AT-6 Texan as "emergency fighter"

[Jerry W. Loper]

The RAF had "emergency fighters" like the Miles M.20 in the wings, in case 1st line fighters like the Spitfire and Hurricane weren't enough. Could the USAAF have modified the North American AT-6 trainer into an "emergency fighter" by, say, increasing its speed by more than 100 mph by installing a new powerplant, making it a single-seater, and boosting its armament?

 

[FLYBOYJ]

 

[GregP]

When I was in Arizona, one of the fellows there converted a T-6 into a P-64, but I don't recall the wingroot going as far as faring into the engine cowling. So, the real P-64 shown in Joe's pic above must be shorter than the T-6 by about a cockpit length.

Basically the conversion was to add the turtledeck and fare in the canopy, add the big engine and prop, and clip the wings.

The real P-64 looks like a shorter airframe maybe with the wings moved forward a bit.

 

[Bernhart]

I beleieve Belgium used them in the congo as ground attack aircraft

 

[Shortround6]

The RAF had "emergency fighters" like the Miles M.20 in the wings, in case 1st line fighters like the Spitfire and Hurricane weren't enough. Could the USAAF have modified the North American AT-6 trainer into an "emergency fighter" by, say, increasing its speed by more than 100 mph by installing a new powerplant, making it a single-seater, and boosting its armament?

Australians built the Boomerang Fighter

Which may meet your criteria, speed just over 300mph.

But the US had a lot more factories building fighters by 1941/42 which rather reduces the need for such things.

 

[Jerry W. Loper]

Thanks, guys!

Australians built the Boomerang Fighter

View attachment 266825

Which may meet your criteria, speed just over 300mph.

But the US had a lot more factories building fighters by 1941/42 which rather reduces the need for such things.

 

[Wildcat]

Being pedantic I know, but the Boomerang was derived from (but many differences) the Wirraway. The Wirraway was inturn developed from the NA-16, not the T-6 as many seem to think.

 

[GregP]

Take an NA-16, add retractible landing gear, larger engine prop, provision for armament, and a straight rudder outline and you have a T-6.

You are technically correct, but the airframe is the SAME with the exceptions above. The main differences are the LG, engine and straight rudder outline. The engine is major, but you wouldn't notice it from a casual glance. The dead giveaway is the straight or curved rudder ... and whether or not the gear was up.

 

[evangilder]

The P-64 was developed from the NA-50, seen here.

 

[nuuumannn]

Take an NA-16, add retractible landing gear, larger engine prop, provision for armament, and a straight rudder outline and you have a T-6.

They are similar, but different. The NA-16 also had a fabric covered fuselage and rounded wing tips, as did the Wirraway. The Wirraway and the NA-16-2K that went to Australia as the basis of the Wirraway also differed from the AT-6/Harvard in having a three bladed propeller.

The NA-16 was equivalent to the US military's BT-9, with fixed undercarriage and fabric covered fuselage, the BT-14 or Yale to the Brits had the fixed gear but semi monocoque fuse and the BC-1 had fabric fuselage and retractable gear - this was the British Harvard Mk.I. The AT-6 obviously differed to these in having the monocoque fuse and retractable gear, whereas the Wirraway had the fabric covered fuse and retractable gear. Although derived from the NA-16, the Wirraway had more in common with the BC-1.

 

[GregP]

Hey EvanGilder,

That's the guy's plane who was a jeweler who converted the T-6 into a P-64, Carl Smeeter, and that's the T-6 he converted.

I was there. He borrowed a battery from my friend with a T-6 and tried to replace it with a dud. My good friend, Curtis Earl , never ever gave him another spare part. Carl died before 2009 (like 1993 - 4 or so), so I'm not sure who is in the cockpit in the picture. Carl's P-64 was identical at least. You can SEE it's longer and the wing doesn't get into the cowling area, so it is Carl's conversion ... or another T-6 so converted in the same manner and the same color.

 

[evangilder]

Yeah it's an NA-50 replica, buikt from a T-6. If I remember correctly, it was based in Arizona when I took that shot. It was a few years ago, and I didn't get a chance to talk to the guy about it.

 

[GregP]

Don't know which airport this pic is on, but the conversion was done at Deer Valley airport on the north side of the Phoenix metro area.

 

[wuzak]

Australians built the Boomerang Fighter

View attachment 266825

Which may meet your criteria, speed just over 300mph.

But the US had a lot more factories building fighters by 1941/42 which rather reduces the need for such things.

So, what is the pilot thinking?

"They say if I survive the month they will order me a Spitfire!"