# North American A-36



## Snautzer01 (Feb 25, 2019)

*WWII photo- A-36 Apache Fighter/ Dive Bomber plane Nose Art- JUMPIN' JIVE* | eBay

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Like List reactions


----------



## Wurger (Feb 25, 2019)



Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Gnomey (Feb 26, 2019)

Nice shots!


----------



## Snautzer01 (May 5, 2019)

WW2 Picture Photo Sicily Italy 1943 A-36A Apache aircraft Doodle 1880 | eBay

Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Like List reactions


----------



## Wurger (May 5, 2019)




----------



## MIflyer (May 5, 2019)

One interesting thing I discovered that an A-36 unit acquired some P-51-1 aircraft, armed with four 20MM guns, and used them as well to hit suitable targets. I saw a cannon armed P-51 in the video 'A Day with the A-36's" and it turned out that was the reason.

So you could have a diorama with a mix of A-36's and P-51-1.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Informative Informative:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## ThomasP (May 5, 2019)

Good info!


----------



## Snautzer01 (Jun 27, 2019)

*WWII photo- A-36 Apache Dive Bomber / Fighter plane Nose Art- BOMB* | eBay

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Like List reactions


----------



## Snautzer01 (Jun 27, 2019)

*WWII photo- A-36 Apache Dive Bomber/Fighter plane Nose Art- CALIFORNIA MUSTANG* | eBay

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Like List reactions


----------



## Wurger (Jun 27, 2019)




----------



## MIflyer (Jun 27, 2019)

That last one is not an A-36A. It is a P-51-1, known as the Mustang Mk 1A in the RAF. P-51-1's were used with a USAAF tactical recon unit in the Med and the A-36 unit acquired a few to use in strafing targets that needed a little extra punch.

The attached picture is labeled A-36 pilot but in fact he is standing next to a P-51-1 and was assigned to the tac recon unit. 

I also have attached a few A-36 photos.

Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Like List reactions


----------



## fubar57 (Jul 3, 2019)

Cool shots

Reactions: Agree Agree:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## nuuumannn (Jul 3, 2019)

MIflyer said:


> That last one is not an A-36A. It is a P-51-1, known as the Mustang Mk 1A in the RAF. P-51-1's were used with a USAAF tactical recon unit in the Med and the A-36 unit acquired a few to use in strafing targets that needed a little extra punch.



Just a wee addition, MIflyer; the first USAAF Mustangs were designated as simply P-51s (Manufacturer's designation NA-91), without a suffix, although almost all but two were designated F-6As for recon, with the fitting of cameras. The British equivalent being, as you state, the Mustang 1A. The next variant the USAAF received was the P-51A (Manufacturer's designation NA-99) from March 1943, which differed from the P-51 in that it had the capacity to carry external stores and had a slightly more powerful Allison under the hood. The Brits called this the Mustang II.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Wurger (Jul 4, 2019)




----------



## Snautzer01 (Jul 4, 2019)

WWII Original North American A-36 Apache/Invader Attack Bomber Aircraft Photo | eBay

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## MIflyer (Jul 4, 2019)

The A-36A came out well before the P-51A. The P-51A was really built to keep the production line hot until the B model came off the lines.


----------



## nuuumannn (Jul 4, 2019)

MIflyer said:


> The A-36A came out well before the P-51A.



Only by five months, and the A-36 was preceded by the P-51/Mustang 1A.



> The P-51A was really built to keep the production line hot until the B model came off the lines.



...which was delayed owing to overheating in the radiator ducting, among other snags. The two XP-51Bs were in fact the two P-51s initially delivered as Mustang 1As as part of Lend Lease through the RAF order, but diverted to the USAAF and subsequently modified with the Packard V-1650/Merlin 61 engine. It is worth pointing out that it took some time before the USAAF gained real interest in the Mustang because it was a 'British' aeroplane and it wasn't until the Merlin engined models that the USAAF heads really began to take notice. And when I say Merlin engined models, I mean the Mustang Xs modified by Rolls-Royce with RR Merlins, from which the USAAF gained performance data, which convinced them that putting a Merlin engined P-51 into service was the way forward with that airframe.

Reactions: Informative Informative:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Juanita (Jul 4, 2019)

Very interesting postings. I did the illustrations for the MMP 'Yellow Series' book on the A-36. 
I have a suspicion there is more of a story still to be told about the type's use particularly during the Italian campaign when it was being replaced. Suspect it did much more in the recon role than has been documented.

Juanita


----------



## MIflyer (Jul 4, 2019)

The British lacked Mustang Mk 1's in the Med and borrowed an A-36 for recon. They tried to escort the A-36 with Spitfire V's and found they could not stay with the A-36. As to why the RAF did not borrow some P-51-1's in the Med, I guess there were just not enough of them available.

The 310 P-51A's began to be delivered in March 1943, following the 500 A-36's that began delivery in Sept 1943.


----------



## Barrett (Jul 5, 2019)

Ref. Apache: you can start a pretty decent cyber food fight on that subject, especially on Facebook. Apparently the OFFICIAL-OFFICIAL name for the 51 herd always was Mustang but wartime publicity and elsewhere (including USAF Museum) used Apache for some early 51s plus the A-36s occasionally as Invaders. My dad's Corpus Christi recognition manual ('43) shows a four-cannon Apache.

Reactions: Informative Informative:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Skyediamonds (Jul 5, 2019)

Good info. I’m currently modeling a “D” Mustang to be finished as Big Beautiful Doll in natural metal from a wooden Guillow’s kit. I thought I knew a lot on the Mustangs but as I got deeper into the build & read more information of the plane, I found out I knew very little. Please keep up the good info!


----------



## Barrett (Jul 5, 2019)

Ref. Big Beautiful Doll: as aces assn. secretary I got to know John Landers a bit more than casually. Big, strapping extroverted Texan. His 78FG guys said he taxied at half throttle and flew at full throttle. Group CO at age 24. Once or twice he screened some of his combat film, all in color, and it was im-pressive. Will always remember how his tracers followed a vehicle through a 90 deg. left turn on a narrow road and overtook the target. I asked, "Colonel, how'd you do that?" He said "Rudder, son, lots of rudder." But he had to be cross controlling to keep the ball centered...

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## MIflyer (Jul 5, 2019)

I have a 1:18 scale 21st Century P-51D in Big Beautful Doll markings I have never taken out of the box. I was in Wal-Mart several years ago and they had them on clearance for $25. I should have bought several.


----------



## Skyediamonds (Jul 6, 2019)

Wow! Thank you Barrett for that insight on John Landers. Not everyday one comes across an individual who personally met such an ace as John Landers. 

Miflyer: yes! I would’ve felt the same way. Always with hindsight do we “learn.” Hope that model is still around. It should be priceless by now.


----------



## MIflyer (Jul 6, 2019)

Yes, I still have it, in the box, never opened.

If I wait long enough I figure one day I'll be able to trade it for a 1:1 scale version.


----------



## Skyediamonds (Jul 6, 2019)

LoL... I was going to ask if you had opened the box. If so, I would’ve asked if the decals included cockpit stenciling. If so, I would’ve scoured around on eBay & Internet for another large plastic Mustang kit, throw away everything but the stenciling decals. I’m working on the cockpit interior of my nearly scratched Guillow’s Mustang (see my build thread under modeling projects) & the stenciling has proven to be a challenge.


----------



## GrauGeist (Jul 7, 2019)

What is a "P-51-1"?


----------



## MIflyer (Jul 7, 2019)

P-51-1 was the USAAF designation for the NA-91, what the RAF called the Mustang Mk1A. After being fitted with cameras the USAAF called them the F-6A. They retained their four 20MM guns and were used in N Africa and the Med.

The USAAF designation for the first production NA-73 aircraft, which the RAF called Mustang Mk1, was the XP-51, two of which the USAAF got from the initial RAF production run. The RAF also bought 300 NA-83, which they also called Mustang 1, and which the USAAF never had any.

The NA-99 was the P-51A in the USAAF, and became the F-6A or F-6B when it got cameras. I think the only Allison Mustangs used by the USAAF in the ETO were F-6A or F-6B. In the RAF the NA-99 was the Mustang II. The NA-99 had the 1200 hp V-1710-81 engine, which seems to have been set up for higher altitude performance than the earlier Mustangs. I'd have to look up the specs on the engine.

There is a tendency to call all Allison powered Mustangs the P-51A but that is not really accurate.

At that time the first production model of any aircraft had no letter designation. The first P-40's were called just P-40. In the case of the P-39 they got carried away with designating minor modifications and used up a lot of letters as result. Eventually they used the letter plus dash number, so that in the case of the P-47D you could have both bubble top and razorback D models, with dash numbers for changes and then dash letters after the numbers to indicate if it was built in Farmingdale or Evansville. Today we use Block numbers.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Informative Informative:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Navalwarrior (Jul 11, 2019)

MIflyer said:


> One interesting thing I discovered that an A-36 unit acquired some P-51-1 aircraft, armed with four 20MM guns, and used them as well to hit suitable targets. I saw a cannon armed P-51 in the video 'A Day with the A-36's" and it turned out that was the reason.
> 
> So you could have a diorama with a mix of A-36's and P-51-1.


Resp:
The cannon armed Mustangs were taken from the British order (Mustang MkIA) and became P-51-1 (and -2); then again redesignated F-6A, for photo recon in USAAF service. There were no fittings on these aircraft to carry bombs. These Allison engined Mustangs retained the British 20 MM cannons. Many operated in the same Theater as the A-36A dive bomber. No A-36As carried cannons, only 4 to 6 50 cal MG.
Note that the A-36A was the first Mustang frame variant to be drop tank capable. NAA simply plumbed the bomb racks, even though the contract did not call for plumbing. So when NAA began to produce the P-51A (on the same production line as the A-36A, but well after many dive bombers were produced) they kept the wing mounted bomb racks/plumbing. 
Apache as well as Invader, were used to designate these aircraft; however, the British name 'Mustang' tended to push these titles aside. I believe that since the RAF had been using 'Mustang' a year or so before the names Apache/Invader were introduced, and aircraft recognition cards issued (to AA batteries and Naval forces) referred to the airframe, multiple names could cause confusion . . . and slow the 'mental' reaction time whether it was friend or foe. Mustang was just easier, although technically incorrect.


