What happened in Malta and N Africa after it arrived?
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
What happened in Malta and N Africa after it arrived?The Spitfire didn't see service in the Mediterranean theatre, Malta or Africa, until the middle of 1942. The RAF had been in combat against the Italian Air Force since June 1940 (East African campaign). The predominant fighter types of the British Commonwealth throughout the North African campaign would have been the P-40 and Hurricane.
The Spitfire didn't see service in the Mediterranean theatre, Malta or Africa, until the middle of 1942. The RAF had been in combat against the Italian Air Force since June 1940 (East African campaign). The predominant fighter types of the British Commonwealth throughout the North African campaign would have been the P-40 and Hurricane.
So what? The P-47 didn't fly combat ops until March 1943 and the P-51 even later. Bet you won't put either of them forward as overrated.
What happened in Malta and N Africa after it arrived?
In Malta? The Battle of Britain formally ended in 1940, but that didnt stop the LW wanting to get into UK airspace. Without the complete denial of access by the Spitfire, D-Day may well have been much more difficult.The USAAF arrived as well, not long after?
Of course it is over-rated, but, only because it has been elevated to a virtually god-like mythical realm, which no aircraft can justifiably reside in
from an objective perspective of its real performance. Even if you subtract that, you`re still left with an essential, and irreplacable machine for the war effort.
The P-51D didnt appear until mid 1944, are you discussing WW2 or some other?Sure, most aircraft proved to be essential to the war effort - I wonder how many of them could be considered "irreplaceable" though? I mean, the P-51D was doing a job in the last 18 months of the war which no other aircraft could do (perhaps P-47 excepted) escorting bombers to the depths of Germany and back - and yet - 25% of voters selected it as most overrated aircraft of ww2.
Sure, most aircraft proved to be essential to the war effort - I wonder how many of them could be considered "irreplaceable" though? I mean, the P-51D was doing a job in the last 18 months of the war which no other aircraft could do (perhaps P-47 excepted) escorting bombers to the depths of Germany and back - and yet - 25% of voters selected it as most overrated aircraft of ww2.
Well OK - in the last 12 months of the war - do you really want me to go back and edit my post?The P-51D didnt appear until mid 1944, are you discussing WW2 or some other?
No, it is just a discussion. The P-51B/C were vital to sweeping the LW away before D-Day, but P-51D appeared after that. It is just about opinions, to me it is unfair to say the Spitfire did nothing after the BoB, it was doing PR work before and after the BoB and was key in winning in Malta, N Africa and maintaining protection over UK until the end of the war.Well OK - in the last 12 months of the war - do you really want me to go back and edit my post?
In all fairness, I may not be 100% objective in the lens that I view the role and importance of the Mustang. But, pointing out that the P-51D was irreplaceable? No. The P-47D-25 with 370 gal of internal fuel, the P-38J-25 with dive flaps, engine and cockpit woes solved - could have picked up the slack for long range escort in summer 1944. Maybe not quite as effective as the P51D in combat vs LW, but 'good enough'. The P-51D was arguably a slightly better weapon system but the fleet of P-51Bs plus remainder of B/C production in July through September would have been sufficient for ETO ops through end of 1944.Sure, most aircraft proved to be essential to the war effort - I wonder how many of them could be considered "irreplaceable" though? I mean, the P-51D was doing a job in the last 18 months of the war which no other aircraft could do (perhaps P-47 excepted) escorting bombers to the depths of Germany and back - and yet - 25% of voters selected it as most overrated aircraft of ww2.
Ahh - there are many common parts and assemblies between NA-73, 83/91 and NA-97 and NA-99, and NA-102/103/104/106/109/111 etc.As a kid in the 1960s who got 90% of his knowledge of aviation from Airfix catalogues and products the P-51D WAS a Mustang. When I got a model of a Mustang MkI as a present I thought Revell had made a mistake with the labelling. The two just look like WW2 era airplanes not particularly related to each other, it was some years later that I read about the P-51B/C, I still cant remember ever seeing a P-51B/C shown in a documentary that wasnt specifically about the Mustang story. I think as the war went on attitudes to taking pictures and video became more relaxed and since the P-51D is more photogenic it stole the whole show.
By contrast there is very little footage of WW2 bombers taking off so documentaries all use the same footage. You can often see the distinctive three tails of an Avro Manchester which makes it look common, in fact only about 20 were built.
That is indeed the problem with these over or underrated threads. Even spitfires are sometimes rated too high, even groundhuggers are occasionally buried too deep.Of course it is over-rated, but, only because it has been elevated to a virtually god-like mythical realm, which no aircraft can justifiably reside in
from an objective perspective of its real performance. Even if you subtract that, you`re still left with an essential, and irreplacable machine for the war effort.
Probably just a typo but according to wiki 202 Manchesters were builtYou can often see the distinctive three tails of an Avro Manchester which makes it look common, in fact only about 20 were built.
If you read in the wiki article only about 20 were built with that tail, plus the first Lancaster prototype.Probably just a typo but according to wiki 202 Manchesters were built