The story of P-51 Mustang 1 of 6

The story took its beginning when Britain had trouble finding suitable use for their P-40s which were inadequate for the european airwar. With the upcoming "Lend an lease"-law the british hoped to take advantage of USAs enormous production capacity and in April 1940 they contacted their earlier supplyer of aircraft, North American Aviation, and presented the specifications for a new fighter.
NAA were well informed of the needs to a fighter for the european arena and promised to produce an even better fighter than specified by the british. 1 months later the british placed an order of 320 stk of the new fighter, but the prototype had to be finished within 3 months, so big were their needs!
117 days later the first prototype, NA-73, rolled out of the assembling hall however without a motor and with weels borrowed from AT-6 Harvard!
Six weeks later the prototype flew without complications. Britain placed a initial order of 300 fighters which they gave the name Mustang. The Mustang had a new profiled wing with less drag than the conventional wing and a very clever cooler/exaust port which too reduced the drag.
Although fitted with an Allison V-1710-39 1100 hp-engine the fighter had very fine performance in low and low/medium heights, except its climbing capabilities were poor. Nevertheless the british orders climbed to almost 1000 examples.
In USA there initially were very limited interest for NAAs fighter and only willingness to accept two free examples under the designation XP-51. Later was eventually placed an order for 150 examples of P-51 named Apache.
In Britain many experiments with the Mustang took place and a quantum-leap in the performance of the Mustang came, when they in the fall 1942 mixed what they saw as the hitherto best fighter design, the Mustang, with the best fighter engine, the Rolls-Royce Merlin.
Four fighters were equipped with Merlin 61 and 65 engines and four-bladed propellers to manage the extra power, and then the testing went on.
When North American received the test data, the way immediately lay open for the mass production of the Mustang as everyone know it . . . . . WW2s best longrange escortfighter, which took the pants of the germans! (the videos sadly enough skips most of these details).
Carl Vendler

[@jeffleake1960]

I hope the guy who had the genius idea to put a merlin engine into this airframe got a medal at the very least . As he undoubtedly saved allied lives

[@nickdanger3802]

He was a test pilot for Rolls Royce, what else would he recommend?

[@ErikBramsen]

Good program and great, GREAT footage!

[@Buckoux]

Excellent series! Great footage - some very rare - and the music does not try to upstage or out-loud the subject of the film. 5 of 5 stars!

[@nickdanger3802]

Production of Two stage two speed supercharger with automatic speed control developed by Packard begins in late 1942.

[@432b86ed]

If the video producer _insisted_ on background music, why not at least something period sounding?

[@cara4226]

This is THE WORST, most unnecessary music.

[@NearAbbeyRoad]

@theshow2k8 The wanted nothing from the Brits. Mustang was a British plane made by a US company to UK requirements. Air Ministry told NA to look at the Curtiss X-46 experimental plane. NAA never had the laminar flow wings on the first concept With the superior RR Merlin, it went brilliantly. The US and UK planes in Europe were finished off in Liverpool. It was downing FW190s before the USSAF used them, who initially didn't want to know it. They left two planes in the corner of a hangar

[@nomis777]

thank you!

[@notsureyou]

Actually the idea of swept back wings (to reduce drag in high speed flight) originates from Italy. However they never tested the principle to see whether it was true (that a swept back wing produced less drag). The Germans however tested the idea (proved it correct) and were at the fore-front of the research. The British reasoning was purely for stability.

[@nickdanger3802]

5.25 P40's replaced Hurricanes in North Africa. The highest scoring Allied ace in North Africa, Clive "Killer" Caldwell RAAF, flew only P40's.

[@NearAbbeyRoad]

@EngineerAeronautical "was only ONE of the main designers of the P-51 along with Raymond Rice, Larry Waite, Art Chester, John Atwood and chief aerodynamicist Ed Horkey (all born in the USA). There were literally hundreds of American engineers that worked at NAA that did all the detail design and engineering on the P-51." Designs were overseen and approved by the British Air Ministry. It was THEIR plane. NA had never designed such a plane so had to be monitored.

[@notsureyou]

(part 3) among the groups, to the point that there were several groups all investigating the same problem, doing the same tests, coming up with the same results, yet they didnt talk to each other. A total baffling situation. Combine that with trying to make up for lost time, scarce materials, and the end result was a guarentee.

[@NearAbbeyRoad]

Brits wanted NA to make the P-40, a poor plane, but the best USA could offer. British air industry 24/7 flat out and was allowed to approach US companies for more planes, by-passing US government. NA said they could make a better plane in the tooling up time for the P-40. The British told NA to asses the Curtiss XP-46 experiment plane, laying down the specs for the plane. Mustang is a British plane made by a US company. RAF operated before the USSAF ordered, who had nil involvement in design.

