F4U Corsair vs P-51 Mustang

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

A couple of anecdotes from the memoir - ' Too Young to Die' - of a Kiwi Corsair,( a new Goodyear) pilot, flying in Nippon, immediately post-war, noting his encounters with Mustangs..

"One day during a flying-practice detail, when I usually practised aerobatics, I flew down towards the Australian base,
at Bofu where I heard a Mustang take off, advising the tower that he was bound for Iwakuni, so I decided to follow
& formate with him for the trip home.

As I pulled in beside, he gave me a wave & we both headed towards Iwakuni at just below
2,000ft which was the
cloud base on track. Flying over hilly terrain there was a little turbulence, & I noted the Mustang was gradually
accelerating, requiring me to continually open the throttle to keep beside him.

Eventually, with the airspeed creeping up over 300 knots both aircraft were flying in a decidedly nose-down attitude
to prevent climbing into the low clouds, & the sound of my engine had changed from the usual
bark of the 18 cyl radial to the beautiful whine of a turbine. I had the throttle up to 56" & 2,700rpm when a voice over the R/T said: 'Christ, this thing will blow up soon!' - In reply I asked him what power he was using, & he replied '61" & 3,000rpm'.



That was virtually flat out for a Mustang with its V12 Packard-built Merlin 1590hp engine, & the amazing thing was our airspeed was identical, ( although I still had another 3" of boost & ADI up my sleeve)....

More to follow..
 
Last edited:

The Mustang had 6" boost extra available....
 

GAG... more anecdotal "evidence", the absolute worst kind to make a point.
 
Peter Gunn said:
GAG... more anecdotal "evidence", the absolute worst kind to make a point.
Click to expand...

Dunno why you'd object to an actual account from a veteran P-G, even the fact that he was unaware of the
extent of the P-51's power-settings, does not detract from the encounter - as a matter of interest to the thread.

Maybe exercising a little less "dumb/snarky" & going a bit further down "the back" - is in order?
 
Anyhow, here's a bit more from 'Too Young to Die':

"After a few minutes at this speed the coast appeared ahead, & as we lowered our noses towards Iwakuni
the Mustang gradually slipped ahead in the gentle dive, due to its sleeker profile. Although the maximum speed
we reached during this short race was of little consequence - we were well below rated altitude, & not using
war emergency power, & the effects of turbulence & rocket mountings on both aircraft were considerable,
the similarity in performance was surprising - considering the aircraft were completely opposite in
construction, although together - they represented the cream of American design.

The 5-bladed 2000hp Griffon-engined Spitfires which frequently visited our base had however, considerably
higher performance than either the Mustang, or Corsair..."
 
Peter Gunn said:
Not surprisingly that went over your head like a Sabre Jet.

Well, not to give Adler any more headaches, I shall not engage the troll.
Click to expand...


Ok, lets see if I've got this straight.. P-G is gonna focus on the P-51 decal he stuck on his mirror,
instead of focussing on his own reflection.. yeah, seems 'bout right..
 
Hey J.A.W.,

Reference post 229.

The Spitfires that the low-altitude radial-powered Fw 190s gave trouble to were NOT 5-bladed, Griffon-engined Spitfires. They were earlier Mk V ancestors with Merlins of considerably less HP than 2,000. The Griffon Spits didn't take a back seat to very much of anything in a fight, unless they got ambushed. Ambushed means they never saw the enemy until the enemy was already firing and they were already taking hits.

The vast majority of WWII aerial victories were from ambush.

I have not had very good luck with passing on information from actual pilots in here, so I don't do it much anymore. Seems most would rather believe some author who never flew a plane than an actual wartime pilot. Go figure. Of course, you DO have to ask the pilot questions to get to the real data at times, but the guys who were there know a lot more than non-pilot authors ... in my book anyway, as long as you can differentiate fact from conjecture. If you have the opportunity to as a few questions, you can do that. If you don't, then the data may or may not be useful. Memory is often rose-colored. At least my own seems to be.

Better in here to stick to flight test data. It is difficult to argue with. Even so, some try to stir the pot. For my own research these days, I try to get at least 5 or 6 reporting points, throw out the high and the low, and average the rest. Using only the highest numbers is the stuff of deliberate misinformation. A particular Bf 109 site comes to mind immediately. The average fighter out there wasn't the squadron's best aircraft; it was average. Ditto the average pilot.
 
I do not agree Greg, hands on accounts by actual pilots have their place, inc' here..

& in post 229 - pbhen has been a bit naughty, falsely conflating 1941/43 era Spit Vs, with the much more capable XIV..

However, as the record shows, during the 1st Israel/Arab conflict in 1948, well flown IDF Merlin-Spitfires ( Mk IXs),
certainly showed the complacent 'peace-time' prep-level RAF Griffon-Spit boys, what was what..

Interestingly, one of the IDF pilots was 'Slick' Goodlin, former Bell test pilot, who'd been bounced out of
the X1's 'hot-seat' by Chuck Yeager, who then punched the 'tangerine dream' machine - through Mach 1...
 
The first Spitfire Mk IX test aircraft flew on 26 February 1942. It was so successful that it was ordered into full production. Progress was rapid, and full production began in June 1942. It entered service the next month with No.64 squadron at Hornchurch.

The Mk IX was a significant improvement on the Mk V. It had a top speed of 409 mph at 28,000 feet, an increase of 40 miles per hour. Its service ceiling rose from 36,200 feet to 43,000 feet. It could climb at 4,000 feet per minute. In July 1942 an early Mk IX was flown against a captured Fw 190A, and the two aircraft were discovered to have very similar capabilities. The RAF had its answer to the Fw 190 problem

www.historyofwar.org/articles/weapons_spitfire_mkIX.html
 
There were serious, professionally designed comparative tests between the P-51 Mustang and F4U Corsair. I believe the reports are available from on-line.
 


Well, that's an opinion, but here are some facts & figures..

The speed of the FW 190 JaBos attacking Britain, flying in low, under the radar, bombing/strafing &
then running hell for leather back for France, back over the Channel - was a problem for Spitfires..

From the service tests on wwiiaircraftperformance site: FW 190 (Oct `42) Spitfire (Oct `42) Typhoon (Oct `41)

Max speed at sea-level, FW - 335mph ; Spit IX - 335mph ; Typhoon - 368mph.
Max speed at 6,000ft, FW - 355mph ; Spit IX - 348mph ; Typhoon - 385mph.

For topical contrast, in April `43 C-V gave figures for their F4U as: sea level - 311mph, & 7,500ft - 336mph..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

J
Ki-84 vs P-51 engagemants 1945
2
Replies
31
Views
5K
CHen10
G
Mustang Numbers
2
Replies
21
Views
3K
gruad
G
S
Spitfire vs. Dora mass battle
2
Replies
30
Views
2K
PAT303
P
O
F4U-4 Corsair contribution in WW2
2
Replies
32
Views
4K
nuuumannn
P-51H Mustang earmarked for the UK?
Replies
1
Views
743
Geoffrey Sinclair
G
Menu
Log in
Register