Three American, Three German, One British aircraft...

[SlipBall]

Boy that looks great Ivan, I love that canopy

[Screamadelica]

Nice looking pony. I think the RAF paint job is a definite must have for the game.

[Altflieger]

IvanK +1 Horseback, in your dreams.

[bongodriver]

Nice avatar Screamadelica.....a Sisters fan?

[Screamadelica]

Ah... yes... guilty as charged bongo. I'll admit to being a dusty old goth! :unsure: I was a massive Sisters Of Mercy fan back in the eighties and nineties, still am. I used to fly IL2 with "Floodlands" as my inflight music. Always thought that their song "Dominion,Mother Russia" would make a great track for one of Mysticpuma's videos. Glad you like the avatar, well spotted. :beer: And the next aircraft to come after the release should be British!

[mazex]

Ah... yes... guilty as charged bongo. I'll admit to being a dusty old goth! :unsure: I was a massive Sisters Of Mercy fan back in the eighties and nineties, still am. I used to fly IL2 with "Floodlands" as my inflight music. Always thought that their song "Dominion,Mother Russia" would make a great track for one of Mysticpuma's videos. Glad you like the avatar, well spotted. :beer: And the next aircraft to come after the release should be British!

 

Ahh - but Floodlands is not the "real" Sisters of Mercy ;) I have all the classic EP:s before they split up and Eldritch started experimenting :) But I have a soft spot for his first experiment after the 1985 split - "The Sisterhood", which led to Floodland... And I sure like Floodland too - but it's not Sisters for me like "Amphetamine Logic", "Temple of Love" etc... :)

[Altflieger]

You girls should get a room. I saw them play live at Leeds warehouse 1983. Can we get on?

[Merlin-27]

Yes! This thread is getting too friendly. I have nothing to entertain me during my early morning at work!

[mazex]

You girls should get a room. I saw them play live at Leeds warehouse 1983. Can we get on?

 

Well, not that far behind then... I saw them live in a warehouse in Gothenburg in 1984 ;) I remember reading that Andrew was so pissed that they sold so few records in Sweden that he refused to take the money for those sales :)

 

And sorry for the thread hijacking :)

[horseback]

IvanK +1 Horseback, in your dreams.

 

No dreams; the timing is unquestionably hinky. Regardless of what is in the book IvanK is touting (or who commissioned it), here's your timeline, and keep in mind that North American owned the rights to the design, which means that any major modifications to the aircraft legally had to have their approval, war or no war, government or no government:

 

1st (prototype) Spitfire flight with a two stage Merlin engine: September 27th, 1941

 

1st Mustang Mk I arrives in Britain: October 24th, 1941 (not ready for flight until the end of the month)

 

1st Mustang Squadron (2 Squadron) receives its first Mustangs: February 1942

 

1st Mustang Squadron (2 Squadron) operational: April 1942 (I believe that RAF had between 16 and 20 aircraft assigned to fighter squadrons at that time)

 

Ronnie Harker, Rolls Royce test pilot, is invited to fly the new American fighter, supposedly by the CO of the new Mustang Squadron although several sources cite Tommy Hitchcock, the US Embassy's Air Attache (formerly of the Lafayette Esquadrille in WWI) as being a facilitator; regardless the flight takes place in late April 1942, and Harker is very impressed.

 

The US Army orders 1200 Allison powered P-51As: 23 June 1942.

 

Rolls Royce makes a "preliminary study" of installing a Merlin 61 engine into a Mustang airframe: 14 July 1942 (Bastille Day!! General De Gaulle insists in his autobiography that this is incontrovertible proof that it was his idea).

 

The US Army awards North American Aircraft a contract for the conversion of two P-51 aircraft to XP-78s using Packard Merlin engines with two stage superchargers: July 25th, 1942.

 

1st Spitfire Mk IX Squadron (64) receives its first MK IX Spit aircraft in June of 1942, declared operational in the new type on 28 July 1942.

 

Only four more Mk IX squadrons become operational by the Dieppe operation in August of that year (there aren't a lot of MK IXs available, and not many more 60 series Merlins).

 

Prototype installation of the Packard Merlin into a P-51 airframe is made by North American and Rolls Royce takes delivery of five Mustang Mk Is and begins their conversion process: August 1942

 

August 26, 1942: an order is placed by the US Army for 400 P-78 aircraft (NA-102); the model is redesignated the P-51B the following month, and the P-51A order is cut back to 310 in order to get the Merlin powered models in production sooner. Executives at Curtiss Aircraft (makers of the P-40s that the Mustang would have replaced) heave a huge sigh of relief.

 

Key facts:

 

1) The RAF was desperate to get as many Spit IXs into operational squadrons on the Channel Front as soon as possible, but they had only four operational squadrons totaling not quite 100 aircraft almost a year after the first converted Mk V was flown; there were plenty of airframes available--the bottleneck appears to have been the supply of engines.