[@Epck]

Why aren't TV documentaries like this these days

[@philthayer4087]

New cost $45k. Surplus after 1945 $2,500. Now 800K

[@notsureyou]

p2, and originated in 1909 (from memory). Where a british man showed that the sept wing (more so a non-joined V wing) made tailess flight possible because it was very stable in flight.

[@notsureyou]

The German issues was that they had put so little money into turbo-jet technology, that by the time they had a decent axial flow engine, they didnt have a big supply on the specific metals that were needed. With the Germans it was a case of too late. They had the lead early on, but (thankfully) due to short sited leaders, they could never take advantage of it. Yet still, the Germans had the first jet powered aircraft, the first jet fighter, and the first jet bomber.

[@terryjohn]

we had theeses shows in 1992'' its fairly new shows then.they also covered B29's tj

[@NearAbbeyRoad]

Curtiss designers always said NA stole their designs and regarded the Mustang as a Curtiss plane, being based on the experimental X-46. The British Air Ministry insisted the X-46 be the base for the design, as NA had no experience of leading edge fighter design and manufacture. NA only had lots of production capacity and had to be led by the UK in a series of iteration designs to ensure the design was right - the UK were.paying. The UK also amended the design after the first flight tests

[@drgondog]

Lee Atwood, instructed by AFPC Sir Henry Self to PURCHASE the XP-46, and P-40 wind tunnel tesing data on individual cooling schemes - to avoid running afoul to any possible intellectual capital issues with either Curtiss or AAF-Materiel Division.. The reason for the precaution is that the NAA Model P-509 as proposed to the Brits in lieu of the P-40 incorporated the imbedded radiator behind the wing - same as XP-46 - but also because the design epitomized a novel approach to yield Meridith Effect. The British made no such 'insistence' that the P-509 or as it evolved, the X-73, be based on the XP-46. You infer too much control from BPC/British Air Ministry over NAA deign team. While they were the Customer, they agreed Specification 1620 for XP-51 dated April 24 which were jointly developed by NAA and BAM engineers to transform P-509 to NA73X prototype. The notable and key requests which were complied with were a.) increasing fuel from 156gal (self sealed) to 170gal (self seal) and b.) increase winspan slightly, and c.) agree to consult with Dr. Shenstone from RAE on the lower duct/radiator cooling design. The latter was very important i 1941 as iniial flight testing reusults for cooling drag were disappointing. Actually AAF also contributary wrt to recommending 'flat panel' windscreen and moving the car intake to the prop disk/fuselage disk region.

[@notsureyou]

(part2) they were in fact bad at high speeds. That combined with snaking made them useless as a gun platform at the higher speeds. Where the meteor had the advantage was in the areas of jet reliability, wing loading (for slower speeds fighting), and armament. For a dogfight the 30mm canons that the me262 had were overkill for fighters, and due to the trajectory and MV was not suited to shoot down fast moving tight turning fighters. I would still choose a Me262 over the Meteor.

[@theshow2k8]

The Americans wanted their own version of the Spitfire so the Brits came up with this for them.

[@NearAbbeyRoad]

The British diod not use swept wings on the Meteor was because they were unstable at low speeds. The Meteor was designed to dog-fight. The Meteor wings were upsized on Canberra bomber - which is still flying. The Meteor flew until the late 1980s. The supersonic Starfighter never had swept wings. There is nothing magic about swept wings.

[@jaymoe67]

@DandAinTac You may be right about the Bf 109 being the first ALL METAL, low wing monoplane w/ retracting LG, How ever ther were a few that preceded it with partial wood construction, or fabric covered flaps wich still continued throught the war. The mosquitoe and many Russian designs proved that wood still had a place in production and even the F4U corsair still had fabric covered flaps in production in the war. However the Bf 109 was designed for mass prodoction from the start.

[@NearAbbeyRoad]

UK air factories were overloaded. The US allowed UK to contact US companies directly to make arms. The UK took advantage of a new design with all latest technology, if it failed it would be no worse than the P-40. P-51 was designed to a tight UK specification. NA had no experience of fighters, so needed guidance. The British Air Ministry told NA to buy, at great cost, & study the design of the Curtis XP-46 experimental plane. 1st design lacked laminar flow wings, the UK told them to study them

[@notsureyou]

(part 3) The sound barrier wasn't broken (in a proven level flight) during the war. Swept back wings reduce the onset of compressability as you approach the speed of sound. Hence why nearly all commercial jets have swept back wings.

