Allied Gold-Match II

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

p51 p38 p61 p47 f4u
The P-51 as Mustang Mk 1 only was useful because it could take pictures and run away, not exactly what you want in a fighter, when it was fitted with the same engine as a Spitfire, it was really quite good, so what were you saying about flying upside down and Spitfires?
 
high g moves starved your enigines
 
The early Spitfire actually could fly upside down.
What it couldn't do was "bunt", that is, nose over into a dive, without a short period when the engine "cut" due to fuel starvation, this problem being cured by alterations to the carb system.
To follow a diving enemy, the Spitfire did a half roll and then the pilot "pulled" to initiate a dive, before rolling level again. Seemed to work quite well ...............
 
That has answered a question. Bob Doe in Bungay's "The Most Dangerous Enemy" feared he would be washed out because he hated flying inverted, I have always wondered how he knew or at what stage of training flying inverted was a "thing" because I understood (falsely) you couldnt do it with a Merlin.
 
Inverted flying was done in basic training (maybe not as part of the course, but it was done) I was reading about pilots returning from practice in an inverted glide in a Tiger Moth, which didn't have inverted fuel. It's not really a problem unless the prop stops and you don't have enough altitude to dive to restart.
 
I believe this was sort of settled by Flying Magazine and the Confederate Air Force when they held a couple dogfight matches between a Mustang and a Bearcat (first in the early 60's, then 70's?) the Bearcat dominated below 15k, things became more even between 15k and 25k, and then the Mustang dominated above 25k. Yes, the Spitfire is more maneuverable than the Mustang but the outcome should be pretty much the same.
 

Users who are viewing this thread