Author Topic: Request for p51c (Read 778 times)

MiloMorai · « **Reply #15 on:** August 07, 2003, 01:04:23 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Vermillion
The "H" model was the late war, lightweight version of the Mustang that was never put into production. Roughly equivalent to the P-47M/N.

There was 555 P-51Hs completed before V-J Day, out of 2000 P-51Hs ordered, made up of 555 NA-126s and 1445 NA-129s with minor differences.

The Dallas built a/c was to be the P-51M.

Kevin14 · « **Reply #16 on:** August 08, 2003, 10:02:19 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Vermillion
No Kevin, Milo has it right

The "H" model was the late war, lightweight version of the Mustang that was never put into production. Roughly equivalent to the P-47M/N.

Ok, thanks for clearing that up

WestyAH · « **Reply #17 on:** August 08, 2003, 10:24:39 AM »

The "H" was mass produced. As were the P-47N's (N is just a modified "M" imo with the clipped "wet" wings). But post war it was not favoured by the crews and pilots (and the Air Force/ANG) that used them. My readins on the model indicate the more rugged D model was preffered. The D model they had more of and in particular more spares for with which to maintain and keep them running longer too.

Squire · « **Reply #18 on:** August 09, 2003, 01:05:22 AM »

No merlin powered Mustang (B, C, D, K, H) served with 20mm cannon.

The K was a D with a slightly different prop (built in Dallas), and was just short of the Ds performance. Why the different prop, I have not been able to find out.

Widewing · « **Reply #19 on:** August 09, 2003, 09:33:03 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Squire
No merlin powered Mustang (B, C, D, K, H) served with 20mm cannon.

The K was a D with a slightly different prop (built in Dallas), and was just short of the Ds performance. Why the different prop, I have not been able to find out.

The major reason for the prop change was due to availabilty. Hamilton Standard was unable to produce propellers in sufficient volume for the high level of demand. additionally, the War Production Board urged aircraft manufacturers to use different sources to assist with boosting growth of the smaller companies as well as for common-sense strategic purposes. A fire at the H-S plant could shut down the only source for weeks. Multiple sources meant less disruption due that type of event, or even something as simple as a strike by unhappy employees. So, several manufacturers went with the Aero Products props, including Grumman for the F8F-1 Bearcat. Still others were using the Curtiss Electric props (generally disliked for several reasons) Unlike the H-S prop, the Aero Products prop lacked the airfoil shaped shank cuffs, which reduced total thrust enough to result in about a 4 mph loss at max speed for a perfectly tuned, perfectly clean airframe. Since no such thing existed in typical combat service, actual performance differences weren't really discernable to the pilots.

P-51Ks had a slightly different shaped canopy bubble as well, again due to a different manufacturer using a slightly different shaped mold.

My regards,

Widewing

Puke · « **Reply #20 on:** August 09, 2003, 01:08:43 PM »

How would an Allison engined Mustang fare in the MA? Was the Allison better at low altitudes than the typical Merlin 'stang...better acceleration and/or speed?

And I know how those four cannons would perform.

BenDover · « **Reply #21 on:** August 10, 2003, 03:31:17 PM »

From what I've heard the merlin was slightly better than the allison at lower alt, but was alot better than the allison at med-high alt.