- Thread starter
-
- #21
Aw geez, bringing out the alien tech...
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Aw geez, bringing out the alien tech...
If you're fighting fair you're doing it wrong.The Spitfire could beat a Mustang in a fair fight most of the time. However if you're in a fair fight your doing it wrong and a Mustang did it's fighting beyond the range of any Spitfire with guns.
ok, I told this story before...maybe in this thread...but there is alcohol involved and I am not in the position to research. my father was coming back from a mission over Europe....he was in a 51 ( and I don't know if he was already an ace when this happened) . he didn't fly too many B/Cs so....I will assume he was in his D. as approached the English coast he saw a lone spitfire on patrol. he's 19, thinks he has the world by the ass because he is in the "best plane ever made". he thinks he is going to show this brit who's the boss. so he is feeling his oats and decides to jumps the spit. long story short...he gets his ass kicked! besides the initial jump that was the only thing he had going for him. in all his fights he never had an EA on his tail but this guy was able to get there no problem despite anything he could do...any trick he could pull out of his @$$. he came away from that very humble and respectful. the real "take away..to coin the phrase" from this is...compare apples to apples and oranges to oranges. the 51 was a 1 of a kind fruit. none of the other allied or enemy planes were designed as long range escorts. the 47 coulda, woulda, shoulda, but was late to the dance. to get a certain performance you will have to sacrifice other performance issues. the spit vs a 109 or 190 is a better match because they were both in the same performance envelope....fuel on board, weight of armament, range, alt, etc.. absolutely NONETHING the germans had was in the same perimeter as the mustang. so to draw comparisons is fruitless. I will, however, throw in that when most fights over germany initiated....the 51s dumped their drop tanks and had all of their inboard wing fuel and 25-35ish gallons in the fuse tank...and they STILL were par with whatever variants of 109s/190s they encountered. for what the spitfire was designed for....it and the hurricane saved the uk from the BoB and the blitz. no small accomplishment...f'n indeed. but for the battle of mainland Europe the pony won that equestrienne event....
This page gives empty weights of P-51B 6,985lb and P-51D 7,635lb P-51 Mustang Variants - P-51K - MustangsMustangs.comWas there a significant weight difference between the P-51C and the P-51D?
Why did they put Spitfire markings on a Mustang?
RAF sqn obviously !Why did they put Spitfire markings on a Mustang?
Greetings Rochie,I hate these kind of discussions, they bring out the worst in us.
I post the below quote from Bobbysocks, not to prove the Spitfire was better but to show trying to compare aircraft that excelled at different things is pointless.
The Spitfire could be considered one of the very best single engine propeller driven fighters ever, all through its service life.
And so could the P-51
The P-51 was the biggest game changer in the airwar over europe and was almost as good as a Spitfire at doing Spitfire stuff yet was capable of doing what it did at least 5 times as far away and still fly back !
From Bobbysocks, who's Dad was Dale E Karger a 357th FS Ace
There are a couple of things to add to Rochie and Bobbysocks post. The Spitfire and especially the Hurricane were game changers in 1940, without them it is possible there would be no place for any P-51s to fly from. The real game changer was US industry producing 4 engine bombers, without the bombers what threat is a P-51 to German industry and infrastructure? In the action described by Bobbysocks of his father, the Spitfire was doing what it did throughout the war, protecting the UK with all its bases which included USAAF bases. In these discussions "time is of the essence". In 1940 the P-51 didn't exist, but even if it did it would not be a better interceptor than a Hurricane or Spitfire with a 1940 Merlin engine. It may have been faster than both when it got off the ground and up to altitude, but it weighed a ton more and with only 1000BHP that is a massive extra weight to haul up to 25,000ft you cannot zoom climb until you have first climbed.Greetings Rochie,
Thank you for this. It's a great point to make. I hope the members were aware that there was a bit of lightheartedness in my post earlier. The only pertinent point was about the EM chart showing where the P-51 seems to be at an advantage. The rest is, if you will, barbershop talk. Just like debating who is the greatest basketball player. For me, it's Wilt #1, Kareem #2, and LBJ #4. Let the debate begin.
Again, thanks for your post and viewpoint.
We iz doin serious myth bustin here.I too think this is better suited for its own discussion.
Carry on ladies and gents.
I am surprised they found no advantage to using some flap to improve the Mustang III turning circle I thought that was an evaluated and proven truth. I have certainly read about pilots using it.I do not know the answer, but I can contribute a 1944 AFDU report on Mustang III vs IX. Perhaps it may be at least useful, although its a Mustang C, not a D.
View attachment 594118
View attachment 594119
For equity purposes lets keep it with the P-51D/Spitfire Mk IX comparison. If you want to go Spitfire Mk XIV then you need to go with the comparable generating Mustang the P-51H.
I do stand corrected. For some reason I had the XIV later in the war.As mentioned above, the Spitfire XIV entered service more than a year before the P-51H did, months before the P-51D did and at a similar time to the P-51B.
Damn...I forgot about this one.
Rocket firing Hurricanes.Damn...I forgot about this one.
Well, there we have it, folks. The ultimate Spitfire world beater.
Case closed - now on to the great debate of which was better: the P-47 or the Typhoon
NOTHING could beat this Spitfire...