ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 2 ต.ค. 2024
- “I want to start with an embarrassing confession. With a lifelong obsession with aircraft and a few decades of experience engineering them, you might think I’d have an insightful and obscure favourite airplane (or ‘aeroplane’ as Hush-Kit would have me say). But the answer will disappoint you. Like many, I absolutely love the P-51 Mustang. I have tried hard to come up with a more sophisticated answer.
Joe Wilding (@joe_wilding) / Twitter
Joe Wilding
Despite some strong contenders, I keep coming back to the Mustang. The Mustang is the Jimmy Stewart of airplanes. Both are solid performers with dashing good looks, and few have a negative comment for either one. The Mustang’s graceful curves draw you in. The performance and technical details are what keep me coming back. It’s the best of both worlds: a stunning piece of art and a technical marvel. While the art claim is uncontestable, let’s dive a little deeper into the technical claim.
Narration: Parsifal Solomon
From an original Hush-Kit article by Joe Wilding
OUR FABULOUS BOOK, The Hush-Kit Book of Warplanes is now available here: unbound.com/bo...
VISIT OUR BLOG HUSHKIT.net
or support volume 2 here: unbound.com/bo...
Support book 3 here: unbound.com/bo...
Buy our t-shirts and be a totally brilliant supporter here: www.redbubble.....
Support us on Patreon here and help us carry on:
/ hush_kit
the P51 mustang: the plane the HE100 wanted to be.
I've always felt the Mustang got undue praise simply because of its looks, just like the Spitfire, when other aircraft did all the heavy lifting during the war. The P-47 was the real USAAF workhorse but it's hardly ever recognized because it's "ugly." It's role as bomber escort, and the political decisions that hampered it, are largely ignored.
"Questionable handling characteristics" while panning to an F-104. 🤣
Bit of an understatement, that.
Looking at you 104
I love Hushkit!
Still love the Jug more than the P-51 (but only because a Jug is SOOOO bloody American. Over the top, over engineered, and over here all shiny and frigging HUGE!)
👍👍
Thank you very interesting ☮️❤️👍
I was lucky to be able to fly in a P-51D “lil horse” in 2012 alongside another Mustang “the Dakota Kid”. Barrel rolls and split s’s over Galveston bay, a very memorable day. It was like being in a flying hot rod, very snug but great visibility. They removed the fuel tank that was behind the pilot and placed another seat and a stick so I was able to actually fly it for a short time.
No one expects a surprise Al Murray!
No one expects the Spanish Inquisition either!
Our chief weapons are...
Long range and escorting bombers were never requirement for the Mustang/P-51. None of the fighters that did perform long range missions during WW2 were designed as such. Happy circumstance is largely responsible for the long range fighters of the USAAF. Until December 1941 the USAAF was not allowing pursuits to carry drop tanks. Soon after when the USAAF got around to demanding more range from pursuits Lockheed already had tanks and systems designed. By May P-38 for Bolero and Alaska had been modified for drop tanks. In August 1942 Lockheed tested 310 gallon drop tanks on a P-38F. The 310 gallon drop tanks were used in combat in April 1942 for Operation Vengeance and June 1944 during a P-38 dive-bombing attack on Ploesti. Lockeed drop tanks were used on P-47s, P-61, and Navy patrol airplanes. Despite the superb qualities of the Mustang it could still not do what a P-47N or P-38L could do. The only advantages the Mustang had were logistic, economic, and political (propaganda).
Absolutely the best analysis of the Mustang I have ever heard, short of the research I have done !! All the details explained why the Mustang was so damn good for its time, all the new next generation design features !!!
If any aircraft can be associated with Jimmy Stewart, it would necessarily be the B-24. He flew them in combat over Europe as a squadron and later group commander.
I had the great pleasure to meet a lady pilot who flew aircraft as a ferry pilot during the war. She flew finished aircraft from their factorys to staging areas. The lady was my friends grandmother. I asked her what was her what was her favorite plane to fly. Without hesitation she said Mustang. She added that you had to be careful with the throttle on takeoffs but for pure flying joy nothing beat it. She kept her pilots license and flew for fun until private aviation got too expensive.
Nice video but come on…
We the consumers of Hush Kit are über airplane nerds. So what we need is a part 2, the next additional items 11 to 20, P51 really really obscure facts. Such as the P51 was late to Europe for the USAAF because of a delay in making any decision. The original A36 and its dive brakes. The totally all new P51H, but the H didn’t look as good as the B or D. Who to pick as the 1940s actress to represent the H model? The mid engined Griffon powered Mustang proposal. The modular construction to speed production. North American Aviation origins as Fokker. Edgar Schmued German born designer of the Mustang and why he was erased from North American history. The actual dollar costs of US fighters: the really expensive P38, the expensive P47 and the really cheap to build P51. What the Luftwaffe pilots said about the Mustangs ability to absorb cannon rounds - NOT! So much more to say, so say it. Oh yeah great looking airplane!