[@NearAbbeyRoad]

@EngineerAeronautical "P-51's used the American built Packard V-1650 engine. It was based on the Merlin, but much higher quality, and was significantly modified by Packard as well. Improvements to the main bearing design, supercharger, carburetor, and numerous other enhancements were made by Packard" The Merlin made under licence from RR. Not too different. Difference was to engineer it to be mass produced. RAF Mustangs did have the faster RR. Most of the slower Packards went into bombers

[@jacktattis143]

nearabbey road: No Packard were production only all mods and R&D were by Rolls Royce Supercharger was epicyclic and locally obtainable that is why R/R allowed them to use it. Bendix Carb was made by Bendix from Drawings sent by R/R It was a R/R Skinners Union design And the drawings were given free of charge Source Haynes Merlin Workshop Manual

[@notsureyou]

@NearAbbeyRoad i thought id read that somewhere, now that i re-read it, it was the leading edge slat design that was based on the me262, and the swept back wing technology copied from the germans after the war. but the wairfoil apparently wasnt.

[@imcustomized]

From 'Edgar Schmued' in wikipedia: "An urban legend has grown up about Edgar Schmued, possibly related to his German origins, claiming he had once worked for Willy Messerschmitt and that the Mustang was heavily influenced by the Bf 109. Just as familiar is the notion that the abortive Curtiss XP-46 was the basis of the P-51 design. " He was indeed from Germany, however.

[@Jerrycobra]

what year was this?

[@notsureyou]

which is what I compared the me262 to. It was faster and went further. It handled better at higher speeds. The me262 was stage 1 for Germany. However after they lost the war, they lost all rights to make any of the other aircraft a reality. The me262 whilst having less reliable engines, they did use Axial flow (unlike the Meteor), which is what ALL jet aircraft use today. So they started the development road for the axial flow jet engine.

[@jacktattis143]

whittle had an axial flow as well but war production mad it easier to build the Centrifugal engine

[@notsureyou]

In terms of using swept back wings to reduce the onset of compression (thus for speed not stability), only Germany was on the forefront in terms of R&D, which is why there were no allied jet aircraft with swept back wings until after the war ended. The original design for the Sabre proves this, since the original design (and that of its competitors for the next US fighter) had straight wings, not swept back.

[@notsureyou]

(part2) my bad the Starfighter doesn't. "Most jet fighters of the period used a swept-wing or delta-wing planform. This allowed a reasonable balance between aerodynamic performance, lift, and internal space for fuel and equipment. Lockheed's tests, however, determined that the most efficient shape for high-speed, supersonic flight was a very small, straight, mid-mounted, trapezoidal wing. The new wing design was extremely thin."

[@notsureyou]

Which is why the me262 handled better at the high mach numbers. The leading edge of the starfighter is in fact swept back, I cannot (at present) think of a single jet aircraft, that is capable of supersonic flight, that does not have the leading edge of the wing sept back.

[@leneanderthalien]

The only development from the Me 262 engines, was the French SNECMA ATAR: was technicaly based on the BMW 003 , but need a very long develoment to make it reliable and better performing . First run from the ATAR 101 in 1946 (2000kg trust), but was serial built only (ATAR 101D 3000kg) in 1951 for the Dassault Vautour and Super Mystère B2 (4000kg trust with afterburner) Most powerfull ATAR: 9k50 (1969) 7200kg trust , use on Mirage IV and F1

[@wilburfinnigan2142]

Lurk58 I believe that Dutch Kindleberger had a design in mind for a fighter long before the Brits came to North American aviation.There is evidence he did a lot of research on designs and even bought the research on the XP46 from Curtise. But he stated all that told him was what NOT to do. How else could they have designed such a revolutionary plane so quickly ???

[@notsureyou]

@NearAbbeyRoad from what I have read, the original design for the sabre had straight wings like other american designs. All the sites I have just checked all claim the the idea for the swept wing came from captured german technology. even the site from the mig 15 says "German research during World War II had shown swept wings would perform better at transonic speeds, and Soviet aircraft designers were quick to take advantage of this information"

[@NearAbbeyRoad]

Correct.

[@notsureyou]

I think you mean that the me262 if it slowed to attack slower planes (a dumb move in and of itself), if it then tried a high angle climb it would stall and kill the pilot. Or did you mean if the pilot tried to open the throttles too quickly that the engines would stall causing them to either catch fire or flame out?

[@notsureyou]

The problem is that the Germans left it too late. Yes they had some great up coming designs, but it was too late. They had relied on the me109 for too long, delayed the jumo 213 too long (engine used for the 190d9), not refined and built the he100d1, the also put low priorities on jet technology and aircraft, until it was too late.

[@nickdanger3802]

NAA B25 First flight 19 August 1940

[@NearAbbeyRoad]

Germans did not invent swept back wings. They were in design in the 1920s in the UK

[@leneanderthalien]

That true, the MG 15 use Rolls Royce NENE turbo jets (built under license, was named VK-1) The Rolls Royce NENE was created in 1944 and use later in big number of aircrafts, like the hawker sea Hawk,the Dassault Ouragan and the Mystère IV, the Dehavilland Vampire, The Gruman F9, and many others....

