Yes we have similar things in this area as well. Next time I am up in that area, we will have to meet up for a beer.
Spit or P51 in mid 43
- Thread starter pbfoot
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Mustang nut
Banned
- 200
- Jun 14, 2011
Sure thing Adler
Readie
Chief Master Sergeant
You are on the money with the East West Germany thing MN.
I recall reading that the EG's were disappointed not to have liberated ( if that's the right word) by the US British troops rather than the Russians.
Enjoy the beer fest !
I could murder a beer or 3
Cheers
John
drgondog
Major
Perhaps the confusion is that I was asking a question
Readie
Chief Master Sergeant
Er, lost me again matey. I'm not being funny ..I really do not understand what you are trying to say.
Cheers
John
drgondog
Major
"And the total from April 1943 through May 1945?" was a question to separate RAF total ETO claims of 10K+ from pre and post-8th/9th AF Ops.
Lighthunmust
Banned
A late mark Spitfire with superior climb and dogfighting ability able to climb faster to a superior altitude within minutes of scrambling.
A Mustang that two hours in advance of attack is patrolling at an altitude above the attacking force, can wait another hour at that altitude if the enemy is late for the party, and then spending another hour chasing the enemy home, before even thinking about having enough fuel to get back to base.
Sure the Spitfire had superior performance for dogfighting, but not sufficiently superior to overwhelm average pilots using good tactics flying Mustangs.
As far as doing all the tasks asked of a fighter; with few exceptions advantage Mustang.
A Mustang that two hours in advance of attack is patrolling at an altitude above the attacking force, can wait another hour at that altitude if the enemy is late for the party, and then spending another hour chasing the enemy home, before even thinking about having enough fuel to get back to base.
Sure the Spitfire had superior performance for dogfighting, but not sufficiently superior to overwhelm average pilots using good tactics flying Mustangs.
As far as doing all the tasks asked of a fighter; with few exceptions advantage Mustang.
Good points, what we will never know is how good P-51 actually could be against LW opponents and tactics with both sides fighting at 1:1 numerical odds..theoretical and perhaps trivial, but would answer many of todays questions and polls about 'Best something of WW2', 'Plane A vs Plane B' etc...
I think it would be very good. Experience shows - speed is most important characteristics. Even for Zero sacrifice was made for more speed.. Fast aircraft were always successfull. Mustang was very fast, among faster aircraft of war. Other qualities were good. Excellent package. Especially if you do not think World War I combat style... one plane against one plane.. but World War II... Combat size in squadron, or wing. Speed matters more in this case - speed protects against all planes. Good turn protects only against one.. if you notice him, that is point too.
Back on thread... Mustang with same powerplant... speed 60 km/h faster than Spitfire. Range - three times. There is no question. Much superior aircraft overall. Spitfire was good above England - not anywhere else it could not go. Also low speed is great disadvantage to Spitfire. Not only maximum, but also look at good cruise speeds, maximum cruise speeds.
Back on thread... Mustang with same powerplant... speed 60 km/h faster than Spitfire. Range - three times. There is no question. Much superior aircraft overall. Spitfire was good above England - not anywhere else it could not go. Also low speed is great disadvantage to Spitfire. Not only maximum, but also look at good cruise speeds, maximum cruise speeds.
Last edited:
drgondog
Major
Look to Dec 1943 through May 1944 for your comparisons when Mustangs were fighting LW with less than 1:1 odds
- Thread starter
- #91
pbfoot
1st Lieutenant
This a quote from the Official History of the RCAF Vol 3 The Crucible of War
"War is a complicated business and though the British and the Americans (especially the latter) commanded Immense resources there was nothing to guaranteethis material would be well applied in every case. Neither of the two major naational air forces involved in the Normabdy campaign had seen fit to equip itself with long range fighters until the autumn of 1943. Thus in the summer of 1944 even as air forces were learrning more about the tricky business of supporting ground troops a task which ideally , required a capability for prolonged loitering over the battlefield there were not enough Mustangs to go around. The Spitfire could not be replaced and RCAF pilots would have to do their best with the tools available."
The same book also states the MKIX Spit had a useful combat radius of 170 miles
I still believe the Brits should have stopped production of the Spit and swapped over to Mustang even if losing a couple of months production after all they only outnumbered the LW 6-1 in fighters
"War is a complicated business and though the British and the Americans (especially the latter) commanded Immense resources there was nothing to guaranteethis material would be well applied in every case. Neither of the two major naational air forces involved in the Normabdy campaign had seen fit to equip itself with long range fighters until the autumn of 1943. Thus in the summer of 1944 even as air forces were learrning more about the tricky business of supporting ground troops a task which ideally , required a capability for prolonged loitering over the battlefield there were not enough Mustangs to go around. The Spitfire could not be replaced and RCAF pilots would have to do their best with the tools available."
