British Vs American wasted aircraft, maybe.

Discussion in 'Aviation' started by Shortround6, Jun 3, 2015.

  1. Shortround6

    Shortround6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2009
    Messages:
    9,770
    Likes Received:
    801
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    retired Firefighter
    Location:
    Central Florida Highlands
    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
    at-9.jpg
    792 built

    The AT-10
    beech_26.jpg
    2370 built

    The AT-7 Navigator
    Beechcraft-AT-7.jpg
    1141 built

    The AT-11 Kansan
    4738861960_0bbf64c65c_z.jpg
    1606 built

    The Cessna AT-17
    Cessna_AT-17.jpg
    several thousand, numbers get mixed with the Utilty and cargo versions.

    The Fairchild AT-21
    Fairchild_AT-21.jpg
    around 170

    Boeing?Stearman tried for a contract
    Stearman_XBT-15.jpg
    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????
     
  2. pbehn

    pbehn Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2013
    Messages:
    2,235
    Likes Received:
    411
    Trophy Points:
    83
    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.
     
Loading...

Share This Page