[@NearAbbeyRoad]

@notsureyou Swept back wings was not a German idea. German research was made public, yet allied research was not.

[@notsureyou]

not really, i could have named quite a number but felt it was over kill :) The me262 does resemble the me309, whether or not it was I have no idea. The me262 compared with the same equivalant meteor, the me262 has the speed and range advantage. That model meteor started to snake (from memory) somewhere around mach 0.76, the me262 didnt start snaking until (again from memory) mach 0.83. The me262 controls were light even at the higher speeds, the meteors controls weren't

[@Will87]

I believe that this was from a show called WINGS, they did profile of Soviet and German aircraft accompanied by "national" music.

[@notsureyou]

@NearAbbeyRoad but the airfoil of the wing was copied from the me262

[@rustyATV]

I was thinking it was a little deeper, had to do with the fact that Mustangs are horses of European descent that run free in America.

[@ebluex]

Is that "ROCKMAN - Distortion Generator" in the background?

[@cara4226]

Ha ha ha ha

[@alexanders5873]

The MIG-15 was powered by a Rolls Royce turbine engine, it was the best in the world at the time. Brittan agreed to sell the engines to Russia, but they only bought several and reverse engineered them to make a "Russian" engine that was identical.

[@notsureyou]

Actually the metal they used in their copied b29 was actually a tad thicker. This was due to a slight difference between imperial and metric. The copies also included a hole that was accidently drilled by a boeing employee. It would have looked bad for any nation to use aircraft that were used by the enemy. With the Czechs they would have had issues with spare parts etc. A agree that the me262 had issues. But compared to the equivalent Meteor it was better.

[@NearAbbeyRoad]

Correct. The Spitfire was a by-product of the air racing fervour in the 1930s,

[@ianziegler5464]

Which is better playing Mustang or Corsair

[@charizardranger]

Mustang

[@NearAbbeyRoad]

@notsureyou The Sabre was heavily based on a British design.

[@notsureyou]

In what way? the Metoer was slower, had less range, had control issues at high speed. The only trumps it had was its more reliable engines. But I keep forgetting, I'm debating with someone who believes that swept wings don't reduce the onset of compressability.

[@notsureyou]

Actually neither knew of each others work, and the germans used an axial flow design which was clearly the way forward, since ALL jet aircraft use that type of engine.

[@notsureyou]

@NearAbbeyRoad from what ive read the airfoil of the sabre was heavily influenced (copied) from the me262

[@drgondog]

Not true. The marginal sweep was introduced because the center of lift of the wing was too far forward relative to CG. Adjusting the LE slightly solved the problem without resorting to major senter section airrame re-design.

[@notsureyou]

@@drgondog "Crucially, the XP-86 was not able to meet the required top speed of 600 mph (970 km/h); North American had to quickly devise a radical change that could leapfrog its rivals. The North American F-86 Sabre was the first American aircraft to take advantage of flight research data seized from the German aerodynamicists at the end of World War II. These data showed that a thin, swept wing could greatly reduce drag and delay compressibility problems that had bedeviled fighters such as the Lockheed P-38 Lightning when approaching the speed of sound" "Because development of the XP-86 had reached an advanced stage, the idea of changing the sweep of the wing was met with resistance from some senior North American staff. Despite stiff opposition, after good results were obtained in wind tunnel tests, the swept-wing concept was eventually adopted. Performance requirements were met by incorporating a 35° swept-back wing, using modified NACA four-digit airfoils, NACA 0009.5-64 at the root and NACA 0008.5-64 at the tip, with an automatic slat design based on that of the Messerschmitt Me 262 and an electrically adjustable stabilizer, another feature of the Me 262A" The Airfoil of the Me 262 (with less wing sweep at : 11% at the root, and 9% at the tip. Specifically, the root airfoil is a NACA 00011-0.825-35 and the tip is a NACA 00009-1.1-40 As an aside: "Adolf Busemann had proposed swept wings as early as 1935; Messerschmitt researched the topic from 1940. In April 1941, Busemann proposed fitting a 35° swept wing (Pfeilflügel II, literally "arrow wing II") to the Me 262, the same wing-sweep angle later used on both the American F-86 Sabre and Soviet Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-15 fighter jets. Though this was not implemented, he continued with the projected HG II and HG III (Hochgeschwindigkeit, "high-speed") derivatives in 1944, designed with a 35° and 45° wing sweep, respectively.

