwing mixed Allied and Axis teams together regularly, with Pacific maps as the rare exception.
4 Likes
Was flying the Finnish BF-109G2 yesterday, the task was to defend Stalingrad, with a team that includes German planes while USSR was on the other (attacking) side…
The AI slop is strong in this one. At least check your text first.
Also very disappointing how there aren’t even rough dates when these arrived to Soviet Union.
Among the huge lack of information, this sounds like a guess written by someone. More like sending 10 aircraft to the front isn’t that effective. Still it would be nice to know where that training unit operated as some of them familiarized the pilots on less intense fronts.
What’s with armament? Why wing .50 cals were removed and .303 changed to .30?
Germany and Japan regularly defend Dover from the invading English and Russians…
2 Likes
The machine gun configuration is incorrect.
Should be:
2 x .50 in M2 Browning machine guns in nose (300 rpg; 600 rds total)
2 x .50 in M2 Browning machine guns in wings (300 rpg; 600 rds total)
2 x outboard .303 in Browning machine guns (814 rpg; 1,628 rds total)
2 x inboard .303 in Browning machine guns (932 rpg; 1,864 rds total)
In total, the Mustang Mk I carries 1,200 rounds for the 0.50 caliber guns and 3,492 rounds for the 0.30 caliber guns.
I have no hard evidence or cannot confirm that Mustang Mk.I was ever fitted with provisions to carry bombs.
4 Likes
There’s tons of information I needed to add to the post and change after I submitted it (I shouldn’t have) you’ll see some things change on this post today.
You used to be able to edit the post while it was pending on the old forum.
-1
No historical significance for Russia and would be at a BR already crowded with powerful planes.
I was debating on doing one for the Knight of Pythias
It was another fighter used by the research institute.
+1, the idea is pretty cool, and unlike a lot of people i dont mind if a nation get some “copy-paste” ;)
I did some research on this, and it turns out the aircraft was the P-47D-10. The razorback P-47D-22-REs were also used by Soviet pilots, alongside the bubbletop P-47D-27s, which we already have in the game.
Anyway, we’ve digressed here. Send DM to me if you want more info or sources on this.
1 Like
The section quoted states what guns COULD be fitted - AFAIK the wing .50’s were not fitted or not used by the British, so 2 x .50’s in fuselage and 4 x .30’s in wings is correct - eg see P-51 Mustang Variants - RAF - MustangsMustangs.com
All the guns were fitted with some - eg testing of the XP-51 here - P-51 Mustang (Allison Engine) Performance Trials
But I’ve not seen any evidence that was ever used in service by anyone.
Thanks but I’ll change it when I’m able to find more information.
MustangsMustangs .com isn’t a reliable source for technical specifications. If you’re looking for accurate specs, you’re better off consulting primary sources. I’m asking you to provide a more trustworthy or primary source that explicitly states the British only used six machine guns in service. That’s completely unheard of to me, and this is the first time I’ve come across such a claim. If you can provide evidence that back up your claim, then perhaps it could be considered as one of two possible configurations for the British Mustang.
The XP-51s acquired by the Americans were literally Mustang Mk.Is that had been diverted from the British production line. The British granted the Americans permission to take two of them, and these retained provisions for eight machine guns.
In addition, I have sources that disagree your claim regarding the British only using six machine guns on the Mustang Mk.I. Instead, it also used eight machine guns in service by USAF and RAF.
First of all, this report from WWII Aircraft Performance summarizes British employment of the Mustang Mk.I in combat.
It goes:
As for ammunition count, it differs from what’s stated in the pilot’s notes. While I recognize there’s a discrepancy in ammo count between some documents, I’d still go with what’s written in the pilot’s notes, as it is the most trustworthy primary source available.
Another page of the pilot’s notes (keep in mind this was written specifically for British personnel) also repeats this configuration:
Additionally, here are excerpts from secondary sources I used, which also support the idea that the British intended to use the eight-gun configuration for the Mustang Mk.I:
North American P-51 Mustang (Crowood Aviation), pg. 25-26, 35, 38
Allison-Engined P-51 Mustang (Air Vanguard), pg. 37
P-51 Mustang in Action - Aircraft No. 45, pg. 7, 9
P-51 Mustang: In Detail & Scale Part 1 pg. 12
Finally, @lxtav made a suggestion for the British Mustang Mk.I and noted that it was armed with eight machine guns in service. He also has additional photos of it.
In conclusion, I see no logical reason why the British would opt to omit two .50 caliber machine guns. The sources suggest the British preferred to maintain heavier firepower in their Mustang Mk I aircraft.
5 Likes
Fair enough - looks like good evidence to me.
However the one thing that is NOT good evidence is the bit from the pilot’s handbook that says it has PROVISION for the guns - that is not evidence that they were used.
But the photos and other documents are such evidence, so it’s only a quibble.
Would have been useful to have it all up front too
ETA: This site also states 4 x .50’s - The Soviet Union’s US-built Mustang Mk. I fighters | vvs air war
I can’t link to the original picture in this screen grab, but it might perhaps show 3 gunports in the near wing??