I don't understand how some planes ended up being so fast

[Carboncrank]

And we do not allow any modern political discussion of any kind on this forum.

Go and read the forum rules. This will be the only warning on the topic of politics.

Posting modern political discussion, regardless of what side of the fence you are on, can and will get either a thread closed or a poster removed (temporarily for a first offense) if they can not abide by the forum rules that are posted. Please respect the forum rules, especially regarding politics and civil discussion. I have posted links to two threads regarding forum rules.

A few ground rules for the new folks

The Thread to end All Political Threads (Hopefully)



You will not try and refrain, you will refrain...

Not trying to be an asshole here, but modern politics has 0, zilch, nada, nothing to do with this topic, and this forum has a 0 modern politics rule in place anyhow.

 

[Carboncrank]

And we do not allow any modern political discussion of any kind on this forum.

Go and read the forum rules. This will be the only warning on the topic of politics.

Posting modern political discussion, regardless of what side of the fence you are on, can and will get either a thread closed or a poster removed (temporarily for a first offense) if they can not abide by the forum rules that are posted. Please respect the forum rules, especially regarding politics and civil discussion. I have posted links to two threads regarding forum rules.

A few ground rules for the new folks

The Thread to end All Political Threads (Hopefully)



You will not try and refrain, you will refrain...

Not trying to be an asshole here, but modern politics has 0, zilch, nada, nothing to do with this topic, and this forum has a 0 modern politics rule in place anyhow.

Sorry it's too late. you were an asshole about it. boot me at will but I won't be talked to like that. if you want be so petty as to boot the son of a hellcat and skyraider pilot, and the nephew of a b-17 bombardier who spent 18 months as a prisoner, and who grew up on airbases and has a life long connection to wwII aircraft over the use of the word "try" feel free, I don't grovel, I don't beg forgiveness.

I don't do well with assumed authority and I will always speak truth to power, and I don't mean politics in this case, I mean the bullying tone in your reply.

 

[Carboncrank]

We may have some confusion as to what the "original premise" of this thread is.

I could be wrong (it's happened plenty of times before), but I took it as a general question as to why some rather large, heavy aircraft were as fast or faster than some smaller, lighter and more streamline appearing aircraft. I believe that question has been answered by the replies concerning power and drag at altitudes.

Now perhaps the examples given for the bulky fighters were not the best possible ones (may depend on your point of view) as they were either prototypes or late/post war versions built in limited numbers, but I don't believe that invalidates the basic question.
The XP-47J is supposed to have flown at over 500mph. Perhaps only once or twice? Perhaps never? Depends on which stories you believe. However this prototype does show up along with the 500+ speed in practically every book or long article about the P-47 and so is widely known.
View attachment 471855
And yes it is far, very far, from a standard P-47. However stuffing the same basic powerplant in a P-47D airframe did get you the P-47M version (100 built) and 470mph which I figure is close enough to ask how they did it compared to even a P-51H which was a bit faster on a lot less power.

I don't believe anybody in this thread has been arguing that normal production P-47s of 1943/44 could do 500mph or even 450mph.

I do believe that people who want to argue about the technical aspects of aircraft would do well to use better sources than Acepilots.com. a nice "quicky" look at a plane but hardly detailed (like the common error of not giving the altitude at which the speed was achieved)

or course the premise matters. the original post made no distinction about a normal p47. it should have been pointed out as an extraordinary claim with no extraordinary proof. In what world should anybody begin a discussion of anything on a false premise.

 

[Carboncrank]

We may have some confusion as to what the "original premise" of this thread is.

I could be wrong (it's happened plenty of times before), but I took it as a general question as to why some rather large, heavy aircraft were as fast or faster than some smaller, lighter and more streamline appearing aircraft. I believe that question has been answered by the replies concerning power and drag at altitudes.

Now perhaps the examples given for the bulky fighters were not the best possible ones (may depend on your point of view) as they were either prototypes or late/post war versions built in limited numbers, but I don't believe that invalidates the basic question.
The XP-47J is supposed to have flown at over 500mph. Perhaps only once or twice? Perhaps never? Depends on which stories you believe. However this prototype does show up along with the 500+ speed in practically every book or long article about the P-47 and so is widely known.
View attachment 471855
And yes it is far, very far, from a standard P-47. However stuffing the same basic powerplant in a P-47D airframe did get you the P-47M version (100 built) and 470mph which I figure is close enough to ask how they did it compared to even a P-51H which was a bit faster on a lot less power.