----------



## ColFord (Jul 11, 2019)

The US Allison engined P-51s were not fitted in USAAF service with British 20mm cannon, but US manufactured 20mm cannon, produced by Oldsmobile to the basic Hispano 20mm cannon design. The US manufactured 20mm cannon were included in the P-51s supplied to the RAF, however the RAF armament trials and initial in service use identified a series of major issues with the US manufactured 20mm cannon, the NAA designed mounts and the US manufactured ammunition. As a result the RAF initiated a major program to fix the issues, resulting in replacement of all the US manufactured 20mm cannon in the RAF Mustang Mk.IAs with British manufactured Hispano Mk.II* 20mm cannon, revised ammunition loading, revised case and link ejection system and greatly beefed up cannon mounting. A visual sign of these changes being implemented, is on the USAAF P-51s, EXTERNAL recoil spring ahead of the wing cannon shroud, on the RAF Mustang Mk.IAs, INTERNAL recoil spring inside the wing cannon shroud and basically the bare cannon barrel and muzzle projecting forwards of the shroud.

Certainly there is much discussion and research gone into the Mustang, Apache and Invader names and their use relating to various variants of the P-51/A-36 family of airframes. Essentially, Apache was a NAA internal marketing name being considered as the name for the P-51/A-36 family of aircraft for sale to the USAAF. The RAF had selected the name Mustang for their aircraft some time earlier and to avoid confusion NAA dropped the use of Apache before it was ever considered for adoption. However the name did show up as result of early marketing material produced by NAA when they were trying to generate interest in the USA with the USAAF. The RAF use of the name Mustang stuck. Again, due to mis-communication between various parties the names Apache and Invader did pop up in various official documentation - as an example I have a copy of a US War Office issued aircraft recognition manual produced in early 1944, that shows a RAF Mustang Mk.I type aircraft silhouette, with aircraft name shown as Mustang, with an annotation about dive bomber variant also being known as 'Invader'. Presented with the documented evidence that the A-36 was never offfically named Apache in USAAF service, the USAF Museum has amended the story board in front of the A-36 on display in their collection to remove use of the Apache name, other than peripheral mention in the text regarding the confusion over the name. The official wartime USAAF/War Office list of aircraft types, designations and approved names, did include Mustang for the P-51/A-36 family, but did not include Apache or Invader.

The RAF removed the bomb racks that were fitted to their P-51As/Mustang Mk.IIs, as they were all allocated to use as low level tactical reconnaissance aircraft, their radius of action in the ETO on internal fuel was sufficient for RAF requirements, so no need for the racks and associated tanks. Taking them off gave a few more knots in airspeed. Late in WW2, some experiments were being conducted on RAF Mustang Mk.IIs on forward facing camera installations to accept large negative format cameras. This was to allow coverage of linear targets as an aircraft flew towards them, so flying along rivers, canals, roads, etc. Part of this experimentation included fitting 35mm cine cameras into modified drop tanks, hence the need for something once again to put the drop tank onto. Also produced great quality film footage, much better than standard gun camera footage, of low level strafing attacks.

RAF modified the Allison engines on their Mustang Mk.IIs similar to what they had done with the earlier engines in the Mustang Mk.I and Mk.IA, to produce better low down power and response, operating at 6,000ft and below. That was the prime operating range for the sorties that they flew, based around the camera and camera lense combinations they used in both the oblique and vertical camera mounts and what was considered to be the best range for visual acquisition and identification by the Tac/R pilots of targets of interest on the ground from the air.

Reactions: Winner Winner:
1 | Informative Informative:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## MIflyer (Jul 12, 2019)

RAF modified the Allison engines on their Mustang Mk.IIs similar to what they had done with the earlier engines in the Mustang Mk.I and Mk.IA, to produce better low down power and response, operating at 6,000ft and below.

What were those mods?


----------



## ColFord (Jul 12, 2019)

The major modifications were changes to the supercharger impellor, the supercharger gear ratios and the automatic boost controls. There were a lot of smaller detail modifications that had been identified and developed over time as the RAF gained experience in wringing the best peformance, reliability and longevity out of the Allison engines they were using in their Mustangs.


----------



## Navalwarrior (Jul 12, 2019)

ColFord said:


> The US Allison engined P-51s were not fitted in USAAF service with British 20mm cannon, but US manufactured 20mm cannon, produced by Oldsmobile to the basic Hispano 20mm cannon design. The US manufactured 20mm cannon were included in the P-51s supplied to the RAF, however the RAF armament trials and initial in service use identified a series of major issues with the US manufactured 20mm cannon, the NAA designed mounts and the US manufactured ammunition. As a result the RAF initiated a major program to fix the issues, resulting in replacement of all the US manufactured 20mm cannon in the RAF Mustang Mk.IAs with British manufactured Hispano Mk.II* 20mm cannon, revised ammunition loading, revised case and link ejection system and greatly beefed up cannon mounting. A visual sign of these changes being implemented, is on the USAAF P-51s, EXTERNAL recoil spring ahead of the wing cannon shroud, on the RAF Mustang Mk.IAs, INTERNAL recoil spring inside the wing cannon shroud and basically the bare cannon barrel and muzzle projecting forwards of the shroud.
> 
> Certainly there is much discussion and research gone into the Mustang, Apache and Invader names and their use relating to various variants of the P-51/A-36 family of airframes. Essentially, Apache was a NAA internal marketing name being considered as the name for the P-51/A-36 family of aircraft for sale to the USAAF. The RAF had selected the name Mustang for their aircraft some time earlier and to avoid confusion NAA dropped the use of Apache before it was ever considered for adoption. However the name did show up as result of early marketing material produced by NAA when they were trying to generate interest in the USA with the USAAF. The RAF use of the name Mustang stuck. Again, due to mis-communication between various parties the names Apache and Invader did pop up in various official documentation - as an example I have a copy of a US War Office issued aircraft recognition manual produced in early 1944, that shows a RAF Mustang Mk.I type aircraft silhouette, with aircraft name shown as Mustang, with an annotation about dive bomber variant also being known as 'Invader'. Presented with the documented evidence that the A-36 was never offfically named Apache in USAAF service, the USAF Museum has amended the story board in front of the A-36 on display in their collection to remove use of the Apache name, other than peripheral mention in the text regarding the confusion over the name. The official wartime USAAF/War Office list of aircraft types, designations and approved names, did include Mustang for the P-51/A-36 family, but did not include Apache or Invader.
> 
> ...


Resp:
Great info! Thanks much. I always wondered about whos cannons went into the Mustang MkIA/F-6A. Every photo (they were few) showed Mustangs at NAA without cannons fitted, so I believed that British made cannons were installed once the aircraft reached England. And I believed the British furnished the Americans with cannons for their F-6As. Wrong again. Correct me if I am wrong, but the RAF never fitted Malcolm hoods on their camera outfitted Mustangs. I have seen USAAF F-6As and F-6Bs with Malcolm hoods, but only in the ETO.


----------



## ColFord (Jul 12, 2019)

RAF did fit Malcolm Hoods to the majority of the Mustang Mk.IIs and best as research to date has been able to determine, one Mustang Mk.IA which was used as the initial test aircraft for the Malcolm Hood installation including the air trials which including in flight jettison trials. Plus, again from best information research to date can determine, a handful at most of Mustang Mk.IA, very late in operational career - late 1944 to early 1945 timeframe. Using the Malcolm Hood with the oblique camera(s) fitted required either use of camera(s) with short length lenses that did not protrude beyond the cutouts in the rear perspex quarter windows, or the pilot getting strapped in, closing the Malcolm Hood and then the photo section staff installing the camera(s) with attached lenses into their mounts and putting the rear perspex quarter windows back in place. Reverse procedure on landing where the pilot could not exit until the cameras were removed. If you go to the Imperial War Museum website, and under the photo search function, search "FRE 14828" that should bring up a photograph of a RAF groundcrew member installing a F.24 reconnaissance camera into a Mustang Mk.II fitted with a Malcolm Hood. In the photo you can see the track along the side of the cockpit and quarter windows on which the Malcolm Hood travels, with the edge of the Malcolm Hood seen behind the ground crew member. "FRE 14825" gives another angle, which also shows the whip aerial on the spine of the aircraft that replaces the normal post/blade antenna that is fitted as a part of the modifications for the Malcolm Hood. The accompanying description for those two photos makes use of the US "F-5" designation for the aircraft as it is based off a US wartime photo caption for us in the USA. 

Backtracking a bit, also in IWM collection, photo "HU 110061" shows one of the A-36s used by the RAF in the MTO, also "FRE 14894" shows another.

Reactions: Informative Informative:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Navalwarrior (Jul 12, 2019)

ColFord said:


> RAF did fit Malcolm Hoods to the majority of the Mustang Mk.IIs and best as research to date has been able to determine, one Mustang Mk.IA which was used as the initial test aircraft for the Malcolm Hood installation including the air trials which including in flight jettison trials. Plus, again from best information research to date can determine, a handful at most of Mustang Mk.IA, very late in operational career - late 1944 to early 1945 timeframe. Using the Malcolm Hood with the oblique camera(s) fitted required either use of camera(s) with short length lenses that did not protrude beyond the cutouts in the rear perspex quarter windows, or the pilot getting strapped in, closing the Malcolm Hood and then the photo section staff installing the camera(s) with attached lenses into their mounts and putting the rear perspex quarter windows back in place. Reverse procedure on landing where the pilot could not exit until the cameras were removed. If you go to the Imperial War Museum website, and under the photo search function, search "FRE 14828" that should bring up a photograph of a RAF groundcrew member installing a F.24 reconnaissance camera into a Mustang Mk.II fitted with a Malcolm Hood. In the photo you can see the track along the side of the cockpit and quarter windows on which the Malcolm Hood travels, with the edge of the Malcolm Hood seen behind the ground crew member. "FRE 14825" gives another angle, which also shows the whip aerial on the spine of the aircraft that replaces the normal post/blade antenna that is fitted as a part of the modifications for the Malcolm Hood. The accompanying description for those two photos makes use of the US "F-5" designation for the aircraft as it is based off a US wartime photo caption for us in the USA.
> 
> Backtracking a bit, also in IWM collection, photo "HU 110061" shows one of the A-36s used by the RAF in the MTO, also "FRE 14894" shows another.


