For all of you who understand "sarcasm" and humour

Blind_Io said:
All those "Sticky out bits" is what makes the B-17 a visually interesting and photogenic aircraft. Even with all of those big guns it still looked graceful. Oh, and it shot down more German fighters than Allied fighter cover for the first year of operation. (I think it was the first year)

Oh, as for the P-51D vs Spitfire. The P-51 has a better power to weight ratio, better time-to-climb, better wing loading, heavier armament, higher top speed and higher operational ceiling, and better cockpit visibility.

In a fight the P-51 would win.

Mustand P-51D
Ceiling 41,900 feet
Top Speed 437 mph
Rate of Climb 3,475 feet per minute
Armament: Six Browning M2 .50 Caliber Machine Guns

Spitfire XIV
Celing 44,012 feet
Top Speed 446 mph
Rate of Climb 4,580 ft per min
Armourment 2x20mm Cannon, 4x0.303 Mg's

Wikepida quote "20mm cannon was adapted by Britain to be used in the Royal Navy for the short-range anti-aircraft role. It was fielded in United States Navy ships starting in 1942, replacing the M2 Machine Gun, which lacked range and firepower"

"Turning Circle: The Spitfire XIV can easily turn inside the FW 190. In the case of a right-hand turn, this difference is not so pronounced."

The XIV came into service b4 the P-51D taking range and exterinal fuel tanks out of the picture, 1 on 1 the Mustang would loose.

SpitfireXviBankingRightTopView.jpg


Apart from all that, just look at the thing, thats the DB9 of prop fighters, or fighters for that matter.
 
Now that's what I call OT. Now get yer ugly mugs into your own thread you two! ;)
 
The dog was cute I supose :D
 
zaybxcwd12,

I eill double check those numbers when I have a chance. This debate came up in another board and my resources showed the P-51 having faster time to climb, higher celing and capable of greater wing loading than the Spit. As for the armament, the Spit was equipped with EITHER two cannons and two .30 cal machine guns OR all .30 cal machine guns (6 I think). A .30 doesn't do much to an airframe, the cannons are better for taking a plane down but have a slower rate of fire. In tests the six Browning M2 .50 put out a "wall of lead" that ripped right through an airframe causing the aircraft to break up in many cases or destroying key systems, like flight controll surfaces or control lines. The P-51 still has the advantage on armament, especially if you take into consideration it's dual role as ground attack and ability to carry light bomb loads.

I'm glad you mentioned range, because the Spitfire was not capable of escorting allied bombers into German territory, the Mustang was.

TRIVIA TIME!
Of what material were the Mustang's drop tanks constructed?
 
I am certainly interested in your Stats Jo you are not the only WWII buff out there. I am going to spend sometime this evening cross checking that but I am pretty sure they are accurate. Armourment not 100% sure on this but it could also be equiipped with 4x20mm. Spitfire is a hard plane to narrow down there are that many marks and models I picked the XIV because it came into service about the same time as the P-51D.
Another point of interest is Battle of Britian being primartly Hawker H urricane this is true, however the Spitfire is a remarkable aircraft it was state of thea art in 39 and remained so though devrlopment in 45 for that fact alone there isn't a plane to match to come out of that period. The Zero is an example of this in 41 remarkable machine by 45 not so but the Japaneese didn't have the reasorces to develop there existing military hardware.
 
Blind_Io,

Which Spitfire marks are you comparing, though? By 1944, the P-51D's main Spitfire contemporary was a revised Mk IX, which changed the 4x0.303 guns for 2x0.5 guns, so it had the fire rate of the Mustang combined with the explosive shells of the two cannons. Funny you should mention how the Americans stick with the 6x0.5 guns, because by this point the Hawker Typhoon and Tempest had swapped over to 4x20mm cannon, as well as some F4U Corsair variants; I never understood why the Americans stuck with their machine-gun armament even through the Korean war, while everyone else switched over to cannons early on.

TRIVIA: Wood or fiberglass? (off the top of my head)

So if the Spitfire is the DB9 of WWII fighters, is the Mustang the Z06? And what are its lea..... :oops: not going there again :p
 
:lol:

The main reason we stuck with the Browning M2 was because we were already tooled for it in the factories. We won WWII by not diverting resources to pet projects like the Germans did, but producing robust simple designs in massive numbers. The Browning M2 was used in everything from mounted tripods on the ground, to fighters, bombers, tanks, everything had a Browning M2. To shut down a factory, re-tool it and start making cannons (and to convert an ordinance factory over as well) was just not necessary at the time.

TRIVIA: Nope, but you are close.

The Mustang also premeired technology and design that was later applied to jet technology: flush rivits, stand-off air intake that is out of the boundary layer of turbulence, bubble canopy, squared off wings and controll surfaces for greater efficiency.
 
Correct! They were made out of paper products so we weren't dropping aluminum or other materials that could be used in the German war effort.
 
Blind_Io said:
Correct! They were made out of paper products so we weren't dropping aluminum or other materials that could be used in the German war effort.

I am educated I always thought it was for weight reduction.
 
it is so damn cool............especially when you know german ;)

walter moers makes quite evil cartoons, like his "Little Asshole" series ;)
 
Labcoatguy in you analysis of great fighter planes from the Allied and Axis camp you forgot about this one from GB.

Mosquito.jpg
 
Labcoatguy said:
They must've forgotten about the materials used in the Japanese war effort

Yes, but the fire ballons were ineffective. Also paper is a faily low-value and common material, unlike aluminum and rubber.

http://img128.imageshack.**/img128/80/threaddirection0flzy7.gif
 
zaybxcwd12 said:
Labcoatguy in you analysis of great fighter planes from the Allied and Axis camp you forgot about this one from GB.

I was restricting myself to dedicated day fighters, so I left out the wooden wonder out on purpose. No disrespect to it though, it was so damn capable. It and the P-38 were such convergent evolvers, starting from different backgrounds, but excelling at everything...ground attack, bombing, night fighting, photo recon, everything.

EDIT: With this thread, at least three of us have been blacklisted from being invited to Clarkson's house for dinner :mrgreen:
 
"EDIT : With this thread, at least three of us have been blacklister from bring invited to Clarksons house for dinner"

Dont bank on it, I am not sure how well known this is I might just be talking in the wind, but Clarson has a interest in anything 39-45, Did you know his father in law is a VC winnner from Operation Market Garden?
 
Ok, that was funny


The B-17 did switch to night raids for a while, but we started out with daylight raids because they were more accurate for navigation and bomb targeting - it also meant more danger from AAA and fighters.
 
Top