Spitfire Combat Radius (range) evolution, limitations?

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

Wild_Bill_Kelso said:
Well I disagree.
Click to expand...

It's OK if you disagree. Nobody ever said we all have to agree. The P-51A worked out just fine in combat and was still flying at war's end. The Merlin gave it a much better ceiling, but the P-51A was still faster down low.

I can tell you this from working on them. North American products are very well built, and have solid systems in them. There is no apparent "jury-rigging." Everything fits and is robust. That doesn't happen by luck. It happens from solid engineering and good production line processes.

One change from P-51A to P-51B, other than the obvious engine change, and on was metal ailerons and elevators. All P-51s had fabric rudders. The difference between the metal and fabric wasn't very apparent until the speed hit above about 300 mph, and then the metal didn't deflect like fabric, so the non-deflecting metal gave the later P-51s better roll and pitch at higher speeds than the fabric surface did. At under 250 mph, there was little to chose between them.
 
Last edited:
It was not a question of liking, it couldnt do the job of crossing the channel and getting back again. The P-40 was not the main British fighter in the period, it was not considered to take on the Fw 190 Jabo raids or for the battle of Malta. The English Channel and the defences the Germans had on their side dictated other pressing needs before range you had to outperform the Abbeville boys in their Fw 190s or you didnt get back home.
 

The B-70 was a masterpiece of engineering and performance. I was lucky enough to see one of them flying down in Florida once in 1967, going into Eglin AFB. What killed it wasn't the fact that it couldn't perform as designed; it could. The death of the B-70 was the combination of accurate ICBMs and development of effective high-altitude anti-aircraft missiles, making Mach 3 at 70,000 feet something not quite as invulnerable as we thought it would be. Instead, we turned to low-level penetration and stealth.

The only reason the SR-71 was almost invulnerable (at 70,000 feet and Mach 3) was that fact that is turned out to be quite stealthy, unlike the B-70. If the B-70 had the radar cross section of the SR-71, it would have gone into quantity production. Alas, it had quite a large radar cross section, with a giant rectangular air intake that reflected every bit of energy radiated at it from anywhere. So, it was fast and high-flying, but you couldn't sneak up on anyone with a good radar.
 
pbehn said:
The Mustang I had its first victory (Fw 190) and first loss at Dieppe in August 1942, it was used in tactical recon because that was what it was best suited for, no other plane could do what it did.
Click to expand...
First RAF Mustang Mk.I operational loss on 14 July 1942, aircraft of No.26 Squadron RAF flown by Pilot Officer H Taylor crashed at low level whilst strafing German troops near Le Touquet, France - either hit by ground fire or misjudged height during attack. (First non-operational RAF loss on 9 May 1942 in take-off accident.)

First RAF Mustang air to air combat victory, now known to predate that claimed during the Dieppe operation in August 1942. 'Kill' confirmed by RAF records declassified post-war, surviving Luftwaffe loss records and other records in Government Archives and dates from July 1942.

You obviously know little about the early Mustangs.

NA-73 North American Mustang Mk.I - no US 'P' designation as direct purchase contract between UK Government and NAA. Two aircraft from order provided to USAAC/USAAF for testing given XP-51 designation. 320 built.

NA-83 North American Mustang Mk.I - no US 'P' designation as direct purchase contract between UK Government and NAA. Minor changes and modifications identified in production of NA-73 implemented into NA-83. 300 built.

NA-91 North American P-51 Mustang, Mustang Mk.IA in RAF service. Lend Lease order for RAF, 150 aircraft. First with P-51 designation, no suffix. Basically similar to NA-83, but with change in armament to 4 x 20mm Hispano cannon. Number of these aircraft retained by USAAC/USAAF after Pearl Harbor and were first P-51 to enter US service.

NA-97 North American A-36A Mustang. First order officially for USAAF, 500 aircraft.

NA-99 North American P-51A Mustang, Mustang Mk.II in RAF service. Second order for USAAF, 310 built - originally was going to be more but production switched to Merlin engined P-51B/C.