Resp:
I know that the RAF received six A-36As WW from the local USAAF in Luqa (Malta) in July 1943. One survived to be used by the RAF 112 to transition pilots to the soon to be arriving Mustang Mk III. All photos show lattice framed canopies. On an early mission, one of the RAF A-36As shot down an RAF Spitfire when two Spitifres "jumped" the Mustangs in error.


----------



## MIflyer (Jul 12, 2019)

Okay, so they basically did the same kind of engine mods they did with the "Clipped, Cropped, and Clapped" LF Spit V as an answer to the FW-190 in that same time frame. That makes perfect sense. Thanks!

I understand that the A-36A's the RAF got in the Med were for use not as dive bombers but rather for low altitude recon, since they had no Mustang Mk1's in the theater. They tried using Spitfires to escort the recon airplanes and found they could not stay with the A-36A's. I never heard of them escorting the Mk1's in the ETO. The RAF got one A-36A in England and took some very nice and often reproduced photos of it, leading some people to conclude that they operated the type. 

I read where some Canadian pilots flying Mustang Mk1's took them on a long range flight into Germany and got into the pattern at a Luftwaffe training base.


----------



## Navalwarrior (Jul 12, 2019)

MIflyer said:


> Okay, so they basically did the same kind of engine mods they did with the "Clipped, Cropped, and Clapped" LF Spit V as an answer to the FW-190 in that same time frame. That makes perfect sense. Thanks!
> 
> I understand that the A-36A's the RAF got in the Med were for use not as dive bombers but rather for low altitude recon, since they had no Mustang Mk1's in the theater. They tried using Spitfires to escort the recon airplanes and found they could not stay with the A-36A's. I never heard of them escorting the Mk1's in the ETO. The RAF got one A-36A in England and took some very nice and often reproduced photos of it, leading some people to conclude that they operated the type.
> 
> I read where some Canadian pilots flying Mustang Mk1's took them on a long range flight into Germany and got into the pattern at a Luftwaffe training base.





MIflyer said:


> Okay, so they basically did the same kind of engine mods they did with the "Clipped, Cropped, and Clapped" LF Spit V as an answer to the FW-190 in that same time frame. That makes perfect sense. Thanks!
> 
> I understand that the A-36A's the RAF got in the Med were for use not as dive bombers but rather for low altitude recon, since they had no Mustang Mk1's in the theater. They tried using Spitfires to escort the recon airplanes and found they could not stay with the A-36A's. I never heard of them escorting the Mk1's in the ETO. The RAF got one A-36A in England and took some very nice and often reproduced photos of it, leading some people to conclude that they operated the type.
> 
> I read where some Canadian pilots flying Mustang Mk1's took them on a long range flight into Germany and got into the pattern at a Luftwaffe training base.


Resp:
Yes to the RAF using A-36A for tactical recon in the MTO, but they also used them to harass enemy ground forces when spotted. Similarly to the use of Mustangs MkI/MkIA in the ETO. Yes to MkIs entering German airspace (the 1st Allied single engine fighter to cross the German border since Dunkirk). They were escorting Wellingtons, I believe.


----------



## MIflyer (Jul 12, 2019)

I was just reading the Aug 2018 issue of Flight Journal on the use of the Spitfire as a dive bomber in the ETO after D-Day. The RAF concluded what they really needed was some A-36A's but all they had were Spitfires, which did not prove to be very suitable. They did equip Mustang III's with bombs and use them in the tactical fighter bomber role in France starting in 1944, both before and after the Normandy invasion. That surprised me because I had always assumed every Merlin Mustang we had in that time frame was going for fighter escort.


----------



## Navalwarrior (Jul 12, 2019)

MIflyer said:


> I was just reading the Aug 2018 issue of Flight Journal on the use of the Spitfire as a dive bomber in the ETO after D-Day. The RAF concluded what they really needed was some A-36A's but all they had were Spitfires, which did not prove to be very suitable. They did equip Mustang III's with bombs and use them in the tactical fighter bomber role in France starting in 1944, both before and after the Normandy invasion. That surprised me because I had always assumed every Merlin Mustang we had in that time frame was going for fighter escort.


Resp:
Interesting that the RAF thought of the A-36A. I guess they knew of the excellent results the USAAF had with the A-36A as a dive bomber in the Med. At one point thought was given to reinstating them on NAA's production line, but knew it would interfere with Merlin engine Mustang production. The US Bomber Squ that migrated to Italy prized them over their old P-40s and even thought they were better than the P-47s that were phased in to replace the A-36A and worn out P-40s. The various units flipped a coin to see who would keep the A-36As.


----------



## ColFord (Jul 12, 2019)

Resp:
I know that the RAF received six A-36As WW from the local USAAF in Luqa (Malta) in July 1943. One survived to be used by the RAF 112 to transition pilots to the soon to be arriving Mustang Mk III. All photos show lattice framed canopies. On an early mission, one of the RAF A-36As shot down an RAF Spitfire when two Spitifres "jumped" the Mustangs in error.

_At least three of the A-36s in Luqa in 1943 were the surviving A-36s from those that had been loaned by the USAAF to the RAF and used by 1436 Strategic Reconniassance Flight. If my memory serves me without having to dig back through my files, they were not handed back to the USAAF after finishing with 1436 SRF, but were kept on with the RAF for initially 'hacks' but then to transition pilots on RAF and RAAF Squadrons in the MTO/Italy that were converting from P-40s to P-51s. No.3 Sqdn RAAF used two of the A-36s for their pre-conversion familiarisation training. _

Resp:
Yes to the RAF using A-36A for tactical recon in the MTO, but they also used them to harass enemy ground forces when spotted. Similarly to the use of Mustangs MkI/MkIA in the ETO. Yes to MkIs entering German airspace (the 1st Allied single engine fighter to cross the German border since Dunkirk). They were escorting Wellingtons, I believe.

AND 

I read where some Canadian pilots flying Mustang Mk1's took them on a long range flight into Germany and got into the pattern at a Luftwaffe training base.

_Don't get me started on how these stories get out there or started, but since you have mentioned them.

First long range bomber escort mission outside range of Spitfires & Hurricanes based in the UK, by Mustang Mk.I aircraft of No.268 Squadron RAF, escorting Bostons of No.88 Squadron RAF for a raid on Den Helder in the Netherlands, 16 September 1942. So long range bomber escort, conducted by a Squadron of Mustang Mk.I aircraft of Army Co-operation Command, not Fighter Command. Ever wonder why you don't know about it? They conducted a number of other long range bomber escort sorties for Bostons and Venturas through the timeframe late 1942 to mid-1943.

First long distance "Rhubarb" into Germany by single engined fighter based in the UK. Four Mustang Mk.I aircraft of No.268 Squadron RAF (again Army Co-operation Command, not Fighter Command) operating independantly and not in conjunction, escorting or anything else. Conducted on 21 October 1942, on sortie from Snailwell via a refuelling stop at Coltishall, to a point near Texel in the Netherlands, then down through the Netherlands to a point near Heede in Germany then commenced attacking targets such as hutted camps, canal traffic on the Dortmund-Ems Canal, a gasometer and factory at Lathen, then attacking a number of small ships and tugs on the way out over the Zuider Zee and the Netherlands back to the UK. (At the same time the Squadron had a section of another four Mustang Mk.I aircraft also conducting a Rhubarb across the Netherlands, positioned where they could provide a diversion and support if required.) As to the "escorting Wellingtons" I have examined the RAF records for that date, and there were raids by RAF bombers on the Dortmund-Ems Canal, some ten to twelve hours later that night. So the Mustangs were definitely not escorting them. In seeking to identify how the two sorties became links, I looked at the official Air Ministry Communiques issued to the Press advising of RAF operational activities at the time. In the original, the sorties by the Mustangs and the later operations by the Wellingtons are two separate and quite distinct items with other operational activity between the two entries. Digging deeper, I found a copy of the Communique as edited and contracted for transmission from the UK to the USA by one of the press agencies. Here in reducing the original communique down for sending to the USA, the press agency has run the details of the Mustang operations and Wellington operations together in the narrative description, so it gives the impression the Mustangs were operating in support of the Wellingtons. That then gets picked up by the US press and presented as Mustangs escorting Wellintons - found that in period US newspapers. Those newspaper entries then get found by researchers/writers writing books about the Mustang in the 1950s and 1960s in the USA, and that's where the story gets twisted around and widely spread. Again, in part this is before most of the RAF wartime records were declassified or released to Archives, so the source documents were not available to researchers/writers of many of those early Mustang books.

The story of Mustangs getting into the pattern of a Luftwaffe training base is actually that of two pilots of the Air Fighting Development Unit (AFDU), S/L JAS MacLaclan DSO, DFC and Bars flying a modified Mustang Mk.IA aircraft and F/L AG Page (later W/C AG Page DSO, DFC and Bars) flying a modified Mustang Mk.I aircraft conducted a low level sortie on 25 June 1943 where they attacked initially Luftwaffe training aircraft at an airfield south of Paris, then Luftwaffe night fighter Ju-88s doing test flight for operations that night at an airfield in Bretigny. In a very short space of time they shot down number of Luftwaffe aircraft. This sortie had been in planning for some time and in preparation for it the two pilots had spent some time with the Mustang pilots of a number of the Army Co-operation Squadrons "picking their brains" about the tactics they were using on their low level sorties, German response times to sorties over the occupied countries and so on. This was done whilst they in return were educating the Army Cooperation Command pilots in the latest developments in Fighter tactics, German fighters, etc. _

_Pilots of one of the RCAF Mustang Mk.I Squadrons had been operating intruder operations earlier, but these had been mainly confined to northern France, Belgium and western Netherlands, not as far in as Germany. A couple of those intruder operations did encounter Luftwaffe aircraft operating trainer aircraft, but usually only individual aircraft, not the circuit full of trainers as encountered by MacLachlan and Page on their sortie._

Reactions: Bacon Bacon:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## MIflyer (Jul 12, 2019)

A friend of mine who was in the CBI said that the A-36A's they had in Burma were sometimes better ordnance haulers than the P-47's because they were better able to get out of jungle airstrips.

