P-51D "Moonbeam McSwine" bidding adieu to the USA

Great pictures, thanks for sharing them!

 

If you've ever had the privalege of flying in a North American prop design you'll attest to the fact that the ailerons move just as easily in flight. I was blown away by the ease with which a T-6 rolls. No physical effort required to move the stick. Was told the T-28 was even lighter. My bucket list definitely includes finding out if the P-51 is similar.

Great pics.

 

T-6 stick is relatively light in flight but the Mustangs gets pretty stiff at higher speeds.

T-28 has adjustments and you can set the feel of the ailerons but in general they are much lighter then both the T-6 and the P-51.

Both the T-6 and the P-51 have mechanical bell crank positions to change the throw on the ailerons.

The previous owner of Moonbeam, Vlado is not a small guy and he definitely filled up the cockpit. It looked like his shoulders touched both sides of the cockpit at the same time. I am lucky at 5 ten and 160 I fit easily with room to spare.

Both the T-6 and the T-28 have huge cockpits in comparison.

There are several Mustangs out there with some form of dual controls and many offer rides usually costing $1,000.00 to $3,500.00.

Vlado bought his Mustang about a year before I bought mine and he helped me with my purchase and maintenance since I bought it in 1989. Sad to see it go overseas but we really only lease them as the next owner may bring it back to the US.

 

My aircraft can be seen at www.aircombatmuseum.com

Cost of flying a Mustang is a little more then your guesstimate. Burns 60 to 65 gph at $6.50 per gallon. But that is the cheapest part of owning one. Insurance would be around $28,000 to $36,000 per year with a 10% deductible. So deductible is around $180,000 for a 1.5 million aircraft since the insurance is due null and void with any claim. Most people figure $3,500.00 per hour.

Rest of the real cost is engine overhaul and maintenance and most importantly the cost of funds. But until recently the appreciation has been very good as demand has always remained quite high for the better Warbirds.

John Lane repaired my Corsair after a fire on landing in 2001 but I know Sam Taber very well and he is one of the best restorers there is. He does the annuals on the other P-51 based here (Shangra La), and I help ferry it there for the work.

The controls in the C3B on my website are so stiff that I have to use both hands to move the ailerons at cruise.

Worse thing about the P-51 cockpit is the gear handle is quite a reach and you need to have your shoulder harness tight for take off but then you can't reach the handle. Must have been even tougher for the WW2 guys since they were generally shorter then me and they were wearing a lot more gear.

 

Beautiful pictures of a lot of good work going on there. I have one question, however. Why is the underside of the L-4 painted olive drab? When I was in the USAAF during WW2 the undersides of any camouflaged aircraft was medium grey. I have the 1942 T.O. 01-01-07 that specifies this. Why do so many of these restorations paint the undersurface in the colors that are suppose to diminish the the detection of the vehicle in the opposite direction of view? The undersides were medium grey (not pale mouse grey that some restorations show now days), the upper was olive drab. What's so difficult about that?

 

Each wing holds 90 gallons and the removed fuselodge tank held 83 but I think they never filled it all the way in combat. I think it was filled to 53 if I remember correctly.

Most common drop tanks were 75 each. I believe at altitude they would get the fuel burn down to 45 gph. So endurance of 8 hours with a 1 hour reserve is possible.

My L-2 is the correct medium grey. Not sure why they missed the correct underside color on the L-5.

 

Hi Mike. Nice to see you on FChat. Hate to see Vlado sell his 51. He has had Moonbeam since I had hair and was cute. Wishing you and your family a Merry Christmas. Steve & Brant.

 

Thanks, Mike. I get a lot of flak for being such a hardass about marking and paint accuracy but it's the way I am, I guess. I have had to do " accuracy" all my life living with an architect father and a surgeon brother where fact was fact, right was right, wrong was wrong. Having done a few airplane paintings brought accuracy of detail to be very important when the woods are full of bushwhackers. I'll look up the Fed. Specs. on color codes for olive drab and medium grey. WW2 O.D. was basically a mix of lamp black, yellow, and orange, should be about equal parts but sometimes you have to spoon and bottle it a bit to get it right so that it isn't too brown or too green. Medium grey is simply equal parts of lamp black and white, again modulated to get the right shade.
Looks like there is a Stearman fuselage in one picture being beautifully restored plus a Cont. Tank 220HP. Beautiful work.

 

Okay, I was a bit off on the type of black pigment. They call for CARBON BLACK not lamp black. Specified in the T.O. 07-01-01, dated June 1943, paragraph 2 (3). ...for Army Air Forces aircraft is dark olive drab, shade No.41, for surfaces viewed from above...Neutral gray, shade no. 43 will be used for surfaces viewed from below. Masking WILL NOT BE EMPLOYED to separate ANY COLORS . Junction lines will be blended by over spraying.
At this time there was no Fed. Spec. 595 that applied stricter and more detailed controls over colors and application.

