| Today's
Wonderful Treat Pan and Zoom Inside P-51 Cockpit The greatest fighter ever built |
|
Wednesday, December 15, 2010
P-51 Thrill
19 comments:
-
Anonymous said...
-
If I string a bundle of Playstation 3's together, ya think I can take it around the pattern for a few touch 'n go's?
olds-mo-william -
12/15/10, 12:05 PM
-
Anonymous said...
-
This is cool Rodger! Thanks for looking for the cool stuff boss!
Bolivar -
12/15/10, 12:05 PM
-
Boar said...
-
The P-51 was nice, but it was pretty much the equivalent of the Spitfire or the Me 109. Same engine, same configuration. The P-51's advantage was that it was designed for easy mass production.
In my opinion, the P-38 was the best fighter of WW2. The all-time best fighter for its time? The F-22. Nothing can touch it. -
12/15/10, 12:50 PM
-
Anonymous said...
-
That's "Redtail" she's one of the few C models that are flying. This is the second rebuild for her. She has twice been wrecked, both times taking the life of the pilot. More pictures of her at the below link, she is being flown by Rosie Rozendaal here. Rosie was flying the KAM's B-25 with redtail on his wing when redtail crashed on takeoff a few years back. You can imagine what a powerful flight this is for him. To have your friend fall off your wing and crash, has got to make a huge impact. Fun fact, Doug has never had a real job, he started pushing a broom at the Kalamazoo Air Museum when he was 13 and never left. Now he flies everything they have. Its cool to have a friend that flys Corsairs. We are both experimental aircraft builders. - Anymouse
Exceptional photos here.
http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=54933&highlight=redtail -
12/15/10, 1:18 PM
-
Anonymous said...
-
I won't call it a P-51 with a Packard engine. Note the boiler-plate on the right.
-
12/15/10, 3:00 PM
-
Nelson said...
-
@ Boar: I agree. The Fork-Tailed Devil was better than the 'stang, once they got the engine fire issues worked out. The P-38 was so fast on its own that they had to solve a bunch of speed-related issues that hadn't occurred on anything else to that point, except in high-speed dives. I believe they even had to reposition the horizontal stabilizer because of the massive compressive turbulence coming off the nacelles and cockpit pod, which in some cases was strong enough to destroy the stabilizer.
Of course, the P-51 is one of the few aircraft with near-perfect laminar flow over the wings. But I'd still rather have a Lightning over a Mustang. -
12/15/10, 3:16 PM
-
Randy Rager said...
-
Just because the P-38 was the first to experience compressibility problems doesn't make it faster than the P-51. The Mustang topped out at 437mph vs. the Lightning's 414mph. Two propellors create more drag than one, which is why no one has ever taken the piston engine speed record away from the Rare Bear, despite twin engine attempts over the years.
The Mustang was more maneuverable, as most single engine fighters are, compared to their twin engine counterparts.
The Lightning did have about 300 miles more range, twin engine reliability and centreline armament containing a cannon, all pretty serious advantages for a certain type of war. For those reasons the P-38 was valued highly in the South Pacific theatre.
As for the Spitfire and the BF109, neither the Brits nor the Germans ever did figure out the range and armament ends of the fighter equation. Both were fine aircraft unfortunately hampered by certain design flaws. Most notable of course is the 109's unfortunate tendency to kill inexperienced pilots with it's ground handling tendencies. Willy put those main landing gear too close together, and that's a fact. -
12/15/10, 4:01 PM
-
toadold said...
-
One thing that the Mustang had over the other fighters of its age was range. The advanced construciton design which led to a low weight, the laminer flow wing, and finaly the Rolls supercharged engine let it get to altitude at speeds higher than the rest. By the end of the War the German nickname for the Bf1o9 was "The Bulge" they had to keep ugrading and upsizing the engine to keep up with the later Mark Spitfires and the Mustangs. They were putting tear drop bumps on the engine cowling to make room. The other problem was that time between overhauls had decreased by half, they'd had to use journal bearings were they'd used roller and ball bearings before because of bearing shortages. The leading edge slats on the Bf109 gave it good manuverabiltiy but they would sometimes deploy when the pilot was trying to line up shot and throw the aim off. The P-38 had a problem in the cost of manufacture and the time it took to make them. The Army Airforce rushed on the plane and the design tweeks even on the production tooling were delayed. The plane that took out the most German planes was the P-47 of course a good number of those were on the ground when the 47's found them. I think it is telling that the P51 saw combat after WW II.