While the A-36A would have been a logical choice for the RAF 2d Tactical Air Force, an even more logical one might have been the P-47. Based on the engine reliability problems and poor ditching characteristics with the Typhoon, I think the P-47 would have been a superior mount. I do not know if the P-47 was available in sufficient numbers by mid-1944. Republic had two plants going but Curtiss did a poor job of ramping up production of the P-47G.

In any case, the RAF already had plenty of pilots that knew how to fly the Mustang Mk 1, they had ground crews experienced with the airplane and no doubt could have taken on the Apache Mk1 or Mustang Mk VI or whatever easily. But with only 500 built and NAA production switched over to the Merlin version there just were not enough around. Perhaps it was too bad that the 300 P-51A's were built rather than just continuing A-36A's.


----------



## Navalwarrior (Jul 15, 2019)

MIflyer said:


> A friend of mine who was in the CBI said that the A-36A's they had in Burma were sometimes better ordnance haulers than the P-47's because they were better able to get out of jungle airstrips.
> 
> While the A-36A would have been a logical choice for the RAF 2d Tactical Air Force, an even more logical one might have been the P-47. Based on the engine reliability problems and poor ditching characteristics with the Typhoon, I think the P-47 would have been a superior mount. I do not know if the P-47 was available in sufficient numbers by mid-1944. Republic had two plants going but Curtiss did a poor job of ramping up production of the P-47G.
> 
> In any case, the RAF already had plenty of pilots that knew how to fly the Mustang Mk 1, they had ground crews experienced with the airplane and no doubt could have taken on the Apache Mk1 or Mustang Mk VI or whatever easily. But with only 500 built and NAA production switched over to the Merlin version there just were not enough around. Perhaps it was too bad that the 300 P-51A's were built rather than just continuing A-36A's.


Resp:
I've heard the same from a ground support crewman who said that they had less jungle to cut out (three if I remember correctly) for an air strip to support the Chindits as they moved closer to Japanese forces. The P-51As required less runway length as compared to the P-47. He also said that they did put 2 1,000 pounders on the Mustangs, even though they were now rated for this weight. They likely didn't have to fly very far since they were operating from an improvised forward runway.


----------



## Navalwarrior (Jul 15, 2019)

Snautzer01 said:


> *WWII photo- A-36 Apache Dive Bomber/Fighter plane Nose Art- CALIFORNIA MUSTANG* | eBay
> 
> View attachment 542963


Resp:
An A-36A with 'Mustang' painted on the engine cow, so there; they are Mustangs! LOL!


----------



## Navalwarrior (Jul 15, 2019)

nuuumannn said:


> Just a wee addition, MIflyer; the first USAAF Mustangs were designated as simply P-51s (Manufacturer's designation NA-91), without a suffix, although almost all but two were designated F-6As for recon, with the fitting of cameras. The British equivalent being, as you state, the Mustang 1A. The next variant the USAAF received was the P-51A (Manufacturer's designation NA-99) from March 1943, which differed from the P-51 in that it had the capacity to carry external stores and had a slightly more powerful Allison under the hood. The Brits called this the Mustang II.


Resp:
To add to the nomenclature confusion, when the P-51-1 (and -2s) became F-6As, they kept the original black stencil of 'P-51-1' under the L cockpit.


----------



## nuuumannn (Jul 15, 2019)

Navalwarrior said:


> To add to the nomenclature confusion, when the P-51-1 (and -2s) became F-6As, they kept the original black stencil of 'P-51-1' under the L cockpit.



Boy, they love to keep us guessing!


----------



## ColFord (Jul 16, 2019)

MIflyer said:


> I was just reading the Aug 2018 issue of Flight Journal on the use of the Spitfire as a dive bomber in the ETO after D-Day. The RAF concluded what they really needed was some A-36A's but all they had were Spitfires, which did not prove to be very suitable. They did equip Mustang III's with bombs and use them in the tactical fighter bomber role in France starting in 1944, both before and after the Normandy invasion. That surprised me because I had always assumed every Merlin Mustang we had in that time frame was going for fighter escort.



Interested to know where Flight Journal got the idea the RAF concluded they needed A-36As instead of other available UK manufactured aircraft already to hand and available. Every Air Ministry/RAF report I've seen on the A-36A for use by the RAF in the ETO concluded that it did not meet their requirements, in particular RAF operational doctrine for support to the Army by fighter-bombers. It's potential for use in other theatres of operation and suitability for use outside the ETO is left for further consideration/decision eg in MTO and CBI. The reports all concluded that in terms of priorities, the RAF wanted Merlin engined Mustangs - they were looking forward to the requirements to support and escort the bombers of 2TAF and Bomber Command over the Continent in support of the invasion; they wanted more Typhoons which by then were a known quantity and showing the reliability that was needed; they had the Tempest in its various marks in the pipeline, and the late Griffon engined Spitfires in the pipeline. Added into that was standardisation of armament, rationalisation of number of aircraft types to be supported, logisitics suppport, maintenance support, which was needed for the invasion, particularly to ensure the RAF Servicing Commandoes and Servicing Echelons to be put into the Advanced Landing Grounds after the invasion had the ability to maintain and support all main aircraft types in the RAF inventory.

It is interesting that in late 1943 the Air Ministry/RAF had to put great pressure on North American Aviation, Allison Aero Engines and the USAAF to get production of required spares for the remaining Allison engined Mustangs already being used by the RAF in the ETO to ensure their continued serviceability and support through the invasion period and to provide sufficient spares holding to allow repair of damaged aircraft and normal time based servicing of the exisiting aircraft to the end of 1944. Because the NAA and USAAF focus was so much on the Merlin engined Mustangs they had great difficulty getting what was required - hence why you see in early 1944 a consolidation of the remaining Mustang Mk.I and Mk.IA aircraft into a smaller number of Squadrons, and a number of Squadrons previously equipped with Mustangs converting onto the interim Spitfire FR.IX variant eg. No.16 Sqdn RAF, or converting back to earlier sub-types such as No.63 Sqdn onto Spitfire Vs and No.309 (Polish) Squadron to Hurricane IIs & IVs. That is also why you see the proposal for the FR variant of the Hawker Typhoon coming forward and 100 Typhoons being planned for modification to FR standard - altho that number in total was never modified the number being closer to 60. So adding a Allison engined sub-type at a point where because the focus was on the Merlin engined versions, with difficulty in getting spares and support was already becoming apparent, the RAF was certainly not looking to A-36As as a solution for their tactical fighter bomber role for the invasion and beyond.

Underlying all this, going back to late 1940 is a political and doctrinal battle between the British Army and the RAF about close air support for the Army and the need the Army continually felt that the RAF had to have dive bombers and even to the degree at one point where the British Army was proposing it have its own Air Corps of dedicated close air support aircraft, of which a very large part was proposed to be dive bombers - the myth of the Stuka from 1940 lived on. Imagine the dilution of air power that suggestion may have wrought if it had ever been implemented.


----------



## Navalwarrior (Jul 16, 2019)

ColFord said:


> Interested to know where Flight Journal got the idea the RAF concluded they needed A-36As instead of other available UK manufactured aircraft already to hand and available. Every Air Ministry/RAF report I've seen on the A-36A for use by the RAF in the ETO concluded that it did not meet their requirements, in particular RAF operational doctrine for support to the Army by fighter-bombers. It's potential for use in other theatres of operation and suitability for use outside the ETO is left for further consideration/decision eg in MTO and CBI. The reports all concluded that in terms of priorities, the RAF wanted Merlin engined Mustangs - they were looking forward to the requirements to support and escort the bombers of 2TAF and Bomber Command over the Continent in support of the invasion; they wanted more Typhoons which by then were a known quantity and showing the reliability that was needed; they had the Tempest in its various marks in the pipeline, and the late Griffon engined Spitfires in the pipeline. Added into that was standardisation of armament, rationalisation of number of aircraft types to be supported, logisitics suppport, maintenance support, which was needed for the invasion, particularly to ensure the RAF Servicing Commandoes and Servicing Echelons to be put into the Advanced Landing Grounds after the invasion had the ability to maintain and support all main aircraft types in the RAF inventory.
> 
> It is interesting that in late 1943 the Air Ministry/RAF had to put great pressure on North American Aviation, Allison Aero Engines and the USAAF to get production of required spares for the remaining Allison engined Mustangs already being used by the RAF in the ETO to ensure their continued serviceability and support through the invasion period and to provide sufficient spares holding to allow repair of damaged aircraft and normal time based servicing of the exisiting aircraft to the end of 1944. Because the NAA and USAAF focus was so much on the Merlin engined Mustangs they had great difficulty getting what was required - hence why you see in early 1944 a consolidation of the remaining Mustang Mk.I and Mk.IA aircraft into a smaller number of Squadrons, and a number of Squadrons previously equipped with Mustangs converting onto the interim Spitfire FR.IX variant eg. No.16 Sqdn RAF, or converting back to earlier sub-types such as No.63 Sqdn onto Spitfire Vs and No.309 (Polish) Squadron to Hurricane IIs & IVs. That is also why you see the proposal for the FR variant of the Hawker Typhoon coming forward and 100 Typhoons being planned for modification to FR standard - altho that number in total was never modified the number being closer to 60. So adding a Allison engined sub-type at a point where because the focus was on the Merlin engined versions, with difficulty in getting spares and support was already becoming apparent, the RAF was certainly not looking to A-36As as a solution for their tactical fighter bomber role for the invasion and beyond.
> 
> Underlying all this, going back to late 1940 is a political and doctrinal battle between the British Army and the RAF about close air support for the Army and the need the Army continually felt that the RAF had to have dive bombers and even to the degree at one point where the British Army was proposing it have its own Air Corps of dedicated close air support aircraft, of which a very large part was proposed to be dive bombers - the myth of the Stuka from 1940 lived on. Imagine the dilution of air power that suggestion may have wrought if it had ever been implemented.


Resp:
I suspect that the USAAF offered six (6) A-36As to be used for low level long range recon, which the RAF accepted. This is my assessment, from viewing the 6 A-36As that were remarked with RAF roundels, fuselage bands and Lettering. I am surprised that the USAAF didn't give them some of their F-6As instead. The USAAF may have known that replacement aircraft were due in (P-47s ?), so offered the A-36As. The A-36A could carry drop tanks, where their F-6As could not. However, these Allison engine Planes had plenty of internal fuel capacity to meet most mission requirements. So I am only guessing. Dive bombing was likely not the mission the RAF had in mind.


