Col. Rohr's Air Force 1977 (just kiddin')

Swiss Mustangs · **Posted:** Thu Jun 23, 2005 4:51 am

This is one for you Rob

taken in 1977

is it still existing ?

Martin

Swiss Mustangs · **Posted:** Thu Jun 23, 2005 9:19 am

speaking of 101's....

March 1976 MASDC

June 1980

Martin

Swiss Mustangs · **Posted:** Thu Jun 23, 2005 2:33 pm

have to check for F-47's but here's a F-51H

Martin

tom d. friedman · **Posted:** Thu Jun 23, 2005 8:33 pm

only my opinion... but the p-51 h model was the uglified version of the type. maybe more economical but performance wise & asthetically a dissapointment. best, tom

Tulio · **Joined:** Mon May 03, 2004 1:05 am **Posts:** 3236

Tom:

It has been said that a measure of a person's intelligence, is how much they agree with our opinions . . . this makes you a very intelligent person : )

I don't like the "H" model one bit.

Saludos,

Tulio

snj-5 · **Posted:** Thu Jun 23, 2005 11:49 pm

tom d. friedman wrote:

only my opinion... but the p-51 h model was the uglified version of the type. maybe more economical but performance wise & asthetically a dissapointment. best, tom

How's that saying go? God drives a Corvette, rides a Harley
and flies a P-51(D) Mustang

Also only my opinion, but the D model Mustang is one of those
airplanes that, if you change any dimension / lofting curve
a quarter of an inch, you've gone and ruined it.

There's a long-term H model restoration project right down the
street from me (I've had the pleasure of viewing it in a disassembled
state). I was told the number of interchangeable parts from the D
to H could be counted on two hands and one foot.

In the end, NAA did what they had to with the H (put the design on
a diet) but they broke the quarter inch dimension / lofting curve
change rule big-time!

Bela P. Havasreti

dhfan · **Posted:** Fri Jun 24, 2005 12:05 pm

By coincidence I was looking through an ancient copy of Flypast (Feb 1991) a couple of days ago and there was an article about Mike Coutche's F-51H in it. It said the only interchangeable parts with a D are the engine mount spacers.
Not sure about Tom's performance comment. The article said it was a lot quicker than a D.

Don Martin · **Posted:** Fri Jun 24, 2005 12:33 pm

Rob, I think I have a picture of that T-Bird, but, its sitting out side of an American Leagon hall in Penn. I think. The Bangor Air Defence Sector extended, what about half way down the Atlantic coast and as far as Ohio or something like that. I don't ever remember a T-33 up here, before or after they moved the gate. :?:

Don

And Who was that PICKING ON LITTLE ROBBIE ROHR, now? :evil:

Tom Crawford · **Posted:** Fri Jun 24, 2005 12:36 pm

With the jet fighter already in the air I've never understood the need for the "H" model unless North American had to design it on the way to developing the P-82 or visaversa. There are a lot of fuselage and other similarities..

tom d. friedman · **Posted:** Fri Jun 24, 2005 9:43 pm

look how north american created the navion.... with alot of ww 2 surplus p-51 parts, to capture the f- word (fighter) AS ENTICING BAIT. PRETTY GOOD MARKETING STRATEGY ON NORTH AMERICAN'S PART!!! BEST, TOM

tom d. friedman · **Posted:** Fri Jun 24, 2005 9:46 pm

& imean the post war civilian market, & alot of people took the bait!!! great plane, many still flying too. a tribute to the grat idea.

Glenn Wegman · **Posted:** Fri Jun 24, 2005 9:56 pm

I'll take the H over the D anytime!

At first the H looks a little strange, but after you get used to looking at an H, the D looks like it's pregnant.

Glenn

Tom Crawford · **Posted:** Fri Jun 24, 2005 10:05 pm

I sternly disagree. They should have finished up with the "D" and gone straight to the F-86 with minimal stops in between...just keep on creating
classics......

Don Martin · **Posted:** Mon Jul 04, 2005 9:34 am

Sorry to be a dissenter Colonel, But here is another shot of the T-33 taken about 2003 and this is not Bangor as I have ever known it. Try somewhere in Maryland.

Warbird Information Exchange

Col. Rohr's Air Force 1977 (just kiddin')

Who is online