 

2) Putting those precious engines into an American design would have caused the RAF to revolt; the very idea would have caused every Air Marshall to snort his tea out his nose. The only thing that would have made the idea acceptable would have been an enormous American source of the new engines which would have created a large enough supply that everyone could be made happy. The shortage continued for the next year; new P-51B airframes were accumulating at the LA facility in May of 1943 while they awaited their engines-- the RAF had the first rights to Packard's single stage Merlin production (limiting or slowing their ability to produce two stage models) while RR mainly concentrated on producing the two stage models for Spitfires.

 

3) Tommy Hitchcock was the Air Attache for the US Embassy in London; it was his job to monitor not only the military aviation situation in the UK, it was his job to keep abreast of how US made aircraft in British service were measuring up and find ways to make them better, presumably for US service. Hitchcock split his time between polo and flying, and was reputedly very good at both. He flew the Mustang I well before Harker (it was his job, and there were six months between the first examples arriving and Harker's famous flight) and he was quite aware of the Allison V-1710's shortcomings; any version of the Merlin would have improved the Mustang's numbers, so even assuming that the two stage supercharged versions were unknown to Hitchcock, he would (should still) have been lobbying for a Rolls Royce endorsement for putting one of their engines in the new Mustangs. If he wasn't the father of the idea, he was very probably the midwife.

 

4) The close timing between the RR study and the US Army's order with NAA for converting P-51 airframes to two stage Merlins pretty much required that NAA and the USAAF were kept in the loop from the beginning; it is likely that both Hap Arnold and Dutch Kindelberger lusted in their hearts for the best inline aircraft engine in the Allied inventory for the Mustang within microseconds of learning of its existence, so their full cooperation was a given. Nine days is a very short period in which to absorb the technical implications and draw up a contract between parties in London, Washington DC and Los Angeles even today; doing it 'over the phone' in 1942 doesn't bear thinking about. On July 26th, 1942, dozens of second lieutenants in all three cities probably collapsed in exhaustion, some never to recover, broken in their country's service and never knowing exactly why...one has to wonder where their memorial is, and if the National Parks Service has it blockaded because of the government shutdown.

 

My original claim was that the idea for putting the two stage Merlin into the Mustang was 'taken up' simultaneously on both sides of the Atlantic. I'm pretty sure that that means people on both sides of the Atlantic (and on our side of the Pacific) were laboring to get the job done at the same time.

 

As I said, as soon as someone on the Allied side knew about the Mustang Mk I's qualities, they would quite likely have wondered what it could do with a Merlin in it; once the two stage Merlin became known, it would be an obvious choice BUT no matter whose idea it was (and the more I think about the Bastille Day connection, the more I favor Charles De Gaulle), you needed North American Aviation's permission and cooperation to proceed. The logical course then was to get NAA on board immediately.

 

And seriously, their version was much better looking and performing than the Rolls Royce version.

 

cheers

 

horseback

[Altflieger]

The US Army awards North American Aircraft a contract for the conversion of two P-51 aircraft to XP-78s using Packard Merlin engines with two stage superchargers: July 25th, 1942.

 

Horseback. This isn't true. All of this, if, possibly, logical, is whataboutery.

Packard did not make two stage merlins until Dec42. The two US prototypes were powered by Rolls Royce engines sent from the UK. It was not the USAAF's remit to order Merlins from Packard until a licensing deal had been signed between Packard and Rolls Royce.

 

If as I asked, you have any evidence of any American, anywhere on the planet, prior to April 1942 suggesting putting a 66 merlin on the front of a mustang, please share it with us.

[Merlin-27]

While very interesting, can someone tell me why it really matters who came up with the idea first? I'd hope at some point we can just look at it as simply a collaboration that resulted in one incredible aircraft. It's amazing how much emotion can be stirred up by our beloved Mustang...or any of these legendary aircraft for that matter.

[horseback]

The US Army awards North American Aircraft a contract for the conversion of two P-51 aircraft to XP-78s using Packard Merlin engines with two stage superchargers: July 25th, 1942.

 

Horseback. This isn't true. All of this, if, possibly, logical, is whataboutery.

Packard did not make two stage merlins until Dec42. The two US prototypes were powered by Rolls Royce engines sent from the UK. It was not the USAAF's remit to order Merlins from Packard until a licensing deal had been signed between Packard and Rolls Royce.

 

If as I asked, you have any evidence of any American, anywhere on the planet, prior to April 1942 suggesting putting a 66 merlin on the front of a mustang, please share it with us.

What I've been saying is that coming up with the idea wasn't that great a stretch; the key requirements were knowledge of the Mustang's qualities, knowledge of the existence of the two stage Merlin, and the recognition that the size and weight of the original Allison were not significantly different from the Merlin (something that had already been done in the case of the P-40F). The Brits were reflexively stuffing Merlins into everything in sight (I seem to recall something about them in torpedo boats, for Pete's sake). As I said, the idea itself is in the same class as the thought that the voluptuous young lady across the way would look very nice in a top with a deeper neckline (especially if it were to get wet somehow...).