I don't believe anybody in this thread has been arguing that normal production P-47s of 1943/44 could do 500mph or even 450mph.

I do believe that people who want to argue about the technical aspects of aircraft would do well to use better sources than Acepilots.com. a nice "quicky" look at a plane but hardly detailed (like the common error of not giving the altitude at which the speed was achieved)

I thought this forum was about WWII aircraft as in aircraft used in the war.

Carboncrank



I have never stated there were P-47's in service that could go 500mph. Sorry if I led you to believe I did. I also didn't say the Jug was the best fighter; although it did put many top notch German Fighter Pilots out of the picture before the P-51 B/C ever made a sortie in combat. My choices would be the P-47 for ground work, the P-51 for long distance escort and for pure fighter vs fighter a Spit IX or Spit XIV.

1. gen am Originalflügel des Baumusters P-51 "Mustang". In: Deutsche Luftfahrtforschung, UM 2035, 1943.

I don't think I said you said 500mph, it was the original premise.

But thanks for an excellent thoughtful post.

 

[Carboncrank]

You want a source, fine. America's Hundred Thousand, page 333, right hand column, 6th entry.



"Dec 1'43-Twenty-four P-51Bs of the 354th Ftr.Grp. tanke their first fighter sweep over Belgium and France led by Lt.Col. Don Blakeslee of the 4th Ftr.Grp. There is no enemy action and they do some ground strafing."

The P-51s do a fighter sweep over Ameins on Dec 5th and 2 squadrons also escort B-17s from the French coast to Paix France (about 1/2 way from the coast to Paris) Where P-47s take over for the rest of the mission.

Dec 13 sees the first long range escort done by P-51s, they use 75 gallon drop tanks and help P-38s of the 55th Ftr.Grp. escort bombers to Kiel, Bremen and Hamburg. Total of 1462aircraft, 710 are bombers. 46 are P-51s. Majority of the escorts are probably P-47s seeing as how back on Oct 15th the 55th Ftr.Grp. was declared operational while there were 9 fighter groups operational on P-47s

I'm fortunate that the 91st bomb group kept its dailes and posted them on their website. I details every mission flown. I've found that there is very little of that kind of information available in such detail. I've not only looked for dailes of other bomb groups tried to find what p47 squadron it was that missed the hand off Dec 1st 43 that got my uncle shot down. I cant find anything.

So when you mention a specific mustang squadron that flew a combat mission dec 1st I thought cool let me check and see what I can find about that squadron, especially since I'd seen no evidence of the merlin mustangs arriving that early.

One little problem. The 354th has a website and it directly contradicts what you quote from that book that so many people think is the most reliable book on the topic

"The first Merlin-engine Mustangs were delivered to the 354th Fighter Group of the 9th Air Force in Great Britain on December 1, 1943. The P-51B first went into action as a fighter on December 17, 1943".

354th Fighter Group During WWII

 

[Carboncrank]

Well then you should have learned the danger of basing a conclusion on a false premise.

You claim for the P 51 was this "The mustang was obviously the best fighter of the war in all regards." In this you must be very precise about names. The Mustang was not an escort fighter, it was an Allison engined tactical recon plane, it had very good but limited performance because it could not perform at high altitude. The P 51 B/C and D were what made the legend and some of these were operated by the RAF and called Mustangs. When it comes to best fighter the only thing that is obvious is that it is an opinion not a fact. As a British citizen I place huge store on being there. The P-51, P 47, P 38, P39 were fine aeroplanes but they were not there in 1939/40 so you may as well discuss F-22s. Similarly, it is all very well to complain about the short range of the P 47 as your anecdotal post does, but where was the P 51? It wasn't there! When the P 51 B/C was introduced in numbers the USAAF had already learned a lot and it was this knowledge as well as the P 51 which led to success. Without the Spitfire and Hurricane the P 51 has no place to take off and land from in Europe, that is my opinion, it is a valid opinion so the P51 is not "OBVIOUSLY" anything, as great as it was.

