DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
IL2 Air Combat!
HTML https://il2freemodding.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: IL2 Aircraft Articles
*****************************************************
#Post#: 10560--------------------------------------------------
Plane of the Week: North American P-51 Mustang
By: vonofterdingen Date: March 30, 2020, 3:46 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[img width=1024
height=764]
HTML https://i.postimg.cc/02b1WsPW/Screen-Hunter-231.png[/img]
Next to Brexit, I can’t think of a more controversial topic
than “what was the best aircraft of WW2.” Certainly there are
plenty of candidates, and with equal certainty I will say that
the North American P-51 Mustang fighter will be in the
conversation. Was it as good as its reputation? Did its sheer
numbers give it an unbeatable advantage over superior Luftwaffe
fighters flown by fledgling pilots? A sub-controversy has lurked
around IL-2 game boards as long as I can remember: is the P-51
poorly or correctly modeled?
From Wikipedia:
The North American Aviation P-51 Mustang is an American
long-range, single-seat fighter and fighter-bomber used during
World War II and the Korean War, among other conflicts. The
Mustang was designed in April 1940 by a design team headed by
James Kindelberger of North American Aviation (NAA) in response
to a requirement of the British Purchasing Commission. The
Purchasing Commission approached North American Aviation to
build Curtiss P-40 fighters under license for the Royal Air
Force (RAF). Rather than build an old design from another
company, North American Aviation proposed the design and
production of a more modern fighter. The prototype NA-73X
airframe was rolled out on 9 September 1940, 102 days after the
contract was signed, and first flew on 26 October.
The Mustang was designed to use the Allison V-1710 engine,
which had limited high-altitude performance in its earlier
variants. The aircraft was first flown operationally by the
Royal Air Force (RAF) as a tactical-reconnaissance aircraft and
fighter-bomber (Mustang Mk I). Replacing the Allison with a
Rolls-Royce Merlin resulted in the P-51B/C (Mustang Mk III)
model and transformed the aircraft's performance at altitudes
above 15,000 ft (4,600 m) (without sacrificing range),[9]
allowing it to compete with the Luftwaffe's fighters.[10] The
definitive version, the P-51D, was powered by the Packard
V-1650-7, a license-built version of the two-speed
two-stage-supercharged Merlin 66, and was armed with six .50
caliber (12.7 mm) AN/M2 Browning machine guns.
From late 1943, P-51Bs and P-51Cs (supplemented by P-51Ds
from mid-1944) were used by the USAAF's Eighth Air Force to
escort bombers in raids over Germany, while the RAF's Second
Tactical Air Force and the USAAF's Ninth Air Force used the
Merlin-powered Mustangs as fighter-bombers, roles in which the
Mustang helped ensure Allied air superiority in 1944. The P-51
was also used by Allied air forces in the North African,
Mediterranean, Italian and Pacific theaters. During World War
II, Mustang pilots claimed to have destroyed 4,950 enemy
aircraft
The P-51 Mustang was a solution to the need for an effective
bomber escort. It used a common, reliable engine and had
internal space for a larger-than-average fuel load. With
external fuel tanks, it could accompany the bombers from England
to Germany and back.
However, the Allison engine in the P-51A had a single-stage
supercharger that caused power to drop off rapidly above 15,000
ft. This made it unsuitable for combat at the altitudes where
USAAF bombers planned to fly. Following the RAF's initial
disappointing experience with the Mustang I (P-51A), Ronald
Harker, a test pilot for Rolls-Royce, suggested fitting a Merlin
61, as fitted to the Spitfire Mk IX. The Merlin 61 had a
two-speed, two-stage, intercooled supercharger, designed by
Stanley Hooker of Rolls-Royce,[45] and this gave an increase in
horsepower from the Allison's 1,200–1,620 horsepower (890–1,210
kW), or 1,720 horsepower (1,280 kW) in War Emergency Power,
delivering an increase of top speed from 390 to 440 mph (340 to
380 kn; 630 to 710 km/h), as well as raising the service ceiling
to almost 42,000 feet (13,000 m). Initial flights of what was
known to Rolls-Royce as the Mustang Mk X were completed at
Rolls-Royce's airfield at Hucknall in October 1942.
