1943, sea level to 15000 ft: the best fighter?

CORSNING said:

davparir,
The P-51B became operational with the USAAF in June 1943. I do not have any figures on how many were operational by Oct. 1943. Just an FYI: The Allison engine Mustangs were prefered at the lower levels of operation.

Who would you cite (US) as one who held that opinion that flew both?

Zero combat operational in Oct 1943. The 354th FG (Pioneer Mustang Group/9th AF) flew its first combat escort missions in early December 1943, the next three were 357/363 and 4th FG in February, the 355th in March, 352nd in April, 339th on April 30, 361st, 359th in May 1944

Vincenzo,
The calculation is fairly simple. 3.28 (meters to feet) X 60 (seconds to minutes) = 196.8. That is the multiplier for meters/second to feet/minute. But actually I used the chart at the bottom of the Bf.109G page at www.wwiiaircraftperformance.

Thanks for the reply Guys, Jeff

Click to expand...

The 354th didn't have P-51B's when they arrived in OTU in October 1943.

HEADQUARTERS, NORTHWEST AFRICAN STRATEGIC AIR FORCE, APO 420

SUBJECT: British Army Cooperation Tactical Employment of the Mustang I (P-51).

TO: Commanding General, Northwest African Air Forces, APO 650. (Attention: Tactics Officer)

AUGUST 26, 1943


" The record of the Mustang I is excellent. The pilots all like to fly it and its success has been due to its reliability, simplicity and the fact that it is faster than any contemporary aircraft at low and medium altitudes."

" The british have operated at full throttle at sea level (72"Hg) for as much as 20 min. at a time without hurting the engines. According to them, the Allison is averaging 1500 hours between bearing failures as compared to 500 to 600 hours for the Merlin. The Allison, they have found, will drag them home even with the bearing ruined."

" As has been mentioned before, they have had exceptionally good service out of these engines and due to its smoothness at low RPM's they are able to operate it so as to obtain a remarkably low fuel consumption giving them an operational range greater than any single engine fighter they possess (the fact that the Merline engine will not run well below 1600 prevents them from obtaining an equivalent low fuel consumption and therefore limits its usefulness for similar operations)."

" It is suggested that the Allison powered P-51A may lend itself better to a combination low altitude fighter-intruder and a medium bombardment escorter than will the Merlin powered P-51B due to the inherent difficulty of operating the Merlin engine at the low RPM's necessary for a low fuel consumption. It is felt that definite engineering and flight information should be secured in these two aircraft immediately."

CHARLES F BORN
Brigadier General, CSC,
Assist Chief of Staff, A-3.

dragondog,

My sorcess agree with you that the first sortie of the 354th was on Dec. 1, 1943 and they were the first to receive P-51Bs.
June 1943: 20 P-51Bs were accepted by the USAAF.
September 17, 1943 P-51Bs arrive in England. First assinged to the 354th then the 357th FG.
October 1943: 763 Mustangs are accepted by the USAAF.

I have not found information (yet) saying how many P-51Bs were in England by the end of October '43. I guess that's where you true historians come in and fill in the blanks.

All I am saying is that the USAAF had P-51B in June '43. What they did with them you definitely know better than I.

CORSNING said:

HEADQUARTERS, NORTHWEST AFRICAN STRATEGIC AIR FORCE, APO 420

SUBJECT: British Army Cooperation Tactical Employment of the Mustang I (P-51).

TO: Commanding General, Northwest African Air Forces, APO 650. (Attention: Tactics Officer)

AUGUST 26, 1943


" The record of the Mustang I is excellent. The pilots all like to fly it and its success has been due to its reliability, simplicity and the fact that it is faster than any contemporary aircraft at low and medium altitudes."

" The british have operated at full throttle at sea level (72"Hg) for as much as 20 min. at a time without hurting the engines. According to them, the Allison is averaging 1500 hours between bearing failures as compared to 500 to 600 hours for the Merlin. The Allison, they have found, will drag them home even with the bearing ruined."

" As has been mentioned before, they have had exceptionally good service out of these engines and due to its smoothness at low RPM's they are able to operate it so as to obtain a remarkably low fuel consumption giving them an operational range greater than any single engine fighter they possess (the fact that the Merline engine will not run well below 1600 prevents them from obtaining an equivalent low fuel consumption and therefore limits its usefulness for similar operations)."

" It is suggested that the Allison powered P-51A may lend itself better to a combination low altitude fighter-intruder and a medium bombardment escorter than will the Merlin powered P-51B due to the inherent difficulty of operating the Merlin engine at the low RPM's necessary for a low fuel consumption. It is fe.t that definite engineering and flight information should be secured in these two aircraft immediately."

CHARLES F BORN
Brigadier General, CSC,
Assist Chief of Staff, A-3.

Click to expand...

