WI No P51 Mustang

Why should it have any? The jets were clean sheet designs which owed nothing to prop fighters, with the exception of the Supermarine Attacker which used the Spiteful's wings.

The Hawker Sea Hawk was developed from the Fury with the cockpit in place of the piston engine up front and the Nene in the place of the cockpit.
 
i think its value is overstated heavily for this reason
spits and p-47s can keep air superiority over normandy and once fighters are based in france they dont need the same kind of range that the mustang had.
if the americans take prohibative losses they would transfer b29s to the theatre which had a much higher speed service ceiling and more effective defensive aramament
 
First POD needed is for NA to agree to build P40s for the British Air Ministry rather than talking them into a new fighter. Second POD is for some bright individual to say "gee, I wonder how the Mustang Is would perfrom with a Merlin up front?"
 
WI No P51 Mustang
The Mustang justifiably was the greatest fighter in history in that it enabled the defeat of the Luftwaffe and the establishment of total allied air superiority. It combined range enough to escort bombers to Berlin with a performance edge over most German fighters.
then whe would be talking about the P-53 or the P-38 or the :confused::confused: as the best plane of WW2, The US had dozens of planes on the drawing boards, many not built due to resource shortages, No P-51 means these resources go to some other plane.
What influence would no P-51 have on the development of jet aircraft postwar?
Why should it have any? The jets were clean sheet designs which owed nothing to prop fighters, with the exception of the Supermarine Attacker which used the Spiteful's wings.
Post war Sweden retro fitted it's twin Tail with a Jet engine, while Russia did the same to It's Yak 3's.
perhaps the US dos the same with the P-38, giving the US a Twin Jet Vampire.
 
First POD needed is for NA to agree to build P40s for the British Air Ministry rather than talking them into a new fighter. Second POD is for some bright individual to say "gee, I wonder how the Mustang Is would perfrom with a Merlin up front?"

If that happened - the aircraft would be a P-40 with a merlin engine, which would not have the range to be an escort fighter over Germany. Indeed, its more likely that this NA P- 40 would be used like other P-40s with the RAF in North Africa. Doubt it would be called a 'Mustang' either, being a P-40 built under license - it would be a ****hawk.

See my previous post for PODs
 
then whe would be talking about the P-53 or the P-38 or the :confused::confused: as the best plane of WW2, The US had dozens of planes on the drawing boards, many not built due to resource shortages, No P-51 means these resources go to some other plane.

Dozens?? Such as?
And even if they do, even if they get built, even if they get built in time (doubtful) - it still needs the British influence on the effect of the Merlin on performance, and then for this merlin engined mythical aircraft to have the production resources to make enough to make a difference!
 
Some quotes from Wilfred Freeman's biography re: Ch 14 The Triumph of the Mustang.
P.232
" .... even as late as March '43 Eaker, having allocated all the Allison-engined Mustangs to the 9th Tactical AAF, claimed that the merlin was too heavy for performance at height"
"Since '35 the Allison V.12 engine had been developed for the US Army Air Force, on the orders of their Research and Development organisation at Wright Field, and they were reluctant to acknowledge the superiority of the Merlin, even though the Merlins for the new P.51B would be made by Packard"
"Without extra tanks their weights and radius of action were: P-38, 17,500lb, 290 miles; P-47, 14,500lb, 280 miles; P-51 , 9,800lb, 350 miles."
P.235
"In terms of US gallons, its normal internal fuel held 1853 (269 with full rear tank) compared with 99 for the Spitfire, and it consumed an average of 64 gallons per hour, compared with 144 for the P-38, and 140 for the P-47. With full internal tanks, including an 86 gallon rear fuselage tank, and two 108 gallon drop-tanks, its combat radius was 750 miles."
"Eaker's prejudice against the Merlin Mustang was proof at first against its remarkable qualities, and none of the first 145 aircraft to reach Britain for the 8th AAF came as long range fighters. As late as 30 October '43 - 493 of the 673 P-51Bs and P-51Cs due to be delivered to Britain in 1943 were for roles other than escort."

When the 8th Air Forces raids first started - losses were relatively light - % unscathed in May '43 ranged from 63 - 72, and the numbers used were low. Including the two Schweinfurt raids the numbers were reversed i.e. from 29 - 14% unscathed, with an increase in numbers over the earlier raids - such losses could not be sustainable!
 
