Can we have P-51C

[Krusty]

If I recall properly the only ones with the 4x20mm were the F6C (or whatever they were called) and on the port side of the radio compartment they had a bubble window housing the recon camera. They were almost all recon birds, I believe. The brits didn't think much of the P51 at first, seems logical that they'd use it just for recon.

[Guppy35]

OK guys, lets clear it up once and for all.  No operational Merlin Mustangs with 4 20mm cannon

There were some early Allison Mustangs with the 4 20mm but not operational Merlin Mustangs with that armament.

The only Merlin Mustang I know of that carried that load out was the second XP51B


The only operational Mustang with the 4 20mms had the Allison engine.  Ironically, in the AH low alt, tac air environment, this bird would do quite well.

Dan/Slack

[Guppy35]

Originally posted by Krusty
If I recall properly the only ones with the 4x20mm were the F6C (or whatever they were called) and on the port side of the radio compartment they had a bubble window housing the recon camera. They were almost all recon birds, I believe. The brits didn't think much of the P51 at first, seems logical that they'd use it just for recon.

Krusty, I think this is the bird you are thinking of.  It was an experimental Allison P51 that they used to test camo and potential recce set ups.  It had the bulged window behind the cockpit.  It's not an F6C


This is an F6C in it usual set up with the malcom hood and the recce gear either behind the pilot or lower in the fuselage on the left side.

Dan/Slack

[MiloMorai]

Originally posted by Krusty
If I recall properly the only ones with the 4x20mm were the F6C (or whatever they were called) and on the port side of the radio compartment they had a bubble window housing the recon camera. They were almost all recon birds, I believe. The brits didn't think much of the P51 at first, seems logical that they'd use it just for recon.

Yes very logical for the Brits to use the Pony for recce considering its speed at low altitude.

"A total of 91 aircraft from the Block-10 production lot (71 P-51B-10-NAs and 20 P-51C-10-NTs) were fitted with two oblique K24 cameras, or a K17 and a K22, to become F-6C-NA or -NT photo aircraft. Most of these aircraft retained their guns. In each case the cameras were mounted immediately in front of the structural break ahead of the tailwheel, looking out the left side."

from the site mentioned in a post above Krusty.


On the engine/model:

"With the introduction of the P-51C-5-NT onto the Dallas production line and the P-51B-15-NA in the Inglewood production line, the Packard V-1560-7 engine was adopted as standard. It offered 1450 hp for take off and a war emergency rating of 1695 hp at 10,300 feet. Maximum speed at 20,000 feet was reduced from 440 to 435 mph, but increased from 430 to 439 mph at 25,000 feet. 398 P-51B-10-NAs, 390 P-51B-15-NAs, and 1350 P-51C-10-NTs were built, all powered by the V-1650-7 engine."

[bunch]

Originally posted by Guppy35
.....The only operational Mustang with the 4 20mms had the Allison engine.  Ironically, in the AH low alt, tac air environment, this bird would do quite well.....

I have a book, Patton's Gap[/b], by a combat/rece pilot who flew the 0.50/0.303 armed version of this bird over NW France.  His impression was the, while it was faster than anything lese out there, it's manuverability was quite poor...did the early mustangs have the full 269 gallons of tankage the Ds did? maybe this guy had a full fuselage tank all the time?

[MiloMorai]

Originally posted by bunch
I have a book, Patton's Gap, by a combat/rece pilot who flew the 0.50/0.303 armed version of this bird over NW France.  His impression was the, while it was faster than anything lese out there, it's manuverability was quite poor...did the early mustangs have the full 269 gallons of tankage the Ds did? maybe this guy had a full fuselage tank all the time? [/B]

If you had checked out the link posted earlier, your question would have been answered.