Please Carboncrank have some respect. There are experts in aerodynamics post here and their posts will show in chapter and verse why laminar flow was not achieved on the P 51. There are veterans of the European bomber campaign still post here. There are people who have written histories and can quote chapter and verse on the subject you claim to be an expert. There is no conspiracy against your view, just put them in a more friendly way.

the mustang isn't the mustang until it has the merlin. I'm perfectly aware of what model i was referring too. i would assume you were too. So the premise is not false

I see there are some aerodynamicist on here and I'm reading what they say with interest. I think you're aware of the popular belief that it was a laminar flow wing and I quoted a document backing that claim. That's all I did. I see they've got way better math skills than I do.

 

[Carboncrank]

It's a really interesting take on the relative ineffectiveness of the P-47. I hope you post more information because relative loss and victory ratios would let us know a lot.

I don't go for the story about IG Farben being bombed or rather not bombed on time. It's a conspiracy theory. Nothing wrong with conspiracy theories, they must be created and examined because sometimes they are true. I love conspiracy theorists. In this case it doesn't work for me.

It's not a story and it's not a conspiracy theory. If you want me to look up The Daily Report from The 91st Bomb Group 322nd Squadron mission on December 1st 1943 I will. That was the target and just the other day I found a photo reconnaissance photograph showing the damage they did. Problem is my uncle didn't make it to the Target because of the Missed P-47 hand off.

I'm not totally sure that was the damage from the December 1st strike but I know they came back to that Target repeatedly. Please don't ask me to try to find the 1946 Congressional hearing I was talking about where they said that company was a political Target as well as a military one. I know what I read. It was eye-opening. I'll try to come back tomorrow and address the rest of what you said in that post. Hearings I'm talking about had nothing to do with the McCarthy hearings.
You must have read some of them many books about the relationship between Wall Street and Nazi Germany. I started out with just a question about where the money had come from to support the Nazi war machine. It's a stunning story and wall Street's ended up to their eyeballs. Profit over the well-being of country or the world continues to this day. American investors we're trying to help I G farben set up offices in Canada when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor.

I'll be back.

 

[pbehn]

the mustang isn't the mustang until it has the merlin. I'm perfectly aware of what model i was referring too. i would assume you were too. So the premise is not false

I see there are some aerodynamicist on here and I'm reading what they say with interest. I think you're aware of the popular belief that it was a laminar flow wing and I quoted a document backing that claim. That's all I did. I see they've got way better math skills than I do.

Mustang was the RAF name for the machine they ordered , P 51 was the number of the machine the USA ordered. The MKI Mustang had an Allison engine as did the P51A they were generally the same with small differences like specified armament. Over time the two designations have become synonyms when in fact they were actually slightly different.


North American P-51 Mustang variants - Wikipedia

Popular belief is not fact, the P51 has a wing that is popularly referred to as laminar flow but in fact never achieved that as you are now aware.

 

[rochie]

being an ex para, and the son of a para who was the son of a para and also being the grandson of a Royal Navy Veteran does that mean my dick is bigger than yours and i can adopt an aggressive and confrontational tone in nearly all of my posts because being from a family of brave veterans means i am always right ?

just wondering

 

[drgondog]

Carboncrank - a couple of misconceptions from your research may be useful to point out. First it was sad that you were free to criticize the fighter escort as the blame for your uncle being shot down. Really?

First, R/V between bomber boxes and assigned fighter escort occurred for multiple reasons.

Bad weather was the number one cause and bad weather, including icing was prevalent on December 1, 1943. The situation that day was near complete undercast with heavy layered overcast to 30,000 feet. The cover was so bad that the Leverkusen target was deselected due to weather and the first BD bombed on alternate Solingen via PFF.

The 3rd Division turned back. All three bomb divisions struggled to form up over England because of the crappy weather. Ditto fighters but they had the advantage of increasing speed to make up time to R/V

Other reasons for missed escort were a.) bad navigation on part of either bomber or fighter, b.) delayed forming of the bomber force causing late arrival at R/V, c.) change of frag order re; times for R/V making it impossible for fighters to get there, d.) bomber task force off course.