----------



## Gnomey (Jul 18, 2019)

Good shots!


----------



## Mustangtmg (Sep 25, 2019)

Snautzer01 said:


> *WWII photo- A-36 Apache Dive Bomber/Fighter plane Nose Art- CALIFORNIA MUSTANG* | eBay
> 
> View attachment 542963


This is a NA-91 ... most likely the F-6A version, if it made it to the theatre. Its name WAS "Apache" until late '41 until July, 1942 when it became "Mustang" like every other aircraft (including the A-36A) made by NAA that looked like a P-51 Mustang.


----------



## Navalwarrior (Sep 25, 2019)

Mustangtmg said:


> This is a NA-91 ... most likely the F-6A version, if it made it to the theatre. Its name WAS "Apache" until late '41 until July, 1942 when it became "Mustang" like every other aircraft (including the A-36A) made by NAA that looked like a P-51 Mustang.



Resp:
Most if not all of the F-6As retained the black stenciling on the left fuselage just forward of the canopy of P-51-1 or -2; F-6Bs retained the stenciling of P-51A. Confusion, confusion! I believe 'Mustang' became dominate due to the aircraft's first use in combat by the RAF. Identification placards introduced at the time for allied gunners, fighters, etc. needed quick 'I'd calls' to prevent destruction of 'friendlies.'


----------



## johnbr (Nov 11, 2019)

North American A-36A Mustang > National Museum of the United States Air Force™ > Display 
https://www.boeingimagelicensing.co...ult&VBID=2JRSN2A4G8IMTX&SMLS=1&RW=1536&RH=780 
WWII A-36 Apache/Invader Fighter Planes Photo Print for Sale


----------



## Navalwarrior (Nov 11, 2019)

johnbr said:


> North American A-36A Mustang > National Museum of the United States Air Force™ > Display
> View attachment 560502
> View attachment 560503
> View attachment 560504


Resp:
Funny. I was just viewing this aircraft, plus two Spitfire's (MkV Tropical and a MkXI) at the USAF Museum earlier today. The b/w photo . . . from Langley, VA?


----------



## johnbr (Nov 11, 2019)

North *American* *A-36A* *Mustang* poster net


----------



## stug3 (Nov 13, 2019)

Navalwarrior said:


> Resp:
> An A-36A with 'Mustang' painted on the engine cow, so there; they are Mustangs! LOL!





Navalwarrior said:


> Resp:
> To add to the nomenclature confusion, when the P-51-1 (and -2s) became F-6As, they kept the original black stencil of 'P-51-1' under the L cockpit.



This USAAF telegram from July 1942 suggests a preference that all P-51 types be referred to as 'Mustangs'

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Winner Winner:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## stug3 (Nov 13, 2019)

RAF Mustang EW998 (original SN 42-83685)
The only A-36 delivered to the RAF for evaluation.


----------



## Wurger (Nov 14, 2019)




----------



## Navalwarrior (Nov 14, 2019)

stug3 said:


> This USAAF telegram from July 1942 suggests a preference that all P-51 types be referred to as 'Mustangs'
> View attachment 560745


Resp:
Wow! Nice job; "for all North American fighters of P-51 type." Is there more info in the rest of the memo?

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## stug3 (Nov 14, 2019)

Navalwarrior said:


> Resp:
> Wow! Nice job; "for all North American fighters of P-51 type." Is there more info in the rest of the memo?



That was the only part of it I saw, maybe the rest of it or the whole thing is floating around the net somewhere.


----------



## sotaro (Dec 3, 2019)

stug3 said:


> That was the only part of it I saw, maybe the rest of it or the whole thing is floating around the net somewhere.


On Quora a fellow alleges that the Allison engined Mustangs exported to the U.K. were not supercharged. Is there any validity to that assertion? Seems absurd to me, but he does refer to a ban on export of supercharged engines... which I still think is absurd...


----------



## Navalwarrior (Dec 3, 2019)

sotaro said:


> On Quora a fellow alleges that the Allison engined Mustangs exported to the U.K. were not supercharged. Is there any validity to that assertion? Seems absurd to me, but he does refer to a ban on export of supercharged engines... which I still think is absurd...


Resp:
The Allison engine P-51A, which became the Mustang Mk II, was equipped with a new Supercharger (over previous models; Mk I and Mk IA) which further enhanced low lever performance. It also increased its mid-to-high level performance over previous Allison engines, raising its maximum speed from 388 to 409 mph at 11,000 feet.
I suspect other viewers can provide more technical info than I, but engines and carburetors were in short supply by 1942. However, pressure was on industry to improve both throughout WWII.


----------



## MIflyer (Dec 4, 2019)

That old business about the Allison V-1710 engine not being supercharged has been making the rounds for a long time. And it is pure BS. The Allison in the P-39, P-40 and P-51 was supercharged to the same degree that the Merlin was in the Hurricanes and the Spitfires Mk I, IA, II and V.

But the Allison did not have a two speed supercharger, which limited it's performance in some respects. The A-36 had the Allison set up to maximize its performance at about 5,000 ft while the P-51A had it set up for max speed at 20,000 ft.

The P-38 had two stages of supercharging, the built in supercharger of the Allisons each being fed by a turbosupercharger.

In the case of the V-1710 in the P-39, P-40, and P-51, there was no supercharger "On/Off" switch, unlike some of the earlier Merlin installations and that may have led some pilots to conclude it did not have one. Also, the XP-39 initially had a turbosupercharger feeding the Allison's internal supercharger, but it was deleted when they found that the installation actually was slower than just the Allison by itself. Some writers later concluded that the USAAC had the turbo deleted due to a desire to emphasize low altitude performance but nothing could be further from the truth. The Army Air Corps emphasized high altitude performance. 

The V-1710 in the P-63 had an additional stage of supercharging using an auxiliary supercharger run off the starter interface to substitute for the turbo; it used a hydromatic automatic transmission to vary supercharging.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Informative Informative:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Navalwarrior (Dec 4, 2019)

MIflyer said:


> That old business about the Allison V-1710 engine not being supercharged has been making the rounds for a long time. And it is pure BS. The Allison in the P-39, P-40 and P-51 was supercharged to the same degree that the Merlin was in the Hurricanes and the Spitfires Mk I, IA, II and V.
> 
> But the Allison did not have a two speed supercharger, which limited it's performance in some respects. The A-36 had the Allison set up to maximize its performance at about 5,000 ft while the P-51A had it set up for max speed at 20,000 ft.
> 
> ...


Resp:
Also, I think the British messed up the P-38 by insisting on several supposedly cost saving changes; one change was insisting on non-counter rotating Allisons . . . which ruined its performance and ease of handling. Lockheed tried to accommodate their requests, which brought criticism of the plane's ability.


----------



## MIflyer (Dec 5, 2019)

Yes, and the Brits were buying Lightning I's, which were equipped with the C series Allisons, as was the Hawk 81's they were buying in large numbers, and they probably were thinking in terms of better logistics.

Reactions: Agree Agree:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Navalwarrior (Dec 5, 2019)

MIflyer said:


> Yes, and the Brits were buying Lightning I's, which were equipped with the C series Allisons, as was the Hawk 81's they were buying in large numbers, and they probably were thinking in terms of better logistics.





MIflyer said:


> Yes, and the Brits were buying Lightning I's, which were equipped with the C series Allisons, as was the Hawk 81's they were buying in large numbers, and they probably were thinking in terms of better logistics.


Resp:
And every requested change lessened the P-38's attributes. It would have been interesting to see how it performed in RAF pilot's hands, if accepted as is.


----------



## Gnomey (Dec 8, 2019)

Nice shots!


----------



## Mustangtmg (Dec 27, 2019)

stug3 said:


> That was the only part of it I saw, maybe the rest of it or the whole thing is floating around the net somewhere.


I'm not bragging ... well, maybe just a little ... but the Telegram, whose top part (it's from Dutch Kindelberger to Col Arthur Ennis) was emailed to me by the Historical Archivist at Boeing in April, 2019. Because I'd been corresponding with him on other Mustang-related subjects, he occasionally emailed me scans of anything and everything pertaining to the Mustang family. I received the Telegram along with a scan of the cover of the Parts Catalog for the A-36A. It says "A-36A Mustang," by the way.

He told me that I could post them online (they'd apparently been cataloged earlier, but he came across them, and as far as I know - and from what actual Mustang historians (both authors and just serious "regular folks") tell me, these two documents have NEVER been seen before. I actually wrote an article for The Hangar Deck that was posted right before these two documents were called to my attention by the email that I received.

I added that (you'd have thought that Boeing would've done that before emailing it to me) onto the images before posting them on the Facebook P-51 Mustang Group right after receiving them. The Archivist told me that I could post them online if I added that to the image. My image of the Telegram has my "stamp" on the bottom, and this one near the top, but that's neither here nor there.

I'll attach the scans of the whole Telegram and the Catalog cover. I thought that I'd already done that here, but maybe not...I've sent this info to a number of websites, so, they all tend to "run together."

Here goes!

Tom


----------



## Mustangtmg (Dec 27, 2019)

johnbr said:


> North American A-36A Mustang > National Museum of the United States Air Force™ > Display
> https://www.boeingimagelicensing.co...ult&VBID=2JRSN2A4G8IMTX&SMLS=1&RW=1536&RH=780
> WWII A-36 Apache/Invader Fighter Planes Photo Print for Sale
> View attachment 560505
> ...


Why do we have three different Mustang Models here???

The top on shows NA-91 Mustang Mk IAs (RAF) / P-51 Apache (before being modified to P-51-1-NA, P-51-2-NA, F-6A and XP-51B aircraft)

The 2nd photo is the A-36A Mustang at the National Museum of the US Air Force.

The 3rd photo is the A-36A Mustang owned and flown by the Collings Foundation.

The 4th photo is one of the XP-51 aircraft, pulled from the NA-73 batch intended for the RAF. This photo is from (I believe) the Summer of 1943 and is XP-51 SN 41-039.

I'm confused as to just why these are posted without an explanation that I can understand.  Maybe I'm just dense!