 

I quoted directly from America's Hundred-Thousand. It is likely that if the contract specified Packard Merlins, then it was on the basis that Packard had (at least) received a contract proposal to build the two stage engines (which would have allowed the US government the right to poach 'examples' for their own use). In any case, Packard were very busy pumping out the single stage Merlin in large numbers for both the RAF and the USAAF (in P-40F/Ls), and would logically be commissioned to build the two stage versions.

 

It is significant that Packard started building their two stage Merlins less than a month after the North American XP-51B made its first flight, don't you think? It takes a while to tool up for building new engines using American (SAE?) measurements instead of the British measurements, after the contracts are signed off, so five months isn't unreasonable when they had to start new, separate production lines since the single stage Packard Merlins continued in production under their pre-existing contracts.

 

Whoever was behind the invitation to Rolls Royce's Ronnie Harker probably had the idea before he did; so it could have been the Wing Leader for that first Mustang wing (two squadrons of which were Canadian, which included a number of Yanks among their pilots), one of the three squadron leaders, or it could have been Tommy Hitchcock, the Air Attache from the US Embassy, who wanted a RR advocate for putting a Merlin (any Merlin) into a Mustang. It doesn't really matter.

 

What matters is how quickly the idea caught fire and was implemented by both the British and the Americans at very close to the same time, so that the best aircraft possible was arrived at.

 

cheers

 

horseback

[Skoshi Tiger]

My text, "The SPitfire, Mustang & Kittyhawk, in Australian service" (by Stewart Wilson) has the following passage.

 

"The conversion of two Mustangs to Packard Merlin power in the United States occurred simultaneously, the first aircraft ( with V-1650-3 engine and 11ft 2in (3.124m) diameter Hamilton-Standard four-bladed propeller) taking to the air on the last day of November 1942, seven weeks after the British prototype had flown. Initially designated XP-78, these aircraft were soon officially known as the XP-51B. The American conversion differed from the British ones in several ways, including the deletion of the Mustang X's rather bulbus nose intercooler intake and moving that into an enlarged ventral scoop which incorporated both it and the main radiator. The XP-51B recorded a top speed of 453mph (729km/h) at 29,000 feet"

 

Wikipedia says that the V-1650-3 engine (which is equivalent to the Merlin 61) was fitted with a two stage/two speed Wright supercharger.

 

 

As horseback stated seven weeks isn't a long time, especially if the US was engineering their prototype for eventual production and Mustang X was a quick and dirty, slap in a Merlin and see what happens.

 

I don't know when the first production V-1650-3 were available but my book states that the proto types XP-51B were tested over winter of '42/43 and the first production P-51B's were delivered in June '43, That's only seven months between prototype and delivery which is fairly impressive. I expect there were engineering examples and prototype engines available before they went into production. Maybe the XP-51B used pre-production engines I don't know????

 

Cheers!

 

Horseback sorry for coming over as being 'patronizing' in my previous post. I was trying (Obviously unsuccessfully) at being funny and a bit controversial (that bit worked at least).

 

The P-40 (all marks) are one of my favorite aircraft. ("Damned by words but flown to glory" Gen. Scott USAAF) it being the backbone of the RAAF's fighter strength through out the war. But it did have it's limitations and it was generally accepted by our fighter pilots of the time that they had to accept the enemies initial attacks in order to engage them at the P-40's best height for performance.

[BRIGGBOY81]

drop the Typhoon and make the Tempest 5.

 

Better airframe...

 

couldnt agree more :thumbup:

[MudRat02]

Kittyhawks, and 75 SQN in PNG ;)

[horseback]

Horseback sorry for coming over as being 'patronizing' in my previous post. I was trying (Obviously unsuccessfully) at being funny and a bit controversial (that bit worked at least).

 

The P-40 (all marks) are one of my favorite aircraft. ("Damned by words but flown to glory" Gen. Scott USAAF) it being the backbone of the RAAF's fighter strength through out the war. But it did have it's limitations and it was generally accepted by our fighter pilots of the time that they had to accept the enemies initial attacks in order to engage them at the P-40's best height for performance.

De nada, mate. You gave me an opportunity to dispel a few popular misconceptions that have irked me for years.

 

I too have a great deal of respect for the P-40's record, but from the start it was an improvisation that at best 'sort of' worked, and Curtiss' management just 'doubled down' on it instead of making a real effort to do more than put band-aids on the obvious flaws & problems in the design--by all accounts, much too often they left their engineering staff high and dry in terms of resources. Stalin would have had the lot of them in front of a firing squad by the end of 1943. The credit should go to the pilots.

 

The RAAF would have been far better served if we'd sent you Hellcats or Corsairs as soon as the production numbers allowed; of course, the last thing MacArthur wanted to see was the RAAF equipped with aircraft having adequate range...

 

cheers

 

horseback