As far as the RAF was concerned, the Allison engined Mustang worked out very well in combat, particularly in the role of a low altitude tactical reconnaissance fighter. In 1944 and 1945 in studies conducted by RAF staff in comparing the potential available aircraft for that role, they repeatedly came to the conclusion that the best possible replacement was more Allison engined Mustangs - not Hawker Typhoons, not various versions of Merlin or Griffon engined Spitfires, not Merlin engined Mustangs. Only problem was, they could not get them because the production lines had been fully switched to producing Merlin engined Mustangs for the 'pure' fighter role. Down low, with the engine modifications made by the RAF to the Allison engines in their Mustangs, they were fast, lighter than the Merlin Mustang, and had control responses that the pilots found more than matched their requirements. RAF, reluctantly, retired the last of the their Allison engined Tac/R Mustangs in August 1945 - they basically wore out the aircraft they had, combined with combat losses, usual training losses, etc. Pilots flying Mustang Mk.IA and Mk.II were still engaging in air to air combat - altho that was not their primary role - on an opportunity basis in and scoring 'kills' and 'damaged', confirmed, as late as February 1945 against types such as Me-262 and 'long nosed' FW-190s. They also racked up a very impressive score in strafing of ground targets, particularly railway steam engines and rolling stock, enemy transport, river barges and the like. Plus their best 'scores' were racked up by the Typhoon and Spitfire pilots, or the Squadrons of RAF or USAAF medium bombers who were called in as a result of their sighting reports on concentrations of enemy armour, transport, artillery positions and the like. RAF pilots in Allison engine Mustangs flew operations in them from 10 May 1942 until VE-Day, in May 1945, including first operation of single engine fighters based in UK against Western Germany in October 1942, first long range low level bomber escort against targets outside range of Spitfires and Hurricanes in September 1942, and a whole lot more.
 
wuzak said:
Denied permission because GM owned Allison and NAA?
Click to expand...
Yes. Later, when the P-51B was a done deal with Merlin, Allison appealed to GMC to create an opportunity for the two stage (auxiliary) V-1710. NAA shot it down with design studies made late 1941 on Continental and Allison engine installation issue and associated re-design required of Mustang to incorporate a 20" movement (forward) of the wing to accommodate CG changes.

There was no love lost between Allison and NAA early in the Mustang life when Allison was 90 days late in delivering the commited engine for X-73 - on the basis that 'nobody actually believed the NAA fcst'.
Wild_Bill_Kelso said:
I would say the B-70 was cancelled for a reason and leave it at that.
Click to expand...
That would expose a lack of knowledge. Please expand.
The first P-51B ace was Jim Howard 354FG six weeks into Combat ops with 2.33 carried over from AVG, The next two Aces in 354th FG were in mid and late February 1944, seven weeks after combat ops.

How do you define 'didn't do so well' for CBI, look to number of P-38s and P-40s deployed and start counting 'Ace in Type', then look for P-47D aces?

How about P-47N - in combat from March 1945 to EOW?


The CBI was only operational theatre with recipients in 1st Air Commando, 51st FG and 23rd FG. There were only 3 operational squadrons deployed as fighters and all were primarily engaged in tactical operations, mostly ground support and escort for light and medium bombers in tactical role.

To answer your question, England (10) and Mulhollem (6) achieved Ace status (311FG). Others including Tex Hill (2 P-51A) scored in the short time before replacement - when the P-51A was shifted to Recon and 311th/23rd received P-51B/C after about 2 months.
 

The Allison engined P-51 did have a niche and it was good in it's niche to the end of the war, but that niche wasn't really as a fighter.

I gather aside from the metal rudders, there was also something about the rigging of the ailerons...? Does that ring a bell?
 
ColFord said:
You obviously know little about the early Mustangs.
Click to expand...

That would be an incorrect assumption on your part.


I never said any of these subvariants didn't exist, nor does their existence come as any kind of surprise to me. Did you expect me to list them all out every time I mentioned the Allison engined mustang fighter variants? Even that is too long. Hence P-51A / NA-73 etc.

ColFord said:
As far as the RAF was concerned, the Allison engined Mustang worked out very well in combat, particularly in the role of a low altitude tactical reconnaissance fighter.
Click to expand...

Yeah but the emphasis there is on the reconnaissance. Yes it did have a role, especially in British use, which I mentioned already. And it also had a role for the Americans for a while as the A-36 "don't dare call it Apache" dive bomber, which I think was actually a bit more important in that role than is typically recognized.

