Warbird Information Exchange

DISCLAIMER: The views expressed on this site are the responsibility of the poster and do not reflect the views of the management.
It is currently Sat Jul 04, 2020 4:26 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Classic Wings Magazine WWII Naval Aviation Research Pacific Luftwaffe Resource Center
When Hollywood Ruled The Skies - Volumes 1 through 4 by Bruce Oriss


Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 45 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat May 31, 2008 9:13 pm 
Offline
3000+ Post Club
3000+ Post Club
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 9:11 pm
Posts: 3160
Location: MQS- Coatesville, PA
There is a big difference between the early P-51 landing gear and the P-51D.
The biggest difference is in the up-locks and the inner gear door system.
Princess P-51C
Image
Image
Bald Eagle P-51D
Image
Image
Rich


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat May 31, 2008 9:20 pm 
Offline
2000+ Post Club
2000+ Post Club

Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 6:25 pm
Posts: 2760
Just curious, I've always wondered why the inner gear door on the Mustang has the different piece of metal on it? Is it a structural thing or what?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat May 31, 2008 9:26 pm 
Offline
2000+ Post Club
2000+ Post Club
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2005 5:54 pm
Posts: 2587
Location: VT
Is it where the tire would rub on the way up? thats what I have always thought...............good question,

_________________
Long Live the N3N-3 "The Last US Military Bi-Plane" 1940-1959
Badmouthing Stearmans on WIX since 2005
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat May 31, 2008 9:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2005 10:05 am
Posts: 972
Location: Mesa, Az
Thanks for the pics. Looks like the C has the clamshell door cylinders on the front of the door and moved the accumalator to the spar. Correct? Looks like completely different setups. Very little interchangable I imagine

_________________
The more I learn about aircraft, the more I realize I still have to learn.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat May 31, 2008 10:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 11:32 pm
Posts: 697
Location: KBLI
Thanks for the info. Rich. I knew they were different; but not quite THAT different...

_________________
"They can teach MONKEYS to fly better than that"

http://www.heritageflight.org
http://www.bravo369.org


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat May 31, 2008 10:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2007 8:45 pm
Posts: 941
Location: Kimberley, B. C. Canada
Hey Rich -- Great post. I too was surprised at how different the setups are.

When Pete originally built up the airplane, he redid a -D fuselage and from what I remember used a lot of -D parts throughout the airplane. Is she now completely a -C? Who did the modification work in England and where did they get parts? How much actually had to be redone? Did Pete do an "authentic" job on the fuse or was it cobbled up to look good on the outside?

Thanks...
Image

_________________
Neal Nurmi

---Wingman Photo---


Last edited by Neal Nurmi on Sat May 31, 2008 11:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat May 31, 2008 10:49 pm 
Offline
3000+ Post Club
3000+ Post Club
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 10:18 pm
Posts: 3055
Location: Phoenix, Az
The reason for the change was on the early D models, several airplanes crashed because the clam shell opened slightly in flight because the gear leg was tapping on it. At high speed, it would open slightly, the slip stream would catch it, rip it open and the wind would catch the exposed gear and wrench it out of the wing, causing the wing to be ripped off.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat May 31, 2008 11:03 pm 
Offline
3000+ Post Club
3000+ Post Club
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 10:18 pm
Posts: 3055
Location: Phoenix, Az
[quote="Neal Nurmi"]Hey Rich -- Great post and fascinating thread. I too was surprised at how different the setups are.

When Pete originally built up the airplane, he redid a -D fuselage and from what I remember used a lot of -D parts throughout the airplane. Is she now completely a -C? Who did the modification work in England and where did they get parts? How much actually had to be redone? Did Pete do an "authentic" job on the fuse or was it cobbled up to look good on the outside?

Thanks...