----------



## Navalwarrior (Dec 27, 2019)

Mustangtmg said:


> Why do we have three different Mustang Models here???
> 
> The top on shows NA-91 Mustang Mk IAs (RAF) / P-51 Apache (before being modified to P-51-1-NA, P-51-2-NA, F-6A and XP-51B aircraft)
> 
> ...


Resp:
To give aviation historians something to do. Just kidding. I'm sure others on this blog have answers, but as you pointed out the British ordered the fighter first . . . so they got the honor of naming it 'Mustang.' When the USAAC/USAAF held back the second British order (could legally do it since the US Govt paid for this second order), they used their traditional nomenclature of P for pursuit and the number 51 to designate this particular fighter. At some point, the AAF decided to use them as tactical photo recon aircraft by fitting cameras. Result, they were renamed F-6A; F for photo, 6 for model designation and A to denote 1st variant. 
The first model built specifically for USAAF was the dive bomber variant; A-36A. A denotes 'attack', 36 denotes this particular model dive bomber built on the P-51 Mustang frame, and the letter A as the first variant. Again, the A-36A was the first variant on this airframe ordered (the P-51A soon joined the A-36A on the production line) directly for USAAF service. At this point all nomenclature is correct! 
Confusion returns when Invader/Apache is added to the A-36A. However, 'Mustang' soon overshadows Invader/Apache as the war progresses. You will likely get many different explainations for this forum. 
My belief for the return to the 'Mustang' name for P-51s, F-6A/Bs and A-36As: Since the RAF Mustang I and IA entered the war first, and the RAF preferred names versus numbers . . . the aircraft identification cards published were with 'Mustang' when ID by anti-aircraft crews, RAF pilots/air crews, ground and naval forces. So substituting different names for technical and non visual differences . . . causes confusion . . . when all you really needed to do was sound off quickly and clearly . . . Friend or Foe!


----------



## ColFord (Dec 27, 2019)

May 29, 1940 - British Government places first order for the Allison Mustang, comprising 320 aircraft to the NAA designation NA-73, which were allocated the AG series serials in RAF service. Under the contract, first delivery to be by January 1941. Purchased and paid for by the British Government. Delivery under terms of contract is acceptance at factory and safe delivery to port of departure in the USA, when the crated aircraft then becomes the property of the British Government.

September 24, 1940, British Government places second order was for an additional 300 aircraft to the NAA designation NA-83, which were allocated AL, AM and AP series serials in RAF service. Purchased and paid for by the British Government. Production and delivery to follow on immediately to first order.

March 11, 1941, the Lend Lease Act came into force in the USA - this well pre-dates Pearl Harbor and the US entry into the war. This meant any additional orders that the RAF wanted to place was then required to be placed in accordance with the arrangements for Lend Lease. This meant the aircraft would be manufactured under an order from the US Government and as such it had to have a US Military designation for the aircraft.

So on September 25, 1941 the USAAF ordered 150 aircraft to meet a RAF specification, which would be the NAA designation NA-91 and which would be allocated serials in the FD serial range in RAF service. As the aircraft were ordered under USAAF arrangements they were also given US serial blocks and the USAAF designation P-51. In RAF service the NA-91 would be the Mustang Mk.IA. Of the 150 aircraft produced, 93 would be delivered to the RAF, the remainder being retained by the USAAF. Timing for this additional order is interesting as it is made around the same time the acceptance flight testing program of the NA-73/Mustang Mk.I was completed at NAA and the first aircraft was accepted by the RAF, crated and commenced its journey to the UK. So in light of the positive initial results, they wanted to order more.

Production of the NA-91 had not yet commenced at the time of the US entry into the war in December 1941, the production line was still manufacturing the last of the NA-73 production run and the start of the NA-83 production run for the RAF. Production of the NA-91 commenced immediately upon completion of the NA-83 order - actually with the last of the NA-83 going off the end of the line as the first of the NA-91 started coming down the start of the line. 

The shortfall in the original order for the NA-91/Mustang Mk.IA aircraft to the RAF would be made up by the later delivery of 50 P-51A/Mustang Mk.II aircraft in late 1943 to early 1944.

A-36 in RAF service, if it had been accepted, had proposed designation of "Mustang Mk.I (Dive Bomber)".

That's the initial British ordering timeline and numbers.

Reactions: Agree Agree:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Navalwarrior (Dec 28, 2019)

ColFord said:


> May 29, 1940 - British Government places first order for the Allison Mustang, comprising 320 aircraft to the NAA designation NA-73, which were allocated the AG series serials in RAF service. Under the contract, first delivery to be by January 1941. Purchased and paid for by the British Government. Delivery under terms of contract is acceptance at factory and safe delivery to port of departure in the USA, when the crated aircraft then becomes the property of the British Government.
> 
> September 24, 1940, British Government places second order was for an additional 300 aircraft to the NAA designation NA-83, which were allocated AL, AM and AP series serials in RAF service. Purchased and paid for by the British Government. Production and delivery to follow on immediately to first order.
> 
> ...


Resp:
ColFord, do you have a 'source' that states the second British order was paid for by the British? Initially I believed that a British order (any production order) was paid by them. However, recently an author (don't have it in front of me) stated that the US actually paid for their Mustang MkIs. I thought this strange, but it seemed to support the US decision to retain these Mustangs post Pearl Harbor attack. I am not doubting you, but would like to be able to cite the source. Thanks.


----------



## ColFord (Dec 28, 2019)

I always go back to my primary source, Air Ministry and BPC files held in the UK Archives. The original two orders for the 620 Mustang Mk.I aircraft - NA73 and NA-83 - predates Lend Lease. It was a contract between NAA and the UK Government on a commercial basis, same as they had for the original Harvard Mk.I order from pre-War. So at that stage everything the British were contacting for and purchasing was purely on a "cash and carry" basis. It was why by the time that Lend Lease came in, the British had seriously depleted their foreign currency reserves and the various arrangements for trading 99 year leases on locations of interest to the US and other measures came into play including the sharing of UK developed technology. 

It is the third order for the Mustang Mk.IA, the original P-51, NA-91 that the US paid for as a part of the Lend Lease arrangements and why after Pearl Harbor and the rapid expansion of US forces that the USAAF felt they could hold back for their own use some of those aircraft. I can tell you that in the UK files that the Air Ministry were less than impressed by that, especially as the senior command of the USAAF up to that point had done very little to support production of the Mustang for the RAF - issues with priority over materials, supply of engines, putting pressure on NAA management, etc. 

I should note that I've also had access to some material from the US and NAA side of the process which backs up - sometimes with a different view of events - what is in the UK files as part of the process of reviewing the drafts of a book being written by two US authors/researchers on the origins, design and development of the Mustang which is due out first half of 2020. Very detailed, quotes lots of original source documents verbatim.

So I don't know where the other author has come up with the idea that either of the first two orders for the Mustang Mk.I were paid for by anyone other than the British. Maybe they have confused the purchasing arrangements for the P-51/Mustang Mk.IA/NA-91.


----------



## Navalwarrior (Dec 28, 2019)

ColFord said:


> I always go back to my primary source, Air Ministry and BPC files held in the UK Archives. The original two orders for the 620 Mustang Mk.I aircraft - NA73 and NA-83 - predates Lend Lease. It was a contract between NAA and the UK Government on a commercial basis, same as they had for the original Harvard Mk.I order from pre-War. So at that stage everything the British were contacting for and purchasing was purely on a "cash and carry" basis. It was why by the time that Lend Lease came in, the British had seriously depleted their foreign currency reserves and the various arrangements for trading 99 year leases on locations of interest to the US and other measures came into play including the sharing of UK developed technology.
> 
> It is the third order for the Mustang Mk.IA, the original P-51, NA-91 that the US paid for as a part of the Lend Lease arrangements and why after Pearl Harbor and the rapid expansion of US forces that the USAAF felt they could hold back for their own use some of those aircraft. I can tell you that in the UK files that the Air Ministry were less than impressed by that, especially as the senior command of the USAAF up to that point had done very little to support production of the Mustang for the RAF - issues with priority over materials, supply of engines, putting pressure on NAA management, etc.
> 
> ...


Resp:
Thanks much. I expect that the author assumed or extrapolated incorrectly . . . since the US held back the second order for British service. There is much misinformation in print/web inre to Allison engined Mustangs. I have found unit info from various US units that clearly lists incorrect info, particularly photo captions.


----------



## Navalwarrior (Dec 31, 2019)

Navalwarrior said:


> Resp:
> Thanks much. I expect that the author assumed or extrapolated incorrectly . . . since the US held back the second order for British service. There is much misinformation in print/web inre to Allison engined Mustangs. I have found unit info from various US units that clearly lists incorrect info, particularly photo captions.


Con't:
The magazine 'Mustangs International,' Winter 2019 has some terrific photos/history of Allison engined Mustangs, plus a special on early mustang pilots . . . including Maj James Howard of Flying Tiger Fame and his record in the first Merlin Mustangs to operate in the ETO. On page 23 it mentions a Royal Air Force A-36A, Aircraft number 1437 Strategic Reconnaissance Flight, and page 25 two photos of aircraft HK 944 (large letter 'C' just aft of roundel). You can see the coverings in the lower nose where the two 50 cal MG were removed.


----------



## Snautzer01 (Jan 21, 2020)

AVIATION PHOTO AVION GROUPE NORTH AMERICAN P-51B MUSTANG VERS MARS 1945 COGNAC | eBay


----------



## Wurger (Jan 21, 2020)




----------



## Navalwarrior (Jan 21, 2020)

Snautzer01 said:


> AVIATION PHOTO AVION GROUPE NORTH AMERICAN P-51B MUSTANG VERS MARS 1945 COGNAC | eBay
> 
> View attachment 567350


Resp:
Mustang MkI. Note nose guns and top air intake.


----------



## Snautzer01 (Mar 16, 2020)

WWII Aircraft Mechanics Photo Lot: Wreckage Of American P-51A Mustang | eBay


----------



## Navalwarrior (Mar 16, 2020)

Snautzer01 said:


> WWII Aircraft Mechanics Photo Lot: Wreckage Of American P-51A Mustang | eBay
> 
> View attachment 573660


Resp:
Actually, the one in the rear of the photo is an A-36A. Note the two guns in the lower nose.