Figure out the Fighter mission - some insight may be gained, Dig deeper into the FG histories to figure out who had Target escort. Get the MACR of your Uncle's B-17 to see where and how they were shot down? Clue - of the 5 91st BG losses, 4 were flak, 1 fighter. Get Encounter reports for the FG's mentioned below to get an idea of time and location of claimed German fighters

The LW fighter shoot down was B-17 42-39836, 322BS/91st BG, Pilot Charles Early, 2 KIA 8 POW MACR 1320 Location - Koblenz. The 20th FG P-38s engaged LW at Coblenz and the 4th, 56th, 78th, 352nd, 353rd, 355th and 356th FG P-47s all scored in Cologne/Coblenz/Aachen/Solingen area.

Point - the 4th FG led a Ramrod Target escort and reported that R/V at 1123 and that the 1st BD was late to R/V. They also reported that instead of taking the lead box, they dropped back to second box as the another P-47 FG plus P-38 FG was already in place - i.e. Penetration support probably for the P-47 group and Target escort for the P-38 group.

The 354th FG flew its first mission, led by Don Blakeslee (4FG Gp Ops Officer) on a sweep. It was not a bomber escort mission but a sweep over Knocke/St.Omer/Calais as standard first mission familiarization. The next mission was Penetration escort on the 5th - to Paris. The first Germany mission was the 11th to Emden.

Also, as stated before - the NACA/NAA 45-100 airfoil was Never named Laminar by the engineers. It was always Low Drag.

 

[drgondog]

the mustang isn't the mustang until it has the merlin. I'm perfectly aware of what model i was referring too. i would assume you were too. So the premise is not false

I see there are some aerodynamicist on here and I'm reading what they say with interest. I think you're aware of the popular belief that it was a laminar flow wing and I quoted a document backing that claim. That's all I did. I see they've got way better math skills than I do.

No, actually the AAF Material Command cleared that all up and issued a memo, to wit:
For the following aircraft, the official designation is Mustang
P-51
A-36
P-51A
P-51B/C
P-51D
P-51K

The first three are Allison powered, with variations on the engine supercharger gear ratios, max power FTH, and Hp. As a point of interest, the P-51A w/WI was always faster than Merlin P-51B/C/D/K until 150 Octane fuel and 75" Boost - below 15,000 feet. As another point of possible interest, the key distinction between the A/B was the ability of the B/C to carry the excellent aerodynamics and airframe to much better performance at 30,000 feet than the P-51A at 20,000.

Had the 8th AF changed bombing altitude doctrine from 25,000 to 15,000 - more like RAF, they would have lost more to flak, but would have had a.) much more effective reliability from P-38, b.) effective escort from P-51A and P-47 much earlier than the introduction of the P-51B. That said, Berlin was still not possible until addition of 85 gallon tank into P-51A and 55 Gallon LE tanks in P-38, so that issue would stall Berlin attacks by a modified P-51A to the same timeframe as P-51B

 

[pbehn]

No, actually the AAF Material Command cleared that all up and issued a memo, to wit:
For the following aircraft, the official designation is Mustang
P-51
A-36
P-51A
P-51B/C
P-51D
P-51K
Had the 8th AF changed bombing altitude doctrine from 25,000 to 15,000 - more like RAF, they would have lost more to flak, but would have had a.) much more effective reliability from P-38, b.) effective escort from P-51A and P-47 much earlier than the introduction of the P-51B. That said, Berlin was still not possible until addition of 85 gallon tank into P-51A and 55 Gallon LE tanks in P-38, so that issue would stall Berlin attacks by a modified P-51A to the same timeframe as P-51B

The RAF did use Mustang Mk Is to escort Wellingtons to Germany but these were not plumbed for drop tanks.
Do you know when that memo was dd? I thought the A36 was known as the Apache.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Sorry it's too late. you were an asshole about it. boot me at will but I won't be talked to like that. if you want be so petty as to boot the son of a hellcat and skyraider pilot, and the nephew of a b-17 bombardier who spent 18 months as a prisoner, and who grew up on airbases and has a life long connection to wwII aircraft over the use of the word "try" feel free, I don't grovel, I don't beg forgiveness.

I don't do well with assumed authority and I will always speak truth to power, and I don't mean politics in this case, I mean the bullying tone in your reply.

