@Skua ok that makes more since

@JetstreamAeronauticalEngineering I see what you mean. The way it works is that all Merlin engines are designed by Rolls-Royce, but obviously it would be ridiculous for RR to build them in the UK and then ship them over to the US. What they did instead was gave a licence to Packard to make Merlin engines in the US on their behalf. These are the engines that went in to the Mustangs. So any Merlin-engined Mustang has a Rolls-Royce engine, it's just that the actual parts were put together by Packard. Over the years, RR improved the Merlin and made a lot of different versions, which applied to all of the numerous planes that used Merlin engines. This means that later P-51s were indeed faster, but so were later Spitfires, Hurricanes, Lancasters, Mosquitoes etc. The Mustang was faster than Spitfires with equivalent engines simple because it created less drag. The Spitfire sacrificed some of this speed for improved turning, with less weight and a lower wing loading. Similar planes, but designed quite differently for different jobs.

@Skua I think what I was trying to say is that the early models used Merlin engines but the later models use rolls-Royce(I think that how you spell it) Merlin engines. Honestly I don't know the difference, I guess it's just more Horse power.

@Skua Ikd I'm confused now that I read it

@JetstreamAeronauticalEngineering I'm not quite sure what you're trying to say here... the later models also used a Merlin engine?

@Skua that was in the early models. The p-51d/k had the Merlin 70 which propelled the p-51 473mph at 25,000 ft and 395 at 5,000 ft

@DeezDucks I know

@JetstreamAeronauticalEngineering I do realize my mistake but I was stating the P-51 employed the effect better than the Spitfire or BF-109.

@MediocrePlanes LuftWaffel, obviously. Delicious.

@JetstreamAeronauticalEngineering the V-1650 is the Merlin produced under licence by Packard. You can look that up if you want

That's not the Merlin engines

@DeezDucks @Skua the p-51a/b/c had the V-1650-3 engine (later P-51B and early C models having the V-1650-7) this gave the P-51 a top speed of 440 mph at 30,000 feet and 425 at 15,000 feet.

@DeezDucks @JetstreamAeronauticalEngineering uhh, guys... the P-51 was slower until it was fitted with the Spitfire's engine, and the Meredith effect was discovered by a guy working on the Spitfire - F. W. Meredith. No disrespect to the Mustang, but it was not the plane that won the Battle of Britain.

@Xjay_Inc yes all of these thing are true, but if it wasn't for the spitfire in the early years of ww2 if the spitfire wasn't so maneuverable and light then the nazis would have been able to invade Britain thus meaning there would be no allie country's that had a formidable military the fight the nazis back.

And the Martin baker mb5 was said to be better than the spitfire

Also the supermarine spitful was about 100 mph faster in level flight

It's the PR MkX 0.891Mach @RamboGaming

@DeezDucks exactly, that's why the Brits couldn't compete until later in the war when the P-51 came along

I prefere the P-51. They employed stuff like the Meredith effect among others to achieve a higher top speed with the same powerplant

@Beast34 that would be about 682mph. At that speed the mk V wings would rip

@RamboGaming

Yes

@Beast34 do you mean mach 0.89?

Pretty sure one variant mk 5 I think did something like 0.89 in a dive sorry if I'm wrong I read it a while ago

English please