Author Topic: P51b (Read 1096 times)

TDeacon · « **Reply #15 on:** June 08, 2004, 08:01:02 PM »

Note I have added comparative images to my previous post, to illustrate my claim of the p51-b model being out of proportion.

GtoRA2 · « **Reply #16 on:** June 08, 2004, 08:23:46 PM »

Erg
Is that a program you can download that displays the performace like that?

GScholz · « **Reply #17 on:** June 08, 2004, 08:31:36 PM »

Why do some people like the C better? I don't think there was any difference. AFAIK the B and C models were the same, just made at different factories (B was built at Inglewood, California, and C at Dallas, Texas). Both could have the Malcolm hood.

ergRTC · « **Reply #18 on:** June 08, 2004, 09:15:04 PM »

tdeacon, can you find a photo rather than a drawing? I have seen them 1st person at airshows, and I am not sure even myself.

Here is the link to that program. Very useful, web based java

http://www.jannousiainen.net/online_sims/jg_4/index.htm

For the CT this is a must. For the TOD I am sure it will only be more useful. Particularly for cruise speeds as well.

TDeacon · « **Reply #19 on:** June 08, 2004, 09:18:46 PM »

I have many drawings, in various publications, from various decades, and they all show that same "chubby" look. Hard to find a photo exactly from side, at distance sufficient to minimize distortion.

I would prefer the AH p51-d to be about 5% higher (probably not HTC's highest priority, though)

Guppy35 · « **Reply #20 on:** June 08, 2004, 10:03:44 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by GScholz
Why do some people like the C better? I don't think there was any difference. AFAIK the B and C models were the same, just made at different factories (B was built at Inglewood, California, and C at Dallas, Texas). Both could have the Malcolm hood.

I think you hit on the problem GScholz. Some seem to think the Malcom hood was specific to the C model. Some also think that the C was the only natural metal 'razorback'

C Production ran a bit longer then the B out of Inglewood to finish up some production orders however, so the "razorback" Mustangs that were still flying in later 44 and 45 were more then likely C models.

The Recce F6s were more Cs then Bs too I believe

Dan/Slack

gofaster · « **Reply #21 on:** June 09, 2004, 11:10:15 AM »

So can I count everyone here as part of my "Bring the Malcolm Hood to AH" army? Our numbers are growing every day!

edit: by the way, you can avoid the "B-Stang Assist Syndrome" by actually staying behind your target for more than 1 second; assuming fellow countrymen don't jump down and steal your fish off the hook with their Spitfire IX cannons.

Zanth · « **Reply #22 on:** June 09, 2004, 12:09:58 PM »

Until this thread I did not realize that a "Malcom Hood" was not some sort of engine cover (lol).

Guppy35 · « **Reply #23 on:** June 09, 2004, 02:10:37 PM »

From the 359th FG History, taken in November 44, just to illustrate the point.

Two P51B/C in formation with 4 D models. One B/C with the Malcom and one with the "coffin" hood. But both still flying Ops in the late fall of 44

Not the best photo, but it shows the mix of Mustang types

Dan/Slack

gofaster · « **Reply #24 on:** June 09, 2004, 02:47:13 PM »

That photo looks like it was taken by the flight leader looking over his right shoulder. Notice how the two D-stangs wing together and the two B-stangs wing together, in that leading 4-ship.

Morpheus · « **Reply #25 on:** June 09, 2004, 02:56:38 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Zanth
Is that a rear view mirror on top of the canopy?

Most had them.

Guppy35 · « **Reply #26 on:** June 09, 2004, 04:28:28 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by gofaster
That photo looks like it was taken by the flight leader looking over his right shoulder. Notice how the two D-stangs wing together and the two B-stangs wing together, in that leading 4-ship.

Gotta admit they look good together though don't they?

Dan/Slack

Replicant · « **Reply #27 on:** June 09, 2004, 04:55:53 PM »

Be nice if they did model a Malcolm Hood Mustang! It really looks sweet!

GtoRA2 · « **Reply #28 on:** June 09, 2004, 05:22:47 PM »

They should model the malcom hood model and make it like 1 perk point.

Widewing · « **Reply #29 on:** June 09, 2004, 05:50:26 PM »

I only wish that HTC would correct the landing gear angle. It's off by a considerable margin. It creates a nose-high ground stance and shifts the on-ground CG forward, making it excessively prone to nosing over under breaking. It also looks screwy..... like a kid making his first plastic P-51 model and inadvertently reversing the landing gear legs..... See below.

My regards,

Widewing