Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: 5PointOh on April 07, 2008, 07:58:08 AM
-
Its not a terribly big deal, but why is the radiator shudder not modeled. I always figured it should be considering the some of the planes have the leading edge slats modeled. I'm sure the thrust effect has been modeled. The other item is why only 6 rockets on the 51 when it was capable of holding 10. Just my morning random thoughts.
-
You meant "shutter", yes?
As to the rockets, 10 was postwar.
Here si a challenge for you, find a wartime document or phot of a P-51 hanging both six rockets and two 1,000lb bombs. Or even two 500lbs.
-
According to my copy of The Great Book of Fighters (Green and Swanborough 2001, ISBN: 0760311943), the P-51D armament is listed with:
- 6 × 0.50 in machine guns
- 10 × 5 in rockets
- 2 hardpoints for up to 2,000 lb
It's based on service data from WWII for the D-variant. Not post war. But what do I know? :)
-
I am sorry I did mean shutter.
This is from the P-51Ds operation manual.
(http://www.zenoswarbirdvideos.com/Images/P-51/P-51ROCKETLAUNCH.gif) I counted ten.
-
Wow - confirmed. 10 points. I wonder why our P-51D has six?
-
You won't find any photos of wartime 51s with 10 rockets because they didn't carry ten rockets. Also understand I don't think you'll find any photos of ETO Mustangs carrying those types of rockets at all. As far as I can determine the Iwo 51s carried 6 and and 2 DTs. I can post photos of Korean war 51s carrying 6 and 2 500 pounders.
Note that in the photo from the manual, that to have 10 rocket rails there is no wing pylon. This would mean no DTs or bombs carried if you took 10 rockets.
I've never seen a photo of a combat Mustang without the pylons and 10 rockets.
Standard practice, very late in the summer of 45 and in Korea was 6 rocket rails and 2 pylons.
-
The deal with the extra rockets is that the bomb/drop tank pylons have to be removed to accommodate it. I imagine that's why you never see pictures of that configuration.
-
Makes sense Pyro. Since the P-51 was customizable to the n'th degree, if you want 6 rockets AND bombs, you'd remove #7, 8, 9, 10, 22, 23, 24, and 25 rocket hard points (see image above).
I dozens of picutres of the P-51 - some showing the 3 rocket hard points next to the larger one for bombs/fuel tanks. Let me see if I can find one.
-
Here is the RCAF P-51D with the rocket + fuel tank hard points.
(http://www.swissmustangs.ch/mediac/400_0/media/RCAF~Mustang~in~flight.jpg)
Another
(http://www.swissmustangs.ch/mediac/400_0/media/P-51D~late.jpg)
This one has 3 on each wing (from the 348th) allowing 8 rockets. [edited]
(http://www.swissmustangs.ch/mediac/400_0/media/p51_52.jpg)
It seems that the rocket armed P-51D only saw limited use during WWII and that the primary configuration of the P-51 was indeed the main hardpoints for bombs/fuel tanks. Interesting. :)
Courtsey of Swiss Mustangs (http://www.swissmustangs.ch/index2.html)
-
The deal with the extra rockets is that the bomb/drop tank pylons have to be removed to accommodate it. I imagine that's why you never see pictures of that configuration.
Thank you sir for the insight, it was just something I was wondering about on my way to work. So how about the shutter... :D
-
This one has 4 on each wing (from the 348th) allowing 8 rockets.
(http://www.swissmustangs.ch/mediac/400_0/media/p51_52.jpg)
You are actually seeing 3 rocket rails and the wing hard point. Not 4 rocket rails in that photo.
-
Oops, didn't read Guppy's post before I repeated part of it.
On the third picture, I concur that there are only 3 rockets and a bomb pylon there.
-
Your right (eye's gettin old). It's only 3 rocket rails on each wing. I thought it was four. (Had to lean in and squint.) :D
-
Well, the question is one of capability versus actual use. Personally, if you can't arm a P-51D with 10 rockets, you shouldn't be able to arm it with 1,000lb bombs either. Or, if you can arm 1,000 lb bombs, we should be able to carry 10 rockets. P-51D POH (dated during WWII) shows the capability of 10 rockets. So, the capability existed during the war, even if they didn't use it.
I'd up Karnak's challenge to show a wartime P-51D in a combat zone carrying 1,000 lb bombs. To paraphrase the POH--those bombs created limit loads on the pylons and disrupted flight characteristics so severely that they weren't recommended for use. So, does anyone have photos of the Pony hanging crowd pleasers? I'd love to be proven wrong if you do so I can quit being such a grumpy pants about this issue.
-
Well, the question is one of capability versus actual use.
No, that's actually a different question. I didn't mean to imply otherwise. I never answered the original question in this thread but the reason there isn't a 10 rocket option on the P-51 is that I couldn't do it without running into limitations and having to resort to cheap tricks. Whether it should or shouldn't be allowed that option is a question I never got to. At some point, it will come back up and we can worry about it then.
-
Thank you Pyro for the honest answer. Like I said it was just a question I thought about on the way to work. I think if it had to been done cheaply then not having the ten rockets is okay. So how about that radiator shutter.
-
What about the P51's with the 4 20mm's.
:noid :noid
-
yes there was a 51 (RAF Mustang IA) with the 4 20mm, but very few had the 4 20s (93 to be exact). Plus being powered by the Allison V-1710 (1150 hp and a max speed of 382 @ 13000) it would hardly be worth having. The 51D/K
had more power and a total production run close to 8000.
-
Well, the question is one of capability versus actual use. Personally, if you can't arm a P-51D with 10 rockets, you shouldn't be able to arm it with 1,000lb bombs either. Or, if you can arm 1,000 lb bombs, we should be able to carry 10 rockets. P-51D POH (dated during WWII) shows the capability of 10 rockets. So, the capability existed during the war, even if they didn't use it.
I'd up Karnak's challenge to show a wartime P-51D in a combat zone carrying 1,000 lb bombs. To paraphrase the POH--those bombs created limit loads on the pylons and disrupted flight characteristics so severely that they weren't recommended for use. So, does anyone have photos of the Pony hanging crowd pleasers? I'd love to be proven wrong if you do so I can quit being such a grumpy pants about this issue.
15th Fighter Group flew some close support for the Marines when they first got to Iwo. They didn't go very far with them, but they carried 1000 pounders. A 15th FG P51D getting the bomb sway braces tightened before a mission from Iwo in April 45.
(http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s199/guppy35/1000lber.jpg)
-
You meant "shutter", yes?
As to the rockets, 10 was postwar.
Here si a challenge for you, find a wartime document or phot of a P-51 hanging both six rockets and two 1,000lb bombs. Or even two 500lbs.
Does Korea count? I can show you lots of photos of 51Ds carrying 6 rockets and 2 500 pounders :)
Just to expand on it. The rockets and those rails didn't appear until late in 45, again as far as I can tell it was the Iwo 51s that had them. They didn't carry bombs too because to get to Japan they needed the DTs so they took rockets and DTs. In Korea the range wasn't an issue so they could take both at the same time.
-
Its not a terribly big deal, but why is the radiator shutter not modeled.
overheating dweebs............
-
What about the P51's with the 4 20mm's.
:noid :noid
thats the p51c
-
thats the p51c
No it you refer to the post by 5pointoh
yes there was a 51 (RAF Mustang IA) with the 4 20mm, but very few had the 4 20s (93 to be exact). Plus being powered by the Allison V-1710 (1150 hp and a max speed of 382 @ 13000) it would hardly be worth having. The 51D/K
had more power and a total production run close to 8000.
-
No it you refer to the post by 5pointoh
well would be nice 2 have p51c
-
The B is almost identical to the C other than point of assembly. But I have seen some resorces state that the C was slightly faster.
P-51B (NA-102/104) production version of XP-51B,
6,840lbs empty, 9,200lbs normal, 11,200lbs max
1,620 hp Packard twelve-cylinder Vee liquid-cooled Merlin V-1650-3 twelve-cylinder Vee liquid-cooled Merlin
388 mph @ 5000 ft, 406 mph @ 10,000 ft, 427 mph @ 20,000 ft, 430 mph @ 25,000 ft, 440 mph @ 30,000 ft
1.8 minutes to 5000 ft, 3.6 minutes to 10,000 ft, 7 minutes to 20,000 ft. Service ceiling 42,000 ft
Four 0.5-inch Browning MG53-2 guns in wings, 350 rounds each gun, and 280 rounds each outer gun
NA-104 wing hardpoints strengthened for 1,000-lbs bombs
Final 550 aircraft added 85-US gal rear fuselage tank (P-51B-7-NAs), also retrofitted to some earlier aircraft
Green camouflage paint removed later in production run to reduce weight/drag
1,988 built, 25 to RAF
Mustang Mk III British equivalent P-51B/C (274 P-51Bs and 626 P-51Cs)
British addition of "Malcolm Hood" or "Bubble" canopy on Mustang III improved visibility, retrofitted to many P-51B/Cs
P-51C (NA-103/111) Similar to P-51 B but built in Dallas TX , (not Inglewood CA)
6985 lbs empty, 9800 lbs normal, 11,800 lbs max
1695 hp Packard twelve-cylinder Vee liquid-cooled Merlin V-1650-7
395 mph @ 5000 ft, 417 mph @ 10,000 ft, 426 mph @ 20,000 ft, 439 mph @ 25,000 ft, 435 mph @ 30,000 ft
1.6 minutes to 5000 ft, 3.1 minutes to 10,000 ft, 6.9 minutes to 20,000 ft. Service ceiling 41,900 ft
So in AH the B=C and the D=K (Although the K had a Aeroproducts propeller, but was changed in the field for reliability/durability)
-
I would give my first born for a 51 with 4 20mm hispanos. I dont care if its slow or not! :D
Strip(er)
-
15th Fighter Group flew some close support for the Marines when they first got to Iwo. They didn't go very far with them, but they carried 1000 pounders. A 15th FG P51D getting the bomb sway braces tightened before a mission from Iwo in April 45.
(http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s199/guppy35/1000lber.jpg)
Thanks Dan--I knew you'd have 'em if anyone did. I'm assuming fuel load would be fairly light for takeoff, one lap around the island, and pickle. Any pics/stories of ETO/MTO/CBI aircraft using them? Must be strange operating off such a small island and using your ordnance only a few kilometers from the flight line.
I guess my argument would be that if the bombers are restricted to the payloads they carried with max fuel, the fighters should be as well. I don't think you'd find a whole lot of instances where Pony pilots packed the crowd pleasers with full bags of gas. But, they did use them, so I'll hush up in the future :aok
-
This is as heavily a loaded 51 as I've seen in WW2. Another Iwo bird taking off loaded with Rockets and 38 style 165 gallon DTs. Not sure what those DTs would weigh full of fuel but I'd think it would be plenty.
(http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s199/guppy35/Iwo51D.jpg)
-
Blimey, that bird is well loaded!
-
Standard avgas weighs approx 6lbs per gallon. At that weight, you would be looking at about 990lbs per drop tank!!!! :eek: Most pics that I have seen have been with 3 tubes under each wing. Have done some research and have not found anything with 4 rockets under each wing. Not to say that it didn't happen however.
:salute
-
15th Fighter Group flew some close support for the Marines when they first got to Iwo. They didn't go very far with them, but they carried 1000 pounders. A 15th FG P51D getting the bomb sway braces tightened before a mission from Iwo in April 45.
(http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s199/guppy35/1000lber.jpg)
The problem I have with the 1,000lbers in AH is that they are carried to the effective exclusion of all other bombs (on fighters allowed to take them) when in reality they were very rarely carried by fighters. In particular it makes the apparent capability of Axis aircraft look much worse than it was in reality. In practicality the Fw190, Ki-84 or N1K2-J roughly carried the same bombload as Allied fighters, but in AH people just see them as less than half as effective. Two 250kg bombs on a Ki-84 compared to two 1,000lb bombs and six rockets on a P-51D or two 1,000lb bombs, one 500lb bomb and eight rockets on a P-47 or two 1,000lb bombs and eight rockets on the F6F-5 when those Allied loadouts never, or almost never, happened in reality.
-
The problem I have with the 1,000lbers in AH is that they are carried to the effective exclusion of all other bombs (on fighters allowed to take them) when in reality they were very rarely carried by fighters. In particular it makes the apparent capability of Axis aircraft look much worse than it was in reality. In practicality the Fw190, Ki-84 or N1K2-J roughly carried the same bombload as Allied fighters, but in AH people just see them as less than half as effective. Two 250kg bombs on a Ki-84 compared to two 1,000lb bombs and six rockets on a P-51D or two 1,000lb bombs, one 500lb bomb and eight rockets on a P-47 or two 1,000lb bombs and eight rockets on the F6F-5 when those Allied loadouts never, or almost never, happened in reality.
I concur. This reduces the utility of the tactical bombers. I would not only limit fighters to 500lb bombs but would take it one step further by having certain structures (ordnance comes to mind... ammo bunkers!) and ships (bring on the battleships!) impervious to less than 1k bombs to account for armor / hardened facilities.
Regards,
Hammer
-
I agree. I'll start another thread so it can be discussed.