I got the idea the Air Force considered the P51 H a failure. Because of the weight savings measures the aircraft was not seen as durable as most other American planes. There was a shortage of P51 D's early on in the Korean conflict due to attrition and still the H was pressed into service there. I could be wrong but I don't think the plane saw any foreign service at all. When the Air Force decided to phase out the H it refused to sell it to the general public. Exactly opposite of piston airplanes of the time. There were no foreign sales despite some of the small number of WW 2 era and after piston airplanes going to Central America. When the H was retired it was scrapped en mass. The only reason there are any H models left is those few air frames were written off and sold as scrap and the guy buying the air frame preserved it. I have not heard the replacement parts supply part before.

Aircraft Factory should be the default standards for FSX ^^ Not everything has to be accu sim :)

I have added this product to my list of add-ons for when I get my new simming rig. I already have a freeware H-model from Simviation, but frankly, that one is not great.

When you said it looks like it does NOT look like a P-51, I was thinking that too.

There were only 555 P-51H models made. They were pretty much used up in Air National Guard service.

That is a cool plane I realy like it, to bad im not the one for old aircraft like the P51 but still it's a cool aircraft. I prefer A2A's Cessna's im that sorta person :)

British Fighters weren't always superior in speed, although they were very manueverable and could easily outturn most American fighters. The central design of most US fighters during the war was speed, in a way. US fighters in general were very heavy and therefore retained airspeed through manuevers very well, as well as having great acceleration, especially in a dive. The other advantage of the higher weight and durability was that their overall top speed in a dive was considerably higher than many other fighters of the war, simply because many other lightweight, less durable fighters, like Spitfires and most Japanese planes, would simply fall apart under the stress of the high speed which US fighters could obtain. That said, the heavy weight also led to a worse climb rate and as previously mentioned, a bad turning rate. The design philosophies of the Spitfire and Mustang were very different. The Spitfire was much more of a lightweight and manueverable design than a fast one. It's goal was to outmanuever the enemy by having a faster turn time. The Mustang, however, was designed to use speed as it's main advantage over the enemy, especially it's higher speed retention. Most tactics of Mustang as well as Thunderbolt pilots were based around forcing the enemy into low speed situations while preserving or out-retaining the enemy in speed, leaving the enemy vulnerable to attack. My overall point here is that the designers wanted the P-51H to be more Spitfire-like, with a faster turn time, rate of climb, and lighter weight. More powerful in some respects, but less powerful than the D model in others, especially in speed retention, as well as durability. It's a game of trade-offs; being more like a Spitfire-like does not automatically mean better in all respects.