Which is technologically superior? Which was more effective? Which would win in a dogfight?
WW2 - Mustang VS Spitfire
Other urls found in this thread:
You do realize there were 21 Spitfire variants produced in WW2, and that they're not all the same, right?
I dunno, compare the best of each i suppose
Wasn't the Mustang shit until it got the Merlin engine?
Why make a thread if you don't know anything about the planes
Mustang as its newer than the Spitfire.
Because my thread is a question
Mustang was cak until it got the Spitfire's engine.
>Which is technologically superior?
Which was more effective?
Which would win in a dogfight?
it would have an actual white pilot.
They have different roles and expectations though.
In a pure dogfight the spitfire would win, but the mustang shits all over it as an all round fighter.
I'm a bong and even I'll say Mustang for all three. Was designed later in the war.
If we were judging on aesthetics though...
What was the RAF equivalent of the mustang
I just assumed spitfire was their best because it is really famous
Not really one plane (part of why the P-51 was so great)
A combination of Spitfire, Hurricane, Typhoon and Mosquito. Even dubsguy knew the score
They are good at different things. The mustang is an escort fighter with huge range for escorting bombers long distance and is an energy fighter designed for high altitude combat. The spitfire is an interceptor designed for turn fighting and a quick take off.
Typhoon or Tempest, kind of.
They didn't really make a matching plane, RAF planes were more focused on defending Britain or dog fighting on short missions, not long range bombing escorts.
This is why the RAF bombed at night, because of a lack of suitable escort fighters.
> It makes me furious when I see the Mosquito. I turn green and yellow with envy. The British, who can afford aluminium better than we can, knock together a beautiful wooden aircraft that every piano factory over there is building, and they give it a speed which they have now increased yet again. What do you make of that? There is nothing the British do not have. They have the geniuses and we have the nincompoops. After the war is over I'm going to buy a British radio set - then at least I'll own something that has always worked.
Why would he so explicitly cuck himself?
I mean that boils down to
You did have the Beaufighter, but they were much too bad at maneuvering to be a daytime fighter in any great capacity.
Dude is just looking for a scapegoat for his lack of strategic ability. Same goes for Rommel and his bitching about Allied spare parts.
I don't know, Rommel really did have a bad logistical situation due to the enemy controlling the sea that separated the Afrika Corps from the rest of Germany. Goering though was just a colossal fuck up in every regard. See kids, this is why you don't put political appointees in charge of your air force. And if you do, make sure it's a purely ceremonial position and don't let them make actual decisions.
Honestly, some of the High School clique shit that Hitler's government got up to was one of the biggest reasons the Axis lost.
Over 90% of the supplies sent to Libya went through. Rommel's supply situation was entirely due to his idiotically overrunning his lines and had nothing to do with the control of the Mediterranean (which was contested anyway).
The Mustang was absolutely more advanced, although it's no surprise, given that the Spitfire was roughly half a decade older.
The Spitfire was the best the Brits could manage with the technology of the time. However, by the time the P-51 had come around, North American was able to make use of significant technological advances in airfoil and radiator design. The P-51 made use of newly developed NACA laminar flow airfoils compared to the simpler 4-series airfoils on the Spitfire. The Mustang's radiator made use of the Meredith effect (effectively using the radiator to provide thrust to cancel out its own drag), while the Spitfire had no such features. Despite being significantly larger and heavier (50% heavier gross and 100% heavier max takeoff weights), the Mustang could fly faster, higher, and further than the Spitfire.
Granted, the Brits were able to keep the Spitfire upgraded through the end of the war with the Griffon-engined variants, but they were really pushing the limits of the design with marginal returns.
For some detailed aerodynamic analysis, check this out.
Back to your shithole
>Why ask a question about planes if you don’t know anything about planes?
Why does it even matter when we know the jap Zero would smoke them both in a 2 on 1 and fuck their girlfriends
Heard there was an overrated Jap fighter talking shit around here. Anyone see where he went?
No. I'm too fast for you, turds.
>last generation eclipse
>of all cars
Out of Ten Lancer Evolutions, a Galant VR4, a 3000GT VR4, a 3rd generation eclipse GSX, or a Starion Turbo, you choose a fucking last gen overweight under engineered Eclipse?
I'll pick up more chicks in that G4 eclipse in one weekend than you will in a year driving that metallic turd.
Zero and Zero
>Why ask about anything if you know nothing about the thing you're asking about?
>Heh, get on my level of intelligence, kiddo.
I unironically hope you fucking kill yourself, you're so goddamned autistic.
I've never seen anyone make this joke before in this website
You are funny
As said, the variant is important
However looking at pure specifications, the Spitfire XIV was superior in every way to the P-51 Mustang except range, but this highlights an important difference in their roles. Spitfires were intended for short range interception whereas Mustang were for long range defense of bombers and ground attack