Greg was right all along
A beautiful looking aeroplane wrapped around a beautiful Rolls Royce Merlin engine 👌
Packard Merlin
The P-47 had the range, but the Bomber Mafia wouldn't fit them with the needed drop tanks. More of a political eff-up than a technical advantage of the P-51 (which was a better dog fighter).
Even with drop tanks I think they were unable to get to Berlin.
@@timpetta2974 That's just the standard line that gets constantly repeated. Look up the superb episode on exactly this misinformation on Greg's Automobiles and Airplanes - you won't regret it 👍
Wrong, so wrong. Get a clue.@@timpetta2974
The Mustang wing was a major modification of the pre-war NACA 45-125 and the first NAA/NACA 45-100 was tested at GALCIT in May 1940. Not Laminar Flow but Low Drag/High Speed. The Max T/c was in 38% range. The marvel of the airfoil, namely delayed Mcr and greater transitional turbulent flow due to lower velocity gradient from LE to Max T/C- led to lower profile drag due to delay of full blown turbulent separation well aft of max thickness of the wing.
Not 'mid war'
Kudo for praise for Allison powered versions. Kudo for discussing Conic Lofting/Projective Geometry. While intuitive to Schmued, it was developed mathmatically by Liming - Chief of Engineering Lofing and Weebe at NAA. The essence, once again was to create a form to the freestream which generated th lowest possible velocity gradient - with no disruptive projections.
No to increased drag for P-51D vs P-51B. At Max Internal gross weight at TO, the D is 500pounds heavier which will cause slightly more Induced Drag, but the Parasite drag of both the cockpit enclosure and wing pylons of the D was lower than the B. See NA-5534 and NA-8449 (Performance Calcs for P-51B and P-51D respectively for CD build up at low speed Reynolds numbers).
With pylons, same gross weight, same engine/MP the P-51D is about 12mph faster at 25000 feet (combat conditions after drop tanks released). That said, the P-51B in that comparison has more fuel remaining ~50 gal.
Lednicer did a study using very sophisticated CFD modeling showing that the pressure distribution differences between the B and D were due the greater angle of the B windscreen creating a stagnation point at the cowl interface.
Kudos for describing Meredith effect coherently and noting the value to reducing cooling drag to net (or near net) at high speed. While all Mustangs were designed for Meredith, the process was incremental improvement all the way to the P-51H.
TheNA-73X crash landed due to fuel starvation on final approach - pilot error in not switching to auxiliary tank.
Best factual presntation I have seen to date on the Mustang attributes.
FWIIW Kindelberger tried to switch to Merlin XX in fall of 1941 but was shut down by GMC Board of Directors to protect Allison. Allisontried again in 1943 but then the Army intervened and told GMC to stand down.
Would like to see you cover BAe P.1233-1 SABA.
Thanks.
Forgot to mention that the color shots of the 355th FG were taken by S/Sgt Cal Sloan while my father was flying the two seat converted P-51D. June 1945.
A Plane with good looks, the Italian Breda Ba.88 Lince, they were so good, the Regia Aeronautica use them as decoys in North Africa.
0:29 Don Blakeslee.
Better title: "Top 10 things that made the Merlin-engined Mustang so outstanding".
I knew the credit stealing couldn't be far away. The Mustang started out as an low level attack aircraft thus it was the A-36 and did not need all the extra supercharging and they used the Allison engine which is superior to the Merlin at low level. Wise engineering eh wut ol' chap?
In fact Allison had an excellent high altitude engine but it was too big and would have required a large re-design so the Merlin was used. And the Merlin was an excellent engine no doubt.
I've even seen Brit's try to take credit for the entire design of the P-51 which is bloody rubbish. The Brits were desperate for aircraft and came to North American Aviation (NAA) and asked them to build the obsolescent P-40 for them. NAA President "Dutch" Kindelberger said "We can do better.: Thus the P-51 and All American it is.
Actually I'm partial to Brits but there seems to be quite a few that want to jump and grab the credit, most unseemly and decidedly not ol' tie :-)
@@GregWampler-xm8hv I love it when Seppoes try to stick up for 'MURRICA! by being even more ignorant.
@@hoilst265 The secret fuel that made the Spitfire supreme
Royal Society of Chemistry
11 October 2022
The USA developed and supplied the high-octane fuel that gave the Spitfire and Hurricane a winning edge in the Battle of Britain. A French American, Eugene Houdry, developed a process to convert useless crude oil into 100 octane fuel. 100 Octane fuel increased the Spitfire's speed by 25 mph at sea level and 34 mph at 10,000 feet. A 13-octane point increase contributed to the British victory in the Battle of Britain in 1940.
