PDA

View Full Version : Spitfire V Mustang


Mr-Burns
5th Nov 2009, 09:39
Simple one this. In terms of looks - what do we think? Spit or Mustang?

TheOptimist
5th Nov 2009, 09:42
In terms of prettiness and general gorgeousness - The spitfire
In terms of looking completely badass - The mustang.

If I had to choose a favourite I'd go for the Spitfire, although it is very close. Mustangs are prettier in person than on photo's.

GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU
5th Nov 2009, 10:05
The Mustang was simpler and cheaper to build and repair. Fewer compound curves and expensive alloy forgings. It could also fly further/stay in the air longer.

I’ve now just annoyed myself!

A and C
5th Nov 2009, 10:13
You have to see these aircraft as a developement generation apart, the Spitfire is a thirtys aircraft with no attention paid to ergonomics or crew comfort (drop your map and it is the last you will see of it for the rest of the flight!)

The Mustang is an aircraft that takes the develpment a stage further, sit in it and you will see an aircraft that feels "modern" (drop the map and just pick it up off the floor!) all the controls are much better placed and on the whole it is a much better working enviroment.

The Spitfire is a much better point defence fighter with a lower wing loading, better rate of climb & it will turn tighter. It wont go very far!

The Mustang will fly much further and take the fight to the enemy but it is not best equiped for point defence due to the ROC.

The Spitfire is probably less hard to fly, I have been told that a few hours flying the Chipmunk from the rear seat will teach you to fly the Spitfire, the Mustang is altogeter a little "hotter" to fly.

Both are true classic aircraft and I dont have the words to describe my trip in the back of a Mustang apart from remembering the mind blowing power.

Interestingly one of the American unlimited air racers who was using a much modified Mustang, got him self a Sea Fury and found that all the "tweeks" he had done to make the Mustang faster were installed on the Sea Fury as standard! But then the Sea Fury was a further generation of piston engine fighter development.

TheOptimist
5th Nov 2009, 10:15
The OP specifies in terms of LOOKS.

angels
5th Nov 2009, 10:20
Well I suppose by the end of the war it has to be the Mustang, but remember the Mustang wasn't really any good at altitude until Rolls Royce got their hands on it.

Also remember that during war the inventiveness of scientists and technicians expands hugely. Nothing like the possibility of catastrophic defeat to concentrate the mind.

World War Two started with pistion engines and quite a few bi-planes and ended up with ballistic missiles and jets.

So comparing the Mustang and Spitfire (even the later Marks of the Spit) you're ignoring the fact that the Spit was around earlier and was good enough to help win the BoB. Had it not done that then for Blighty at least, the appearance of the Mustang wouldn't have mattered that much. (And, as mentioned, it was the Brits that made the Mustang what it was.)

All the above subject to ropey memory.

Edited to add - Bugger. The question was about looks!!! :eek:

So - Easily the Spit. :ok:

Mr-Burns
5th Nov 2009, 10:26
Stand-by for pipe ....... do y'hear there ........ I say again ........ In terms of LOOKS ........

Bloody engineers .................;)

jimtherev
5th Nov 2009, 11:34
Wasn't RJ Mitchell an engineer??? (Who apparently believed 'what looks well, flies well'?)

A and C
5th Nov 2009, 11:43
Ok the Spitfire looks better to the casual observer but without understanding what the builder was trying to achive you only get half the picture.

Dengue_Dude
5th Nov 2009, 11:53
The Spitfire - with all those curves it has to be. Later Griffon powered Spits were less attractive, for me, the optimum beautiful shapes were Mk9 - Mk14 (teardrop canopy as well). Mk22 onwards were ugly in comparison.

Mustang - looks great but angular, but only the later ones (D onwards) with teardrop canopies rather than the P40-type cockpits

Both superb aircraft but obviously not the same role, so it would be comparing apples with oranges if we got into comparisons.

sitigeltfel
5th Nov 2009, 12:43
I never liked the Spitfire, more of an MG man when I was younger. It was just a spin off from the triumph Herald I believe, a vehicle that was lucky to drive out of the factory without breaking down. Never drove an early Mustang but if they were anything like the one I hired in the US a couple years ago, you are welcome to them.

Is that it?