First of all I thank your father for his service. My family served on both sides of the conflict, and in every major conflict since. I'm a combat veteran myself. None of that makes me above the forum rules, or better than anyone else here.

Second of all, it was not bullying. It was telling you the forum ground rules. Everyone, include myself has to abide by them. Maybe you should not be so sensative. You broke the forum rules, and were informed of it. All you had to do was apologize, and say you wont do it again. All would be forgotten, and we would not even be discussibg this.

You should have read them, when you joined the forum.

Third. This forum has many actual combat veterans, sons of combat veterans, and everyone has a life long passion for aviation. So please don't attempt to put yourself on a higher pedastal.

Fourth. Those who live in glass houses should not throw stones. From day one, you have exhibited a holier than thou, above everyone else attitude. My parents taught me to treat others as you would like to be treated. Try it sometime...

When people come in with the "I know it all attitude", everyone else becomes very stand offish.

Now the ball is in your court. You can stop pretending to be above the forum rules, stop pretending to be above everyone else, and be a productive member of this forum, which I think everyone would prefer, or you can leave.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

being an ex para, and the son of a para who was the son of a para and also being the grandson of a Royal Navy Veteran does that mean my dick is bigger than yours and i can adopt an aggressive and confrontational tone in nearly all of my posts because being from a family of brave veterans means i am always right ?

just wondering

Thank you so much for saying what I wanted to say...

 

[rochie]

Thank you so much for saying what I wanted to say...

No worries, whenever childish sarcasm is needed just pm me

 

[drgondog]

The RAF did use Mustang Mk Is to escort Wellingtons to Germany but these were not plumbed for drop tanks.
Do you know when that memo was dd? I thought the A36 was known as the Apache.

The name Apache was a short term designation from AAF in 1942, Invader was an informal nomenclature for the A-36 in MTO. Never used by NAA. I'll have to dig up the memo

 

[drgondog]

One little problem. The 354th has a website and it directly contradicts what you quote from that book that so many people think is the most reliable book on the topic

"The first Merlin-engine Mustangs were delivered to the 354th Fighter Group of the 9th Air Force in Great Britain on December 1, 1943. The P-51B first went into action as a fighter on December 17, 1943".

354th Fighter Group During WWII

The 354th arrived in England Nov 1, 1943. The first P-51B-1-NA (5) arrived on 11 November but several pilots got time in 67th Tactical Recon P-51A Mustangs. The total reached 54 P-51B-1s plus three new P-51B-5 by November 30. Blakeslee led the first mission on December 1 with 354FG CO Martin flying #2 on a sweep along France/Belgian coastal area. That date is the first operational date. If you want first victory date -> Glen Eagleston shot down a Me 110 on 13 December, 1944

The info is clearly stated in the 'history' section of the posted website. You just didn't read closely enough.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Hey Bill, what squadron did your dad fly P-51's in again?

 

[drgondog]

Hey Bill, what squadron did your dad fly P-51's in again?

354FS/355FG then 355FG HQ (as contrast with our recent subject 354FG). Also 35th FBW CO flying P-51s out of Johnson AFB near Tokyo. I think he had nearly 1000 hours in P-51B/C/D/K and H. Nothing compared to warbird community but very high with USAF

They were sister Groups relative to Org date and assignment of FS and FG number. The 354Fg has 353, 355 and 356FS. The 355FG had 354,357 and 358. Both groups still very prominent in USAF today. During Vietnam, they both flew F-105s and when 354TFW transitioned to A-7 with 355TFW, the 354FS was TDY to Korat under 354TFW.

IIRC the 354FS just returned from their 7th A-10 deployment from Sandbox, Afghanistan and now Syria. AFAIK they have lost nobody but some A-10s never flew again.

 

[Carboncrank]

Mustang was the RAF name for the machine they ordered , P 51 was the number of the machine the USA ordered. The MKI Mustang had an Allison engine as did the P51A they were generally the same with small differences like specified armament. Over time the two designations have become synonyms when in fact they were actually slightly different.


North American P-51 Mustang variants - Wikipedia

Popular belief is not fact, the P51 has a wing that is popularly referred to as laminar flow but in fact never achieved that as you are now aware.

Would you say it created less drag than any wing before it?