Mustang Mayhem, The Rest of The Story

@ Bil Al from Oz - I won't have time to read the article you linked till later, but while you are correct that the Hurricane was wood and fabric, the Spitfire was an all metal stressed skin monocoque, the same as a 109, P-51, P-40, etc. I did find an article which identifies the 109 as the first airplane of that type of construction to enter active service, so in that regard, it was the forefunner for the design that would continue with all modern fighters in WW2, not just the Mustang. The Seversky P-35 was the first American fighter to use this construction system. The radiator design is actually an important distinguishing point. Many articles on the P-51 have noted the unique placement of the radiator, and the contribution that location and design made to both how slippery the airframe was, as well as the fact that it's design actually provided the P-51 with a degree of jet thrust, which helped the airplanes performance. Several articles mention that North American noted the negative affect the underwing mounting of the radiator had on both the Spitfire and 109, so if there' was any influence, it was learning from the mistakes of the past (the P-51's wide track, inward retracting, fully enclosed landing gear vs the narrow track, outward closing, still exposed landing gear of the Spitfire and 109 is another example of that sort that is mentioned frequently). I would also say that gun placement is not a superficial design point. You must engineer the airplane withs specific gun placement in mind, as that will affect a variety of other design elements. Heavy cannons and all guns in the nose surely requires a different/strong structure for the nose of the airplane vs one that has no guns, or only machine guns in it. Similarly, the weight of 3-8 machine guns and their recoil is something that a wing must be designed to withstand. The wing must also make room then for ammunition storage, which affects fuel tank design as well.

The positioning of the radiator under the belly of the P-51 was designed to give extra 'thrust' as you stated. You are correct about the Spitfire, but it still has a differing style of airframe. I think you'll find the German and American airframes were actually more similar than the relationship to that of the British. Wellington designed a fantastic fuselage for a bomber. A radiator being a heat exchanger expanded the cooling airflow (gas) through convection and conduction. The gas expanded and increased in volume and exited through the exhaust duct at the rear of the heat exchanger assembly, thus providing additional thrust. Gun placement is very delicate, a gun can cause yawing, roll, etc if the gun is placed incorrectly. The US owes the Third Reich, much of the aerospace tech/concepts/engineering that was used after the war came from the Germans. The Germans explored variable geometry wing, sweep wings, area rule, etc. This doesn't even include the rocketry. The British like to claim the first jet engine (which is true), but it was a centrifugal flow engine. The Germans were manufacturing axial flow engines, modern in design and still used today. I have actually worked on historical fighters/aircraft and I do work on McDonnell Douglas (Boeing now)fighter aircraft for a living. The oldest engine I've worked on is a Gypsy Major. I've worked on Meteor's as well, as our Winjeel with the radial Pratt and Whitney. But my main line of work is fast jet. I do think the US has the best and most advanced aerospace technology globally. It's a pity Detroit can't operate as well. But the US aerospace industry plays on a more level playing field with other countries. More competitive. But, when it comes down to design, yourself and many would be quite surprised at how certain developments were created. Look at the modern day motor vehicle, the technology they use is adapted from the Apollo spacecraft. The downloading of codes for maintenance that is used in cars started out with the Apollo program and the first aircraft to adapt that technology was a McDonnell Douglas F/A 18 in the 70s, then prestige vehicles started adapting computers in the 80s. If you look at the global avaition industry I think you'll see roughly how the automotive industry will end up. Very rationalised with much more government control and regulation. That's a pity, progress will regress.