Spitfire Mk.XIV vs P-51D Mustang

[CORSNING]

Maybe...but the P-51H didn't fly until 3 Feb 45 whereas the Spit XIV entered squadron service in Dec 43. The Spit 21 was in squadron use in Jan 45 so even that's not a true counterpart of the P-51H. The Mk22 was probably the closest from a timescale perspective...so how about that comparison?

Just to keep the record straight, the Spitfire 14 became operational with No.610 sqdn. on 8 January 1944
and the P-51B-1 became combat operational and flew its first sortie on 1 December 1943.

 

[Shortround6]

As far as being designed as a "dog fighter" goes it was actually more a by-product of a different part of the requirement.

At least by the time of the F.10/35 requirement which had 5 entries under performance. none mention maneuverability. The last one (e) which states "take-off and landing. The aircraft to be capable of taking off and landing over a 50ft barrier in a distance of of 500yds"

This calls for a rather low wing loading, especially considering the fixed pitch prop the British were using. Section (c) also called for ceiling of at least 30,000ft being desirable. Prototype Merlin engines were showing ????? power at high altitude in 1934/35?

I would note that early production MK I Spitfires with fixed pitch props failed to meet the 500yd take off requirement by a large margin.

 

[Shortround6]

Just to keep the record straight, the Spitfire 14 became operational with No.610 sqdn. on 8 January 1944
and the P-51B-1 became combat operational and flew its first sortie on 1 December 1943.

There is often a difference of several weeks between a squadron getting it's first few aircraft of a certain model/mark and being declared "operational" and then actually flying a combat mission. Could be 3 different dates
I don't get too bothered by a few weeks difference. It can also take a few more months for the 2nd or 3rd squadron to become operational or enough planes to actually have a significant impact on operations but it sure looks like the Spit 14 and P-51B were close to each other in timing (P-51 production may have been higher leading to faster deployment of additional units)

 

[michaelmaltby]

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usqV_zUpGCs

 

[CORSNING]

Great video Michael. Them boys need to change the title to (NA-73,
Mustang I).... I am just saying. Them babies are 8-gun versions in the
video.

 

[CORSNING]

OH, OK....I see where this is all going. Ok, ...Ok, a few years ago with some
help from Neil, Bill and several others I was able to do a chronological posting of
the Vought F4U Corsair vs North America P-51 Mustang. This isn't going to hurt
all that much but it would be very time consuming and probably great fun for me.

Did I happen to mention that I just finished an in-depth study of the P-47 timeline
with a great amount of help from Francis Dean? And that I was planning to add
that information to the AIRCRAFT PERFORMANCE section on a certain site
this weekend?....crap!

 

[ykickamoocow]

I hope bringing back such an old thread is not against the rules but I was wondering why people say these aircraft are not comparable as I would have thought they were very comparable. Sure they are not the same because the Mustang was a long range escort/fighter and the Spitfire was an interceptor but the Spitfire is exactly the sort of aircraft the Germans would have sent to attack the Mustangs and the B-17's had they been in possession of them.

With that in mind how do you all think the Spitfire MK XIV would have gone against the Mustang with the Spitfire attacking large formations of bombers and P-51D's?

 

[CORSNING]

I hope bringing back such an old thread is not against the rules but I was wondering why people say these aircraft are not comparable as I would have thought they were very comparable. Sure they are not the same because the Mustang was a long range escort/fighter and the Spitfire was an interceptor but the Spitfire is exactly the sort of aircraft the Germans would have sent to attack the Mustangs and the B-17's had they been in possession of them.

With that in mind how do you all think the Spitfire MK XIV would have gone against the Mustang with the Spitfire attacking large formations of bombers and P-51D's?

I personally believe the Spitfire 14 was quite capable of making a good show of itself wherever
it was stationed. I believe this model of Spitfire set the standard for performance by which
all last generation WW2 interceptors were measured. However even with maximum external
fuel its range was only 850 ml. So while the Merlin engine Mustangs could be stripped and
engine boosted to be a close second in the interceptor roll, The Spitfire Mk.XIV was hopelessly
outclassed by the Merlin Mustangs as a long range escort fighter.