"For the next important and powerful Merlin 66 engine, Rolls Royce finally decided to use the Bendix-Stromberg Injection carburettor. The American Bendix-Stromberg pressure carburettor was developed in the mid 1930’s and was in production from 1938. This carburettor was designed to operate as a fully pressurised fuel system that dispensed with the problematic float controlled fuel level with its emulsion tubes and diffusers. Negative G had no effect on fuel flow or carburettor function. The pressurised and metered fuel flow was delivered as a spray into the inlet air stream just in front of the supercharger inlet. This feature virtually removed the risk of carburettor icing, in fact the throttles and chokes of the injection carburettor did not need heating by hot oil or coolant circulation at all and their deletion removed several other problems associated with the previous provision of those heating circuits.
Rolls Royce had been aware of the Bendix-Stromberg Pressure type of carburettor for several years and versions of the carburettor were used on many American engines including the Allison V-1710. Notably, Packard built their Merlins in the USA with a version of the Bendix PD16 from the very start of Packard Merlin production."
ROLLS-ROYCE MERLIN CARBURETTOR DEVELOPMENT page
My favorite WWII fighter. I'd love to see a video on the C-130 Hercules. Arguably the most successful aircraft design in history and designed by Kelley Johnson's Skunkworks. The same people that brought you the SR-71. I have nearly 6,000 FHs as a navigators in C-130Es and Hs with the USAF.
FYI Kelly Johnson thought the C-130 was junk when shown the design. I read that in the autobiography of the man who took over for Mr. Johnson.
A very well-written and balanced narrative.
Did I mention low drag?
The Mustang was a great aeroplane, but not good in a dogfight. Typical excellent American engineering with great attention to detail. But the near laminar wing had a nasty stall and could not turn. The BF.109K would be my choice - water/methanol/hydrazine injection and high boost. 2200+HP. They could have got even MORE power with individual cylinder injection.
The airfoil was the davis airfoil and also used on the B24 bomber. One gigantic reason P51 was successful was that north American used the same T6 advanced trainer cockpit control layout on their P51. This was especially helpful at later stage of the war when US fighter training was not as extensive. It was fast at altitude, had superior range and good enough, plus outnumbered it's opponents as the war went on. Even a P51 could not out maneuver a Japanese zero. It was speed and power that made the difference. Many consider the P47 thunderbolt as the better fighter and the P51 as the glamour girl. 3 most pruduced US fighter planes were the P47, P51 and P40. Also the 3 most top scoring planes. That tells something about the underated P40 and it's Allison engine. P40 was still in production at wars end. North american said they could build a fighter better than the P40 and it was not until they put the higher powered motor on it before it was. The Allison engined P51 was actually redesignated as a dive bomber at first
*_"The airfoil was the davis airfoil and also used on the B24 bomber"_*
No, it was quite different. The maximum thickness was quite a bit further aft and the chord almost symmetrical. Go to the Aces High bulletin board and search for a topic called, 'The P-51 and its laminar-flow wing'. There is a very good discussion there, including comparisons between the Davis wing and the P-51 wing. The Davis section had its point of maximum thickness at about 30%, whereas the P-51 aerofoil was at 38.9% of chord. In fact, the P-51 wing could be more closely compared to Richard Whitcombe's supercritical wings which revolutionised air transport 25 years later.
Its notable feature was the development of shock waves top and bottom at high speed. This resulted in lower drag and better transonic performance than older designs like the P-47.
@@thethirdman225 google this question " did the b-24 liberator and a P-51 mustang use the same Davis airfoil" , notice it says "similar", not "quite different" then get back to me
@@thethirdman225 google says they both use a "Davis airfoil cross section" if you look it up you will know what you did not
How can you have a thumbnail and a video title that contradict each other.
Sexiness in the sky
As with all aircraft the P51 Mustang is a set of compromises.
In order to provide long range performance it has a greater volume than some of it's contemporaries, when fully fueled up at the beginning of a mission the handling was potentially dangerous, the Me109 & Spitfire sacrificed range for low volume & frontal area. Like the Hurricane the P51 has a wing thick enough to enclose the entire undercarriage when folded & in common with the fw190 & Hurricane that wing is strong enough & thick enough to have an undercarriage hinging well out on the wing providing a wide track for easier ground handling.
The P51's simple wing has advantages but lacking the complex & subtle wing of the Spitfire it lacks the aerobatic sophistication of that series of aircraft which explains the longevity of the Spitfire design series whilst the Mustang underwent fewer changes because it was already optimised for it's intended role as a long range fighter with little to be gained by major changes.
