Spitfire Mk.XIV vs P-51D Mustang

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

That's pretty much the gist, it's a realistic appraisal, but there seems to be a train of thought that you compare two aircraft by who wins in a dogfight, a one on one same speed, altitude, pilot skill, fuel weight and aircraft condition fight at that!

I always ask, can plane A be used for the same tasks as plane B, and in that I have to conclude the P51 was the better aircraft as you can do the same jobs the Spit does but the Spit can't do the same jobs the P51 does, the N'th degree performance details don't really matter that much in reality!
 
Not to belabour this point unduely, but a non-clipped wing, Malcolm hooded Spitfire Mk.XIV is, in my humble opinion, the best looking airplane in history. Certainly better than any Mustang or Bearcat. Does this opinion have any bearing on this discusion? Of course not. I suppose we can all just be happy with the fact that both of these superlative fighters were on the Allied side.
 
This thread reminds me a bit of one year while I was at Oshkosh for the airshow....there were some people standing around talking to these two pilots who flew up a Bearcat and a Mustang with the Confederate Air Force...one of the guys asked the Bearcat pilot if he ever razzed the Mustang guys about the difference in climb performance of two planes...he said he did, but only once...they were preparing to fly together one day and the Bearcat pilot asked the Mustang pilot what altitude he was going to fly at...the Mustang pilot said "about 8 thousand feet"....the Bearcat guy said I'll be waiting for you when you get there. Then the Mustang guy asked the Bearcat pilot what speed he cruises at...the Bearcat guy said I need to keep it below 220 or it sucks too much fuel...the Mustang guy said "my economy cruise is 350, so I'll be waiting for you when you get there!"
 

Seems like the fact the Allies had such a large variety of planes they could often find the right one for the job.
 
Clayton Magnet said:
...but a non-clipped wing, Malcolm hooded Spitfire Mk.XIV is, in my humble opinion, the best looking airplane in history.
Click to expand...
Agreed.
Clayton Magnet said:
Certainly better than any Mustang or Bearcat.
Click to expand...
This is being cruel.
Agreed.
Clayton Magnet said:
Does this opinion have any bearing on this discusion?
Click to expand...
In fact for me the truely killing late mark Spitfires are the brand twenties or smthg... With the total bubble canopy and the enlarged tail and boby. The XIV is certainly a historical king, though.
Of course this relevant ; the .21 and etc. are the next generation, the next step, so a comparison is telling. It is good to compare those two, to show the 6-12 months progress of those times. Not that the P-51D would be ridiculous in any case... Spit .22 should be then compared with Bearcat and Ta-152 and A7M Reppu and Lag-9 and MB-5 and XP-72 etc.

The mark XIV is a bit 'nitted together' ("bricolé") to my eye, while the later marks really fit the connaisseur's comfort. But of course it is the XIV that told the story.

So, I would really choose the P-51D as my 1944 classic, and no Hayate nor Spitfire XII-XIV nor Lag-7, Yak-3 nor even a 1944 Corsair to steal the show.
 
Last edited:

A Griffon Spit over a Merlin Spit? For shame!!!! (Agree on the 'Stang and 'Cat, though)
 
silence said:
A Griffon Spit over a Merlin Spit? For shame!!!! (Agree on the 'Stang and 'Cat, though)
Click to expand...

The Griffon Spits with normal wings (and preferably Malcolm hood) are the most beautiful allied AC of the war imho. It looked so sleek, powerful, mean.
The vertical fin should be that of the XIV and Mk. 21, not that larger but uglier one introduced in the Mk. 22.
It comes easily second after the late-war Focke Wulfs and 109s in my preference on looks.
Never considered the Merlin Spits pretty.
With its shorter nose it reminds me of a heron, not the most beautiful of birds. The small rudder is not attractive either.
 
Last edited:
This is a beauty contest?

How about the MC-205 if we want looks?

I think I will be the only one that think this but I think the P-63 is attractive in a weird sort of way.

I couple of the Soviet planes were nice looking.
 
Last edited:
WAY off topic, but what the hell...
MC.205 and FIAT G.55 are almost good looking, but I find their canopies just ruin the whole effect.
 
WAY off topic, but what the hell...
MC.205 and FIAT G.55 are almost good looking, but I find their canopies just ruin the whole effect.
 
This is a beauty contest?
Click to expand...

Of course, this is about the Spitfire after all.

Oh, which to choose...





Although the Griffon Spits are beautiful aircraft, they do agressive quite well, too. What always seems puzzling is why they went back to a high back with the Mk.21; at the time there were XIVs on the production line with low backs; the XIV was the first production variant with a low back.







(This is me recycling the same photos over and over again!)
 

But the Griffon Spits have those ugly carbuncles right above the exhaust! I don't mind a girl being a little short, but facial bumps like that are a total turnoff!

Gotta agree on the late FWs, though; IMO the D-13 is about as hot as they come (radiators hanging off the fuselage and/or wings just detract, IMO. Best-looking 109? The F-2 with the shallower (than the F-4) nose inlet, none of the extra nose scoops of the Gs nor the bulges for the bigger wheels and MGs.
 

Yeah... to my opinionated eye, along with what I said in post #333 the bubble canopy, five-blade prop, and 4x20mm just don't look as good. Give me a Spit IX with the classic wing (and a beer keg hanging under each wing!).
 

Nah, the Mustang is by far the prettiest plane ever built...
 

The carbuncles of the Spit are are ok for me. It looks stronger that way.
I prefer the weapon configuration of the D-9 with the MG bulges making it more meanlooking than the later Fw/Ta fighters.
About the 109 the K-version with its bigger yet streamlined front fuselage (without the ugly blisters of the G-versions) and the thickened wing part to house the bigger wheels
one gets the impression of hardly tamed power underneath.
It had all the bulges in the right place while still looking sleek.
This plane meant business. This also applies to the 190s/152s and the later Spits.
The Italian fighters never struck to me as more or less attractive than the ones of other countries yet some people say that they owe their "special"(?) beauty to their famous Italian design heritage.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

Spitfire vs Me-109
Replies
3
Views
1K
PAT303
P
S
Fw 190D-9 vs. Spitfire Mk. XIV, same engines
Replies
8
Views
1K
dedalos
D
Mustang & Spitfire drag doc
Replies
3
Views
1K
drgondog
A
Italy VS USA: Different ways to improve the P-35
Replies
14
Views
2K
Jugman
J
Sakai Saburo Vs Sugita Sho-ichi
2 3 4
Replies
70
Views
4K
GrauGeist
Menu
Log in
Register