Mustang

[J_A_B]

I'd still love to see a P-51B/C or D/K variant running at 72 inches MAP.  It'd fit in well in both the MA and in the upcomming CT, since 72'' was the setting used by the 8th AF after they switched over to 150-octane avgas.  



J_A_B

[Ball]

do the spitfires while you are at it...

[mussie]

Man the 51 is fast already, whats it like on 150 octane gas ?

[J_A_B]

Figure you'd gain about 10 MPH and a few hundred feet per minute of climb up to critical altitude when using WEP.  It's a pretty useful improvement, but nothing overly dramatic that would upset the balance of conditions in the MA.  Performance at normal power settings is unchanged.

I believe the V-1650-7 was actually cleared for use at up to 75 inches MAP, but I've not heard of operational settings past 72'' being used.


EDIT:  As an additional bonus, the addition of another P-51 subvariant to AH would provide more "room" for skinners, as this airplane is one of the most popular choices for user-created textures.  A P-51C or P-51K would also permit identification within the AH ICON system.


J_A_B

[NitroFish]

No reason to have both P-51B and P-51C.

The pairing of the P-51 airframe and the Packard-Merlin 68 engine was designated P-51B/C (B being manufactured at Inglewood, California, and C at Dallas, Texas).

The P-51K differed from the P-51D only by its hollow-bladed Aeroproducts propeller. This propeller turned out to be badly manufactured and created dangerous vibrations during times of high throttle, and was eventually replaced.

Link

[J_A_B]

Nitro, the reason to use both would be to differentiate the 72'' plane from the 67'' in-game.  Since the 150-grade fuel wasn't used outside the ETO, the 67'' power setting P-51's should remain in-game even if HTC decides to model one at 72''.   Given the way the AH ICON system works, it makes sense for a new P-51 addition modeled at 72'' to be labeled as a P-51C or a P-51K.  It's easier to tell P-51B from P-51C, than P-51B-5-NA from P-51B-15-NA.

Additionally, although P-51B's and C's were similar, there were changes made during production.  A late-model P-51B/C would *not* be the same as the P-51B we have in AH even if modeled at 67'', as the later production run of P-51B/C's used the V-1650-7 engine instead of V-1650-3.  

Don't use Wikipedia as your source.   It's less than accurate.  Case in point:  The Wikipedia article is wrong about the P-51D/K armament.  P-51D's had 400 rounds per inner machine gun in each wing, and 270 rounds for the two outer guns in each wing.  The outer guns shared ammo boxes, which is why you could increase ammo load for the remaining gun if you removed one of the outer guns.  There are other mistakes as well, but that's just an example.

J_A_B

[NitroFish]

The only difference that I have been able to find is the P-51B was built in Inglewood, CA and the P-51C was built in Dallas, TX. I don't see why we need both models when they are the same. Here is a couple other links to non-Wikipedia sites, it was quick to link to Wikipedia and it confirmed what I had read many other places.

I realize that both P-51B and P-51C used V-1650-3 and V-1650-7. Would redoing the P-51B with the V-1650-7 really be worth it?  Kind of like the P-51D with 2 less .50 cal and worse visibility.

http://www.cafsmw.org/smw-aircraft/Mustang.html

Trivia question: although visually identical, a common question is "What is the difference between a B and C model Mustang?" The answer is simply "Where it was built". "B" model Mustangs were built in Inglewood, CA and "C" models were built in Dallas. 886 "C" model Mustangs were built before the production line was converted to producing the new "D" model Mustangs in July, 1944.

http://www.acepilots.com/planes/p51_mustang.html

North American geared up for Mustang production, moving the B-25 program to Kansas City, dedicating the Inglewood plant to the Mustang, and expanding the Dallas plant for the Mustang (Dallas-built versions of the -B model were designated P-51C). P-51B's began rolling out of Inglewood in May, 1943; eventually 1,990 of the -B models would be made. The first of 1,750 P-51C's produced at Dallas flew in August.

I thought I read in a book at home that the P-51D and P-51K were the same but just built in different plants. But I will defer to you on that because I don't have that at work with me.

[J_A_B]

"I don't see why we need both models when they are the same."

You're so focused on that little detail that I think you missed the point of this thread--a "can't see the forest because of the trees" sort of issue.  Understandable, as many people who post here are mistaken about things of that nature, but I assure you there's a good reason I specifically suggest the "C" or "K" designation.  Read on.


Since this is the 'withlist' forum, I posted my wish:  That we see a 72 inch MAP Merlin Mustang in AH.  The Mustangs currently in AH run at 67''.  Since 72'' was only used in the ETO, I asked for such a plane to be added to the planeset, instead of replacing either of the current Mustangs.  

Point is, a Mustang running at 67'' does not, repeat, DOES NOT perform identically to one running at 72''.   The use of 72'' MAP improved speed by about 10 MPH and added a few hundred feet per minute to the climbrate below critical altitude--a pretty useful improvement.  