The P-51 was not designed with long range as a requirement. It was never intended to be a long range fighter. You people need to get past this myth. US Army airplanes had longer range than European airplanes a a matter of course. Compare the size of the US with Europe. The Japanese realized early on that long range and fighter escorts were necessary so their designs such as the A6M and Ki-43 were designed with extra range.
@@martinricardo4503 the P51 was specifically built to meet a British requirement at the suggestion of it's designers & builders, the US subsequently adopted the design as also suitable for their needs.
The airscoop and oil filter were based on an RAF as well as a Messerschmidt design, captured from 'downed' G
erman planes during the battles of France and Britain, these were handed over to the Americans by the Tizzard delegation at the beginning of the war , with a 'demand' they be included in the new design.
Source ?
Yeah, right.
If it's look good.........
The missing turbo supercharger wasn't the v1710's problem. P-38s had great high altitude performance.
''The P-38 performed usefully but suffered from a number of problems. Its Allison engines consistently threw rods, swallowed valves and fouled plugs, while their intercoolers often ruptured under sustained high boost and turbocharger regulators froze, sometimes causing catastrophic failures. The P-38’s General Electric turbo-supercharger sometimes got stuck in over-boosted or under-boosted mode. This occurred mainly when the fighter was flown in the freezing cold at altitudes approaching 30,000 feet, which was the standard situation in the European air war''.
General Robin Olds would not agree with you or anyone else that thought the P-38 was a good aircraft.
@@Slaktrax It for sure had a bunch of issues, but it was groundbreaking in so many areas, that they were bound to have a bunch of gremlins (still my fav WWII bird).
@@Slaktrax BULL$HIT the Allison threw rods air sucked valves !!! Allison was actually a better designed, simpliar, stronger, and lighter engine than the merlin and out produced the merlin in HP untill the very late 60 series high altitude, with its new 2 stage supercharger, There were about 38,000 Allison powered fighters that served the whole duration of the war. Actually the merlin threw more rods as it had an inadequet oil pump , which PACKARD corrected on their versions !! !
The P38 had turbocharger's, mounted behind each engine in the boom. The US government wouldn't allow the export of any turbocharger equipped aircraft until after they entered the war. That's why the RAF were buying non turbocharged P40's and such in 1940-41. They did try a P38 version without turbos which Lockheed were allowed to export but it was very poor.
The Merlin and Allison engines with single stage superchargers were very similar in performance the difference was the later Two stage supercharger and intercooler which Rolls Royce developed which was compact enough to fit the P41 airframe. Turbocharger's required a lot of space for the ducting involved, that's why P47's were so damn big.
Given that the turbo supercharger was a bulky machine that needed complex plumbing into the aircraft could you actually fit one into the Mustang’s airframe and till retain the fuel capacity required for the mission it was required to do? I understand that an extra fuel tank had been added behind the pilot and this tank compromised the aircraft’s handling until it had been emptied to such an extent that they had to be escorted by other fighters until this tank had been used up.
A dulcet voice like yours could convince me of all manner of absurd ideas, e.g. that socialism is better than a free governmental system.
Or National Socialism
A refreshing change from some voices on YT not least motorsport common taters.
Excellent video!
The US built engine had a very short life compaired to the british built engines.
livetillyyoudielovelife..BULL$HIT !!!! The Packard hd a longer time before overhaul as the tolerances were more consistant, and the Packard had a better bendix pressure carb !!!
Source ?
"One area where the Americans contributed to the greatness of the Merlin was the crankshaft bearings. US aircraft engine manufacturers had determined that a silver-lead alloy with indium plating provided long wear and exceptional corrosion resistance. Thankfully, German engineers who evaluated captured American engines falsely deduced that the indium was merely an impurity. Packard shared the secret bearing formula with Rolls-Royce who incorporated it into the Merlin."
The Packard Merlin: How Detroit Mass-Produced Britain’s Hand-Built Powerhouse
In October 1942, the long-range Mustang became the first RAF single-engine fighter to fly over Germany; restrictions on targeting were relaxed for attacks on German soil. By then, the initial batch of 320 NA-73 Mustang Is had been delivered by NAA, as well as most of the second batch of 300. 14 RAF squadrons were equipped with Allison Mustangs. The aircraft in the second batch were designated "NA-83", but incorporated only minor modifications and were hard to tell apart from the first batch. Most of the changes were added to allow the aircraft to operate more effectively under tropical and desert conditions.
[1.0] The Allison Mustangs RAF ALLISON MUSTANGS IN COMBAT page
I agree. Total BS!@@wilburfinnigan2142
The Mustang was not designed with long range in mind. The A6M was. The P-40 has decent range but the P-39 range was awful. @@nickdanger3802