-
12/15/10, 4:02 PM
-
Anonymous said...
-
Retired USMC Colonel, fighter pilot w 7500 hrs/1000 in F/A-18 Hornet. I have 10 hrs solo in P51 Mustang.
One has to be careful comparing fighters without considering EVERY aspect of a particular fighter, versus every other fighter that it might fight.
I can`t describe every little detail in this comment, but will try to list just a few for the aircraft mentioned: P51,Spitfire,ME-109,P38 Lightning.
Overall the P51 was superior to the Spit & 109! Why? Not fuel-limited,human-engineered cockpit,bubble canopy(360 degree view),could dive out of a "furball" and not be run down(except by ME-262 jet),simple & accurate gunsight,and except at low speeds could match Spit/109 turn radius(speed is life!)
Spitfire/ME-109 had dogshit rear view due to canopy design(had to rely on wingman or rear-view mirror... Spitfire had carborator which cut out engine when upside down. Worst: Spit had fuel cell right behind main instrument panel, guaranteeing cockpit fire if hit!!! Both Spit and 109 VERY fuel limited, thus small combat radius(w NO drop tank capability).
P51 weakness was: water-cooled Merlin engine!
P38 Lightning: With an experienced pilot it was, indeed, the best fighter. PLUS, not often mentioned, it was easily recognizable, so got a lot less friendly ack-ack fired at it! BUT,
up until the E-model, P38 had high pilot labor(which distracts in dogfight)due to constant need for engine power adjustments to keep engines on line! Inexperienced pilots couldn`t handle it. Further, cockpit had rotten human-engineering; rudder pedals/seat arrangement so cramped pilot`s legs that some had to wait 5 minutes after dismounting before they could walk to the line shack!!!
HUGE advantage: Nose guns which meant bullets went exactly where gunsight pointed,at ANY range!!!!
WWII pilots: high school grads, many under age 21(pilots aged 26&up were dubbed "old men"... Many went into combat w 10 hours or less in type. No such thing as TopGun; it was all on-the-job training, if they lived...
THIS is the main reason trained Jap Zero pilots did no well in 1942(the *unarmored Zero + Midway killed the experience-level disparity & Japs never recovered...)
What I have addressed is about 1/3 of the total factors for comparison, but I hope you get the drift.
Besides, I am card-carrying member of SondraK`s Porch, which is unimpeachable----- ;^)
Semper Fi,
Col J -
12/15/10, 4:35 PM
-
toadold said...
-
Col J:
You reminded me of another problem the 109 had. The narrow stance of its landing gear made it very prone to ground loops by newbie pilots. It was also said you id the older 109 pilots from the forehead scars they got from banging their heads into the gunsights during rough landings.
If I was there back in the day and had to do a lot of ground attack I'd take the P-47. That radial engine would keep on running even if it had a cylinder or two shot out and the way the radios and self sealing fuel tanks were arrange gave the pilot extra protection. There is the story about a guy named Johnson IIRC in which he was limping home in a damaged P-47 trailing oil smoke and out of ammo when a lone 109 tried to take him down. The 109 was out of ammo for it's 20mm so it was relying on it's 7.92mm guns. He couldn't faze from a 6 attack position and when he tried for a side attack into the 47's cockpit Johnson would bluff him out by turning into the attack. I don't fault the 109 pilot for not wanting to risk even a short burst from 8 .50 cal machine guns. The 47 was also to low for an underneath attack. The 109 pilot got into a low fuel state gave the 47 driver a hand salute and went home. -
12/15/10, 5:32 PM
-
Anonymous said...
-
Point of order; WWII American pilots were mostly all officers with college educations. Very few American Pilots enlisted men with just a high school education.