"In the pursuit of still more range, a P-51B was experimentally fitted with an extra 85 US gallon self-sealing fuel tank behind the pilot's seat, bringing the total fuel to 419 US gallons (including 2 drop tanks). Although the Mustang already offered outstanding range performance, this additional fuel made it even better. This extra range was being demanded by expanding operations in both the European and Pacific theatres. However, this extra fuel tank moved the center of gravity aft, which made the directional stability of the Mustang quite poor, so that the pilot would have to spend the first hour or so concentrating on keeping his airplane pointed in the right direction until this new tank was finally empty. The last 550 P-51B-5-NAs were fitted with this extra tank, becoming P-51B-7-NAs, and into P-51C-1-NTs, becoming P-51C-3-NT. In addition, some earlier P-51Bs and Cs were modified in the field to accommodate this tank. In service, however, the directional instability caused by the presence of a full fuel tank behind the pilot's seat was a hazard for new or inexperienced pilots, and the tank was usually restricted to 65 US gallons."

[Karnak]

From a gameplay standpoint I don't think adding the P-51 with four 20mm cannon would be a good idea.  It would simply be another extremely rare American aircraft that would be seen way more often than it should be and with P-51 flaps being what they are in AH you'd have a quad Hispano aircraft as fast as an La-5FN down low that turns like a Spitfire. I don't think that would be good for the game.

[Urchin]

Are you joking?  It'd be great for the MA...  people would fly it.  

Remember, path of least resistance.  

The P-51 would be a greased path... people'd love it.

[Karnak]

Originally posted by Urchin
Are you joking?  It'd be great for the MA...  people would fly it.  

Remember, path of least resistance.  

The P-51 would be a greased path... people'd love it.

Yes, it would be great for the MA.  Just like the F4U-1C.

[Urchin]

 I didn't invent the MA.  

What makes a plane popular?  

One of two things.  

Either it has better performance than every other plane (la7), or
it has good performance and Hispanos (Tiffie, F4U-1C).

Hell, the Ki-84 is better than a Spit-9, handling wise.  Why is it going to be a solid 6-7 after the La-7, P-51, Spits (x3), and Tiffie?  Edit: Forgot the Niki.  

Firepower.

[Guppy35]

Originally posted by bunch
I have a book, Patton's Gap, by a combat/rece pilot who flew the 0.50/0.303 armed version of this bird over NW France.  His impression was the, while it was faster than anything lese out there, it's manuverability was quite poor...did the early mustangs have the full 269 gallons of tankage the Ds did? maybe this guy had a full fuselage tank all the time? [/B]

If he is talking about some of the recce modified A model Mustangs with the Allison engine, then it didn't have the fuselage tank.  And there were a number of those used in that role alongside Merlin Mustangs

Two images of Allison engined, Malcom hood equipped F6B Mustangs operating with the 107th Tac Recon Squadron during the drive across France etc in late 1944.

Note the D Model from the same squadron in the bottom photo

Dan/Slack

[humble]

Originally posted by Karnak
Yes, it would be great for the MA.  Just like the F4U-1C.

The C-hog is a relatively rare in the MA, as the plane set continues to expand you could probably unperk it without a problem. I'm having a suprisingly tough time with the "new" Ki-84. It's just unbelievable in the vertical...might be the toughest nut in the game now....

As for the 4 x 20mm on pony...probably about the same impact as the C hog...better performance but I'm guessing less ammo load. C-hog would have roll and dive and bit better handling...pony speed and climb.

[Urchin]

As soon as the F4U-1C is unperked (at some unspecified time in the future), I guarantee that 99% of the La-7 pilots would switch back to it.  

Probably some other folks to.  

Actually the only reason it got perked was because of the cannons, the performance was ok but not outstanding.  

It is practically identical to the F4U-1D, but it consistantly has a K/D that is much much higher with about the same # of kills... why?  Simple.. the F4U-1D has the performance to land a snapshot on just about any plane, but then it is dogmeat.  The F4U-1c has the firepower to kill in one hit, X4.  Practically an insta-kill plane.  Plus it is relatively fast on the deck (not a speed demon, but 350-355 or so places it amoung the fastest of the 2nd tier planes).  

I'm actually very surprised the Typhoon doesn't see more use, I guess the abysmal roll rate must turn some people off.

[Angus]

Well, imagine the whines if we had a 4 cannon Spitty. 5mhp slower than our current MkV, but.....

[straffo]

Originally posted by Urchin

I'm actually very surprised the Typhoon doesn't see more use, I guess the abysmal roll rate must turn some people off.

Not only ,think about turn rate and climb rate.