At the same time, the possibility of combining the P-51
airframe with the US license-built Packard version of the Merlin
engine was being explored on the other side of the Atlantic. In
July 1942 a contract was let for two prototypes, briefly
designated XP-78 but soon to become the XP-51B. The first flight
of the XP-51B took place in November 1942, but the USAAF was so
interested in the possibility that an initial contract for 400
aircraft was placed three months beforehand in August. The
conversion led to production of the P-51B beginning at North
American's Inglewood, California, plant in June 1943,[48] and
P-51s started to become available to the 8th and 9th Air Forces
in the winter of 1943–1944. During the conversion to the
two-stage, supercharged Merlin engine, which was slightly
heavier than the single-stage Allison, so moved the aircraft's
center-of-gravity forward, North American's engineers took the
opportunity to add a large additional fuselage fuel tank behind
the pilot, greatly increasing the aircraft's range over that of
the earlier P-51A.
HTML https://i.postimg.cc/T1HMdkqJ/Screen-Hunter-230.png
By the time the Pointblank offensive resumed in early 1944,
matters had changed. Bomber escort defenses were initially
layered, using the shorter-range P-38s and P-47s to escort the
bombers during the initial stages of the raid before handing
over to the P-51s when they were forced to turn for home. This
provided continuous coverage during the raid. The Mustang was so
clearly superior to earlier US designs that the 8th Air Force
began to steadily switch its fighter groups to the Mustang,
first swapping arriving P-47 groups to the 9th Air Force in
exchange for those that were using P-51s, then gradually
converting its Thunderbolt and Lightning groups. By the end of
1944, 14 of its 15 groups flew the Mustang.[49]
The Luftwaffe's twin-engined Messerschmitt Bf 110 heavy
fighters brought up to deal with the bombers proved to be easy
prey for the Mustangs, and had to be quickly withdrawn from
combat. The Focke-Wulf Fw 190A, already suffering from poor
high-altitude performance, was outperformed by the Mustang at
the B-17's altitude, and when laden with heavy bomber-hunting
weapons as a replacement for the more vulnerable twin-engined
Zerstörer heavy fighters, it suffered heavy losses. The
Messerschmitt Bf 109 had comparable performance at high
altitudes, but its lightweight airframe was even more greatly
affected by increases in armament. The Mustang's much lighter
armament, tuned for antifighter combat, allowed it to overcome
these single-engined opponents.
Chief Naval Test Pilot and C.O. Captured Enemy Aircraft
Flight Capt. Eric Brown, CBE, DSC, AFC, RN, tested the Mustang
at RAE Farnborough in March 1944 and noted, "The Mustang was a
good fighter and the best escort due to its incredible range,
make no mistake about it. It was also the best American
dogfighter. But the laminar-flow wing fitted to the Mustang
could be a little tricky. It could not by any means out-turn a
Spitfire. No way. It had a good rate-of-roll, better than the
Spitfire, so I would say the plusses to the Spitfire and the
Mustang just about equate. If I were in a dogfight, I'd prefer
to be flying the Spitfire. The problem was I wouldn't like to be
in a dogfight near Berlin, because I could never get home to
Britain in a Spitfire!"
The U.S. Air Forces, Flight Test Engineering, assessed the
Mustang B on 24 April 1944 thus: "The rate of climb is good and
the high speed in level flight is exceptionally good at all
altitudes, from sea level to 40,000 feet. The airplane is very
maneuverable with good controllability at indicated speeds up to
400 MPH [sic]. The stability about all axes is good and the rate
of roll is excellent; however, the radius of turn is fairly
large for a fighter. The cockpit layout is excellent, but
visibility is poor on the ground and only fair in level flight."
Kurt Bühligen, the third-highest scoring German fighter pilot
of World War II's Western Front (with 112 confirmed victories,
three against Mustangs), later stated, "We would out-turn the
P-51 and the other American fighters, with the Bf 109 or the Fw
190. Their turn rate was about the same. The P-51 was faster
than us, but our munitions and cannon were better." Heinz Bär
said that the P-51 "was perhaps the most difficult of all Allied
aircraft to meet in combat. It was fast, maneuverable, hard to
see, and difficult to identify because it resembled the Me 109".
[img width=1024
height=639]
HTML https://i.postimg.cc/L4yM3XKg/Screen-Hunter-234.png[/img]
In game…
I am not particularly fond of the P-51 in game. When choosing
an aircraft for a USAF dynamic campaign, I will choose just
about anything else unless I need to fly high-altitude bomber
escort. It feels very unstable to me, even more so than a P-39.
With a P-39 I can feel the stall coming and avoid it; with the
P-51 I seem to go into a stall without warning on the easiest of
turning maneuvers. It may just be that I need to get used to the
P-51 controls and how to use them. Well, I have time for that
these days, don’t I?
#Post#: 10561--------------------------------------------------
Re: Plane of the Week: North American P-51 Mustang
By: JG51_Ruski Date: March 30, 2020, 4:53 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Good post Thank You von
#Post#: 10569--------------------------------------------------
Re: Plane of the Week: North American P-51 Mustang
By: larsresult Date: April 1, 2020, 6:04 am
---------------------------------------------------------
During my research and interviews with German and Italian
aircrew in past years I was told that among the American
fighters the P51 was easier to shoot down but they really
feared the P47s which were tougher and more lethal and harder to
evade. The inline engine and coolant area were more vulnerable
than in the P47.
After the initial surprise wore off of finding the P51 in areas
thought out of reach they were less feared. I believe many
American pilots realised the best high altitude fighter was the
P47 as testified by the top scoring units that used them in
Europe. The P38 especially the late models and P40 were
respected for their toughness. As an all round fighter the P51
ranks with the top runners but the criteria is so wide.
Then again if you ask any pilot which was the best he will
usually tell you it was the one he flew., even if it was an
under-powered under-armed flying brick!
#Post#: 10578--------------------------------------------------
Re: Plane of the Week: North American P-51 Mustang
By: MADMICK71 Date: April 1, 2020, 3:17 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Thanks,
#Post#: 10584--------------------------------------------------
Re: Plane of the Week: North American P-51 Mustang
By: Beowolff Date: April 2, 2020, 8:01 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Ah ha! Wonderful! What would I give to actually fly a REAL
Mustang? A lot, I tell you. I love this plane. Thanks for
this beautiful article, Von!
Beo
#Post#: 10597--------------------------------------------------
Re: Plane of the Week: North American P-51 Mustang
By: cafs Date: April 3, 2020, 5:42 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I think that all arguments ended with the correct tactic for any
combat plane, bomber or fighter. When the American 1st Fighter
Group changed his beloved Spitfires, after having flew them for
more than an year, for the P-47, they hated the Thunderboldt,
calling it a flying brick (and worse). The effectivenes of the
1st FG dropped a lot, as the numbers of German planes shot down.
You can not fly a P-47 like you fly a Spitfire. With the change
for the Mustang the, now happy, American pilots found a plane
that they "understood".
Nice article Von. 😀👍
#Post#: 10599--------------------------------------------------
Re: Plane of the Week: North American P-51 Mustang
By: Beowolff Date: April 3, 2020, 8:42 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I agree, Cafs… the Mustang has been somewhat maligned/putdown
the last twenty or so years, usually from people that didn't get
it's strengths and purposes. Also, sad to say, that when IL2
came out (many years ago) the putdowns got 'worse'...usually
from armchair pilots that had no idea about anything
aeronautical except from reading posts on the internet on
forums.
