The Spitfire VS the P-51 Mustang - Which one was better [ WWII DOCUMENTARY ]

The age old debate of which one was better the Spitfire or the P-51 Mustang
If you'd like to support my channel, i have a Patreon: / lookinthepast
Now you can join my channel members to get access to perks:
/ @lookinthepast
P-51 Mustang History: • P-51 MUSTANG HISTORY A...
P-40 Warhawk History: • The Curtiss P-40 Warha...
#p51mustang #spitfire #fighter #wwii #pacific #war #history
The Supermarine Spitfire and the North American P-51 Mustang two of the most influentialy fighter planes from WWII. Which one of them were the better aircraft, the light nimble SPitfire proving itself in the Battle of Britain - or the P-51 Mustang which protected the bomber formations thanks to it's great range and high performance?
Footage has been:
- Researched
- Edited
- Narrated
by Look in The Past channel.
I post digitally enhanced/restored rare documentaries regularly. Feel free to browse around my channel and subscribe if you like the content. Thanks!
Check my Documentaries playlist: • Documentaries
Also check my secondary channel for original history footage videos: / @lookinthepastwararchives
Music: Epic Blockbuster 2 by Rafael Krux

[@LookinThePast]

If you guys have any topics or vehicles you'd like to see a video about please leave a comment and let me know!

[@wakkawakka7624]

Avro Arrow ❤️🇨🇦

[@davekanak]

In an interview, Göring said, "When I saw Mustangs over Berlin, I knew the jig was up."

[@andrewwaller5913]

Apples and oranges. Two completely different aircraft with different roles, made in different counties several years apart. The only similar thing is the Merlin engine, and the Spitfire had a Griffon by late 1943.

[@LookinThePast]

That's what the video is about

[@robertbruce1887]

Agree with both the narrator & test pilot Eric Brown on the summary of these two superb aircraft.

[@johnpollard3038]

Throughout WW11, kill loss ratio for P51 was 11:1. Kill loss ratio for Spitfire was 13:1 That just about covers the issue comprehensively.

[@jacktattis]

No it does not The Spitfire was everywhere the P51 NO

[@lauriepocock3066]

When the RAF went to the US looking for another plane they wanted one with all the positive characteristics of the Spitfire MKV plus all of the things they knew it lacked. They asked for something better and almost got it. Allison had realized that turbo boosting at high altitudes was the way to go and sensibly had not invested in what they saw as yesterday's technology. They took until 1942 to iron out all the problems, but in early 1941 Britain wanted it yesterday, we had a FW190 to deal with; Britain, was at war with Germany and needed every plane we could get. Hence we got a beautiful airframe but it did not reach its full potential until late 1943 by which time we had the MKIX which had incorporated all of the things we knew the MKV lacked. All I can say is thank God we had both, thank God we had Joseph Smith.

[@jacktattis]

MkIX Jun 42 MkVIII Oct 43 and MkVII May 44 three of which were just too good for the P51

[@johndale8017]

Thanks for posting this, an intriguing look at 2 lovely warbirds. I wish to make a suggestion which I will explain, and this is it "within both planes natural combat roles the p51 might be superior". I already know the Spitfire is a better dogfighter in terms of acceleration, climbing and turning. In most situations the p51 would not need to worry about climbing or accelerating because it had ample time to climb and accelerate before combat while escorting bombers. It naturally had speed and height advantage simply because of its role as a long range Escort, and a good interceptor like a fw190, or even a Spitfire would be on the climb to attack while the p51 would be diving at full speed to defend. Add to this, the P51 had better speed retention compared to Spitfire. So, the p51 usually had an unfair advantage because of its role, but I know full well a Spitfire mark 14 would chew the p51 up in an even same height same altitude match.

[@jacktattis]

My friend the Spitfire would be at 40000ft and the P51 just getting to 32000ft

[@johndale8017]

@@jacktattis although I'm wondering if you are referring to the MK 14 Spitfire. It definitely becomes an 'unfair' comparison as it was like the next generation of fighter.

[@jacktattis]

@@johndale8017 Actually the P51D and the Mark XIV were in service the same year ,BUT NO I am referring to every Spitfire from the IX on could do 4800ft/min and better ,.with one 5740ft/min P51D 3475 ft/min with the Spitfire VII HF doing 409mph going through 40000ft

[@jacktattis]

Spitfire by a huge chunk The Spitfire was flown by more nations than the P51 The Spitfire was in more theatres than the P51 The Spitfire could : Go Higher Climb Faster Roll Faster at combat speed /height Dive much further Turn Tighter Had Better Arms With the 90 gal Belly tank go as far as the RAF needed it to. Go faster at higher altitudes than the P51 Fight with the 90 gal Belly tank on

[@MegaGronis]

the Mustang was far better than the Spitfire! No Spitfire saw action over Berlin.

[@JohnHill-qo3hb]

But there is where you are wrong, technically. Spitfires did fly over Berlin, they were painted blue, flown by the RAF and the USAAF doing photo recon, no guns, no armor, no bullet proof windscreen, very large fuel capacity and roughly a 1400 mile range. So yes, technically they did.

[@FeiHuWarhawk]

Mustang was a clean slate design and at least 2 generation advanced aircraft. Mustang grew with minor upgrades. Where the Spitfire was constanlty being modified to the point few parts could be enterchanged. Spitfire was a complicated plane to build. You caoul build 3 Mustang to 1 Spitfire no matter the Mark. Mustangs could be configured for short range Intereption. Mustang was aways faster, had competitive climb and highly maneuverable. If wa a far better more versitile war plane than the Spitfire. SPitfire thou claimed over 6000 enemy planes shot down in 6 years of combat. The Mustang was right behind it at 5900 but only 2 years in combat.

[@Tommytoolsqueezer]

Wrong actually. The spitfire has a faster climb rate than the mustang and is a more manoeuvrable in close dogfights then the p51. The maximum speed of a P51D was 437mph whilst the Spitfire was slightly faster at 448mph. For interception, this was clearly quite important. However, the P51D was generally more specialized than the Spitfire. In it's main role, the Mustang proved itself as a superb escort fighter in Allied bombing raids over Germany. Though the mustang is a better long range fighter. Also the mustang could fly right into Germany and take the fight to them hence the bigger kill rate by ratio

[@Ford_Raptor_R_720hp_V8]

*Fighter Aircraft with Most Kills Comparison 3D* kzbin.info/www/bejne/ZmqZfp-Egaysgtk

[@Ford_Raptor_R_720hp_V8]

@@Tommytoolsqueezer *- Comparing Aerodynamic Efficiency between the 2* *The Merlin Mustang is 2,000 lb. heavier than the Spitfire IX* *Even though the Mustang is much heavier than the Spit* *The Mustang is 30 mph faster with the same engine and horsepower*

[@jacktattis]

@@Ford_Raptor_R_720hp_V8 Yes that is strange But that advantage did not last long Rolls Royce and Vickers were always working together. I do not think NAA and Rolls had that relationship Oh and isn't it strange that the Spitfire could dive to T/M 0.86+ everyday The P51 stuck at 0.78/0.80 AND it was supposed to have the laminated super efficient wing etc. What was wrong? Spitfires could get to 45100ft Mk VII Merlin 49000 ft Mk XIX Griffon Gee what happened ?