Japanese pilots did have more training and far more experience as they had been at war since 1934 give or take. -
12/15/10, 6:47 PM
-
Anonymous said...
-
That was Johnson: second highest scoring ace in ETO. Right behind his friend Gabresky.
His P-47 had already taken several cannon rounds as well. His canopy was jammed, so he had to tough it out.
The P-47 is my favorite aircraft from WWII. Big strong fast and tough- the Corsair filled the same roll in the Pacific. -
12/15/10, 7:46 PM
-
Anonymous said...
-
Au contraire, bon ami soap. USN tried to limit pilots to college grads after Pearl Harbor. Instantly found out they could not come close to filling massive military expansion requirements of War Department. So, they created the "Naval and Marine Aviation cadet", who went thru flight training w same rank as "Midshipman" and when they earned their wings of gold, they were also commissioned as Ensign or 2nd Lt. Called the NAVCAD & MARCAD program. NONE of the cadets had a college degree.
I was a MARCAD and did the same thing in 1964. Difference was that I had to sit thru millions of hours of night school during active duty to earn a post-graduate degree in History.
Army Air Force had the same problem...
Semper Fi,
Col J -
12/15/10, 8:18 PM
-
Anonymous said...
-
I'd take a big round engine any day. A water cooled aircraft makes as much sense as an air cooled submarine.
I don't think we were successful because of our equipment. We had better tactics. If not we wouldn't have stood a chance the first 18 months in the pacific. As Joe Foss said, "we worked as a team and just blew them out of the sky, no points for style."
Semper Fi Col J, Phantoms Phorever from VMFP-3 - Anymouse -
12/15/10, 8:20 PM
-
Anonymous said...
-
Thank you P3! You are partially correct. Before Midway, the Japs had a killer tactic that defeated many pilots attacking them. The Zero was very light and highly maneuvarable. When attacked they would immediately go into a vertical loop. If a Wildcat or Brewster Buffalo followed them,being heavier they would stall at the top and the Zero would still be fully controllable and pounce on them for a kill! However, the tactics of the Flying Tigers(P40s) soon spread throughout the Pacific and that was to attack from above,shoot and then continue to dive away at max speed. And, NEVER try and turn with a Zero! Not long after came the famous "Thatch Weave", which was basically a *fluid 2 or 4* flight. When jumped a section would turn away or toward the other section, allowing it to "sandwich" the attacking Zeros, thus getting on their tails. Zeros either got shot down or fled...
By 1943,the Hellcats and Corsairs, piloted by experienced flight leaders and much superior to the Zero just ate them for lunch!! The Same for the P38 Lightning...
Guadalcanal, with Foss and the Marines in Wildcats, just won by "balls" and P40 *dive don`t turn tactics* They mostly attacked and shot down Jap Mitsubisi bombers. In large numbers! Their other advantage was coast watchers, acting like radar, warning them in time to launch and get in the Sun above the attackers...
Semper Fi,
Col J -
12/15/10, 10:19 PM
-
Anonymous said...
-
Anon 6:47 PM
What Col J said - my Dad and five of his neighborhood buddies whom I can think of were all enrolled in aviation cadet school with only high school educations. They flew B-24, B-25, P-38, P-51, F-4F -
12/15/10, 11:04 PM
-
Anonymous said...
-
Vouching for Col J here; solid stick with ass-kicking reputation! Much appreciated by us grunts.....
Fred Jameson
"the other Col J"
(son of an AF AVCAD pilot) -
12/15/10, 11:41 PM
-
Anonymous said...
-
FRED!!!! Buddy! Won`t ask where/what you are about; for am sure it be another "Inglorious Basterd" mission.... I am fine thanx to you and yours and riding a train to Sondrakistan to spend Xmas w Headmistress,JR and the fucking Corgis.
Merry Christmas,
ColJ -
12/16/10, 12:25 AM
-
Anonymous said...
-
Sounds cool, Jer....at home in HI. Was in Korea until a couple of days ago, and bags packed just in case...lifting a Jameson for you!
Give Sondra a big hug, Joe a handshake, and kick the Corgis for me.
Fred Jameson -
12/16/10, 12:57 AM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)