Blacksheep
5th Nov 2009, 12:54
Wasn't RJ Mitchell an engineer??? (Who apparently believed 'what looks well, flies well'?)So how do you explain the Supermarine Walrus, then? :suspect:

treadigraph
5th Nov 2009, 12:55
It's a difficult decision but I'd plump for the Spitfire - favourite are definitely the MK14/Mk18 low back variants with the wings unclipped.

But all Spitfires look good and so do the Mustangs.

Dear Santa, I've been a good boy this year and while I don't wish to appear greedy...

Evalu8ter
5th Nov 2009, 13:17
Have both! Opt for the Spiteful/Seafang or the MB-5.....All seem to have Spitfire and P51 DNA mixed up!

As for the original aircraft - P51D just looks like a war machine, but a LF XIV Spitfire runs it mighty close....

Neptunus Rex
5th Nov 2009, 13:28
A and C

A dropped map can usually be retrieved by a gentle bunt for a second or so. Minus half a 'g' will bring the errant map to eye level.

:E

GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU
5th Nov 2009, 13:28
As the initiator of the very early and quite blatant Thread drift; sorreeeeey!

That will teach me to answer the TF between pressing “reply” and actually writing the Post!

jimtherev
5th Nov 2009, 14:04
So how do you explain the Supermarine Walrus, then? :suspect:
Sorry, you're right. I don't think anyone can explain the Supermarine Walrus. :eek:

*Zwitter*
5th Nov 2009, 14:07
The very fact that you asked means you'll never understand

Clockwork Mouse
5th Nov 2009, 14:15
The Spitfire is a lady. The Mustang is a bloke. I'm hetero so the Spit has it every time!

GPMG
5th Nov 2009, 14:32
The Spitfire is beautiful, the Mustang is awesome.

I'd bet that most pilots would prefer to fly a Spitfire for a display, but if going to war they would pick the Mustang.

Blacksheep
5th Nov 2009, 14:51
The very fact that you asked means you'll never understandSpeaking as an engineer, its a matter of horses for courses. To launch from a thirty foot hydraulic catapult rail, land in heavy seas, pick up a survivor and taxi back to dry land requires some very unique design solutions. The Walrus, like its mammalian namesake, is a very unique creation, ideally suited to its operating environment. As was the Spitfire. ;)

Jig Peter
5th Nov 2009, 14:53
The Sea Otter was a much better looker than the Walrus, wonnit ?

brickhistory
5th Nov 2009, 14:54
I'm greedy:

Spitfire Mk Vb

and the

Mustang B/C with the Malcolm hood

are equally eye-pleasing.

A2QFI
5th Nov 2009, 14:56
Having read all the above thoughts mine are that the Spitfire, seen airborne, is marvellous and on the ground I prefer the Mustang. I am influenced by the recent Brietling adverts showing what I assume to be a Reno Air Race Mustang, totally chrome plated and well photographed to show it to best advantage.

L J R
5th Nov 2009, 15:06
A Spitfire with the Sun behind HER and an ME-109 in front.........

Evalu8ter
5th Nov 2009, 15:37
"I'd bet that most pilots would prefer to fly a Spitfire for a display, but if going to war they would pick the Mustang."

GPMG - I was perched in the cockpit of a P-51 asking some lucky sod current on both types that exact question. His response was simple - take off, display, land with no holding on the ground or crosswind the Spit wins. However, any display away from Homeplate and he'd always take the P-51. It doesn't overheat on the ground, has excellent VFR reserves of gas, can be trimmed to fly hands-off and is much nicer in a X-Wind. Almost sounds like the different design philosophy between an interceptor and an escort fighter doesn't it?

Thread drift, I know, but as well as looks, what about the sound? The gunport shreik of the P-51 puts my hairs on end...

Arclite01
5th Nov 2009, 15:45
I think it's a bit like a programme I saw years ago (the world about us ??) about the Confederate Air Force - one of the 'Colonels' was asked the same question - his answer 'They are all like beautiful women, they're all beautiful - just in different ways'

I like that answer................

Arc

treadigraph
5th Nov 2009, 16:36
I am influenced by the recent Brietling adverts showing what I assume to be a Reno Air Race Mustang, totally chrome plated and well photographed to show it to best advantage.


If it's the pic I'm thinking of, it's "Precious Metal" a Mustang converted to run an ex-Shackleton Griffon complete with contra-rotating props.

Arclite01, I've just been given a poor quality DVD with what sounds like that programme on - I think it's called "Colonel Culpepper's Flying Circus" and was presented by Ian Wooldridge. Good programme.

kluge
5th Nov 2009, 17:03
If by lyrics beauty be measured;

Spitfire = the poem "High Flight"

Mustang = something by the "Beastie Boys"


But to be able to experience both........:)

boswell bear
5th Nov 2009, 17:04
P51 D does it on the looks for me..... Spitfire MkI a very close second!

Dr Jekyll
5th Nov 2009, 17:41
It's interesting that the Spitfire, like most aircraft is generally regarded as having lost some if it's looks as the design developed. Yet the Mustang seems to have done the opposite.

Dominoe
5th Nov 2009, 17:47
Heart says Spitfire. Head says Mustang. Given the opportunity to fly in either I`d chose the Mustang.

Data-Lynx
5th Nov 2009, 17:59
Blame 'Jim' as I wasn't going to bite. R J Mitchell started with small flying boats with the Supermarine Baby in 1917. This was the forerunner, with a better engine and name, of the Sea Lion MkII (http://www.airracinghistory.freeola.com/aircraft/images3/14.jpg) which won the Schneider Trophy in 1922 as a single-seat biplane. While the move to float planes, with the S-6b in 1931, lead to the development of the Spitfire, 'RJ' also explored larger wooden-hulled flying boats. His Seal was renamed the Seagull and the MkIII was taken up by the Australian Fleet Air Arm in 1925. In the MkV, he added a one-step metal-hull, a pusher engine, retractable main wheels and the capacity to be catapulted from a ship. When the Aussies took 24 MkVs in 1934, even the Air Ministry took notice and the MkV became the Walrus.
The Seagull V, appearance notwithstanding, was outstandingly manoeuvrable. "Mutt" Summers, Vickers' Chief Test Pilot, performed a full aerobatic routine including a loop at the 1933 Hendon display. It was discovered that the Seagull V had better water performance than any other flying boat, and could be operated in open ocean and rough seas one might not think such a small airplane could handle.

Add impressive low speed handling and it explains how Walrus crews explored and developed the 'controlled crash technique' for SAR. This required the pilot to stall the seaplane onto a wave-top as close as possible to a survivor in the water, thus keeping the survivor in sight.

The 'Shagbat' (http://www.cebudanderson.com/downdrink%201.htm)was never pretty but I have met a Fulmar pilot who remained eternally grateful to one Walrus and its team that picked him out of the oggin, when no other ship was in sight. I believe that 'RJ' explored the edges of what was possible at the time and in the environment and I agree with Blacksheep. I suggest that it was this trait that he then applied to the Spitfire.

mr fish
5th Nov 2009, 18:39
on a purely subjective level,
to my eyes a spit (even late seafire variants) looks very much "of its time"

however, a late model mustang seems almost modern,
maybe a combination of the airscoop/teardrop canopy perhaps??

ohh, the F82 "twin mustang" is plain bonkers;)

Dengue_Dude
5th Nov 2009, 19:26
ohh, the F82 "twin mustang" is plain bonkershttp://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/wink2.gif

Yep 'tis. Errr . . . which cockpit shall I fly from today :)

ShyTorque
5th Nov 2009, 20:33
Damn- I left my map in the other cockpit... :ugh:

Dominoe
5th Nov 2009, 21:47
Couldn`t We create a hybrid of the two? Imagine that.

Jackonicko
5th Nov 2009, 22:08
"I'd bet that most pilots would prefer to fly a Spitfire for a display, but if going to war they would pick the Mustang."

Only if they wanted to lose!

Range apart, the Spit IX (and subsequent Marks) had it all over the P-51D.

Manoeuvrability, armament (20-mm over 0.50 cal, please!), handling and battle damage tolerance.

The best US dogfighter of the War? The F6F Hellcat. How can I be so sure?

The SETP ran an interesting comparison between P-47, P-51, F4U and F6F, which were evaluated by modern TPs and the Mustang fared surprisingly poorly, with the unpredictable and vicious departure characteristics attracting negative comment, and the aircraft was rated as being a poor gunnery platform, too.

I'd kill for a photocopy of the article, or better yet a scan.....

"Couldn`t We create a hybrid of the two? Imagine that."

You don't need to imagine - the Spiteful was a Spit with a Mustang type laminar flow wing.

Trojan1981
5th Nov 2009, 22:33
In terms of looks it's a no-brainer.
Think Ford Mustang (NA Mustang) v Aston Martin DB(any)(Supermarine Spitfire)

I'll take the Spit thanks!

In terms of everything else they are a gen apart but I would still take the Spit:ok:

brickhistory
5th Nov 2009, 22:38
Range apart, the Spit IX (and subsequent Marks) had it all over the P-51D.



Range apart?!

Kinda difficult to separate that little characteristic from the overall performance.

RedDragonFly
5th Nov 2009, 22:47
Not been in a Spit unfortunately but have been in the back of a P-51. An amazing experience from start to finish, total of 3 hrs or so across two days. Loved every single second, it pulls very nicely, still does very capable aeros (while I fought the urge to make dugga dugga dugga machine gun sounds) and sounds and looks wonderful and I felt very privileged to have done it.

The owner also has a T6 and a Sea Fury, and says the Mustang is a pussycat compared to the Fury.

It is a beautiful machine, but I would still take the Spit.

Torquatus
5th Nov 2009, 23:22
Couldn`t We create a hybrid of the two? Imagine that.

Supermarine tried. It was called the Spiteful, and the test pilots didn't like it as much as the Spitfire. It was doomed anyway, as by the time it was ready for production the Meteor and Vampire were the new thing.

It was uglier than the Spit and the Mustang as well.

kluge
6th Nov 2009, 03:38
The SETP ran an interesting comparison between P-47, P-51, F4U and F6F, which were evaluated by modern TPs and the Mustang fared surprisingly poorly,

In the right hands the Yak 9 was supposed to be able to wee over all its western contemporaries.

yak (http://www.russianaeros.com/yak9product.htm)


Makes a P51 look like a drag queen.
Still not as pretty as an early mark Spitfire though.

Trojan1981
6th Nov 2009, 04:46
the Mustang is a pussycat compared to the Fury

I have never flown in either but just watching the displays at airshows will prove the above! Also sounds so much more powerful.

Sea Fury = Greatest piston engined fighter ever built, absolutley incredible:ok:


http://i253.photobucket.com/albums/hh68/trojan1981/Bankstown1April1962.jpg

Buster Hyman
6th Nov 2009, 06:08
As a child of the Commonwealth, I'm sorry to say that on looks alone, the Mustang for me. I actually like the clipped wings of the later Spitfire Marks, but if you want a performance Mustang, look no further than the CA-15 Kangaroo! :ok:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/20/CA-15.jpg


Maximum speed (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V_speeds#Vno): 448 mph (721 km/h)
Range (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Range_%28aircraft%29): 2,450 mi (3,920 km)
Service ceiling (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ceiling_%28aeronautics%29): 39,000 ft (12,870 m)
Rate of climb (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rate_of_climb): 4,900 ft/min (1,531 m/min)
:E

kluge
6th Nov 2009, 06:48
..... is there a Joey's head sticking out the oil cooller ?

Data-Lynx
6th Nov 2009, 07:10
What on earth have they done between the two fuselages of this F82? It has to be too big to just be fuel.

http://unrealaircraft.com/hybrid/images/Htwinmust0.jpeg

kluge
6th Nov 2009, 07:12
its for mating with the CA-15 Kangaroo

GPMG
6th Nov 2009, 07:31
Twin engined spitfire? Type 327 mockup.

http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d144/chrismcd3/super3.jpg




http://essmc.org.au/What%20new/january2009/UNI7289.jpg

LurkerBelow
6th Nov 2009, 07:45
Very much the Mustang -
I was at an airshow where the entertainment for the afternoon was
an air-raid and scramble by the good guys to get into the air.
Compared to the Mustang, the Spitfire seemed to waddle like a duck as
it speed off down the airfield as it staggered to get airborne in the rush.
It just didn't look very elegant in comparison to the Mustang.

Load Toad
6th Nov 2009, 09:22
..it waddles like a duck as it speeds and staggers does it; right-oh.