 

Steve Merry Xmas to both you and Brant always great to see you guys at Reno

As far as the Mustang VS the Corsair, I prefer the Mustang. I compare the P-51 to a race car and the Corsair to a nice BMW. The P-51 is faster in cruise and much more nimble in flight.

The P-51 is better in a crosswind but is not as well mannered in landing or takeoff. It wants to dart around and skip and bounce until you are off the ground, or stopped for landing. The torque on take off is very high but you also have to watch removing power on landing as it will try to go into the weeds if you pull the power too quickly.
An interesting fact a lot of us pull the mixture after the mains are on the ground it helps to shorten the ground roll and reduce the need for braking. As soon as the aircraft is slowed down I advance the mixture and the engine starts up again.

The Mustang has several areas where a mistake will be fatal. Areas that I have never seen in any other aircraft. If you need to go around and push the throttle up too fast you will not survive, if you put the flaps up all the way at once, you will have the same results. The aircraft will pitch up stall and roll upside down before hitting the ground. In the last 3 years this has killed two pilots.

The Corsair has double pistons on the landing gear and I have never felt the wheels hitting the ground when landing. It also weighs substantially more then the Mustang. If you look at the two of them next to each other, the Corsair is much larger. And if you look at the propellers, the Corsair prop is huge compared to the P-51.

I try to be as accurate on all of my Warbirds as possible. The Mustang has replica guns and if you pull the trigger on the stick, the solenoids that fire the guns work. I have the original flare gun and spent shells in the correct holders in the cockpit. I also have all of the markings to align the gun camera and gun sight that are on the propeller, and the door that covers the gun camera and opens when the gear goes up works. Even the IFF lights on the wing work. The gun sight works and I have used it to track targets which is pretty cool.

I joined this forum since I may be buying a Ferrari in 2013 (it would be number 4). on all of the last 3, I always complained about the maintenance costs. Believe it or not many parts for the Mustang are cheaper then Ferrari. Last time I bought a set of exhaust they were $200 a piece or $2,400. Carb overhaul about $1,500 and mags about $700 each. Engine overhaul may be expensive around $90,000 but that should last 7 to 800 hours. At 300 mph that is 210,000 plus miles on an engine operating in extreme temperatures, designed in the thirties, that has a 2 stage supercharger, and operating at a higher horse power percentage of full power then an automobile. Any new parts are made in small quantities since there are only about 130 flying in the world and any original parts are used and at least 60 years old.

 

As a low time small plane pilot I am humbled by what you have described in flying the two premier fighters from WW2. I have had a ride in a P-51 and I could sense the power and the danger of not being able to control the awesome strength of the airplane. I was impressed by the effect of changing power settings in flight. Retard the throttle and feel the immediate response to it, like throwing out an anchor. Advance power and it will put your back in your seat. On take off I also felt that at one point that there was a lack of positive control until enough airspeed was attained . I'm probably wrong about that but I'm not wrong that the P-51 is an incredible machine and I'm in awe of those who fly them. Not to discount the F4U and P-47, I have watched them both during the war (I watched all of them) and had hopes of flying something after flight school but it never happened due to my timing. I know that training and ability are the keys to success and I like to think that I could have done it.

 

Appears to be the Emergency Hydraulic Release. See pg 10 and pg 17 of manual in following link.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/34811808/North-American-P-51-Mustang-Pilot-Training-Manual

 

The whole manual is VERY cool. Hours of reading... ha...

Didn't know that the later P-51's had rear radar to warn the pilot if there was a plane on his 6.

 

The engineering advancements during WW2 were absolutely incredible.
The engines had overhead cams, 4 valves per cylinder and 2 stage superchargers. By the end of the war engines typically developed almost 1 to 1 HP to cubic inches. They had tail warning radar, g suits, high quality oxygen systems, water injection, 150 octane fuel. Plus the fact that I can still fly an airplane at 400mph plus, that was built 68 years ago. And other then a few late war aircraft, (Bearcat and Sea Fury), the performance for propeller driven aircraft still have not been exceeded by modern technology.

Believe it or not when you have a cam lobe that is wearing you take sand paper and work down the cam lobe until it is smooth again.

Someone sent this link to me and it is a very accurate description of the operation of the Mustang

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cUOmJzxoaCA[/ame]

 

Mike-- thank you very much for your posts! The P-51, and the F-4U, are magnificent pieces of machinery, and it's wonderful to read your perspective and hear about your experiences.