Spitfire Mk.XIV vs P-51D Mustang

[Soren]

Spitfire Mk.XIV

Max Engine power: 2035 hp.

Max Speed: 721 km/h.

Max Climb Rate: 5,200 ft/min.

Wing Span: 11,23 m.

Wing Area: 22,48 m2.

Empty Weight: 2,994 kg.

Max. Weight: 3,856 kg.

Armament: two 20mm cannons and four 7.7mm Machine Guns.


P-51D Mustang

Max Engine power: 1720 hp.

Max Speed: 703 km/h.

Max Climb rate: 3,475 ft/min.

Wing Span: 11,28 m.

Wing Area: 21.83 m2.

Empty Weight: 3,232 kg.

Max. Weight: 5,206 kg.

Armament: Six Browning M2 .50 Caliber Machine Guns.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

So wich one would you bet your money on in a clash between the two ?

 

[Mosin]

I am noy positive but in my mind. Heres my answer.
The spitfire has a advantage in specifications but I think the P-51
has better liveability exe. better armor
Dont know but thats my opinion

 

[Iskandar Taib]

The Mustang has it on range, and roll rate. It also has better ground handling (wide gear) and the ability to carry stores outboard of the landing gear (a Spitfire would tip over or stress the wing). Other than that the XIV comes out ahead.

I wonder how the range of the XVIII (essentially a XIV with added internal tankage) compares to the P-51.

 

[DAVIDICUS]

A website of interest to this topic:

http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spittest.html

The Mk. XIV looks like a very impressive little ship. Very easy on the eyes too.

The website indicates that there was a tactical trial between the Mk XIV and the Mustang III (B/C version).

http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit14afdu.html

TACTICAL COMPARISON WITH MUSTANG III

Radius of Action
31. Without a long range tank, the Spitfire XIV has no endurance. With a 90 gallon long-range tank it has about half the range of the Mustang III fitted with 2 x 62 1/2 gallon long range tanks.

Maximum Speed
32. The maximum speed are practically identical.

Maximum Climb
33. The Spitfire XIV is very much better.

Dive
34. As for the Spitfire IX. The Mustang pulls away, but less markedly.

Turning Circle
35. The Spitfire XIV is better.

Rate of Roll
36. The advantage tends to be with the Spitfire XIV.

Conclusion
37. With the exception of endurance no conclusions can be drawn, as these two aircraft should never be enemies. The choice is a matter of taste.

 

[Soren]

Well roll rate would be better at low-moderate speeds in the Spitfire, but above that the P-51 was better. (Except the Spit XIV CW could probably roll faster)

In turning circle, well a Fw-190A5 and P-51D were almost identical at all speeds, except at high speed where the Fw-190A5 would turn tighter !.(Not often you see that)

So there's no doubt that the Spit XIV will easely outturn the P-51 at all speeds.

About max speed, well the Spit XIV is also faster, and its climb rate makes the P-51's look pathetic.

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

i'm with the spit.........

 

[Gnomey]

Spitfire for me to.

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

range really was the only thing the stang had the spit truely beat on..........

 

[Gnomey]

range is'nt as important as the others (all though a really short range is not good) and the Spitfire beats the P-51 in most cases. If they met in a dogfight (v. unlikely) the Spit would properly win because of it's superior attributes (speed, climb, turning etc). However they where built for different purposes, (Spitfire is an interceptor, while the P-51 is a long range escort fighter) you can not really compare them. I'm stilll saying the Spit though.

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

well a long range escort is still designed to dogfight so we can compare the two.........

 

[Gnomey]

yes you can but they are designed for different jobs. As a result the P-51 could afford to have a slow climb rate because it could climb all the way to the target, but in dogfights this is a set back. The Spit is designed specifically for dogfighting, the P-51 is for both dogfighting and a long range bomber escort. As a result of this, the P-51 loses some dogfighting attributes but gains range and endurance. The Spit doesn't have this combination of two roles as so is a better dogfighter and would win in a dogfight between the two (based on statistics). However it would come down to the skill of the pilot. The choice of aircraft though is purely which you prefer and I prefer the Spitfire.

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

but that's why we compare, there's no point in not comparing them because they're used in slightly different roles.........

 

[Gnomey]

I give in, there is no use in me argueing this anymore, the two have been compared and although they are used in slightly different roles, the spitfire still wins in my view (and yours)

 

[Schöpfel]

Spit XIV vrs Mustang is a tough one. I'll go with what the AFDU wrote: "...no conclusions can be drawn, as these two aircraft should never be enemies. The choice is a matter of taste."

 

[GT]

Update.

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

if the pilot's quality was the same it's always gonna be the spit........

 

[DAVIDICUS]

What I don't understand is why the insistence by the British on maintaining a significant armament of .303 machine guns even in the waning months of the war.

The .303 (British) 30/06 (U.S.) and 7.92mm (German) guns were poor air to air and air to ground weapons.

Round for round, the .50 BMG has well over four times the energy of the .303. The .303 British has less than 2,500 foot pounds of energy at the muzzel while the .50 BMG develops more than 12,000.

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

we ditched the .303 in the spit long long before the end of the war.......

 

[DAVIDICUS]

Lanc,

The Spitfire Mk. XIV (subject of this thread) was armed with four .303's.

I think what you meant to say was that the British ditched dental hygeine long before the end of the war.

 

[Soren]

Lanc,

The Spitfire Mk. XIV (subject of this thread) was armed with four .303's.

I think what you meant to say was that the British ditched dental hygeine long before the end of the war.

Yes but since the IX and beyond, two .50's would be installed instead of the four .303's. I think this was what Lanc was refering to.