What it didn't do particularly well was fly combat missions as a Fighter with a capital F. As in air superiority, fighter escort, point defense, fighter sweep, etc. They flew some missions in China and they didn't go so well. If you need me to I can get a book down off the shelf and transcribe some details, but I thought this was common knowledge.

Yeah but how many victory claims, how many aces? This way we can compare to other fighter types, for example, compare it with the Merlin engined types. Or with the Tempest or pick your own favorite.
 
Yes - the P-51B/D introduced 15 degree throw ailerons, the P-51D-25 had factory metal elevators and reduced horizontal stabilizer incidence for better dive stability.

You have a curious definition of 'fighter'. Care to expand?
 
Read somewhere that an NACA employee was given the task of improving the V-1710 and complained, "Why bother with this piece of junk?" That guy had a real attitude problem! While improving the V-1710 would not have been exactly pushing back the boundaries of knowledge, simply adding a 2nd speed to the V-1710 single stage supercharger would have really helped the P-39, P-40, and P-51, and might have even given the P-38 more flexibility. At the start of WWII just about everyone had only single speed single stage superchargers, but the V-1710 never incorporated that simple improvement while everyone else did. Ironically it would have been easier to do on the V-1710 than the Merlin, since the gearcase and rear accessory section could be unbolted from the block, unlike the Merlin.

Allison chose to not build a new version of the rear accessory section to accommodate a 2nd speed and instead coupled the auxillary supercharger used on the P-63 and F-82 via the starter drive coupling. As has been noted, this made the engine a lot longer than the basic V-1710 and unsuitable for easy introduction into the existing production fighters.


 
drgondog said:
That would expose a lack of knowledge. Please expand.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't be so certain. But I don't want to derail this thread. Maybe we can start another one for the B-70?

drgondog said:
The first P-51B ace was Jim Howard 354FG six weeks into Combat ops with 2.33 carried over from AVG, The next two Aces in 354th FG were in mid and late February 1944, seven weeks ater combat ops.
Click to expand...
I am well aware there were tons of (Merlin series) P-51 Aces. I was talking specifically about the Allison engined P-51s.

drgondog said:
How do you define 'didn't do so well' for CBI, look to number of P-38s and P-40s deployed and start counting 'Ace in Type', then look for P-47D aces?
Click to expand...
Actually P-40s shot down the largest number of enemy aircraft (or at any rate, had the highest number of claims) in the CBI at 973, followed by P-51 (Merlin) at 345, then P-38s at 157, then P-47s at 16.

drgondog said:
How about P-47N - in combat from March 1945 to EOW?
Click to expand...
Great fighter, though a little late arriving. I certainly never said otherwise. No idea how many claims, but there weren't that many enemy aircraft lying after March 1945.

Well A-36 was flying in Italy, and there are all the British variants as well.


Right. So two? There were at least 37 US pilots who made ace while flying P-40s in the CBI, including Tex Hill who you mentioned. A large proportion of those were AVG pilots who had relatively few aircraft and were only in action for a comparatively short time. I don't know the exact count of P-38 aces in the PTO, but I just counted more than 70 on this list here, in spite of a relatively small number of P-38 units, at least initially.

Clearly the P-51 was a great design, it ended up being the best fighter of the USAAF in my opinion, and certainly in the top 5 fighters of the war in my book. But it did not seem to reach it's potential until after conversion to the Merlin.
 
drgondog said:
Yes - the P-51B/D introduced 15 degree throw ailerons, the P-51D-25 had factory metal elevators and reduced horizontal stabilizer incidence for better dive stability.
Click to expand...
I think that was a significant change.
drgondog said:
You have a curious definition of 'fighter'. Care to expand?
Click to expand...
Fighter is obviously a broad term, and there is wiggle room, but I think there is also a common sense definition. Is an aircraft which never flies air superiority, interception, combat air patrol, fighter escort or fighter sweep missions a fighter? Some 'fighters' were and are really tactical bombers in my opinion. But there are also some you wouldn't put on CAP which are still 'fighters' - a Beaufighter is a still fighter in my book for example, but with a more of a niche role. Same for any number of night-fighters. Or most floatplane fighters. Some aircraft might be fighters in one Theater while having reverted to tactical bombers in another. For example, the Hurricane was basically used as a tactical bomber in the Med by 1943, but was still being used as a Fighter (capital F) in the CBI at that stage, if not necessarily with great outcomes.