I would not want to be in a P-51D protecting B-24s and watch as Spitfire 14s were attacking.
Damn, I'm glad our English friends were on our side.

APPLES & ORANGES!

 

[FLYBOYJ]

I hope bringing back such an old thread is not against the rules

There's no issues with bringing old threads back to life, however we may point out to a poster that they are trying to get a response from an individual who hasn't been on here in years.

 

[pbehn]

I would not want to be in a P-51D protecting B-24s and watch as Spitfire 14s were attacking.
Damn, I'm glad our English friends were on our side.

!

And same from UK. The only scenario I can think of that happening is if the B-24s were attacking the UK. However in that scenario the P-51 probably wouldn't exist and certainly needed a different engine.

 

[fastmongrel]

Its probably been said many many times in this thread and others. Defending the homeland against attacking bombers it has to be the Spitfire XIV nothing else comes close. Flying 750 miles escorting those attacking bombers the P51D nothing else comes close. Its like trying to compare a Sword to a Bow and Arrow both great but different.

 

[wuzak]

The XIV reduced or eliminated the deficits, excluding range, the IX had to the P-51, while maintaining or improving the strengths.

If the XIV was defending Germany against B-17s and B-24s escorted by P-51s, the P-51s would have their hands full.

I would think that in that situation there would be two types of XIV - 4 cannon models for bomber destroying duties and 2 canon/4 lmg or 2 hmg versions for duesl with the escorts.

 

[BiffF15]

Gents,

I think if the Germans had something with the performance of a Spit 14 the Allies would unleash the fighters from the heavies, attack with superior numbers, and seek out the enemy on the ground.

Doolittle was a genius.

My point being in a one on one the better performing fighter has the advantage. When outnumbered that performance edge can be neutralized and defeated. If my enemy is strong in one place, the air, then attack him where he is weak, the ground.

Which of course is what happened.

Cheers,
Biff

 

[Clayton Magnet]

I would think that in that situation there would be two types of XIV - 4 cannon models for bomber destroying duties and 2 canon/4 lmg or 2 hmg versions for duesl with the escorts.

If a Mk.VC Spitfire could haul 4 Hispano II's aloft, what would have prevented the fitment of 4 Hispano V's to a Mk.XIV? Was the short barreled Hispano THAT MUCH heavier than the M2 that would normally occupy the inboard gun position?

 

[wuzak]

If a Mk.VC Spitfire could haul 4 Hispano II's aloft, what would have prevented the fitment of 4 Hispano V's to a Mk.XIV? Was the short barreled Hispano THAT MUCH heavier than the M2 that would normally occupy the inboard gun position?

The XIV had the Mk II Hispano.

Theoretically the inner bays of the E-wing could take the Hispano, but apparently could not.

At least, that's what I recall from a conversation with the late Edgar Brooks.

 

[CORSNING]

Guys,
I need just a wee bit of help here. It has been a while since I started a new topic,
and, well, I can't remember how. There is a new thread I would like to start.
I'm not kidding, Jeff

 

[fastmongrel]

Go to forum you want to post in and click Post New Thread at the right above where the list of posts is
Aviation

 

[CORSNING]

Go to forum you want to post in and click Post New Thread at the right above where the list of posts is
Aviation
View attachment 495554

That is exactly the problem. If I scroll up from this very point, I do not have the POST NEW THREAD
option. The thread I would like to start at this time would fall under WW2 aviation. I have tried jumping
to other areas of this forum but the POST NEW THREAD does not appear at the top of my screen...???
,Jeff

 

[wuzak]

That is exactly the problem. If I scroll up from this very point, I do not have the POST NEW THREAD
option. The thread I would like to start at this time would fall under WW2 aviation. I have tried jumping
to other areas of this forum but the POST NEW THREAD does not appear at the top of my screen...???
,Jeff

The option is not there when you are inside a thread.

You have to go to the forum page - Aviation, in this case - to get that option.

 

[CORSNING]

Thank you Wayne, but I have tried that. I click on the AVIATION at the top of
the page, but when I arrive at that section I still do not have the post new
thread option...?
Now the truth is, I am pretty sure the problem is my fault. I just haven't been
able to figure out why.