The same book also states the MKIX Spit had a useful combat radius of 170 miles
I still believe the Brits should have stopped production of the Spit and swapped over to Mustang even if losing a couple of months production after all they only outnumbered the LW 6-1 in fighters
Shortround6
Major General
Switching from MK IX production to MK VIII production might have involved a lot less disruption of the production line. While not able to go to Berlin the extra 100 miles or so radius would have been rather useful I would think.
I agree in theory.. but probably it is not so easy to switch production to a completely new, advanced plane. Already Spitfire was very difficult for UK to produce, and I risk say that Mustang was much more advanced airframe.. construction wise. Very small tolerances.. Spitfire much rougher, I have seen from close.. panel work and riveting.. very sub par for example compared to US P-47. Otherwise, it loose performance and no longer "Mustang" as we know meaning of word.
But if not change to Mustang... one thing I will not understand ever is why produce very short ranged Mark IX series, when medium range Mark VIII was available..? Why not produce only Mark VIII? Surely situation would be better..
Glider
Captain
I know this is going to sound like a stuck record but the LR fighter problem for the RAF wasn't equipment, it was will. If the RAF wanted long range fighters they had
a) the Tempest which had a combat radius of approc 1,150 miles using 90 gallon Drop Tanks which isn't so far off the Mustangs 1,335 miles combat radius
b) an extended range Tempest which had the same combat range of the Mustang
c) they could have used the modified Spitfire (note the USA and Vickers both produced extended range spits with the same fuel capacity) which had a combat range of 1,150, not as far as the Mustang but pretty good
d) they could have put greater effort into the Hornet which entered production in early 1945. This had a combat range of 1,410 miles
All of these options would be easier and quicker than trying to build the P51 in the UK. The Tempest in particular would be a good option.
a) the Tempest which had a combat radius of approc 1,150 miles using 90 gallon Drop Tanks which isn't so far off the Mustangs 1,335 miles combat radius
b) an extended range Tempest which had the same combat range of the Mustang
c) they could have used the modified Spitfire (note the USA and Vickers both produced extended range spits with the same fuel capacity) which had a combat range of 1,150, not as far as the Mustang but pretty good
d) they could have put greater effort into the Hornet which entered production in early 1945. This had a combat range of 1,410 miles
All of these options would be easier and quicker than trying to build the P51 in the UK. The Tempest in particular would be a good option.
Mustang nut
Banned
- 200
- Jun 14, 2011
The Mustang was used in 1942 at Dieppe, the RAF were impressed with it and wanted 500 per month even with the Allison engine. The necessity of long range escorts for daylight missions meant that almost all P51 B/C and D models went to long range escorts initially at least. Later models were fitted with rockets and bombs.
There was a need for long range fighters over the normandy landing area but actually the LW didnt put up much opposition. When the landings were successful airfields were quickly set up to support the ground troops. Loitering over contested airspace is a dangerous mission, in a pure fighter the enemy can ignore you or bounce you because MGs are not very destructive to ground targets and straffing ground targets is also dangerous.
The allies had plenty of long range fighters in 1944 they just used them against the LW over Germany and not so much over France. This was a deliberate tactic, the LW could not commit fully to opposing the allied invasion because of the damage being done in daylight raids. A spitfire may well have been a better plane with a bit more range but for most missions it was adequate.
Also dont overlook the number of mustangs used countering the V1 threat in 1944, also Spitfires Tempests and Mosquitos which flew a total of approx 44,700 sorties and lost 351 aircraft.
Below is a brief history of the Mustang in the RAF which although from a modeling forum does make some good points.
1. A brief history of RAF Mustang Operations..
The Mustang's achievements in WW2 with the USAAF tend to overshadow its work with the RAF, who of course took the aircraft in to combat before the Americans ever did. RAF operations can be grouped in to three types:
a. Army Co-operation including low level recce, naval strike using Allison engined P51A's or Mustang 1/ll's. Some also acted as low level interceptors against low flying German raiders.
b. Long range escort missions for coastal strike and bomber operations using Mustang lll's and lV's.
c. Ground attack and general fighter support using Mustang lll's and lV's.
a. The RAF loved the early Mustangs and it was very much missed when the production line closed in favour of the Merlin engined B's and C's. As a low level fighter the P51A had few equals in speed and range, even if its agility was exceeded by the low altitude cropped wing Spitfire Mk V's. Mustangs saw action all over Western Europe including Dieppe flying in ones and twos at ranges Spitfire's could only dream about in their armed versions. Mustangs had the standard day scheme of green/brown uppers and sky undersides later replaced by the green/Ocean Grey/Medium Sea Grey scheme. Markings were a standard mix of B roundels on the upper wings and C and C1's on the under sides of the wings and fuselage sides (A's on the green/Dark Earth versions). The RAF also had some of the 20mm cannon armed aircraft designated 1a's. The last Mustang 1/ll squadron kept their aircraft until 1945. All others having been replaced by other types or Merlin Mustang versions.
