![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Scott M. Kozel wrote:
The Amaurotean Capitalist wrote: "Scott M. Kozel" wrote: You keep calling it a "Merlin-engined Mustang" Because it used a Merlin engine. QED. No, it used --- while in fact those built by NAA utilized a Packard built engine that was a modifification of the Merlin design. The Merlin 61 used in the initial Spitfire IX's was also a modification of the Merlin design. The fact remains that the V-1650-3 and -7 were two-stage Merlins produced under licence by Packard. That is partially true. Packard modified the turbocharger to produce more high-altitude power, When you say "turbocharger," are you referring to an exhaust gas driven compressor? Or mechanically driven? ==bob and modified the alloys of some of the major engine components to adapt the engine to U.S. mass production engineering and processes. The Rolls-Royce Merlin engines were hand- built. U.S. mass production processes allowed vastly greater quantities (over 16,000) of the V-1650 to be built in a timely and reliable manner. Packard added considerably to the design of the engine, which includes and is integral with its production processes. If there was no P-51 then North American would have been producing more B-25's at their Dallas plant and probably at Inglewood as well. Which leaves the US with what they had at the time; the P-38, the P-39, the P-40 and the P-47. Now which of these are you going to stop production of in order to develop a better long-range fighter design? The longer-ranged P-47D doesn't come along until April 1944 (and requires that British Typhoon tear-drop canopy in any case), the dive-brake-equipped and longer-range P-38L doesn't appear until May 1944, and neither the P-39 nor the P-40 are ever going to become high-performance, high-altitude long-range fighters. If there was no P-51 then some U.S. company would have greatly accelerated the production of something of similar performance. Most likely an advanced P-38 and/or P-47. Both the U.S. and the British each produced a number of excellent advanced warplanes in WWII. In a universe without the P-51, certainly something else of similar performance would have been produced. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Two essential items... | john smith | Piloting | 19 | December 26th 06 02:48 AM |
Delaware LLC Owned Aircraft California Based Aircraft | ChrisEllis | Piloting | 6 | January 17th 06 03:47 AM |
Commercial rating: complex aircraft required aircraft for practical test? | Marc J. Zeitlin | Piloting | 22 | November 24th 05 04:11 AM |
Exclusive Custom Home Plans, and Essential information about building your New Home | orange tree | Home Built | 4 | November 20th 05 04:37 PM |
Experience transitioning from C-172 to complex aircraft as potential first owned aircraft? | Jack Allison | Owning | 12 | June 14th 04 08:01 PM |