 |
06-07-2008, 04:55 PM
|
#316 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 2,035
Country: | Or a combination of slowing down and reaching warmer air at low altitude where the speed of sound is higher.
But in the case of the P-38 out-diving the P-47 (obviously early metal ailerons) must have had the dive flaps retracted untill the pull-out.
And that account form Buzzard about the 72 G??? pullout at 1,000 ft, while lacking pertinance, is something interesing on its own. Quote: |
"A recording camera in the nose of the airplane had faithfully photographed the test instrument panel throughout my dive. We watched the altimeter drop at an extremely high rate, with the speed going up and the altitude going down until it dropped under ten thousand feet and suddenly i realized what I had done. Milo (Burchham) started to take on a queer look and make unpleasant glances at me, and when the film showed I dove to one thousand feet and pulled 71/2 G's getting out, he blew his top."
|
Last edited by kool kitty89 : 06-07-2008 at 05:02 PM.
|
| |
06-07-2008, 05:27 PM
|
#317 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: oregon
Posts: 2,289
Country: | Quote:
Originally Posted by kool kitty89 Or a combination of slowing down and reaching warmer air at low altitude where the speed of sound is higher.
But in the case of the P-38 out-diving the P-47 (obviously early metal ailerons) must have had the dive flaps retracted untill the pull-out.
And that account form Buzzard about the 72 G??? pullout at 1,000 ft, while lacking pertinance, is something interesing on its own. | I believe Buzzard meant 7.5 Gs |
| |
06-07-2008, 08:37 PM
|
#318 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 2,035
Country: | Ok, (that makes a whole lot more sense). And that's an excerpt from Pilot, LeVier's biography, right? |
| |
06-22-2008, 05:53 AM
|
#319 | | Member
Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Vila Real
Posts: 87
Country: | I believe we can't compare this two planes
because the P-38 served longer than the P-51 (in the WWII),
but the p-51 was a pretty good fighter but came late in the war |
| |
06-22-2008, 10:10 AM
|
#320 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: oregon
Posts: 2,289
Country: | Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigxiko I believe we can't compare this two planes
because the P-38 served longer than the P-51 (in the WWII),
but the p-51 was a pretty good fighter but came late in the war | ?? It (XP-51) flew in October 1940 about a year before US at war.
Mustang I was test flown by Brits October 1941, assigned to RAE for performance trials Jan, 1942 and first mission in July 1942.
The first P-51B (RAF mod with -61/65 Merlin) in Oct 1942(?).
The P51A's and A-36s went to Africa in mid 1943
The first P-51B-1 were shipped to England in August 1943.
The P51B/C/D destroyed nearly 2x the number of German aircraft as the P-38, had a far better air to air ratio in the ETO/MTO
It is true that the P-38F was in combat operations longer than the Merlin Mustang P-51B) - but about the same time as the RAF Mustang I.
So, why not compare them? |
| |
06-22-2008, 01:00 PM
|
#321 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Aquincum, Pannonia Prima
Posts: 543
Country: | If P-51Bs were in England by August 1943, why is it they were not in action until December 1943..? Makes very little sense, Mustangs napping in England while B17s and B24 getting butchered over Schweinfurt and Ploiesti.. |
| |
06-22-2008, 03:30 PM
|
#322 | | IP/Mech THE GREAT GAZOO
Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Colorado, USA
Posts: 13,235
Country: | Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurfürst If P-51Bs were in England by August 1943, why is it they were not in action until December 1943..? Makes very little sense, Mustangs napping in England while B17s and B24 getting butchered over Schweinfurt and Ploiesti.. | During that period the aircraft were assembled, test flown, deficiencies corrected, mods completed and then eventually turned over to squadrons who began training - could this have been done quicker? Possibly. Was it prudent to work in this manner, yes - and I think the end results are evident.
__________________ "IF ITS RED OR DUSTY, DON'T TOUCH IT" |
| |
06-22-2008, 03:30 PM
|
#323 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 8,312
| Kurfurst .....
Just as the Germans had "political" problems, the USAAF also had theirs.
For them to use long range fighters in the summer of 1943, would have been an admission of the failure of the doctrine of unescorted bombing bringing about victory.
Too many generals reputations were on the line at that time.
And untill massive losses were inflicted, the doctrine wasnt going to chnage.
__________________ "Pilot to copilot..... what are those mountain goats doing up here in the clouds?" |
| |
06-22-2008, 03:59 PM
|
#324 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Helsinki
Posts: 546
Country: | And IIRC P-51Bs went first to 9th (tactical) AF. After the heavy bomber losses they were, 354? FG, allowed to protect 8th AF heavy bombers and eventually switched to 8th AF which gave one of its P-47 Groups to 9th in the bargain. Or something like that. |
| |
06-22-2008, 05:54 PM
|
#325 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: oregon
Posts: 2,289
Country: | Quote:
Originally Posted by FLYBOYJ During that period the aircraft were assembled, test flown, deficiencies corrected, mods completed and then eventually turned over to squadrons who began training - could this have been done quicker? Possibly. Was it prudent to work in this manner, yes - and I think the end results are evident. | Dead on. They had designated a whole new Service group and some time was spent training to assemble, put on the wings and tail, etc as well as familiarize ground crews for engine changes, etc.
..and while the first P-51B-1 left the factory for England in late August, the first batch was shipped by sea IIRC and were not assembled and ready to go until late October. The 354th FG started their familiarization with A-36's in early November and the real thing in mid November.
There were a lot of nagging issues with the radios and coolant leaks, etc which delayed full group deployment until just before theri first combat ops under Blakeslee on Dec 1, 1943 |
| |
06-22-2008, 05:56 PM
|
#326 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: oregon
Posts: 2,289
Country: | Quote:
Originally Posted by Juha And IIRC P-51Bs went first to 9th (tactical) AF. After the heavy bomber losses they were, 354? FG, allowed to protect 8th AF heavy bombers and eventually switched to 8th AF which gave one of its P-47 Groups to 9th in the bargain. Or something like that. | True and immediately subordinated under Kepner until May 1944, along with the 363rd FG which started ops in February, 1944.
The 8th AF 'swapped' the combat ready 358FG (P-47s) for the 357FG (great trade) to get its first Mustang Group also in February, 1944 |
| | | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | | | | | Display Modes | Linear Mode |
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts HTML code is Off | | | All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:17 PM. |  | |