British Vs American wasted aircraft, maybe.

[Shortround6]

A big deal is made of a number of British aircraft, that while designed for combat would up as trainers. The US had the luxury of not only starting later but having an industry large enough (or of being capable of expanding enough) to build thousands (if not 10s of thousands) of trainers.

Twin engine trainers include the AT-9

792 built

The AT-10

2370 built

The AT-7 Navigator

1141 built

The AT-11 Kansan

1606 built

The Cessna AT-17

several thousand, numbers get mixed with the Utilty and cargo versions.

The Fairchild AT-21

around 170

Boeing?Stearman tried for a contract

only 2 built.

That is just the twin engine trainers and does NOT include the older or obsolete bombers used as trainers. Single engine trainers are much more diverse than this and built in much greater numbers.

The British might have built a lot fewer Battles and Hampdens and Blenheims but they would have needed even more trainers than the Oxfords and Ansons they did build. Net gain in operational aircraft would be????

 

[pbehn]

I think that for the RAF in the early days of the war the most important S/E aircraft in the US inventory was the T6 Harvard.