P-51 Airframe Toughness

[Old Crow]

My brother read that " the wings of the mustang would fail when subjected to high g-loads, something the P-47 would never do." I believe this was said by a P-47 pilot during WW2. I am aware of the landing gear uplock problem in the P-51D as well as flight restrictions placed on the mustang with a full fuselage tank. It's safe to say that the P-47 had the stronger airframe of the two aircraft. My question is how the P-51's airframe compared to other aircraft such as the P-38, Me-109, Fw-190, Zero etc. In my reading over the weekend, once they fixed the uplock problem and pilots drained the fuselage tank to 25 gal. it eliminated most of the problems but there were still isolated wing failures from time to time.

[HoHun]

Hi Old Crow,

>My brother read that " the wings of the mustang would fail when subjected to high g-loads, something the P-47 would never do."

Well, the P-47 benefitted from ineffective elevator control at high speeds in dive (high Mach numbers, to be more accurate), which is "inherently safe" as it doesn't allow the pilot to pull enough G to break the aircraft.

The P-51 was not that safe due to an effective elevator, but it really tough anyway, and many aircraft didn't break up but became terminally bent and had to be written off after landing.

Other aircraft, well, hard to compare! The P-38, F4F and Me 109 had ineffective elevators. The Fw 190 had effective elevators, but a very strong wing. The Zero was sturdily built, with a single-piece central wing not unlike the Fw 190 (though not as tough, of course) and had ineffective elevators. I've read about the Ki-43 pulling its wings off now and then, but don't know technical details.

The Spitfire had very light elevator control and accordingly was in danger or wrecking itself at high speeds. The same was probably true for the Beaufighter. The Me 110 seems to have had a very low G limit, at least in the heavily loaded night fighter variants.

Now that's not a scientific treatment of the topic, but I've mostly limited myself to technical aspects and what you find in aircraft manuals, though I'm sure that there is anecdotal evidence too - for example, that's all I could find on the Ki-43. As always, anecdotal evidence might not be accurate, but it's interesting nevertheless :-)

I hope you find this useful!

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

[SunTracker]

P-51 broke apart in the PTO while engaged in a turn fight with a Ki-43.  It was flown by Lt. Davis.

Aluminum is not a metal that can be restressed infinite times.  It eventually crumples and breaks.

A P-51 that was flown overspeed in a dive (close to 600mph) returned to base with its wingtips 3 feet from their original position. IIRC, the entire wings were bent upward, being like massive dihedral.

[hitech]

I know some one who had the same type wing tip deflection after landing  a F15 . And he still is a putz.

HiTech

[Bodhi]

Originally posted by SunTracker
P-51 broke apart in the PTO while engaged in a turn fight with a Ki-43.  It was flown by Lt. Davis.

Aluminum is not a metal that can be restressed infinite times.  It eventually crumples and breaks.

A P-51 that was flown overspeed in a dive (close to 600mph) returned to base with its wingtips 3 feet from their original position. IIRC, the entire wings were bent upward, being like massive dihedral.

provide the link to that aircraft with the 3 foot "new dihedral" setting.

[Old Crow]

Thanks for responding to my question guys. Hub Zemke also experienced wing failure on his last mission in his P-51 due to a very severe storm front.

I guess all in all, the mustang got the job done in the end.

[SunTracker]

Read it in a book entitled "P-51 Mustang" in high school.  Was bascially just a 300 page book full of first and second hand accounts of the P-51.

The story went about like this.  A P-51 pilot exceeded his maximum divespeed and pulled out very hard.  When he got back to base, his crewchief said that he totally destroyed his wing and the whole thing would have to be replaced.  The wingtips of the P-51 were about 3 feet higher than they were before he took off.

[Bodhi]

Originally posted by SunTracker
Read it in a book entitled "P-51 Mustang" in high school.  Was bascially just a 300 page book full of first and second hand accounts of the P-51.

The story went about like this.  A P-51 pilot exceeded his maximum divespeed and pulled out very hard.  When he got back to base, his crewchief said that he totally destroyed his wing and the whole thing would have to be replaced.  The wingtips of the P-51 were about 3 feet higher than they were before he took off.

If you can find the author, I'd be interested in reading the book.

[Old Crow]

Does anyone know the ultimate pullout factor for the P-47D? I know that the P-51 at 8,000 lbs. was rated at 12g. At a weight of 11,600 lbs. the pilot's allowable pullout factor was 5g and the ultimate wing failure load occured at 7.5g. I found these figures in Jeff Ethell's book "Mustang- A Documentary History"

[bozon]

in Closterman's books he describes a spit breaking a wing in a high G pull (I read it some 15 years ago so I don't remember the details).

In Johnson's book "thunderbolt!"  he says that one of the things he liked about the jug is his confidence in rough handling it. What ever he did he felt he cannot break the plane.

All anacdotal of course.

Bozon