ALLIED HIGH ALTITUDE PLAYOFFS - Mustang vs. Thunderbolt

plan_D · 06-29-2005, 09:56 PM

How am I being whiney, DAVID? The former section of my post should still have been fresh in your lousy mind to allow it not to become too confused by the latter.

I'm not in the mood to stand down on your level to inflate your ego. Go find some small child in the street you can out-wit to get your fill.

DerAdlerIstGelandet · 06-30-2005, 07:53 AM

Children Children Children both of you stop. I think he was kidding plan_D see the smiley after what he wrote. Lets be friendly now okay.

the lancaster kicks ass · 06-30-2005, 01:39 PM

man i wish we could pull rank on this site

wmaxt · 06-30-2005, 05:39 PM

The P-51B had 4 .50cal guns canted at an angle. I belive they were M2s. The D model had 6 .50 m2 machine guns in a verticle configuration eliminating a major source of jams.

I think the P-47 (paddle/water) had it from 30/32k on up. the P-51 was down to about 1,400hp and losing more quickly. However as the planes go lower the P-47 losses ground to the P-51.

wmaxt

plan_D · 06-30-2005, 06:25 PM

Thank you, wmaxt.

DAVIDICUS · 06-30-2005, 06:25 PM

Wmaxt, if I am understanding you correctly, you are saying that the Mustang's original 1,720hp is down to just 1,400hp by 30-32,000ft. I think that sounds too optimistic.

I wish we had a hp / altitude chart. You would think that they would be floating around by the dozens.

Robert Goebel flew Mustangs with the 31st Fighter Group, based at San Severo, Italy, in the MTO (Mediterranean Theater of Operations).

The P-51 had a two-stage blower in the induction system that was controlled automatically with a barometric switch. Around 17,000 feet, when the throttle had been advanced almost all the way forward just to maintain normal cruise, the blower would kick into high, the manifold pressure would jump up, and the climb could be continued to 30,000 feet. The P-51 could be taken a lot higher than that, but above 30,000 feet the power was way down and the controls had to be handled gingerly.

From: http://home.att.net/~jbaugher1/p51_13.html

The P-51H could develop 2,218hp at WEP at 10,200ft. By 20,000ft, it was already down to 1,900hp.

DAVIDICUS · 06-30-2005, 06:34 PM

From: http://nasaui.ited.uidaho.edu/nasasp...rollsroyce.htm

At 26,000 feet, the Merlin powered Mustang could produce better than 1,330hp (The maximum horsepower of the Allison)

I'm guessing (in the absence of reliable data on point) that the above indicates perhaps 1,350 to 1,400hp at 26,000ft for the Merlin.

The turbo-supercharged Pratt & Whitney R-2800 was likely generating 2,530hp at 32,000ft.

Flyboy15 · 07-01-2005, 02:20 AM

The P-47 was always one of the most reliable fighters flown by the allies. The P-51 is often over-rated as one of the best fighters the allies had, when in reality, it required and engine upgrade from the original version just to perform an escort duty. Also, the P-47 was capable of taking punishment from german fighters that no P-51 pilot would think of allowing.

Also the subject of horse power. Considering the greater hp, the P-47 also weighed in much heavier than the P-51, thus making lift harder to generate to an efficent level for flight. When it comes down to which was the better aircraft, it really isn't about the numbers.

Toward the end of the war the P-51 was replacing every plane the allies had. From what I understand, quite a few P-47 pilots were not to happy about this exchange of aircraft.

lesofprimus · 07-01-2005, 06:09 AM

Quote:

From what I understand, quite a few P-47 pilots were not to happy about this exchange of aircraft.

This is true.... Especially the guys that were doing alot of the USAAF ground pounding.....

evangilder · 07-01-2005, 08:21 AM

I know at least one airplane mechanic who was very unhappy about it as well.

DerAdlerIstGelandet · 07-01-2005, 09:27 AM

I would actually think the P-47 would be easier to work on only because it was more reliable and rugged. As a pilot I would rather fly a P-47 over a P-51 anyday just because she coudl take more of a beating than a Mustang.

FLYBOYJ · 07-01-2005, 11:02 AM

Don't forget, the -51 had one more system - cooling, another thing with fliud to leak....

Round engines are heavier and dirtier but way more reliable.

evangilder · 07-01-2005, 11:35 AM

Agreed, for ground attack, radials are the way to go.

DAVIDICUS · 07-01-2005, 12:56 PM

Some of you have mentioned that many P-47 pilots were not happy about the shift to P-51's. I had never heard that before. I had actually read in one book (I don't remember the title) that when the shift occurred, they were happy as the P-51 was a much better performer.

Do you know specifically what the complaints were concerning their new mounts?

FLYBOYJ · 07-01-2005, 01:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DAVIDICUS

Some of you have mentioned that many P-47 pilots were not happy about the shift to P-51's. I had never heard that before. I had actually read in one book (I don't remember the title) that when the shift occurred, they were happy as the P-51 was a much better performer.

Do you know specifically what the complaints were concerning their new mounts?

Mike Alba - a pilot I knew and mentioned on other posts told me his squadron didn't want to give up their P-38s!