In flight refueling was taking place before WWII.
Only experimentally and only between larger multi-engined aircraft or aircraft with multiple persons (such as observors, engineers or gunners, and not in single seat fighters) and not in a viable fashion. The technology and concepts simply didn't exist for it at the time. It was damned dangerous and impractical beyond the experimental stage.
http://www.unrealaircraft.com/forever/preww2.php
http://www.unrealaircraft.com/forever/ww2.php
 
the p38 had a lot of early compressability problems that made the pilots not fans... also it had the smallest possible cockpit of any ww2 fighter if you put it on a 6-10 hour escort job youd have to pry the pilot out with the jaws of life and it is not going to do well against an fw190 individually
 
Last edited:
the p38 had a lot of early compressability problems that made the pilots not fans

The P-38 went through a variety of models, and by 1943/44 there was no longer any such trouble with the J and L models (and the E probably didn't have the early teething problems anymore, either).

BlairWitch749 said:
also it had the smallest possible cockpit of any ww2 fighter if you put it on a 6-10 escort job youd have to pry the pilot out with the jaws of life

Eh? You know it was used to great effect over long ranges in the Pacific, right? Charles Lindbergh was a tall guy, middle aged, and he flew one on a mission from Hollandia to the Moluccas (more than a two thousand km round journey), in the process shooting down the plane of the Jap CO of the airfield being attacked by the Americans.

Also, Richard Bong and a whole bunch of multiple aces flew it to maximum range on a variety of missions.

BlairWitch749 said:
it is not going to do well against an fw190 individually

The Es and Js and Ls could hold their own against Hun fighters in OTL (with the right tactics)--if the K is put into production and goes into combat in the ETO it is going to perform at a level superior to that of the Thunderbolt; read the excerpt about the K test mule, its performance was rated as better than the P-47.

In the Pacific OTL's models totally dominated the more manoeuvrable Japanese fighters.

I have no doubt that in the event of no high-performance Mustang with a Merlin engine being developed, then the P-38K is the next best option for a long distance escort for the Eight AF bombers.

Though if the Ks developement isn't spead up to fill the gap created by no P-51B in this TL, it wouldn't enter service before the end of '43 (but it's definitely in the air by D-Day).
 
then whe would be talking about the P-53 or the P-38 or the :confused::confused: as the best plane of WW2, The US had dozens of planes on the drawing boards, many not built due to resource shortages, No P-51 means these resources go to some other plane.

I like this answer - truly AH. Of course it could also still be a "P-51", but a completely unrelated design built by somebody else. I would tend to believe that the P-47 and P-38 would have been sufficient in the role - especially after D-Day. Alternatively, more effort may have been spent on improving other experimental types such as the General Motors P-75, or Curtiss P-62, which were cancelled in OTL - in part because the excellent P-51 was available. It is possible that, with further development, these planes might have been made at least satisfactory in the long-range, high altitude escort fighter role. Also, don't automatically assume the USAAF would not adopt a proven Navy design such as the Hellcat or Corsair if no readily available army type was available. While no dual-service type fighter was operational in WW2, consideration at one time or another was given to the P-39 and P-51 by the Navy, and the Grumman F5F/P-50 by both services. However, it is indeed fortunate for the USAAF (and anglo-americans in general) that the British Purchasing Commission did not insist that North American build them P-40's in 1940.

However, in terms of the overall USAAF bomber offensive, I tend to believe the campaign strategy would have continued with the same overall effect whether or not the P-51 existed. Even if the P-38 lacked the manuverability of the P-51 and the P-47 its astronomical range, both planes were far superior to Luftwaffe heavy fighters and good enough to meet outnumbered Fw-190's and Bf-109 on more than even terms. In fact, some would argue that the P-47 was overall a better fighter than the Mustang anyway.
 