Pete had a B model wing he found in Israel, and tail from a scrapped plane in the states, and used parts of a D model fuselage. He found the canopy in a parts house. made the fairings from patterns he pulled off of the Mantz P-51C.
BTW, that plane should be repainted as Shangri La, there was never a nicer looking B model.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat May 31, 2008 11:08 pm 
Offline
Been here a long time
Been here a long time

Joined: Sun May 02, 2004 1:16 am
Posts: 10580
Rich, does the D-model have a torque tube to connect the uplocks together above the wing (similar to a T-6)?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jun 01, 2008 7:13 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 2:01 pm
Posts: 353
Other differences between D and earlier types are the door shapes. The inner door differences are easier to spot on a D because of the raked leading edge. C and earlier are straighter spanwise at their leading edges. The leg doors of D appear to be very similar, but wont fit the earlier hole because of slight dimensional differences AND the location of where this door "bends" (front view) to account for the Expanded Leading edge. As many have no doubt noticed the root section of the D is different and quite a bit larger than on those Mustangs that went before.

AFAIK, and would love to get a definative confirmation or correction(!!) the fork, oleo and the basic geometry of the gear swing appear to be identical, from Mustang I thru D/K. However, the leg doors of D have slightly different swing geometry than earlier and the cast tabs on the gear trunion prevents this part too, from interchangability.

_________________
Charles Neely


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jun 01, 2008 9:59 am 
Offline
3000+ Post Club
3000+ Post Club
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 9:11 pm
Posts: 3160
Location: MQS- Coatesville, PA
bdk wrote:
Rich, does the D-model have a torque tube to connect the uplocks together above the wing (similar to a T-6)?

When they designed the changes to make the -D they focused on lightening the airframe. They attempted to make the latches on the inner door hold the main landing gear up. This eliminated all the uplock linkage as seen in Princess. It didn't work as advertised and blame for some inflight breakups went to partial extension of the MLG. NAA then added uplocks for the gear leg to the -D. It was a much simpler design and as I install these parts into Enchantress I will try to get some pics. A hook was hung from each lower longeron. It has a spring and a direct linkage to the gear handle bellcrank on the R/H side of the cockpit. There are 3 push rods and 2 bellcranks (1 on each side) on the cockpit floor at the firewall that make up the linkage. Actually the hooks go opposite each other. 1 forward and 1 aft so a torque tube wouldn't work.
Rich


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jun 01, 2008 10:03 am 
Offline
3000+ Post Club
3000+ Post Club
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 9:11 pm
Posts: 3160
Location: MQS- Coatesville, PA
Neal Nurmi wrote:
Hey Rich -- Great post. I too was surprised at how different the setups are.

When Pete originally built up the airplane, he redid a -D fuselage and from what I remember used a lot of -D parts throughout the airplane. Is she now completely a -C? Who did the modification work in England and where did they get parts? How much actually had to be redone? Did Pete do an "authentic" job on the fuse or was it cobbled up to look good on the outside?

Thanks...
Image

Stephen Grey purchased it and commissioned a rebuild of this airframe which took about 5 years. The fuselage was rebuilt and is more like a -C but not totally 100%.
Much of the wing was rebuilt as well. There are -D parts but it is hard to find them.
Rich


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jun 01, 2008 12:46 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 2:01 pm
Posts: 353
D parts hard to find? I know weve' been over this before but the upper cowl is off a D and lacks the characteristic hump of the B/C's. Also obvious is the lack of canted panel line in the A frame location.

Not knocking the "restoration" in anyway and I too would rather see it back in Shangri-La colors or how about an accurate "Bald Eagle" scheme?

_________________
Charles Neely


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jun 01, 2008 12:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2005 10:05 am
Posts: 972
Location: Mesa, Az
C'mon guys :wink: Picky- picky. I think it looks great

_________________
The more I learn about aircraft, the more I realize I still have to learn.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jun 01, 2008 1:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 2:01 pm
Posts: 353
Picky? I said I don't have a problem with the restoration. What's wrong with correctly identifying the parts? Especially when we're discussing differences??

Sometimes when people differ over weather or not the glass is half full or half empty, they might lose sight of the fact that the drink itself might be swill.

_________________
Charles Neely


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 45 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 15 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group