72modeler Posted May 31, 2019 Share Posted May 31, 2019 I found this photo just a few minutes ago. It is one of the only two airworthy P-51A's, and has been painted to represent an RAF Mustang II. It's a pretty and rare Mustang, but the main reason I wanted to post it is to show the difference in height of the cockpit of the Allison-engined Mustangs versus the Merlin-engined P-51B/C. The cockpit floor was the wing upper surface on the Allison airplanes, and the cockpit of the B/C got a true floor, as it was raised above the wing to make space for plumbing. I remember we had a lot of discussion on this subject a while back and noted how many Allison Mustang kits did not get this correct. Compare this excellent profile photo with one of a B/C Mustang and you can clearly see the difference in height between the two. Mike http://www.airliners.net/photo/Untitled/North-American-P-51A-Mustang/5543859/L?qsp=eJwljDEOwkAMBP%2BydRpASnEd4QFQ8AHrzkoiBXyyXRBF%2BXvMpRvNSLMhy9f55%2B%2B1MhKMSfOEDpWUPoa0oU7i8iDnUXRFuvYdTNSHYJTQ95y5Ohec/qmF9Z/YcvuM8b0EsL4a49aHL7PVhdqDneYF%2B34AMtwurw%3D%3D http://www.airliners.net/photo/Untitled-Commemorative-Air-Force/North-American-P-51C-Mustang/2113162/L?qsp=eJwtjTEOwjAQBP%2BydSgAkcId5AGk4AMn%2B5REBM46nxSsKH/HDnSzO9LuCi9v4489cmQ4JCb1IxpEUnoluBVPzotoKIz%2BcDl2VY5i0pHxIJrhTm2DJGq3wgilvnrP0Tjg1981sFbFye/TQ706V2Tt/6ktMUwpzrSvsNE0Y9u%2B/pc0gQ%3D%3D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Edmundson Posted May 31, 2019 Share Posted May 31, 2019 (edited) it's actually painted up as Hollis Hills' RCAF 414 Sqn Mustang Mk1 . He achieved first aerial victory by a Mustang in WW2. Tony Edited May 31, 2019 by Tony Edmundson 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magpie22 Posted May 31, 2019 Share Posted May 31, 2019 Lovelly!!!!! I think it would be more correct to say that the wing was lowered due to the increased depth of the Merlin with its intake trunking under the engine, and to allow for a deeper radiator to be installed. This made for a deeper fuselage and, as you say, necessitating the installation of a cockpit floor. Peter, the pedant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VMA131Marine Posted May 31, 2019 Share Posted May 31, 2019 58 minutes ago, 72modeler said: I remember we had a lot of discussion on this subject a while back and noted how many Allison Mustang kits did not get this correct. It's actually a number of B/C Mustangs that aren't correct. The Tampa 1/48 P-51B and the ICM near clone both have curved cockpit floors as if they are formed by the top of the wing whereas they should have a flat floor like the D. The Accurate Miniatures B/C and the reworked version of the Monogram B both have the correct floor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dnl42 Posted May 31, 2019 Share Posted May 31, 2019 Many consider it a nit, but it wasn't until the Meng and recent Airfix kits where a 1/48 Mustang had correct wheel wells. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ColFord Posted May 31, 2019 Share Posted May 31, 2019 An innaccurate representation of the Mustang Mk.I flown by F/O Hollis Hills with No.414 RCAF Squadron at the time of the Dieppe raid. All the photographic evidence and other research indicates that the maple leaf roundel and horse's head insignia were added some time after Dieppe. More recent research in Air Ministry records held in the UK Archives that were not declassified until some years after the war indicate certainly one, possibly two, earlier confirmed kills by RAF Mustangs over FW-190s were recorded before that by Hills at Dieppe. Those claims were checked by cross referencing to surviving Luftwaffe loss records post war. - there were matching Luftwaffe losses that the Luftwaffe themselves acknowledge were incurred in combat with RAF Mustangs. There are quite a number of aspects of the early history of the Mustang in RAF service that are mis-understood and until recently inaccurately recorded in published works. 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
72modeler Posted May 31, 2019 Author Share Posted May 31, 2019 Col, Magpie, and Tony, Thanks for the clarifications; I thought the markings looked familiar, but was so excited to see a perfect profile photo that I posted it and the other photo before researching the accuracy of the colors and markings- my main intention was to show the difference between the two fuselages that we had talked about in that lengthy and informative discussion that we had previously. It's disappointing when a group/owner spends so much time and money on restoring a rare warbird and them spends a pittance on research or photos of the real thing! That being said, she's a pretty kite! Thanks for your input and knowledge. 