----------



## Snautzer01 (Mar 16, 2020)

WWII Aircraft Mechanics Photo Lot: GI Mechanics Repairing P-51A Mustang | eBay


----------



## Snautzer01 (Mar 16, 2020)

WWII Aircraft Mechanics Photo Lot: US P-51A Mustang On Airfield, “Anastasia” | eBay


----------



## Snautzer01 (Mar 16, 2020)

WWII Aircraft Mechanics Photo Lot: Damaged P-51A Mustang, W/ Kill Marks! | eBay


----------



## Snautzer01 (Mar 16, 2020)

WWII Aircraft Mechanics Photo Lot: GI Posing With P-51A Mustang | eBay


----------



## Navalwarrior (Mar 16, 2020)

Snautzer01 said:


> WWII Aircraft Mechanics Photo Lot: GI Mechanics Repairing P-51A Mustang | eBay
> 
> View attachment 573780


Resp:
This photo, along with the next three photos are actually A-36As. Note nose gun ports, but no guns. These nose guns were seen as unnecessary, so we're often removed. Their removal made engine maintenances easier.


----------



## Snautzer01 (Mar 17, 2020)

Navalwarrior said:


> Resp:
> This photo, along with the next three photos are actually A-36As. Note nose gun ports, but no guns. These nose guns were seen as unnecessary, so we're often removed. Their removal made engine maintenances easier.


I ask a mod if they can be moved. Thank you for the reply. Found a few new ones with nose guns. See A-36 thread.


----------



## Snautzer01 (Mar 17, 2020)

WWII Aircraft Mechanics Photo Lot: GI Mechanics Repairing A-36 Apache | eBay


----------



## Snautzer01 (Mar 17, 2020)

WWII Aircraft Mechanics Photo Lot: American A-36 Apaches On Airfield | eBay

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Snautzer01 (Mar 17, 2020)

WWII Aircraft Mechanics Photo Lot: GI’s Repairing Damaged A-36 Apache | eBay


----------



## Snautzer01 (Mar 17, 2020)

WWII Aircraft Mechanics Photo Lot: American A-36 Apache, “Margaret” | eBay


----------



## Snautzer01 (Mar 17, 2020)

WWII Aircraft Mechanics Photo Lot: Mechanic Atop Damaged American A-36 Apache | eBay


----------



## Snautzer01 (Mar 17, 2020)

Navalwarrior said:


> Resp:
> This photo, along with the next three photos are actually A-36As. Note nose gun ports, but no guns. These nose guns were seen as unnecessary, so we're often removed. Their removal made engine maintenances easier.



WWII Aircraft Mechanics Photo Lot: GI’s Examining Crashed A-36 Apache | eBay

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Snautzer01 (Mar 17, 2020)

Also has nose guns i think.

WWII Aircraft Mechanics Photo Lot: GI’s Examining Crashed A-36 Apache | eBay


----------



## Peter Gunn (Mar 17, 2020)

Snautzer01 said:


> WWII Aircraft Mechanics Photo Lot: Mechanic Atop Damaged American A-36 Apache | eBay
> 
> View attachment 573839


I know you're not responsible for the captions, but those look like P-51-1 cannons on the wing in front of him.


----------



## Snautzer01 (Mar 17, 2020)

Peter Gunn said:


> I know you're not responsible for the captions, but those look like P-51-1 cannons on the wing in front of him.


I would like to hide behind that, but cant. To big of a target. Missed the cannons 

So now on this base i have seen A-36, P51 first edition, P51 later makes, P-47, P-38 , C-47, P-61, Beaufighter, a little italian bi-plane etc etc. Quite an airshow.


----------



## Navalwarrior (Mar 17, 2020)

Snautzer01 said:


> I ask a mod if they can be moved. Thank you for the reply. Found a few new ones with nose guns. See A-36 thread.


Reap:
A ok, as they are Allison engine Mustang variants. Note that the P-51A shared the production line at North American Aviation with A-36As.


----------



## Juanita (Mar 19, 2020)

Thank you 

 Snautzer01
for posting those photos. They are all new to me.
I'm guess they were taken in Italy...maybe spring 1943.

If anyone has any information of the camera install in the Allison engines I would love to see it.
Suspect it was a setup that could be field installed in a location near the outlet for the radiator.

Juanita


----------



## Navalwarrior (Mar 19, 2020)

Juanita said:


> Thank you
> 
> Snautzer01
> for posting those photos. They are all new to me.
> ...


Resp:
Both the RAF (1st to do so) and USAAF used their Allison engine mustangs for Foto Recon. Cameras were installed just behind the pilot, with the camera lens facing to port (left) through the rear glass side panel. The USAAF designations were F-6A and F-6B, taken from P-51-1 (-2) and P-51A Mustangs. These had the camera installed in the US, hence their redesignation as F-6A and F-6B, respectively.
The F-6A and F-6B actually used two K-24 cameras, one face to port in rear canopy panel with a second K-42 facing downwards in rear fuselage.

Reactions: Informative Informative:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Navalwarrior (Apr 2, 2020)

Snautzer01 said:


> I would like to hide behind that, but cant. To big of a target. Missed the cannons
> 
> So now on this base i have seen A-36, P51 first edition, P51 later makes, P-47, P-38 , C-47, P-61, Beaufighter, a little italian bi-plane etc etc. Quite an airshow.


Resp:
If you can get a copy of the magazine "Mustangs International," Volume No. 38, Issue No. 12, Winter 2019; it covers nearly all variants of the Mustang airframes of WWII. The operations of lesser known units, their attrition rates and surprising air to air engagements (particularly by A-36As)!


----------



## MIflyer (Apr 2, 2020)

The A-36 unit acquired some P51-1's to use for strafing targets that needed some extra punch.


----------



## Navalwarrior (Apr 2, 2020)

MIflyer said:


> The A-36 unit acquired some P51-1's to use for strafing targets that needed some extra punch.


Resp:
Are you sure about that? All but two P-51-1 (and -2; rumor that there were a couple of -3) were fitted with cameras and re - designated as F-6A. However, the black stenciling (under cockpit) on these F-6As was never changed from P-51-1, etc.. So since these photo Mustangs carried 4 20 MM wing cannons, it was likely F-6As were used for strafing.


----------



## MIflyer (Apr 2, 2020)

I was using P-51-1 and F-6A interchangably. I'm sure the P51-1's the A-36 unit acquired were the F-6A's that were sent to that theater.


----------



## Navalwarrior (Apr 2, 2020)

MIflyer said:


> I was using P-51-1 and F-6A interchangably. I'm sure the P51-1's the A-36 unit acquired were the F-6A's that were sent to that theater.


Reap:
And you are correct. Just didn't want readers to think P-51-1s were sent overseas for the purpose of strafing. The weird thing is that the USAAF while in Africa gave the RAF (on at least two occasions) several A-36As that were used as tactical reconnassance. Weird!


----------



## Gnomey (Apr 7, 2020)

Good shots!


----------



## Navalwarrior (Apr 7, 2020)

Snautzer01 said:


> WWII Aircraft Mechanics Photo Lot: GI Mechanics Repairing A-36 Apache | eBay
> 
> View attachment 573834


Resp:
With two tail sections, it looks like the Mechanics are trying to bring the A-36A back to flying status. Interesting.


----------



## Snautzer01 (Apr 9, 2020)

WW2 Picture Photo A-36A Apache aircraft 1942 1298 | eBay

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Wurger (Apr 9, 2020)




----------



## MIflyer (Apr 9, 2020)

Navalwarrior said:


> The weird thing is that the USAAF while in Africa gave the RAF (on at least two occasions) several A-36As that were used as tactical reconnassance. Weird!



And the RAF tried to escort the A-36 tac recon with Spit V. But the Spits could not keep up - or at least not and fly the same distance as the A-36.

An advantage the A-36 had over the Mustang Mk1 and Mk 1A was its ability to carry drop tanks, as well as an engine optimized for low altitude, around 5000 ft. An A-36 shot down an FW-190 that was being delivered to Luftwaffe unit at a forward airfield. The captured FW-190 pilot said to the A-36 pilot, "How in the world did you catch me?"

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Navalwarrior (Apr 9, 2020)

MIflyer said:


> And the RAF tried to escort the A-36 tac recon with Spit V. But the Spits could not keep up - or at least not and fly the same distance as the A-36.
> 
> An advantage the A-36 had over the Mustang Mk1 and Mk 1A was its ability to carry drop tanks, as well as an engine optimized for low altitude, around 5000 ft. An A-36 shot down an FW-190 that was being delivered to Luftwaffe unit at a forward airfield. The captured FW-190 pilot said to the A-36 pilot, "How in the world did you catch me?"


Resp:
Yes, it was the first Mustang to be plumbed for drop tanks. The dive bomber contract required pylon fittings for ordnance (bombs). So NAA took upon themselves to 'plumb' them for external fuel stores (drop tanks). Note that dive bombing was not a priority of the USAAF, and that the success of the A-36A was a surprise to all involved. Its ability to fend off attacking fighters by its 'fighter like qualities' made it viable. If not for the need to build Merlin Mustangs (limited space at NAA) I believe additional 'production runs' of the A-36A would have been produced. It is clear that the units that fielded the A-36A were high in praise of it, to the point that maintenance crews literally rebuilt them from damaged A-36As, as the b/w photos provided by members of this site. Thanks to all who found and furnished them.

Reactions: Informative Informative:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Navalwarrior (Apr 19, 2020)

Snautzer01 said:


> WWII Aircraft Mechanics Photo Lot: Mechanic Atop Damaged American A-36 Apache | eBay
> 
> View attachment 573839


Resp:
Looking at this photo I noticed the two 20 MM gun pods in the R wing. So this is an F-6A rather than an A-36A.


----------



## Navalwarrior (Jun 26, 2020)

Snautzer01 said:


> WWII Aircraft Mechanics Photo Lot: GI Mechanics Repairing A-36 Apache | eBay
> 
> View attachment 573834


Resp:
I wonder which tail number was used for this aircraft. Did they just go with what was written on the replacement tail, or did they use the number that the A-36A originally had? Laugh!


----------



## Snautzer01 (Sep 3, 2020)

dp


----------



## Snautzer01 (Sep 5, 2020)

Org:Photo Plane Mustang Top !!! | eBay

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Wurger (Sep 5, 2020)




----------



## Gnomey (Sep 11, 2020)

Nice shots!