[@wilburfinnigan2142]

EngineerAeronautical.. Actually the Bf109 probably did influence the design. When Dutch Kindleburger was in Europe selling B25.s he was able to see the current fighters and he knew what he had to design to make a better fighter. Dutch was president of North American Aviation and I believe he had in mind the design for the P51 long before The Brits approached him to build the P40. Why else could he have designed and delivered a plane so fast ???

[@NearAbbeyRoad]

All to British designs and specifications. And when they never got it right they were told to get it right.

[@NearAbbeyRoad]

The British perfected the jet DURING WW2.

[@rustyATV]

Oh, so the Brits named it Mustang? Nice choice! I wonder how they arrived at that.

[@TheIamfrustrated]

Let me know if you find a source that says why they called it Mustang. All of the sources I found said some British Officer came up to North American and said this fighter was to be called the Mustang.

[@terryjohn]

1990's circa early. tj

[@jaymoe67]

@DandAinTac That had more to do with an ongoing fued between Willy Messerschmitt and Erhard Milch. Look up the Def. of Fascism. Early Natzi Germany starts to make sence. Especially when one takes into account the crap that takes place leading up to the Blitz. However pol. infighting ultimately led to the end for the RIECH.

[@notsureyou]

(part 2) The problem that the germans had (not that it seems you are interested), is that they were so convinced that the war would be won by the end of 1940, that they dropped nearly all scientific research that wouldnt be finished (matured) within 1 year. And didnt reverse the idea intil late 1942. By which time there were scientists fighting on battlefields (quite literally). then they tried to play catch up, whilst still having a veil of secrecy

[@notsureyou]

Also: Hawjer Hunter, Supermarine swift to name a few british post war jets. I'm not sure why you are trying to argue, when swept wings work in theory and in real life and is a proven fact. You have shown 1 supersonic jet that didnt have the leading edge overly swept back, I can give a list of many many more that did have the leading edge swept back. The star fighter is the exception not the rule.

[@NearAbbeyRoad]

The German DID NOT think the war would be over in 1940. The USSR was still there.

[@NearAbbeyRoad]

High "mach" numbers? Wow it went that fast? Wow! The 262 had to slow to attack planes, then its advantages were gone. It could not speed away too fast as it would stall and kill the pilot. The Starfighter DOES NOT have swept wings.

[@jacktattis143]

I really cannot understand N/A and Rolls/ Royce not getting together sooner After all Packard were building Merlins. Surely it would have been easy enough to get couple from Packard to test against the Allison.

[@richardlahan7068]

The Packard Merlins were not produced in the US until it was decided to re-engine the Mustang with the Merlin. The idea of equipping the Mustang with the Merlin was a British idea and they were largely responsible for doing the research to see if the engine switch was workable. When the Mustang's performance increased due to the engine switch, Packard began producing Merlins under license from Rolls Royce.

[@hardyakka6200]

NO the British wanted a better plane than the ground attack Curtis. TURBO CHARGED

[@notsureyou]

He178, powerplant: 1 HeS 3 turbojet If you think that a jet plane, that offered no advantages over the current piston fighters then in operation, then sure the Meteor is a great plane....

[@wilburfinnigan2142]

luridplanet....Actually the P51 used the Packard built and redesigned Merlin.Briton had asked Packard to build engines since they couldn't keep up.Packard made changes to facilitate mass production and improved the supercharger.Packard built 55,000 and FORD of England built another 30,000. These were used in Spits Lancasters Mosqotoes etc. British designed but improved by Packard, Same engine ? ? similar....

[@deanwilliams4365]

there was a lot of work done between RR and packard, changed for mass production of what was until then a hand built motor. the problems america had with whitworth threads which lead to flanged bolt heads and nuts. the modifications to the supper charger was in the drive system, this was simplified and adapted by RR themselves. a well known joke of the day was. " how do you tell the difference between a RR built merlin and a packard built merlin? the packard built merin has the oil on the inside" but packard was the winner in the Knowledge gaining stakes, casing of strong light aluminum. head design and not to mention supercharging and intercooling. not to mention the metallurgy of not only the aluminum but chrome molly barrels, chomeing piston rings and keeping everything round at temperature. last note. Ford of England was effectively confiscated by the british army. Mr for did not receive one cent from production in england until after the war years and his death. Henry ford was a dedicated Nazi, admirer of Hitler and up until 1942 assisted hitler in his armament against the allies. this is all public record. the american government was not so well disposed to him either. it is interesting to Note in macnamara's comments that Ford did not make 1 dollars profit throughout ww2.