👍 Mike 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BS_w Posted May 31, 2019 Share Posted May 31, 2019 11 hours ago, Magpie22 said: I think it would be more correct to say that the wing was lowered due to the increased depth of the Merlin with its intake trunking under the engine, and to allow for a deeper radiator to be installed. This made for a deeper fuselage and, as you say, necessitating the installation of a cockpit floor. Peter, the pedant. B & C, three inches deeper than A36/P51A 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Edmundson Posted May 31, 2019 Share Posted May 31, 2019 2 hours ago, 72modeler said: It's disappointing when a group/owner spends so much time and money on restoring a rare warbird and them spends a pittance on research or photos of the real thing! That being said, she's a pretty kite! Mike I kinda like the the effort, except for the maple leaf and horse's head emblem. It shows they did some research. Tony 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Boak Posted May 31, 2019 Share Posted May 31, 2019 16 hours ago, Magpie22 said: Lovelly!!!!! I think it would be more correct to say that the wing was lowered due to the increased depth of the Merlin with its intake trunking under the engine, and to allow for a deeper radiator to be installed. This made for a deeper fuselage and, as you say, necessitating the installation of a cockpit floor. Peter, the pedant. Given the complete lack of 3in grooves in the runways at Mustang bases, I'd say it was more correct to say the top of the fuselage was raised and the wing stayed where it was. Graham, the greater pedant still. Bear in mind that when you get down to what matters, an aircraft flies because of its wing, with assistance of course by the engine. The fuselage is just packaging for what's left over, and something to hold the tail on. Before Area Rule, of course... 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
72modeler Posted May 31, 2019 Author Share Posted May 31, 2019 21 minutes ago, Graham Boak said: Given the complete lack of 3in grooves in the runways at Mustang bases, I'd say it was more correct to say the top of the fuselage was raised and the wing stayed where it was. Graham, the greater pedant still. Bear in mind that when you get down to what matters, an aircraft flies because of its wing, with assistance of course by the engine. The fuselage is just packaging for what's left over, and something to hold the tail on. Before Area Rule, of course... Funny (not really!) you should say that, Graham! See the text below paraphrased from an article by Colin Burnett, in which he discussed the engineering differences between the Allison and Merlin high-back Mustangs. "The Merlin was roughly the same dimensions as the V-1710, but had a 5-inch greater height owing to the larger supercharger. The wing location dropped from 23.5" below the fuselage reference line to 26.5" for the Merlin Mustang...a new cowling arrangement had to be designed, given that the new updraught V-1650 didn't require the downdraught carburetor intake of the V-1710." I think maybe because the lower cowling profile had to be deeper to allow the ducting for the updraught carburetor, and since the radiator was larger with a larger inlet, then dropping the wing that extra 3" made for a smooth transition from the intake and wing lower surface to the radiator inlet. Mike 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silberpferd Posted June 1, 2019 Share Posted June 1, 2019 On Merlin P-51s, the lower longeron was modified, and that was the bottom of the fuselage that was lowered, hence the 3 inches difference. Laurent 2 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Work In Progress Posted June 1, 2019 Share Posted June 1, 2019 The level of theological abstraction in this debate is a testament to human nature. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dana Bell Posted June 1, 2019 Share Posted June 1, 2019 A recent discovery at the National Archives shows that the plans for the Merlin-powered Mustang were a bit more complicated than we all first thought. With the need for speedy production originally trumping the need for improved performance, the plan was to add the Merlin to the original production airframe and call that model the P-51B. An improved version was to lower the wing and change the fillets, calling that version the P-51C. In the end, all production Merlin Mustangs had the repositioned wing. Cheers, Dana 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
72modeler Posted June 1, 2019 Author Share Posted June 1, 2019 @BS_w BSw- Yep, 3" it was; I thought that was the amount, but didn't want to post until I re-examined my references to refresh my memory! You beat me to it! @Dana Bell @silberpferd Thanks for the diagram and text, gentlemen! (Soooo Dana, you short-timer- how many days until retirement?) Now, if we can just get a kit-maker to read all of the BM discussion on this topic and go and measure/scan some decent airframes, maybe we will get an accurate Allison and Merlin high back Mustang...1/72 modelers around the world will finally get the definitive kits for which we have been waiting for so long, and the kit maker will make big bucks/pounds Sterling/Francs (and so on and so forth!) I almost can't believe I'm saying this, but I hope the A-36 is the first one out! Mike 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corsairfoxfouruncle Posted June 1, 2019 Share Posted June 1, 2019 1 hour ago, 72modeler said: Now, if we can just get a kit-maker to read all of the BM discussion on this topic and go and measure/scan some decent airframes, Aint that the trick though Mike ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now