Last edited:
I think the Allies would have found a replacement. The P-38 might (?) have worked. It was meant to be a long range intersceptor/fighter.
As an avowed P-38 fan, I'm biased, here, but let me say: Yep. 2 possibilities: the prototype isn't wrecked on a stunt flight on delivery in '39 & the program works out the bugs before she enters combat. (This also means there are P-38s in Hawaii & P.I. 7 Dec '41, BTW.) Or, less likely, IMO, but more...interesting, re-engine her with R2800s, like the P-47. (A proposal to re-engine with Merlins, which occurred to me first, was evidently quashed by AAF.)
(Though apparently the extreme range of the P-38 was first achieved with the flying techniques pioneered by Charles Lindbergh--in 1944. So for a successful long range P-38K to enter service at the same time as OTL's P-51B, Lindbergh or someone has to get their hands on it in the middle of '43 to see how to nurse the engine to optimal performance.)
Evidently, Lindy's efforts have been overstated; as I understand it, SWPA P-38 squadrons were routinely getting longer radius missions a year earlier. Also, with modifications to the cowlings & intercoolers, there was room for more internal fuel in later versions (plus the prospect of boom tanks, or tiptanks, which AFAIK were never mooted), not to mention bigger (310USgal?) drop tanks (which IIRC 'stang can't operate).
Why not use the F4-U instead it had almost the same range as the P-51 with drop tanks .
Ahh, that sounds like a plan: the F4U-4D was offered to USN with tiptanks, but rejected... And she could also carry a pair of 2000pdrs, or Bat PGM.
In 1940s? I don't think it was possible.
Difficult, but possible. First trials were around 1919, IIRC. Not really practical for single-engine fighters, tho.
Why should it have any? The jets were clean sheet designs which owed nothing to prop fighters, with the exception of the Supermarine Attacker which used the Spiteful's wings.
And NAA's FJ-1, essentially a Jet Mustang...
 
Last edited:
As an avowed P-38 fan, I'm biased, here, but let me say: Yep. 2 possibilities: the prototype isn't wrecked on a stunt flight on delivery in '39 & the program works out the bugs before she enters combat. (This also means there are P-38s in Hawaii & P.I. 7 Dec '41, BTW.) Or, less likely, IMO, but more...interesting, re-engine her with R2800s, like the P-47. (A proposal to re-engine with Merlins, which occurred to me first, was evidently quashed by AAF.)

What do you think of the proposed K model? Allison V1710F-15 engines, generating 1,875 bhp, plus the addition of the P-47's Hamilton propellers. With extra boom tanks it's a SuperLightning!

pacifichistorian said:
Evidently, Lindy's efforts have been overstated; as I understand it, SWPA P-38 squadrons were routinely getting longer radius missions a year earlier. Also, with modifications to the cowlings & intercoolers, there was room for more internal fuel in later versions (plus the prospect of boom tanks, or tiptanks, which AFAIK were never mooted), not to mention bigger (310USgal?) drop tanks (which IIRC 'stang can't operate).

That wouldn't surprise me. I'm sure there were people on Kelly Johnston's staff who could have come up with the same flying methods, though the aura of Lindy as the great problem solver has good PR value.
 
What do you think of the proposed K model? Allison V1710F-15 engines, generating 1,875 bhp, plus the addition of the P-47's Hamilton propellers. With extra boom tanks it's a SuperLightning!
:cool::cool:*Drool* Just add tiptanks, you've got the perfect airplane.:cool: (I've a real weakness for tiptanks.:rolleyes:) The paddle props were a wonder. Add radar & make Northrup build 'em instead of P-61s.:p
 
However, in terms of the overall USAAF bomber offensive, I tend to believe the campaign strategy would have continued with the same overall effect whether or not the P-51 existed. Even if the P-38 lacked the manuverability of the P-51 and the P-47 its astronomical range, both planes were far superior to Luftwaffe heavy fighters and good enough to meet outnumbered Fw-190's and Bf-109 on more than even terms. In fact, some would argue that the P-47 was overall a better fighter than the Mustang anyway.

The 'some' were not those in the know at the time.

Again from A Furse
"Arnold now intervened decisively, insisting that the 8th Air Force got absolute priority for the P-51s for the last three months of 1943. The Mustangs which Eaker had sent to the 9th Air Force were transferered back to the 8th AAF Fighter Command: Spaatz was appointed head of the US Strategic Air Force in Europe, and Doolittle and Kepner took ove r command of the 8th AAAF bomber and fighter forces. Eaker moved out to the Mediterranen to replace to replace Doolittle as head of the 15th AAAF. All US pilots qualified to fly Mustangs were ordered to join the 8th Air force fighter groups, regardless of rand or postings, and fly on every mission. An extra fuselage tank was installed behind the cockpit of the P-51, despite the effect of a full tank on the way the aircraft handled, and drop tanks were urgently developed. By Feb 1944 more than 100 9th Air Force Merlin Mustans were escorting 8th Air Force bombers, destroying three to five times as many German fighters per sortie as the more numerous p-47s between January and March. Before the end of March Doolittle asked for all his P-47s and P-38s to be replaced by Mustangs as soon as possible."
 
Top