Save the Mustangs?

So, after our long, drawn out thread (last month) about whether P-51
Mustangs should be flown, only kept on static display, and/or are worth
saving for future generations, it turns out to all be a moot point -- these
guys are gonna build new ones!

http://www.fighterfactory.com/

I wonder if they're going to manufacture new Merlin engines, too?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

In article 82sPe.279071$x96.34814@attbi_s72, Jay Honeck wrote:

http://www.fighterfactory.com/

I wonder if they're going to manufacture new Merlin engines, too?

....or 130 octane fuel?

"No Such User" wrote in message
...
In article 82sPe.279071$x96.34814@attbi_s72, Jay Honeck wrote:

http://www.fighterfactory.com/

I wonder if they're going to manufacture new Merlin engines, too?

...or 130 octane fuel?

With 100, take off MP is reduced to 45 inches from the normal 61 as it is.
If they bring back 80 again, we'll probably have to drop the damn things
from a mother ship and start them in a dive!!
:-))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
Dudley Henriques

"Dudley Henriques" dhenriques@noware .net wrote in message
ink.net...

"No Such User" wrote in message
...
In article 82sPe.279071$x96.34814@attbi_s72, Jay Honeck wrote:

http://www.fighterfactory.com/

I wonder if they're going to manufacture new Merlin engines, too?

...or 130 octane fuel?

With 100, take off MP is reduced to 45 inches from the normal 61 as it is.
If they bring back 80 again, we'll probably have to drop the damn things
from a mother ship and start them in a dive!!
:-))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
Dudley Henriques

My understanding is that 100 octane was the best available at the beginning
of WWII, and due to capacity limitations on the high test stuff, 100 octane
was the standard fuel for most of the bomber force in Europe during the war,
while the fighters got the higher octane stuff. In this area, the allies
had a huge advantage over the Axis, which relied on lower octane brews.

Bottom line, Merlins run fine on 100LL, but can generate much more power on
130 octane. Fortunately, the extra power isn't as necessary today, because
Mustangs are flown at much lower weights today than they were during the
war.

KB

"Kyle Boatright" wrote in message
...

"Dudley Henriques" dhenriques@noware .net wrote in message
ink.net...

"No Such User" wrote in message
...
In article 82sPe.279071$x96.34814@attbi_s72, Jay Honeck wrote:

http://www.fighterfactory.com/

I wonder if they're going to manufacture new Merlin engines, too?

...or 130 octane fuel?

With 100, take off MP is reduced to 45 inches from the normal 61 as it
is. If they bring back 80 again, we'll probably have to drop the damn
things from a mother ship and start them in a dive!!
:-))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
Dudley Henriques

My understanding is that 100 octane was the best available at the
beginning of WWII, and due to capacity limitations on the high test stuff,
100 octane was the standard fuel for most of the bomber force in Europe
during the war, while the fighters got the higher octane stuff. In this
area, the allies had a huge advantage over the Axis, which relied on lower
octane brews.

Bottom line, Merlins run fine on 100LL, but can generate much more power
on 130 octane. Fortunately, the extra power isn't as necessary today,
because Mustangs are flown at much lower weights today than they were
during the war.

KB

Yes, I know. :-)

DH

"Dudley Henriques" dhenriques@noware .net wrote in message
nk.net...

"Kyle Boatright" wrote in message
...


With 100, take off MP is reduced to 45 inches from the normal 61 as it
is. If they bring back 80 again, we'll probably have to drop the damn
things from a mother ship and start them in a dive!!
:-))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
Dudley Henriques

My understanding is that 100 octane was the best available at the
beginning of WWII, and due to capacity limitations on the high test
stuff,
100 octane was the standard fuel for most of the bomber force in Europe
during the war, while the fighters got the higher octane stuff. In
this
area, the allies had a huge advantage over the Axis, which relied on
lower
octane brews.

Bottom line, Merlins run fine on 100LL, but can generate much more power
on 130 octane. Fortunately, the extra power isn't as necessary today,
because Mustangs are flown at much lower weights today than they were
during the war.

KB

Yes, I know. :-)

So, what gives Dudley? You only carrying half an ammo load?

In article . net,
"Dudley Henriques" dhenriques@noware .net wrote:



With 100, take off MP is reduced to 45 inches from the normal 61 as it is.
If they bring back 80 again, we'll probably have to drop the damn things
from a mother ship and start them in a dive!!


45 inches? When I flew Crazy Horse we used 55 for takeoff, 46 for
climb. As far as I know Lee was using 100LL.

--
Dale L. Falk

There is nothing - absolutely nothing - half so much worth doing
as simply messing around with airplanes.

http://home.gci.net/~sncdfalk/flying.html

"Dale" wrote in message
...
In article . net,
"Dudley Henriques" dhenriques@noware .net wrote:



With 100, take off MP is reduced to 45 inches from the normal 61 as it
is.
If they bring back 80 again, we'll probably have to drop the damn things
from a mother ship and start them in a dive!!


45 inches? When I flew Crazy Horse we used 55 for takeoff, 46 for
climb. As far as I know Lee was using 100LL.

--
Dale L. Falk

You're right. 55 inches is correct. Typo!! Meto for climb is 46/27

Dudley

"Dudley Henriques" dhenriques@noware .net wrote in message
ink.net...

"No Such User" wrote in message
...
In article 82sPe.279071$x96.34814@attbi_s72, Jay Honeck wrote:

http://www.fighterfactory.com/

I wonder if they're going to manufacture new Merlin engines, too?

...or 130 octane fuel?

With 100, take off MP is reduced to 45 inches from the normal 61 as it is.
If they bring back 80 again, we'll probably have to drop the damn things
from a mother ship and start them in a dive!!
:-))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
Dudley Henriques

S/B 55 inches....sorry; typo!!
D

Jay

145 so they can pull 61" MP.

Big John


On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 00:31:40 GMT, (No Such User)
wrote:

In article 82sPe.279071$x96.34814@attbi_s72, Jay Honeck wrote:

http://www.fighterfactory.com/

I wonder if they're going to manufacture new Merlin engines, too?

...or 130 octane fuel?