[@jacktattis143]

Wilbur The Packard supercharger was not better in fact it was less efficient than the Farnam

[@jacktattis143]

@@deanwilliams4365 Bull dust the difference between the superchargers was that the Packard was epicyclic gear driven, the Farnam Clutch driven. The Packards was heavier and the Packard less efficient 2. Two block Head was Rolls Royce NOT Packard. 3. Packard was production onlyall R&D was done by Rolls Royce 4. Ford America had nothing to do with Ford Britain British only and as such under the control of Lord Beaverbrook 5. Bull dust on Ford not making a profit from WW2 He sued the US for damages to his bombed out factories in Germany and won. I believe he tried the same thing in Britain . They laughed at him.

[@notsureyou]

Strange, if that was so, then there would be a host of sources to go by. Which there isn't. The only source that I have found, is from a newspaper article, written by someone who has no idea whatsoever. Since they claim that the first built jet engine (being the german one) was a nothing, the article makes no mention of the He178 etc yet mentions the British jet of 1941. It was clearly written by someone who is unable to be objective.

[@ColKorn1965]

the P-51 would be my choice if I could afford a plane.

[@charlescasey9799]

I thought this was about the p51

[@terryjohn]

Why "" It Kicked like a Wild horse AKA'' MUSTANG. TJ

[@NearAbbeyRoad]

US, UK and Hungary all claim the first swept wing designs. The Germans were not at the forefront of R&D at all.

[@garrington120]

The ROLLS ROYCE Merlin engine turned this mediocre airplane into one of the better aircraft of WW2 , however it was not a patch on the later marques of Spitfire

[@SuperEdge67]

soaringtractor it would have stayed mediocre without a British engine. Gary is right a P51 D was not close to the performance of a Spit XlV ........which I believe actually entered service before the P51D. The P51D was roughly equivalent to a Spit IX. The thing is Wilbur you are knowledgable enough to know that.....yet are such a stubborn old fuckwit you won't admit it.

[@fiftystate1388]

SuperEdge67, All of the top fighters were deadly to each other in the hands of the better pilot. The P-51 took the fight to Berlin. If the European front had demanded it, the last generation P-47 proved in the Pacific it also had the range to go to Berlin.

[@superancientmariner1394]

Holy crap wilbur....are you still trying to re-write aviation history. According to American sources.....the Allison Mustang had the following specs:- Model - Mustang I Production - 620 Length - 32.25 Height - 12.2 Wingspan - 37.04 Weight - empty - 6536 Weight - normal T.O. - 8600 Weight - max G.W. - 10,600 Powerplant - Allison V-1710-39 Horsepower - 1,150 Propeller - Curtiss 3-bladed electric 10'6" Max Speed - 388 @ 15k Service Ceiling - 30,800 Fuel Capacity - 180 Drop Tanks - na Range - 750 Guns - 2x .50 cal, 4x .30 cal. So, according to American sources the Allison mustang could NOT go to 33,000...only 30, 000 (and was absolute shit above 15,000 anyway....which is WHY the Brits put a merlin in the heap of shit.....and BEFORE NAA.). And it's speed of 388 is certainly not 30 mph more than the 369 mph of the spit V....less tha 20 in fact., and it's range radius of 750 mile is a mere 52 miles more than the Spit V's 568....about the same as Seattle to Coupville

[@garrington120]

No he's not back , he is in a mental facility somewhere in WA . One of his few supporters probably the total whack job barraspunkdust , who is too embarrassed to post under his own "OWNED" name , is continuing the rubbish they have both posted over the last 8 years.

[@jacktattis143]

@@fiftystate1388 and there is 499 miles of territory that the Mustang never covered P51 Escorted the Bombers 50 miles wide 500 miles deep is 25000 sq miles the Spitfire was over France Holland Denmark Malta west Germany covering what the P51 didn't

[@emforty2]

P51 was designed by a German and an Engine from the British

[@leneanderthalien]

The first operational british jet fighter squadron, fitted with Gloster meteor MKIII, was created in december 1944, only some months after the first complete Me 262 verband... But if the Meteor was not need in combat zones, it was not use over ennemy territory (use to shot down the V1 and "home defense" over GB... Meteors engines was much more reliable as Me 262 engines The Meteor was improved and use up to the 60'...the Me 262 no... That is for the real facts...

[@Bara4565]

2008

[@NearAbbeyRoad]

The 109 was flat sided with squared off wings to enable cheap production.

[@yblocker]

i always thought the mustangs were fuel injected?

[@richardlahan7068]

Even Spitfires weren't fuel injected. The Germans were way ahead of us on that.

[@notsureyou]

(part 2) the me262 great plane, not the best engines, and armament to kill bombers and not tight turning fighters (they still shot down enemy fighters). An air superiority fighter trying to win an air war that had long been lost, and with only a very comaparrative small amount of planes. Too late (and all things considered it was for the best).

[@NearAbbeyRoad]

It is correct that the British perfected the jet DURING WW2. Post WW2 the British were still way ahead. The USSR has never created an advanced jet engine, neither have the USA.