b. As North American ceased production of the Allison engined versions the RAF reequiped some of the squadrons with less well suited types such as the Spitfire Mk V. While the Spitfire is still the best fighter of WW2 in this role the early Mustangs were certainly the better aircraft as their long range and rugged construction were very useful operating at these altitudes and mission profiles. The RAF then shifted attention to the Merlin engined Mk lll's (the US B/C). The B/C were the same aircraft made by different factories with tiny differences between them, hence the RAF's use of the same designation. By late 1944 this version had established itself as a competent performer capable of doing all that was asked of it. RAF modifications gave the aircraft a bulged Malcolm canopy for improved visibility and cockpit access and the US modification to the ammunition feed resulted in an end to the gun jamming problems that beset the aircraft when it first entered service. Some authorities believe the Malcolm hooded C with the modified ammunition feeds to be better than the later P 51D due to the loss of lateral stability that resulted from removing the fuselage side area. These Mustangs roamed far and wide over Europe escorting RAF bombers as Bomber Command increasingly turned day light precision raids such as those carried out by 617 and 9 Squadron's using Tallboys and Grandslam earthquake bombs. Mustangs also carried out escorts for Mosquitoes and Beaufighters as far away as Norway for anti shipping strikes. Leonard Cheshire even used a Mustang for experimental target marking for 617 Squadron in place of the Mosquito he normally used. Almost all examples were green/Ocean Grey/Medium Sea Grey. Polish units often had colourful markings and large kill boards, 19 Squadron was quite well marked and its post war examples such as the well known Dooly Bird (Matchbox's kit for example) were almost gaudy. These Mustangs took part in the anti Diver patrols against the V1 and were very successful, even if the Tempest had the speed edge on the Mustang.
c. Most notably in Italy the RAF and RAAF employed the Mustang in the lll and lV versions for ground support work and general fighter escort, but in Italy the Luftwaffe was virtually absent by the beginning of 1945, so the main role became ground attack including missions over the Balkans, where the Mustangs superior range was put to good use. In this region Silver painted Mustangs first appeared in some numbers, (later in NW Europe), but most aircraft retained normal RAF camouflage of green/Ocean Grey/Medium Sea Grey. It should be noted that most late RAF Mustangs were the K version with a different propeller to the D's. Airfix provide this option their 1/72nd scale kit, but not the Dallas canopy used on the K. They also do not provide the modified air outlets on the lower cowling that were a feature of most aircraft supplied to the RAF and RAAF. The best looking Mustangs were used by 112 squadron, who in many case's applied their well known sharks mouth nose decoration. It makes a Mustang look really evil! Post war under the terms of lend lease the Mustang did not survive long in RAF service as late Spitfires and Tempests along with Meteors and Vampires became the standard RAF fighters.
Last edited:
Mustang nut
Banned
- 200
- Jun 14, 2011
It is also one of targets, what are you going to hit with 6 MGs in central France, Belgium or Holland, to attack something you need a daylight bomber, Mustangs did escort Mosquitos and later Lancasters in daylight precision raids. The pointblank offensive gave daylight bombing missions to the USAAF and they needed the P51 more than the RAF needed the Mustang.
wuzak
Captain
The Spitfire was difficult to produce because of the compound curvature of its wing - nothing to do with tolerences. But by 1943 they had that problem solved. The Mustang structure was simpler and easier to produce. In terms of aerodynamics the Mustang may have bene more advanced, but structurally I doubt there was much difference.
Mustangs were very sensitive to surface finish because of the laminar flow wing. I have read that it is unlikely that the wing ever completely worked in laminar flow due to imperfections in manufacture.
The production of the MkIX was as an interim measure for combating the Fw190, while teh definitive version was tooled up for production. But like many things during WW2 the production was more important than the improvement. VIIIs could have been rolling off the line since 1942, but didn't - at least not in the same numbers as the IX.
Last edited:
wuzak
Captain
The Spitfire had enough range to support the troops over the invasion beaches. But they weren't really needed. After some ground was taken and airfields captured the Spitfires could be brought closer to the front. In any case, most of the Luftwaffe was busy defending Germany.
In any case, I think the Tempest and/or Typhoon was quite well suited to the task. Good at the low levels that aircraft attacking ground troops would be operating in and very good at hitting the enemy's ground forces.
wuzak
Captain
For the record, the VIII was in production from November 1942, the IX from June 1942. The first XIV rolled off the line in October 1943.
So when talking of changing over production in mid 1943 why wouldn't you go for the XIV?
So when talking of changing over production in mid 1943 why wouldn't you go for the XIV?
Glider
Captain
Engine production was the chokepoint and it was for most of the war. For instance every suitable Merlin III was refurbished and converted to Merlin 45 in the Spit V. To such a degree that the Russians asked for 300 second hand Merlins for installing in some MTB's a request that had to be turned down as they could not be spared. Later on the huge numbers required for other aircraft such as the lancaster ensured that supplies were low and any additional load on the production facilites were monitored with care.
As long as the Spit IX, VII and VIII were good enough, why change?
As long as the Spit IX, VII and VIII were good enough, why change?
Last edited:
