Isegrim,
It's funny that you are whining about facts when I have presented a raft of them. For that matter, virtually every fact that you have presented supports
my position. Where did I claim that each and every Mustang was capable of 400 mph at SL? What I claimed was that any +25 lbs boost RAF Mustang III (of which there were hundreds) in decent condition could do around 395 mph at SL- fully combat loaded and not 'stripped' in any way. I have provided primary documentation to support that conclusion. At one time I was willing to write-off your inability to understand data presented in plain, clear language to a lack of English comprehension, but no more. You are simply disengenuous and willfully obtuse.
I notice you bolded
379 mph at sea level for a P-51B running 150 octane. What you forgot to bold is the part about that being the SL speed for
75" Hg boost, not the RAF standard
81" Hg! That's a 150 HP difference. More misdirection and misrepresentation from Isegrim, Attorney at Law.
Your comments about the utterly debunked 'Hendon tests' say everything that needs to be said about your ability to argue rationally and objectively.
For other P-51D speeds, why don't you check 'AHT'? North American's test shows 368 mph at sea level and 67" Hg, while the USAAF test shows 373 mph at SL on the same 67" Hg. Even if those tests are without wing racks, that still leaves 360 mph and 365 mph for the respective tests.
BTW, Neil Stirling did not provide me with AVIA 8/10618- the Public Records Office of the National Archives did.
Besides I find his arrogance quite fitting for his post history, qouting a letter claimed to be from Neil one time, then ignoring that Neil also says he is wrong (ie. max. 370/380mph on the deck for the Mustang).
You can continue to fixate on the fact that, at one point, Neil posted that RAF Mustangs did 380 mph at SL. Unfortunately, he was wrong. As I made crystal clear to you, 383 mph represents a machine with a
Very Poor surface condition pulled and tested directly from
Combat Operations. As usual, you want to fixate on the fact well-used RAF Mustang in very poor condition could do
ONLY 383 mph at SL.
Again, I ask you- would you be so accepting of performance numbers if the tested example was a well-used, combat operational and very worn Bf 109K-4? If it was, you would be shouting from the mountain tops about how the devinely-inspired design of the 109 allowed it to achieve these amazing performance numbers despite its severly degraded condition.
Again, since you seem to have a comprehension problem:
383 mph +12 mph = 395 mph.
And further, again:
