Comments on: Top Five: WWII Fighters That Are Not The P-51

By: HJ

HJ — Fri, 03 Feb 2012 08:25:30 +0000

Of course, the other great thing about the P-51 was that it was relatively economical to produce and maintain compared to the other US fighters (P-38, in particular) that possessed the range to escort bombers all the way to Germany (and back). For this reason, they were available in large numbers and it was the numbers as much as anything else that meant that the game was up for the Luftwaffe.

By: Magnus Caseus Formatis

Magnus Caseus Formatis — Thu, 02 Feb 2012 19:48:56 +0000

I see that I repeated myself, from waaaaay above. Sorry. One-track mind, here.

By: Rufus

Rufus — Thu, 02 Feb 2012 19:38:35 +0000

The post that just won’t die…

Welcome, HJ!!

By: Magnus Caseus Formatis

Magnus Caseus Formatis — Thu, 02 Feb 2012 17:55:23 +0000

You make a good point. It was a P-51, not an F-51. The roles are similar; but, not the same. In the end, it may have been that, by the time the Mustang was introduced, we had enough seasoned pilots who could really handle the thing, as compared to the Luftwaffe, who was filling pilot seats with newbies. Put a good pilot in an average aircraft, and he’ll make things happen; put a new pilot into an advanced aircraft, and usually, he won’t stand a chance against the seasoned pilot.

By: HJ

HJ — Thu, 02 Feb 2012 17:23:49 +0000

Yes, but the Spitfire was a much better point defence (interceptor) fighter than the P-51 would have been.

They had very different strengths.

By: HJ

HJ — Thu, 02 Feb 2012 17:21:39 +0000

You’ve put your finger on it.

The great achievement of the US in WW2 was its phenomenal achievement in racking up military production to unprecedented levels and with unprecedented efficiency, and not just in aircraft. This made the outcome inevitable, even more than (although I don’t wish to downplay in any way) the contribution of its military personnel.

By: HJ

HJ — Thu, 02 Feb 2012 17:17:20 +0000

I dont think that the P-51 Mustang was the best all-round fighter.

It was a truly excellent machine at long range high altitude bomber support, but it really wasn’t an all-round fighter.

It was significantly less manoeuvrable than aircraft like the Spitfire and FW190 at lower altitudes and it had nothing like the interceptor capability of the contemporary versions of the Spitfire or ME190 – it simply couldn’t climb fast enough. In a dogfight at a range of altitudes, you’d want to be in a Spitfire (short-legged though it was).

That is not to denigrate the P-51 at all, simply to point out that although it had advantages over some of its contemporaries that made it particularly suitable for the role for which it was used, it had deficiencies that meant that it wouldn’t have been suitable for other roles at which some of its contemporaries excelled.

By: Barry Bird

Barry Bird — Thu, 14 Jul 2011 13:44:41 +0000

BIG MISTAKE !!! You’re not proof-reading your typing… The #2 airplane is not a F4U Hellcat.
It’s a F6F Hellcat as it is noted in the “share on Facebook” text below the photo..

By: Manuel Amado

Manuel Amado — Mon, 23 Aug 2010 08:12:39 +0000

67Cougar’s words that is.

By: Manuel Amado

Manuel Amado — Mon, 23 Aug 2010 08:11:09 +0000

I agree with every word…