A tactical recon aircraft like one of the British Allison-engined Mustang variants isn't really a fighter IMO, or if it is, it's one with a very narrow niche. I think the Allison-engined Mustang could have had a substantial role in basically every Theater other than NW Europe if it had been able to do the missions listed above. Probably all it really needed was some tweaking to elevator and ailerons.
 
I'd say the super basic definition of a fighter is an aircraft which destroys enemy aircraft. Which is the criteria I have been applying here.
 

Yes and no. There is something about ALL ailerons, but you don't say what. There was and IS nothing wrong with the ailerons on a P-51A.

Yes, there were two sets of aileron rigging: ±10° and ±15°. From the factory. Naturally, the ones with the ±15° rigging rolled better. The Mustang was prohibited from snap-rolls as the horizontal tail wasn't stressed for it. A half snap-roll was taught in basic flight training and it was called a vertical reverse. The P-51A was prohibited from doing vertical reverses and other snap rolling maneuvers. So were a few OTHER airplanes otherwise called fighters. It wasn't a "deficiency." It was a matter of structural strength that wasn't needed in a front-line fighter. If you were doing snap rolls, you were WAY too slow and were likely not doing things correctly.

The P-51A could hold its own with ANY fighter below 15,000 feet, where the Allison was strong. Above about 15,000 feet, the power started dropping off due to the single-stage supercharger that was specified by the U.S. government in the contracts. The Merlin was fitted to the P-51 because Rolls Royce developed the Merlin with private funds, and so could experiment as they saw fit with the design. When they came up with an integrated 2-stage supercharger, courtesy of Sir Stanley Hooker, it seemed like a good thing to try it in a Mustang, and both the British AND the U.S.A. built 2-stage Merlin Mustang prototypes.

The British unit was called the Mustang X and had a Merlin 61 in it. It first flew 13 Oct 1942. They built five Mustang Xs. Obviously, they liked what they flew when they tried it.

The first XP-51B first flew 30 Nov 42. It was a more thorough redesign. Both the U.S.A. and the British liked it better than the Mustang X.

The P-51B-5-NA also introduced the infamous 85-gallon fuselage tank that turned the P-51 into the best escort fighter available to the Allies. I'm sure the British could have fitted such a tank to the Mustang X, but they weren't in the P-51 manufacturing business, so they bought P-51B/Cs instead from North American, who WERE in the P-51 manufacturing business. Thank heavens SOMEONE was.

After the P-51B/C had the kinked leading edge added and the horizontal tail was strengthened, the aileron and elevators surfaces were metalized, and the dorsal fillet was added for the D/K models, the P-51 lost any "deficiencies" it may or may not have had.

If you check, you'll find almost ALL of the great piston fighters went through similar development modifications one one kind or another, including the Spitfire, the Typhoon, the P-47, the Tempest, the Bf 109, the Fw 190, and several others.

Many fighters went through several engine trials. Here is a Fairey Battle with a radial engine installation:



Didn't exactly turn it into a world-beater, but it WAS different from the single-stage Merlin usually seen in Battles.

With the above, I think I digress, so I'll stop. Cheers to you.
 

You probably don't know this, but Drgondog is an author and has written books (including Our Might Always and Angels, Bulldogs, & Dragons) that include type-specific victories by the Eighth Air Force as well as the P-51 in general. He has flown P-51s, is an aeronautical engineer, his father flew P-51s in WWII, he grew up talking with WWII P-51 aces at his home, and I daresay he is an authority WAY beyond whoever you may be referencing in your posts.

He is currently working on a book containing the enumerated aerial victories in the MTO.

You may want to go read his past 15 - 20 years of posts before you question his ability to comment on WWII much more, and you may not since I don't know YOUR background at this time. Perhaps you, too, are a recognized expert on the subject of the P-51 and WWII aerial victories.

Cheers to you.
 
Last edited:
GregP said:
before you question his ability to comment on WWII much more,
Click to expand...

I don't recall ever having done that, did you want to point out where I did?