Originally Posted by CORSNING

davparir,
The P-51B became operational with the USAAF in June 1943. I do not have any figures on how many were operational by Oct. 1943. Just an FYI: The Allison engine Mustangs were prefered at the lower levels of operation.

Where do you suppose the P-51B was combat operational in June 1943? or July, or August, or September, or October, or November, 1943?

Re the Memo: BG Charles Born did not FLY either the Mustang I, P-51A or P-51B in combat operations, so he is hardly a 'universal reference' regarding the desirability of the P-51A over. In addition, his thesis regarding the difficulty of operating the Merlin engine is Obviously flawed as it was a superior escort to heavy bombers going far greater distances than the mediums.

Having said this, the Allison DiD have lower fuel consumption rates for equivalent Rpm and Boost - now, so what? How many fighter pilots who expect to engage enemy fighters with excellent performance say "Gee I would Far Rather have a little more range and slightly tighter initial turn than top speed, acceleration, climb and sustained turn rate"

Thanks for the info drgondog. I have just printed what I have read. I did make the mistake of saying the Allison was the prefered A/C at low/medium altitudes. Because that just boils down to "Prefered by who?"

So......apparently we have eliminated the water injected F4U and the P-51B. OK, that works for me.

Thanks for all you Guy's input, Jeff.

CORSNING said:

... Because that just boils down to "Prefered by who?" ...

Click to expand...

At least the pilots of the RAF army co-op sqns. They seemed to have been disappointed when they began to run out Allison Mustang because the supply ran out when the production switched to P-51B/C. OK there wasn't option to get Mustang IIIs instead, they got Spitfires as replacement.

From table 89 of USAAF statistical digest
P-51 in ETO end of septmber '43: 34, end october: 159, end november: 231, end december 266

Vincenzo said:

From table 89 of USAAF statistical digest
P-51 in ETO end of septmber '43: 34, end october: 159, end november: 231, end december 266

Click to expand...

Vincenzo - aircraft arraived at UK Approximately 90 DAYS before deployment to combat units. They came off the boats, were assembled, retrofitted with ETO mods andthen deployed to combat units. I haven't looked at the Digest lately to see if they distinguished between P-51A and P-51B. The 67th TRG was operational in October, 1943 with P-51A

Name One group that got P-51B's before December 1943.

I was just give the info to Corsning.
354th sure.

NAME ONE GROUP THAT GOT P-51B BEFORE DECEMBER 1943.

Uh, the 354th. They unloaded at Liverpool on Nov. '43 with their P-51Bs. The Mustangs were on the HMS Athlone Castle with them as they crossed the Atlantic. Sorry, I'm just kidding around. Even though its true. They "officially" received their P-51Bs at Boxted in November 1943.

Vincenzo said:

I was just give the info to Corsning.
354th sure.

Click to expand...

Vincenzo - I already named the 354th but was looking for the 'other P-51B's' that Corsning stated were operational elsewhere. The 354th FG arrived in England on November 1, 1943. Started training in the P-51A from nearby 67th TRG and finally got their first P-51B on November 11. Between November 11 and November 30 they received 54 P-51B-1 and three P-51B-5's. Blakeslee led the first combat mission was December 1 - led by Blakeslee - a sweep to Omer-Calaise and back.

There were no other P-51B's at any other Fighter Group until the 357th arrived and received theirs immediately in January 1944. All of the P-51Bs went to ETO until April 1944 when the MTO started getting some.

Guys, Guys,
drgondog is exactly RIGHT ON! My bad when I wrote "operational" in June '43. The statement is 20 P-51Bs were accepted by the USAAF in June '43. Thanks for correcting that drgondog.

Vincenzo,
Thank you sir, for the info in post #46.

Are we done here guys? Ok then, My vote goes to the Spitfire L.F.Mk.IX. All these A/C have their pros and cons but the most rounded seems to be the Spit.........Unless you have to fly a great distance. Then P-38H/P-51A, I don't know. You call it.
Its been fun guys. Thanks, Jeff.

VBF-13 said:

When in 1943? In the beginning of 1943 the Zero and the Spit I'd think would give every one of those aircraft a good run for their money in that range.

Click to expand...

I agree that the Spit IV and particularly XII were up there with the best in '43 but I think the Zero was starting to push its luck by this stage. The
A6M5 was faster than the A6M2 but at about 350mph it was still only as fast as the best allied fighters of 1939. By 1943 spitfires, 190s and the like were easily beating 400 mph, so limitations in speed and dive mean the Zero would invariably surrender the intiative to any of those fighters.
I think the P-38 is also more of an honest contender than a genuine prospect. It was great against Zeros and Oscars in the pacific where it could always extend or dive away, but in the ETO where the opposition could match it in those areas it was probably inthe middlle of the pack somewhere.

