Spitfire V Mustang
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
From: England
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.
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.
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 2,042
Likes: 0
From: 2 m South of Radstock VRP
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!
I’ve now just annoyed myself!
Joined: Jan 1999
Posts: 6,209
Likes: 2
From: north of barlu
A generation apart
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.
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.
FX Guru
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 901
Likes: 0
From: Greenwich
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!!!
So - Easily the Spit.
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!!!
So - Easily the Spit.
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,146
Likes: 0
From: Erehwon
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.
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.
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 958
Likes: 20
From: The Luberon
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?
Is that it?
Gnome de PPRuNe
Joined: Jan 2002
Aviation Qualifications: Spotter
Posts: 15,198
Likes: 1,201
From: Too close to Croydon for comfort
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...
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...
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,046
Likes: 28
From: Zummerset
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....
As for the original aircraft - P51D just looks like a war machine, but a LF XIV Spitfire runs it mighty close....
