I believe power:weight and turn radius were strikes against the Mustang.
U.S. valued the weight of armor.
I knew two fighter pilots from WW2. One really liked the P-38 and the other swore by the P-47. Both felt the P-51 was a tad tender. Pilots put a lot of stock in “get me home”.
Our planes in the Pacific were so dominating because the Japs had lost all their pilots. By late 1944, our air cadets were being converted to bomber crews according to the CBS reports I am listening to from that period
I knew two fighter pilots from WW2. One really liked the P-38 and the other swore by the P-47. Both felt the P-51 was a tad tender. Pilots put a lot of stock in “get me home”.
Our planes in the Pacific were so dominating because the Japs had lost all their pilots. By late 1944, our air cadets were being converted to bomber crews according to the CBS reports I am listening to from that period
We did.
What's missed in these "top insert number" lists are the differing requirements of the various battlefields.
In Europe, we needed planes with long range. The Mustang fit that bill.
In the Pacific we needed planes that could take the pounding of landing on a carrier. The Hellcat was designed for that.
We didn't adapt the Mustang for that.
I'm not going to turn either one down for sure.
A stronger case could be made for the Corsair to be on the list vs the Hellcat. The Corsair was a more versatile plane once the pilots figured out how to fly it.
You could even make the argument in some ways it was better than the Mustang.