>>Now, on the Mustang in particular. Page 66 of the P-51>Pilot>>Training Manual states the following:>>>>"When you lower the flaps, the airplane becomes nose-heavy.">>>>Hope this clarifies things a bit.>>Absolutely...I thought it was gear down which made it nose>heavy. Thanks for the information on flaps and nose up/down>issues!>>DanWell, in the ** Mustang it is the gear.When you lower the gear without flaps deployed) the aircraft almost falls out of the sky...

My mistake, it's a B-24.The ONLY reference to takeoff power settings is on page 11 which states (I quote) 'the published takeoff power setting for the B-24D Liberator is 49" of manifold pressure and 2700 RPM.'.Powersettings for approach are listed for the B-17G on page 16:'For example, according to the manual, the B-17G finalapproach is to be flown at 120 mph with full flaps, a power setting of 20" of manifold pressure, propellers at high rpm, and a rate of descent of 500 feet per minute."

>>Absolutely...I thought it was gear down which made it nose>>heavy. Thanks for the information on flaps and nose up/down>>issues!>>>>Dan>>Well, in the ** Mustang it is the gear.>When you lower the gear without flaps deployed) the aircraft>almost falls out of the sky...Also from the Mustang training manual:"When you lower the landing gear, the airplane becomes nose-heavy."Both flaps and gear create a nose-heavy condition which you will need to trim out. When both are down together you'll need to trim quite a bit. The checklist covers this.We have just completed a movie that shows a complete trip around the pattern, from a standing start takeoff to a landing on a 2,500 foot dirt strip over an obstacle. This should be available soon. The clip has insets of the manifold pressure, RPM, airspeed indicator, and altimeter to show the exact speed, altitude, and power setting at any given time.

>We have just completed a movie that shows a complete trip around the>pattern, from a standing start takeoff to a landing on a 2,500 foot>dirt strip over an obstacle. This should be available soon. The clip>has insets of the manifold pressure, RPM, airspeed indicator, and>altimeter to show the exact speed, altitude, and power setting at any >given time.Looking forward to viewing it. My landings are getting better but about 2/3 of the time I would end up writing off the plane and possibly myself if it were real. It is hugely rewarding when I do manage to nail one perfectly though. I haven't had this much fun with FS since ... well, ever.

I only want Wings of Power for the Lancaster. Not interested in any of the American/German addons.Will this be made available for download I wonder?RegardsAdam

Adam,We're talking about that now. I'll let you know.Scott.

But the whole package don

OK, got it. The checklist for the Mustang does have some relevant information about this too.

>At this point, with a couple of hours in the P-51, I'd say>it's on par with the RealAir Spitfire. The virtual cockpit 3D>model is excellent, the textures are crisp and clear and the>gauge refresh is as smooth as the Spitfire. In other words,>excellent. >Can someone please confirm that the vc gauge refreshment is as smooth as the RA Spit. The reason why I ask is that I have to admit that I doubt it, even if I wish it was the case

>At this point, with a couple of hours in the P-51, I'd say>it's on par with the RealAir Spitfire. The virtual cockpit 3D>model is excellent, the textures are crisp and clear and the>gauge refresh is as smooth as the Spitfire. In other words,>excellent. >Can someone please confirm that the vc gauge refreshment is as smooth as the RA Spit. The reason why I ask is that I have to admit that I doubt it, even if I wish it was the case

Nah Spitfire rocks because all the gauges are rendered in 3D ;). No I ain

I question the accuracy of the p-51H. The tall tail I believe was a 1950's post war addon done to improve stability by David Lindsay in Canada. You still see it on some civilianized P-51's, though most of the D model warbirds that had this done (and often tip tanks too.) have had them removed in restoration to original external form.Interestingly Chuck Yeager said the H model was the worst airplane he ever flew. Apparently the airplane was made lighter in an effort to increase performance, but in his opinion the airplane didnt fly as well as its heavier predecessors.Eric

The tall tail was there from the beginning in the H.It's designed to make the aircraft more stable and remove some of the killer elements the D and earlier marks show.What you mean as "added to some D models" is probably the plug in front of the rudder. This was actually a change in later production D models to counter the same stability problems which was moderately successful and later used as standard for the H as well.Some pilots may not have liked the H as the higher stability would have made it less agile, putting it at a disadvantage in a dogfight compared to the D.

Hi Jeroen.No Im referring to a vertical extension put into some aircraft post war in the civilian market by Canadian David Lindsays company. The fin strake you may be talking about in front of the rudder was put in on models after the B model I think. I need to go check my books!Eric

You probably want someone else to confirm this but yes, the VC gauges are as smooth as the RealAir Spitfire. I can't say with any certainty that Shockwave has used the same approach as RealAir in modeling gauges as part of the 3D cockpit itself but it certainly appears that way.