[ARC5] "Was the P-51 Mustang unbeatable?" on Quora

MARK DORNEY mkdorney at aol.com
Wed Aug 18 10:57:41 EDT 2021 

Actually, a reverse half loop is performed, not an Immelmann. The Immelmann is more a roll over turn. 

Mark D. 
WW2 RDO

“In matters of style, float with the current. In matters of Principle, stand like a rock. “.   -   Thomas Jefferson 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Aug 18, 2021, at 10:52 AM, MARK DORNEY via ARC5 <arc5 at mailman.qth.net> wrote:
> 
> 
> Flying inverted and then diving away by pulling back on the stick does not produce negative g. Level flight followed by a steep, straight on dive does. The German pilots were basically performing a reverse Immelmann. But instead of climbing, loosing speed, by pulling back on the stick while inverted, they were diving. Direction was changed without sacrificing speed.  When used while attacking from the front of a bomber formation, the maneuver also set up the fighter for a quick second pass on the formation, the second time from below and behind. 
> 
> Mark D. 
> WW2RDO
> 
> “In matters of style, float with the current. In matters of Principle, stand like a rock. “.   -   Thomas Jefferson 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>>> On Aug 18, 2021, at 10:26 AM, Francesco Ledda <frledda at att.net> wrote:
>>> 
>> Both loops, Immelmanns and split Ss are used in combat and are positive G maneuvers.  Zero G and negative maneuvers are usually very short and not liked by pilots.
>> 
>> Sent from my iPad
>> 
>>>> On Aug 18, 2021, at 09:18, Francesco Ledda <frledda at att.net> wrote:
>>>> 
>>> doesn’t know
>>> 
>>> Sent from my iPad
>>> 
>>>>> On Aug 18, 2021, at 08:53, Francesco Ledda <frledda at att.net> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>> There is a huge difference between inverted and negative Gs. Often inverted flight still ha positive Gs, so the engine doesn’t it is in inverted flight!
>>>> 
>>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>> 
>>>>>> On Aug 18, 2021, at 08:47, MARK DORNEY via ARC5 <arc5 at mailman.qth.net> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>> Ok, so the P-51 Merlin engine couldn’t work inverted for long periods.  But the Germans didn’t use the Merlin engine. 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Mark D. 
>>>>> WW2RDO
>>>>> 
>>>>> “In matters of style, float with the current. In matters of Principle, stand like a rock. “.   -   Thomas Jefferson 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Aug 18, 2021, at 7:48 AM, Michael Hanz <aaf-radio-1 at aafradio.org> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>  Autoweek had an interesting rundown on the Packard version of the Merlin, including the dry sump system: https://www.autoweek.com/car-life/classic-cars/a30763715/rolls-royce-vs-packard-who-built-a-better-merlin/  
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Most of the aircraft engines had variations on this theme, it seems.  The need to operate in negative G environments for short periods pretty much demanded a dry sump.  They all sported a tiny crankcase size (just big enough to allow room for a baffle to slow the high velocity of oil being slung off the crankshaft rods and bearings), scavenge pump(s) in addition to the normal pressure pump required in an automotive engine, multiple collection points, large remote collection tank (many gallons rather than a few quarts).  The diagram is from a 1938 Merlin variation:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> <hnocdihaldgdkdkh.png>
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 8/17/2021 10:51 PM, Richard Knoppow wrote:
>>>>>>>    A google search for Rolls Royce Merlin will produce a huge amount of information about this engine. There were many versions and variations. Some early ones had cooling problems that were addressed in later versions, some had lubrication problems as I suggested in my earlier post. There are comparisons with the Alison engine. Also look up information on maneuvering fighter planes for more on inverted flight. 
>>>>>>>    I am not a pilot but I'll bet we have some former fighter pilots on the list. 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On 8/17/2021 7:41 PM, Robert P. Meadows wrote: 
>>>>>>>> Not so much the oil system, but the FUEL system and carburetor. 
>>>>>>>> R 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- 
>>>>>>>> From: arc5-bounces at mailman.qth.net <arc5-bounces at mailman.qth.net> On Behalf Of Richard Knoppow 
>>>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2021 5:48 PM 
>>>>>>>> To: arc5 at mailman.qth.net 
>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [ARC5] "Was the P-51 Mustang unbeatable?" on Quora 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>      I only skimmed the article. One thing that is often overlooked is that the engine in the P-51 like its British counterpart could not fly inverted for more than a few seconds. 
>>>>>>>> The method of lubrication used in the Rolls-Royce/Packard engine would not provide adequate lubrication when inverted. That was a limitation in dog fighting. The Spitfire had the same problem since it used essentially the same engine. 
>>>>>>>>      BTW, I saw a P-51 taking off from the Santa Monica airport a few years ago. The pilot just sat it on its tail and went up at an amazingly steep climb. Very noisy. They are such beautiful planes. 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On 8/17/2021 12:10 PM, Hubert Miller wrote: 
>>>>>>>>> Timewaster warning: this is possibly a waste of your precious time, 
>>>>>>>>> but I found this Quora article quite interesting. Which leads to other tempting timewasters... 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> https://www.quora.com/Was-the-P-51-Mustang-nearly-unbeatable-during-th 
>>>>>>>>> e-Second-World-War 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> -Hue Miller 
>>>>>>>>> ______________________________________________________________ 
>>>>>>>>> ARC5 mailing list 
>>>>>>>>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arc5 
>>>>>>>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm 
>>>>>>>>> Post: mailto:ARC5 at mailman.qth.net 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email 
>>>>>>>>> list: https://www.qsl.net/donate.html 
>>>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>>>> Richard Knoppow 
>>>>>>>> 1oldlens1 at ix.netcom.com 
>>>>>>>> WB6KBL 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> ______________________________________________________________ 
>>>>>>>> ARC5 mailing list 
>>>>>>>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arc5 
>>>>>>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm 
>>>>>>>> Post: mailto:ARC5 at mailman.qth.net 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net 
>>>>>>>> Please help support this email list: https://www.qsl.net/donate.html 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>> Michael Hanz - KC4TOS
>>>>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>>>>> ARC5 mailing list
>>>>>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arc5
>>>>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>>>>>> Post: mailto:ARC5 at mailman.qth.net
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>>>>>> Please help support this email list: https://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>>>> ARC5 mailing list
>>>>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arc5
>>>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>>>>> Post: mailto:ARC5 at mailman.qth.net
>>>>> 
>>>>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>>>>> Please help support this email list: https://www.qsl.net/donate.html
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/arc5/attachments/20210818/b04a654b/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the ARC5 mailing list