[@googleisshittoss]

@insolvancy pmsl!!!

[@NearAbbeyRoad]

@notsureyou Not copied at all. Similar - not copied.

[@NearAbbeyRoad]

The MIG 15 used a Rolls Royce engine. !!!!

[@NearAbbeyRoad]

You forgot the incredible "Lightning" You are attempting to say that the 262 was superior. It was not. It was throw together plane with a 1938 piston plane body. It was not better than the Meteor.

[@notsureyou]

(part 4) I'm not sure why you can't give credit where its due. For me, the Britts did it the better way, in that they perfected one design (and the British axial flow engine was rejected by the war ministry due to reliability issues), and created a plane that suited it. They then ironed out the bugs with that plane (not before the war ended) and it served for a number of years. Does that mean that the me262 was a pile of rubbish def not.

[@hellboy110585]

woh!.. i didnt know that the name 'Mustang' was given by the British.. 'Mustang' sounds so damn american!.. :O

[@deanwilliams4365]

LOL the British Named all there aircraft, warhawk kitty hawk, etc americans only used letter an numbers

[@emforty2]

if Edgar Schmued is an american citizen then my Toyota Corolla is an American car because it was made in america by americans from parts made in america its Toyota Engine made in America of somewhat lesser quality than the Japanese version causing sudden acceleration problems in the USA but not Japan

[@deanwilliams4365]

born 1899 Hornbach, Germany

[@gooblerakka5330]

the Spitfire would stomp the P-51 in a dogfight every time. This was proven multiple times by the American and commonwealth pilots in mock dogfight battles. The best version of the spitfire would out perform the best version of the P-51 in every department but range, plus the Mustang was ugly, kinda reminded me of a pregnant fish with that huge air intake on the belly.

[@mustangflyer6878]

+gooblerakka LOL!!!!!!!!!! Some of you Shitfire Limey's are actually quite humorous, it's nice to know that not all of you Tommie's are assholes......just a very few though. You forget that you FEB's came to U.S. looking for a high performance fighter, since the Shitfire was so great and you idiots actually used carburetors on the early Merlin's that caused the engine to stall during a pushover while the rest of the world was using fuel injection but the Packard Motor Company set you Lobster Backs straight after making several modifications to the Packard Merlin V-1650-7 and making it great. The Me-109 was more than a Shitfire could handle and the Mustang was a lot more than the Me-109 or anything else for that matter could handle, so go read up on the correct facts "Chinless Wonder" and I've seen your 482 lb. Hippuglyopotamus wife. That bitch is so ugly that she makes Medusa look like a Supermodel and she will most certainly derail a train if she looks at. Now go feed that bitch so she will shut the hell up and stop braying!!!!!!!! LOL!!!!!!!!

[@mustangflyer6878]

+gooblerakka What's the matter Limey Catamite, I thought you Tommies were supposed to be brave and courageous and not back down from a fight????? Well, you have just proven that to be a myth, lol. You know it's a good thing that Winston Churchill did not have a bunch of Fog Horns like you during WW II because if that was the case, all of you F.E.B.'s would be eating Knockwurst and Sauerkraut with a huge Nazi flag flying over Number 10 Downing Street, London, SW1. LOL!!!!!!!

[@gooblerakka5330]

Curly, My initial post stated a fact and you decided to respond in a personal manner which I guess is typical of most (not all ) Yanks when butt hurt have a titty fit if the truth is too hard to bear for your delusional pea sized brain. Go ahead, I'll let you have the last word here since you are obviously under 10 or most likely an under educated drooling ape clown with nothing better to do, fortunately I have.

[@mustangflyer6878]

LOLHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!! You are still alive and awake also, now go back to sleep Limey Catamite, I'll rattle your F.E.B. cage later on, lol.

[@johnb1885]

.....actually what you have said is technically meaningless....which Spitfire and Mustang are you talking about..a Mk5 Spitfire to a Mk1 Mustang..you're right..a griffon-engined Spitfire to a Mustang..no contest. Where the Mustang was superb was it's range and manoureability...the former quality that the Spitfire just couldn't match. :)

[@jacktattis143]

John B: The Spitfire from the MkIX on had the wood on the P51 in climb rate, Service ceiling, Roll rate [ particularly with clipped wings] Tacical Mach and from the MkXIV top speed, armament, acceleration , Turning Circle. The P51 had the range and when the Mk VIII got the 90 gal slipper tank the Spitfire could do just over 1200 miles .

[@NearAbbeyRoad]

If you want to die early fly a 262. Again..the 262 was NOT better than the Meteor. The Meteor was in Mk 3 version by the end of 45. No contest the Meteor was a complete plane, not a cobbled together effort like the 262. The Meteor proved jet panes were reliable & cost effective creating the jet industry we know today. If there was only the 262 it would have regarded as rocket planes & motor jets and cast into history and no jet programme as we known it - well not for a long time after WW2.