Spit IV!!!? Here we go again. Uh, OK, which one of you guys mentioned the A6M5 when I wasn't looking? The P-38 was a much more difficult A/C to fly than most of the other "contenders". But it was (and always had been) a "genuine prospect". The H model had acceleration, speed, climb and concentration of fire power. No, it couldn't roll with the others (YET!), but it could be maneuvered in ways like no single engined fighter. It just took an experienced pilot to do it (that is not the fault of the A/C). It was only in the " middle of the pack somewhere" because of lack of time for its pilots to master it. Sorry guys, I just couldn't help myself. My wife tries to keep me on the straight and narrow, be she went out of town and left me home alone.

CORSNING said:

Spit IV!!!? Here we go again. Uh, OK, which one of you guys mentioned the A6M5 when I wasn't looking? The P-38 was a much more difficult A/C to fly than most of the other "contenders". But it was (and always had been) a "genuine prospect". The H model had acceleration, speed, climb and concentration of fire power. No, it couldn't roll with the others (YET!), but it could be maneuvered in ways like no single engined fighter. It just took an experienced pilot to do it (that is not the fault of the A/C). It was only in the " middle of the pack somewhere" because of lack of time for its pilots to master it. Sorry guys, I just couldn't help myself. My wife tries to keep me on the straight and narrow, be she went out of town and left me home alone.

Click to expand...

One of the great (and plausible) "what ifs" of the War is Lt. Kelsey successfully landing the XP-38 in Feb '39. Would have meant a much more advanced version of the Lightening at the start of the US entry into the War.

Looking at the tables posted by Corsning, I can't help but bring up the P-39N. It compares well to the Spit and Fw190, I know it turns better than the Focke Wulf, how about with the Spit? It is a little slower than the P-51A, but better climb and it should also turn and roll better. What about a P-40K or P-40F? Slower than most the other contenders, but from what I have read overall handling was very good.

Hi muscogeemike, wish I was in Texas. Its 51 degrees here in Clyde (its the $#!+$).

Well, if we have to include the Japanese, we might as well do it right (or at least close).

The information I have in my files goes like this (speed in mph./climb in fpm.):

A/C................S.L..........5,000'........10,000'......15,000'

A6M3m32.....297/3560...316/3680...338/3740...335/3100 (A6M5 don't count in Oct.'43).

Ki.43-II........295/3470...317/3275...334/3050...329/2895

Ki.61-I.........302/2440...322/2520...340/2495...358/2310

Ki.44-II........335/4140...357/4350...362/3475...376/3340 (Climb rates at 5, 10 and 15,000' are very close estimates. I haven't had time to get the exact figures from the graph yet).

There is one other:

MC.202........309/5100...328/4000...358/not sure.368/2700 (I do not have a graph for this A/C so climb is estimated at all altitudes and speed is estimated at 5, 10 and 15,000')

If anyone has a graph for the MC.202, the info would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks, Jeff

Hey Mike, how you doing. If we are going to consider a P-40, we might as well use the best performing of the bunch. The P-40N-1:

P-40N-1...314/3100/5Kft...335?/3300/5Kft...352?/2930/10Kft/...362/2300/15Kft...(378@10,550' /3370@6,800').


From what I have read the early P-39s and P40s had very close rates/circles of turn. The P-40N turned tighter/faster (best of the breed). I would "guess" the N-1 could turn with the Spitfire IX (I know I'm going to hear some crap on that one...let-'er rip guys). However, the N model was a cheaply made Warhawk. It wasn't as durable as the E.
"You could fight a Jap on even terms, but you had to make him fight your way. He could outturn you at slow speed. you could outturn him at high speed". (The magic number seemed to be 275mph.)


MC.202: "Clive Caldwell, who scored victories against them in a P-40, felt that the Folgore would have been superior to both the P-40 and the Bf.109 except that its armament of only two or four machine guns was inadiquate. Other observers considered the two equally matched, or favored the Folgore in aerobatic performance, such as turning radius.

If you have better information, please let me know, Jeff.

There may have been only 200 of this "best of Breed".

I don't know where the "cheaply made" comes from or why it should be less durable. Changes to make it lighter include aluminium radiators and oil coolers instead of brass/copper, Aluminium main wheels, taking out the forward fuel tank, leaving out two of the .50 cal guns and restricted the ammo load on the remaining guns. Taking out the electric starter and the fitting a smaller battery also helped get the weight down.
This "best of Breed" turned out to be so limited that not only did succeeding batches of planes have a lot of the stuff put back in (they kept the aluminium radiators, oil coolers and wheels) but many of the N-1s had the forward fuel tank refitted in the field along with the electric starter and bigger battery. I don't believe there was any change in the actual structure of the aircraft.

That is why I went with the P-40K, if I recall correctly it did have a few more mph and ft/ min climb. Or you could go with the F model. I'm just an Allison geek if we haven't noticed.