Truly... I've had 11 and 13 year old kids that read a couple of
books/magazine articles and jumped into net forums with other
clueless fuzzheads tell me how BAD the P-51 Mustang was in WW2
Combat. (true story!) They would argue to their dying breath
about how bad the Mustang was (and a lot of times they were
basing their information solely on how the Mustang flew in a
game!) They'd claim it OVER POWERED, UNDER POWERED, SLOW
CLIMBING, SLOW MANUVERING and so on, with no REAL knowledge of
how it flew in real life and especially in real life combat.
They'd try to compare the Mustangs to German 109's, for instance
(and sure the 109's were good planes but not near on the P-51's
level of excellence, especially later in the war.) They'd
compare the Mustang to Spitfires, to Corsairs, to Russian
aircraft and so on... and 99.99 percent of the time they'd be
wrong in all their arguments.
The men that flew them knew the truth... the P-51 really was the
premier WW2 aircraft... not usually in any 1 category, but in so
MANY categories. It was FAST...very fast (not THE fastest maybe
if you include experimental jobs or sprint versions of other
types...but really fast for a frontline production everyday
fighter...really fast for that.) It was highly maneuverable,
again perhaps not AS maneuverable as some others, but very
maneuverable for everyday needs in combat with a well-trained
pilot and the more training/experience the pilot had the MORE
maneuverable it was, meaning if you had the chops to fly this
plane well it performed BEAUTIFULLY...and yet even the novice
pilots could fly it on par with and/or against better enemy
pilots in lesser machines! It was a vertical machine... so, no
same altitude turner/burner but rather a fast climb and fast
dive combat performer with fast legs to pour on the coals when
you needed it. It was strongly built, it could take a pounding
(except for the inline engine area). It could carry exceptional
combat weapons and stores and deliver them on point when needed.
And most of all...it had LONG LONG legs that could get a pilot
FAR into enemy areas to attack, to protect bombers, to recon,
etc, etc...which was exactly what the Allies needed at the time
of the Mustang's appearance.
According to one American ace of the time... the Mustang's good
performance and easy to learn and fly flight abilities made an
average pilot better. It made a fair pilot a good pilot. It
made a good pilot a VERY good pilot. And it made an exceptional
pilot a feared enemy KILLER.
Trading out old planes for new-fangled higher tech planes almost
always caused pilots (used to the old ones) to complain and
mouth-off, but with the Mustang and looking at the data it's
pretty apparent the NEW planes by far outperformed the older
ones. And very few times have I heard combat pilots complain
about how they'd like to go back to their older planes after
getting 'used' to flying the Mustang.
It was a great combat plane...and to some extent, still is.
There is no doubt in my mind that given the opportunity the old
Mustang (with proper updates and modern modifications) could
still perform exceptionally in certain combat rolls like COIN
and so on missions.
S!
Beo
#Post#: 10604--------------------------------------------------
Re: Plane of the Week: North American P-51 Mustang
By: JG51_Ruski Date: April 3, 2020, 1:18 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Something I tend to notice with younger and some older
simmers,,the fly a sim version of a plane and right away become
experts on how good a plane is,,I agree with the old adage ask a
real pilot what the best plane is and he will tell you The one
I'm flying..All planes have their strengths and weaknesses and
the ship can only perform as well as the man in the cockpit..We
all have our favorites ,,At least here we get exposed to
different aircraft and learn by test flying them..I love long
nosed 109's and when I fly them it's up to me to get the best
out of them,,Can't blame the ship if I don't fly it right
#Post#: 10609--------------------------------------------------
Re: Plane of the Week: North American P-51 Mustang
By: vonofterdingen Date: April 3, 2020, 4:25 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Wise words indeed Russ. I think part of my problem with some
planes is that I do not take the time to learn their strengths.
I tend to gravitate towards turning fighters; perhaps a bit too
much. After the discussion of the FW-190 a few weeks ago, I
returned to it and got the hang of it pretty quickly. The P-51
is worth a similar exercise, in my case at least.
*****************************************************