GregP said:
and you may not since I don't know YOUR background at this time. Perhaps you, too, are a recognized expert on the subject of the P-51 and WWII aerial victories.
Click to expand...

I didn't realize there was a forum rule here that you have to have published a book, or been posting here for 15 - 20 years, before you can comment, reply, or hold an opinion?

It seems like you are questioning my ability to comment on WWII. I assure you, I have that ability. So do a lot of people. If that wasn't the case, there wouldn't be much point in having forums for discussing it.

GregP said:
Cheers to you.
Click to expand...

Right back at you.
 
Wild_Bill_Kelso said:
What it didn't do particularly well was fly combat missions as a Fighter with a capital F. As in air superiority, fighter escort, point defense, fighter sweep, etc.
Click to expand...
I'll leave it these gentlemen as testament to flying the Allison engined Mustang as a 'capital F' fighter with the RAF in WW2. Two of them pictured here, shot down six Luftwaffe aircraft between them in a single sortie in mid 1943. Another made the last recorded kill by an RAF Allison Mustang, against a FW-190 in February 1945. Another made two kills on RAF Allison Mustangs - and numerous steam engines, barges, enemy MET, marching troops and even an E-Boat - before being moved onto the Merlin engine Mustangs to take command of one of the newly re-equipped RAF Squadrons on Mustang IIIs. Another commanded a number of the pioneering RAF early long range operational sorties on the Allison Mustangs, and a couple of others pictured where there as well. Many flew numerous Rhubarbs, Sweeps, Lagoons, Rangers, Populars; performed dangerous low level sorties against V-1 sites in Northern France; along with directing the guns of the Allied Navies onto the beaches of Normandy on D-Day; and directed Allied artillery accurately onto enemy armour and troop concentrations, flak positions ad supply dumps many times. A couple even sunk German mini-subs! A number of those pictured were present when the RAF got its first Allison Mustangs, and when they retired their last, flying operations on Allison Mustangs from 1942 to 1945. (Note: some of them even flew Spitfires at various times during the war, including Spitfire PR.XI and PR.XIX, Spitfire FR.IX and Spitfire FR.XIVe, so they did have a good basis for comparison of the two types.)

I'll leave it to them and a few hundred others of their friends and comrades who certainly regarded themselves as FIGHTER-reconnaissance pilots, wore their battle dress with the top button undone, and a number of whom when the RAF started to receive Merlin engined Mustangs, were moved across to the Fighter Command Mustang Squadrons being re-equipped, in senior roles to show the Fighter pilots how to get the best out of the Mustang.


Using "P-51A / NA-73" in the way that you did certainly did not indicate you understood the lineage of the early Mustangs and the order in which they were produced and entered service. Too many people out there seem to think the P-51A equated to the first Mustang in service, so therefore we tend to try and be precise about how we refer to them so as not to leave room for ambiguity or misunderstanding.
SaparotRob said:
Hot diggity. The Anson IS a fighter!
Click to expand...
And on the definition given, a whole lot of aircraft could be considered a "fighter" by virtue of destroying an enemy aircraft.
 
Pointing out that a given aircraft didn't work out that well as a fighter - which by the way is done here all day long in dozens of threads going back decades - is in no way casting aspersions on any of the men who flew said aircraft. It's completely disingenuous to imply that it does.

I never once said recon pilots weren't brave, or that bomber or fighter-bomber pilots weren't brave, or any of the above. Nor did I ever so much as suggest they didn't contribute to the war effort.

If I post pictures of all the guys who died flying Fairy Battles, Boulton Paul Defiants, or Brewster Buffalos does that mean those aircraft were great fighters all the sudden?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

J
fiatG.55 combat history
Replies
0
Views
731
Jerrybandit67
J
S
Spitfire vs. Dora mass battle
2
Replies
33
Views
3K
Snautzer01
Z
Weather limitations in carrier aviation in the interwar and WWII eras
5 6 7
Replies
126
Views
10K
RCAFson
R
W
The scarcity of fighter to fighter FW-190A pilot combat accounts...
2 3
Replies
52
Views
4K
GrauGeist
N
The Great P-47 Range Debate on you tube now.
4 5 6
Replies
105
Views
9K
Holtzauge
Menu
Log in
Register