----------



## Mustangtmg (Nov 5, 2020)

Snautzer01 said:


> *WWII photo- A-36 Apache Fighter/ Dive Bomber plane Nose Art- JUMPIN' JIVE* | eBay
> 
> View attachment 530201





Snautzer01 said:


> *WWII photo- A-36 Apache Fighter/ Dive Bomber plane Nose Art- JUMPIN' JIVE* | eBay
> 
> View attachment 530201


Who is the "Administrator" or "Moderator" in this group?

I haven't read every post, but we NEED to use the actual OFFICIAL name given to it by both North American Aviation and the US Army Air Forces..."MUSTANG" is the only official name that it ever had.

This has been established for a number of years and even the National Museum of the U. S. Air Force corrected the signage to reflect the "Mustang" official name and mentioning "Apache" (and "Invader") as "nicknames," which IS interesting, but the official name from the day the first of 500 A-36As rolled out the doors at NAA Inglewood, was "Mustang," and it stayed that way.

I hesitated attaching files on this "comment" / "reply," in case I have already contacted y'all and you've not changed the name.

*EDIT: Minutes after posting the above, I looked deeper into this forum and saw a comment (well, more than one) from me and it dealt with the A-36A Mustang's official name and had a couple attachments sent to me by the Boeing Historical Archivist - they both give the A-36A the official name of "Mustang." *



Tom

Reactions: Informative Informative:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Mustangtmg (Nov 5, 2020)

Snautzer01 said:


> WWII Aircraft Mechanics Photo Lot: US P-51A Mustang On Airfield, “Anastasia” | eBay
> 
> View attachment 573773


Well, this is an A-36A Mustang...has no one posted the correction, before?


----------



## fubar57 (Nov 5, 2020)

M
 Mustangtmg
Please note....these are eBay seller links. The site has nothing to do with them. Contact eBay if you want


----------



## Snautzer01 (Jan 5, 2021)

Snautzer01 said:


> *WWII photo- A-36 Apache Dive Bomber / Fighter plane Nose Art- BOMB* | eBay
> 
> View attachment 542962


Org. Nose Art Photo: Aerial View US A-36 Attack Fighter (#42-83830) in Flight!!! | eBay

Reactions: Bacon Bacon:
1 | Like Like:
3 | Like List reactions


----------



## Capt. Vick (Jan 5, 2021)

So where did Apache come from?


----------



## Wurger (Jan 5, 2021)




----------



## GrauGeist (Jan 5, 2021)

Capt. Vick said:


> So where did Apache come from?


In short, the Apache name is what the Army was leaning toward in several communications regarding the P-51 (NA-91), but it was decided in order to prevent confusion, to go with the British name, this was in '41 before the A-36 was even manufactured.
North American used neither name, always refering to it by the company designation: NA-97.

So *technically* speaking, the only "Apache" is the original P-51 (NA-91), the name "Mustang" being made official in early 1942 - so the A-36A (NA-97), the P-51A (NA-99) all that came after, are all Mustangs.


----------



## Snautzer01 (Jan 27, 2021)

LD209 1943 Original Photo NORTH AMERICAN A-36 APACHE Bomber Airplanes Flying | eBay
83707 wrecked in landing addident at Hunter AAF, GA Jan 8, 1943
83716 to RFC at Cincinatti Jan 6, 1945
83715 to CL-26 at Harding AAF, LA Nov 9, 1943

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Winner Winner:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Wurger (Jan 27, 2021)




----------



## Gnomey (Jan 28, 2021)

Good shots!


----------



## Snautzer01 (May 31, 2021)

WWII US Photo Negative - Marked XP-51 Mustang On Airfield Apron Freeman Field | eBay

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## Wurger (May 31, 2021)




----------



## ColFord (May 31, 2021)

Not an A-36, but one of the two original NA-73 taken from the initial RAF production batch and provided to USAAF for testing and given the XP-51 designation. Key identification points are the original style moveable radiator intake ramp along with the shrouded nose gun ports. The anti copying lettering is unfortunately hiding a couple of other possible recognition features including the outer port wing gun camera window.

NOTE: Being 41-048, survived and is now N51NA in EAA Foundation Collection at Oshkosh.

Reactions: Informative Informative:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## GrauGeist (May 31, 2021)

It appears to be 41-038


----------



## Mustangtmg (Jan 10, 2022)

johnbr said:


> North American A-36A Mustang > National Museum of the United States Air Force™ > Display
> https://www.boeingimagelicensing.co...ult&VBID=2JRSN2A4G8IMTX&SMLS=1&RW=1536&RH=780
> WWII A-36 Apache/Invader Fighter Planes Photo Print for Sale
> View attachment 560505
> ...


I thought I've commented on these photos before, but if so, here goes again: The first and fourth photos are NOT A-36As. The top one is shows NA-91s (P-51 or P-51-1-NA or P-51-2-NA in the USAAF and Mustang Mk IA in the RAF - the fairings for the 20 mm Hispano cannons are a dead-giveaway) and the 4th one is an NA-73...one of the two XP-51s pulled from the first batch built for the RAF. That's a test probe that might look like the pitot probe on an A-36A (unlike the A-36A's pitot, it comes from underneath the wing and is the wrong profile) ... you can see the L-shaped pitot probe just inboard of the US insignia, and the three BMG ports in the wing. I could be wrong, but I believe that this is the 2nd Prototype for the USAAF, SN is 41-039 on the 2nd prototype. The absence of a wide single lens outboard of the left wing guns also tells you that it's not an A-36A. The variable intake mouth on the doghouse also verifies that it's not an A-36A.


----------



## Mustangtmg (Jan 10, 2022)

ColFord said:


> Not an A-36, but one of the two original NA-73 taken from the initial RAF production batch and provided to USAAF for testing and given the XP-51 designation. Key identification points are the original style moveable radiator intake ramp along with the shrouded nose gun ports. The anti copying lettering is unfortunately hiding a couple of other possible recognition features including the outer port wing gun camera window.
> 
> NOTE: Being 41-048 was what would have been AG348 in RAF service, survived and is now N51NA in EAA Foundation Collection at Oshkosh.


I feel almost "silly" telling you this but hasn't it been established that the two USAAF XP-51s (41-038 and 41-039) were never SN AG348 and AG354, respectively?


----------



## Snautzer01 (Feb 2, 2022)

Original WWII Snapshot Photo AAF FIGHTER S/N 283830 Telergma 1943 Algeria 89 | eBay


<p>ORIGINAL WWII PHOTO - ORIGINAL TO THE TIME - NOT A COPY, SCAN, OR REPRO</p> <p>QUANTITY: 1 - See the other original WWI & WWII photos that I have listed. Today I am listing many WWII aircraft photos. </p> <p>ITEM: Original WWII Snapshot Photo of TELERGMA FIELD, Constantine, Algeria, 1943...



www.ebay.com





Telergma Algeria 1943 notice place of serial number 

Baugher A-36A 42-83830 86th BG crashed during wheels up belly landing at El Aouina Airfield, Tunisia due to mechanical failure Aug 6, 1943. Pilot survived, but aircraft DBR and condemned for salvage Aug 22, 1944

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Like List reactions


----------



## Wurger (Feb 2, 2022)




----------



## Snautzer01 (Mar 28, 2022)



Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Winner Winner:
1 | Informative Informative:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Snautzer01 (Mar 28, 2022)

About the name Invader

Reactions: Bacon Bacon:
1 | Informative Informative:
3 | Like List reactions


----------



## Snautzer01 (Apr 18, 2022)

RAF 














Org. Photo: US A-36 Apache Attack Fighter Parked on Airfield!!! | eBay


Should you have an issue with any item sold I am of course open to communication to rectify any issues. Take care.



www.ebay.com

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## Wurger (Apr 18, 2022)




----------



## ColFord (Apr 19, 2022)

Snautzer01 said:


> RAF
> 
> View attachment 665123
> 
> ...


Not an A-36 but an RAF Mustang Mk.I. Key identification clues, Mustang Mk.I, Mk.IA and Mk.II all had the 'L' shaped pitot head under the starboard wing, A-36 had the 'spear' pitot head projecting out of the leading edge of the starboard wing. Layout of the landing lights in the wing leading edge is different between the A-36 and Mustang Mk.I, landing light shown is Mustang Mk.I type and location. Can't see any identfiable dive brakes, only the underwing case and link ejection ports for the wing mounted armament, which then brings us to the three armament ports just visible in the leading edge of each wing for the mixed 0.50in HMG and 0.300in MG armament of the Mustang Mk.I vs the 2 x 0.50in HMG in each wing of the A-36. No underwing stores carriers (hardpoints) which the sole A-36 tested by the RAF in the UK carried. Hard to tell from the photo, but this may be one of the first production batch NA-73 Mustang Mk.I, rather than the later NA-83 second production batch Mustang Mk.I. A-36 also had a different 'fatter' profile propellor blade design, where as this shows the early 'thinner/tapered' style propellor blade as used on the Mustang Mk.I and Mk.IA.

Reactions: Bacon Bacon:
1 | Like Like:
2 | Winner Winner:
2 | Informative Informative:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## Gnomey (Apr 21, 2022)

Good shots!


----------



## Snautzer01 (Aug 3, 2022)

Strange tail code BH shot down ( if it is a A-36 to begin with...) October 1943



















Foto 2.WK abgeschossenes feindliches Flugzeug 1943 mit Kennung (68) | eBay


Entdecken Sie Foto 2.WK abgeschossenes feindliches Flugzeug 1943 mit Kennung (68) in der großen Auswahl bei eBay. Kostenlose Lieferung für viele Artikel!



www.ebay.de

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## MIflyer (Aug 3, 2022)

Snautzer01 said:


> Strange tail code BH shot down ( if it is a A-36 to begin with...) October 1943


I found some artwork in an Osprey "Air Vanguard" book on the Allison engined Mustang showing A-36's with similar giant letter tail codes "B3" but they do not ID the squadron. Giant letter tail codes were used in the Med. My next door neighbor flew B-25's there and they had giant letter tail codes, rather crudely drawn, which was a help to me when I made him a 1/48 model.


----------