Hence you'd want to differentiate them in the arena.  Within the AH ICON system, using the P-51C or K designation would be the easier choice.  You could add a P-51D running at 72'' and that'd be fine with me, but it'd be a mess to try to make its ICON unique from the P-51D we already have.  Now, if the current P-51D was simply boosted up to 72'', that'd be fine too.  I simply recommend something that would add to choices, instead of replacing one option with another.

In other words, would you rather try to tell a P-51D-10-NA (67'') from a P-51D-25-NA (72''), or simply see P-51D vs P-51K?  Simplicity--that's why I suggested use of the P-51C or P-51K designation.

Anyway, the wish is for a 72'' MAP Merlin Mustang.  

J_A_B

[Benny Moore]

And a 70 Hg. MAP. P-38!

[NitroFish]

I really didn't want to start anything with you J_A_B.
You just clarified your point about calling the P-51B/C with 67" a "P-51B" and P-51B/C with 72" a "P-51C". And the same thing for P-51D/K. More a wish for AH then P-51B/C in real life.

[J_A_B]

"You just clarified your point about calling the P-51B/C with 67" a "P-51B" and P-51B/C with 72" a "P-51C". And the same thing for P-51D/K. More a wish for AH then P-51B/C in real life."

That's right, I posted that strictly as a wish for AH.

I know both P-51D's and P-51K's were flown at both 67'' and 72''.  If you want to get really confusing, not only were P-51K's built in Dallas, some P-51D's were also built in Dallas (they'll have an -NT suffix instead of the -NA suffix).  Some P-51K's had a different canopy and some didn't, and a lot of them eventually ended up with a Hamilton Standard propeller.  

I don't think you 'started' anything with me; I don't mind the discussion.  It seems like you thought I made the common error of thinking the D and K were signifigantly different and made a good-natured effort to correct the perceived mistake.  That's good, and it's better to be absolutely certain than sloppy and incorrect.  I make mistakes, and recently another member of this BBS corrected an error I made when discussing engine designations, so I appreciate the effort even if it was unnecessary in this case.

J_A_B

[Spatula]

Couple of points.
- The icon system is in place to make up for the lack of visual accuracy on monitors compared to real human vision. So it stands to reason the icon system should only differentiate visual differences which arent obvious due to our limiting monitors. So why would you have an icon differentiating a non-visual difference like fuel grade and MAP settings?

- If you introduced the 72" MAP setting P51 (in which ever variant), why would anyone want to fly the 67" MAP counterparts? You may as well just replace the existing 67" with the 72" MAP a/c. So, now if you upgrade the P51s performance (which is what is proposed), can you imagine the complaints?? The calls to perk it?

Dont get me wrong, i would love to see a 72" MAP setting mustang - as i fly almost nothing but mustangs. But if you bought it in, perhaps it would need to be as a small perk valued option like the Chog. And i dont think icons should give it away either.

[J_A_B]

"So why would you have an icon differentiating a non-visual difference like fuel grade and MAP settings?"

For the same reason that it differentiates between planes like the MC 202 and MC 205.  


"If you introduced the 72" MAP setting P51 (in which ever variant), why would anyone want to fly the 67" MAP counterparts?"

Well, we have lots of airplanes that aren't used a whole lot.  The 67'' version is important to keep in AH for the purpose of replicating settings in which the 150-octane fuel was unavailable.  It might not see much MA use, but that's not a problem.  The 2-gun LA7 also doesn't see much use, despite being the far more numerous version during WW2.

I don't believe a 72'' Mustang would be perk worthy, not in an arena full of unperked P-47N and Spit 16's and LA7's and such.  This is even more true if the 72'' model is a P-51B/C.  The perk-worthy Mustang is the P-51H, but that's a matter for a different thread  


J_A_B

[Spatula]

Originally posted by J_A_B
"So why would you have an icon differentiating a non-visual difference like fuel grade and MAP settings?"

For the same reason that it differentiates between planes like the MC 202 and MC 205.  
 

So the 205 is visually identical to the 202? It had different armament for a start which must have manifested itself visually to some degree. Different engines (601 vs 605) probably (and im guessing here) would lead to possibly slightly different intake configurations?? Drag reduction mods?? My point is there must be some minor visual differences.

[J_A_B]

Not all 205's had the cannons, some of them had wing MG's just like the 202's.

Anyway, if such a minor difference suffices, some P-51B/C's were fitted with a dorsal fillet, and some weren't.  Some had the 'malcolm hood', and some didn't.  Some P-51D/K's had one dorsal antenna, some had two, some had a a direction finder and some didn't.  There were a couple different canopies in use. An Aeroproducts propeller looks a little different than a Hamilton Standard.  

Alternately, don't add a new model at all and just bump the current 67'' P-51D up to 72''.  That suits my "wish" just fine too.  I'm easy to please.

J_A_B