Buster Hyman
6th Nov 2009, 09:42
Trojan...Is that a Gannett in the background?

PS. Any excuse to put another RAN Sea Fury up! ;);)

http://www.navy.gov.au/w/images/808-2.jpg

GPMG
6th Nov 2009, 09:53
Tis a Gannet with it's wings folded, and a natty pair of shorts sported by the ground crew.

The F-82 (twin Mustang) has a radar mounted between the fuselages, it isn't pleased to see you..

Jackonicko
6th Nov 2009, 09:54
Pah!

If we're opening it up beyond Spit and 'Stang....

http://1000aircraftphotos.com/Contributions/PippinBill/8743.jpg

http://www.livingwarbirds.com/images/warbird_pictures/de-havilland-hornet.jpg

or even, if only they'd developed the engine properly......

http://www.1000aircraftphotos.com/APS/2115L.jpg

airborne_artist
6th Nov 2009, 10:09
Buy a ticket for the Lottery tonight and with the £90m you can buy both!

Sea Fury does it for me. Even at 50 it still stirs the loins :}

elecEye
6th Nov 2009, 10:45
the stalwart of the BoB was not the Spitfire.. ok it did a good job
but the Hurricane did most of the work
http://www.richard-seaman.com/Aircraft/AirShows/YankeeAirMuseum2006/Highlights/HurricaneTom2006.jpg

Somph
6th Nov 2009, 10:52
NOT the question. The Hurri is (was) pig-ugly compared to the Spit and Mustang. High-back full-winged Spit for me by a gnat's whatsit hair over the Mustang. :ok:

oldsoak
6th Nov 2009, 11:44
between the lot, I prefer the Martin Baker MB5 :}

...I'll get me coat....

Brian Abraham
6th Nov 2009, 12:22
The initial drawing of the Spit made it a Hurri look a like. Went through 13 iterations during development before becoming the Spit we are so familiar with. 2nd drawing is iteration #11, 3rd #13 (final).

http://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m56/babraham227/s0001.jpghttp://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m56/babraham227/s0004.jpghttp://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m56/babraham227/s0005.jpg

Blacksheep
6th Nov 2009, 12:27
If the Hurri IIc had flown in the BoB no-one would be sniffing about it being a fugly. Those four 20 mms woulda knocked spots off everything in its path. :ok:

http://www.historyofwar.org/Pictures/hurricaneIIC_87sqn.jpg

kluge
6th Nov 2009, 13:03
Anorak mode on: :8

Wasn't that the aircraft LK-A that the Matchbox 1:72 scale model was based on?

Haven't seen that picture in donkeys.

Improve long term memory - drink Chianti with James Boags chasers :ooh:

glad rag
6th Nov 2009, 18:13
100% on the money there Blacksheep!
Many of the "aces" quietly acknowledged the superiority of the Hurricane as a gun platform for destroying the bombers.

Dengue_Dude
6th Nov 2009, 19:47
What on earth have they done between the two fuselages of this F82? It has to be too big to just be fuel.

I think you'll find the big pod was a radar. They sometimes used this as a night fighter with a radar operator in one of the cockpits.

Dengue_Dude
6th Nov 2009, 19:55
the stalwart of the BoB was not the Spitfire.. ok it did a good job
but the Hurricane did most of the work

Careful . . . you'll get loads of paranoids shouting that the 'erks' did most of the work - perhaps they did, but that's what they were there for eh?

Along with most of the BoB 'erks, I shall now put my tin hat on and take cover. . .

Modern Elmo
6th Nov 2009, 22:13
Sea Fury and P-47N -- twins separated at birth?


Cavanaugh Flight Museum: Republic P-47N Thunderbolt (http://www.cavanaughflightmuseum.com/Thunderbolt.htm)

kluge
6th Nov 2009, 23:39
Maybe F-8F Bearcat or La-9 instead of the P47.

Dr Jekyll
7th Nov 2009, 08:34
I always thought the Sea Fury was 'inspired' by the FW190. Good visibility and surprisingly small wings.

Jig Peter
7th Nov 2009, 16:23
And the Spiteful's wing went on to the Attacker, whose tailwheel undercarriage was a "good thing" for flying off carriers ...