[@kbroma01]

Born in Germany and decided that Messerschmitt and his homeland sucked. Lets all thank Edgar for coming over the U.S. Deutschland Under the Allies!!

[@deanwilliams4365]

Olfux Sorry but your opening statement is very misleading or really just incorrect. the British had wished to purchase more P40s but this was blocked by the US army who had woken up to the potential of the US entering the war at some stage, thus ALL P40 production was to go to the US army. there was also a great anti British sentiment at this time and many of the british attempted purchasing attempts were blocked. Mr ford refused to build the merlin, stating that he would probably not get paid as britain would lose the war, addition to the truck factories he had built in germany ( hence the British government's Borrowing the ford factories in england) Prat and whitney did not want to sell to Briton since they had just received a large order from the Nazis for Jig routers/ drillers, the list goes on. How ever the British approached North American and asked them to produce P40s under licence. NB the british had purchase building rights for the P40 in 1939. north americans response was that they had started to work on a fighter already and since North american had no orders for fighters they were keen to get some business. the british sent over two aircraft engineers to assist ( NB 1 was a german jew who had until a few years earlier was working for messasmitt and was the airframe engineer for the 108) there contribution was the removal of the chin coolers ( like the p40) and the introduction of the internal radiators or more importantly the bleeding edge intake. investigation in this area came about because of the british Range requirement and thus the required fuel loading. the allison being a bit more thirsty than the merlin at that time. the Apachie being the british name for the XP51 Ie american experimental licence 5, the laminar flow wings was a north american innovation. this have a thicker wing which could be made stronger. this was important since the apachie was envisioned as a mainly interdiction aircraft more in the role of a beaufighter than and interception fighter. the limitations of the allison were already well known. it is also well known that all this happened before lend lease was established, the british were paying in gold, both her own and from the dominions. actually the gold for the first apaches was shipped to the US directly from New Zealand. the british were very happy initially with the xp51 since it was 25-30 mph faster than the P40. as we all know the xp51 was shipped to north africa where it was welcomed. Range strong wings that did not flex or buckle at low altitudes, .50 guns , range and ability to take more battle damage than both the P40 and hurricane because of its less exposed radiators put it in good steed. the down side is that although aircraft er being delivers the parts packages were not. american industrial action and the anti british attitude in some areas resulted in Xp51 sitting on the sand doing nothing. these problems were not just limited to aircraft, 1 complete shipload of tanks arrived at alexandria from the US but not one tank had a motor!!!. a mixture of south african and new zealand maintenance personnel were not adverse to swapping bits around from salvaged aircraft. the result was merlin powered P40s and P51. there was not much of an improvement in the p40 since it was really to much of a brick. but the xp51 was enhanced. firstly with its range being increased since the merlin was more economical. and a little bit of speed. the altitude advantage was not realised until a latter date with later versions of the merlin. from this point you are correct. since america was now building merlins and the XP 51, both of which the american armed forces were not interested in and production was free from political interference, trials where held in england and a redesign was settled upon. The american were not interested in the P51 until the 8th bomber wing was slaughtered over france. NB america paid a licensing fee for ever P51 and merin it used, this offset some of the lend lease debt. NB England only paid off its ww2 american debt in 2006 and its WW1 debt to america in 2014.

[@NearAbbeyRoad]

@LVEbonys "The P-51 was a new concept and truely different in many aspects from the 109. I am impressed with German engineering and the final aircraft concepts either discovered or fought againt in the last months of war were very advanced. This did not make Germany better as a country. There were good engineers both sides, regardless" German planes were outdated from 1940 onwards. Only the FW 109 stood out.

[@pivotnoob236]

um.....wrong my great grandfather flew one of these...its an american plane but when it was first made the engine was shit! but they put in a new british engine and turned out to be epic

[@NearAbbeyRoad]

The German never had a decent jet engine. They were behind the Brits after initially copying them.

[@PDZ1122]

No. It wasn't.

[@NearAbbeyRoad]

The 262 overall WAS NOT better than the Meteor. The engine and airframe were just bad. The USSR copied to the mm the B-29 bomber, they impounded one in WW2. If the 262 was so good they would have copied it exactly. They never. They used British designed engines in their planes after WW2. The Czechs were give a few captured 262's by the Soviets after WW2, with proper reliable engines fitted. They abandoned them after a short while.

[@kbroma01]

By 1944 there were plenty of seasoned Allied pilots to take on Gunther and he was shot down many times. So much for your crap of him being more than a match to the Allied Pilots. What a terrible concept of having German Pilots fighting until they were injured or dead. Deutischland Under the Allies!!!