eBay: North American P-51 Mustang

[drgondog]

Resp:
Thanks drgondog. I am still skeptical. It is food for thought. My two sources are Aircraft of World War II, Amber Books, UK, 2017 and Allison-Engined P-51 Mustang, by Martyn Chorlto, Osprey Ltd, 2012. The British are meticulous in their research, hence the reason we used JANES for combat ship identification.

The lore and record trail of the Mustang recon ships in the service of the US is tortuous - ditto the RAF mods, for which I owe Colin Ford a great deal for his contribution to my new book (with Lowell Ford).

FWIIW the MACRs are the defining docs because they serial numbers and dash number description are sourced with the Engineering Office of each unit and explicitly extracted from the form 1 and 65 (IIRC), NOT the data block.

 

[ColFord]

Unfortunately I would not consider the Allison-Engined P-51 Mustang by Chorlton to be a reliable reference. It is riddled with errors of fact, especially the sections attempting to set out RAF operational use of the Mustang. It repeatedly gets aircraft types and sub-types used by RAF Squadrons incorrect, and it repeats many of the errors from earlier Mustang books that are incorrect. The profiles that are included in a number of instances are farcical - for example the side profile of a Mustang Mk.I of No.II(AC) Squadron RAF XV-E AG633, which in the caption indicates it was lost in a landing accident at the end of 1942 (which it was), yet is depicted with D-Day distinctive marking on its lower surfaces!! It is a book where any original and accurate research was sadly lacking.

 

[Navalwarrior]

The lore and record trail of the Mustang recon ships in the service of the US is tortuous - ditto the RAF mods, for which I owe Colin Ford a great deal for his contribution to my new book (with Lowell Ford).

FWIIW the MACRs are the defining docs because they serial numbers and dash number description are sourced with the Engineering Office of each unit and explicitly extracted from the form 1 and 65 (IIRC), NOT the data block.

Resp:
I want a copy of your new book on the Mustang! To some degree, the numerous errors makes the hunt for accuracy of the Mustang variants that much more enjoyable. I too saw errors in Chorlton's book. I penciled in corrective notes in those cases.

 

[drgondog]

Resp:
I want a copy of your new book on the Mustang! To some degree, the numerous errors makes the hunt for accuracy of the Mustang variants that much more enjoyable. I too saw errors in Chorlton's book. I penciled in corrective notes in those cases.

Lol - well get your pencil ready, I already sent in a request to Osprey to insert an 'erata' sheet for some missed serial numbers and slightly 'off' dates.

 

[Navalwarrior]

Lol - well get your pencil ready, I already sent in a request to Osprey to insert an 'erata' sheet for some missed serial numbers and slightly 'off' dates.

Resp:
Roger. LOL!
The following is from: Rickard, J (7 June 2007) North American F-6 Mustang, http://www.historyofwar.org/articlesofwar.org/articles/weapons_F-5_Mustang.html
F-6A based on P-51 55
F-6B based on P-51A. 35
F-6C-NA based on P-51B. 71
F-6C-NT based on P-51C 20
F-6D based on P-51D-NT 136
F-6K based on P-51K. 164
Just so you know I am not making this stuff up. LOL!

 

[ColFord]

Resp:
Roger. LOL!
The following is from: Rickard, J (7 June 2007) North American F-6 Mustang, http://www.historyofwar.org/articlesofwar.org/articles/weapons_F-5_Mustang.html
F-6A based on P-51 55
F-6B based on P-51A. 35
F-6C-NA based on P-51B. 71
F-6C-NT based on P-51C 20
F-6D based on P-51D-NT 136
F-6K based on P-51K. 164
Just so you know I am not making this stuff up. LOL!

Well the guy who runs that site, I don't know where he gets his "facts" from, but it contains so much incorrect information on the Mustang it is laughable. As an example to quote just one little bit about the Mustang Mk.I he states:
The first RAF squadron to receive the Mustang was No. 2, which received the new aircraft in April 1942. The first operational sortie, an attack on a German airbase in France, took place on 10 May 1942. A more significant first came on 27 July, when Mustang Is of No. 2 Squadron became the first single engined allied fighter aircraft to enter German airspace since the French campaign of 1940. Their mission was an attack on targets in the Ruhr.

No.26 Squadron RAF was the first RAF Squadron to receive the Mustang Mk.I and use them operationally.
Sortie by No.2 Squadron RAF of 27 July 1942 - never happened.
First sortie by RAF Mustang Mk.I over western Germany was on 21 October 1942 and was conducted by 4 x Mustang Mk.I aircraft of No.268 Squadron RAF into the area of the Dortmund-Ems Canal, well to the north of the Ruhr.

Re the F-6 numbers, he has noted in an update that Robert Bourlier has identified significantly higher numbers modified to those in the table he provides, but has not updated the table. Also he does not anywhere in any of his precis about various aircraft types, cite his sources for the information he posts up on his site.

So not the best authoratative or factually correct site to rely on.

 

[drgondog]

Resp:
Roger. LOL!
The following is from: Rickard, J (7 June 2007) North American F-6 Mustang, http://www.historyofwar.org/articlesofwar.org/articles/weapons_F-5_Mustang.html
F-6A based on P-51 55
F-6B based on P-51A. 35
F-6C-NA based on P-51B. 71
F-6C-NT based on P-51C 20
F-6D based on P-51D-NT 136
F-6K based on P-51K. 164
Just so you know I am not making this stuff up. LOL!

I know that. In my latest book, I ignored many publications on Mustangs simply because they repeated many errors by previous authors. That list was 'true' on or about April/May 1944. That said, examination of MACRs and Mission Planning docs would have given Rickard food for thought to dig deeper than the AAF-MC documents that are most commonly used - and which I presented to you above,

 

[Navalwarrior]

I know that. In my latest book, I ignored many publications on Mustangs simply because they repeated many errors by previous authors. That list was 'true' on or about April/May 1944. That said, examination of MACRs and Mission Planning docs would have given Rickard food for thought to dig deeper than the AAF-MC documents that are most commonly used - and which I presented to you above,

Resp:
I will wait for your book. Please finish it soon. Thanks.
Just FYI: The Yanks Air Museum of Chino, CA lists their Allison engined P-51A in the write up as "The only surviving F-6B of the 35 modified."

 

[Navalwarrior]

Well the guy who runs that site, I don't know where he gets his "facts" from, but it contains so much incorrect information on the Mustang it is laughable. As an example to quote just one little bit about the Mustang Mk.I he states:
The first RAF squadron to receive the Mustang was No. 2, which received the new aircraft in April 1942. The first operational sortie, an attack on a German airbase in France, took place on 10 May 1942. A more significant first came on 27 July, when Mustang Is of No. 2 Squadron became the first single engined allied fighter aircraft to enter German airspace since the French campaign of 1940. Their mission was an attack on targets in the Ruhr.

No.26 Squadron RAF was the first RAF Squadron to receive the Mustang Mk.I and use them operationally.
Sortie by No.2 Squadron RAF of 27 July 1942 - never happened.
First sortie by RAF Mustang Mk.I over western Germany was on 21 October 1942 and was conducted by 4 x Mustang Mk.I aircraft of No.268 Squadron RAF into the area of the Dortmund-Ems Canal, well to the north of the Ruhr.

Re the F-6 numbers, he has noted in an update that Robert Bourlier has identified significantly higher numbers modified to those in the table he provides, but has not updated the table. Also he does not anywhere in any of his precis about various aircraft types, cite his sources for the information he posts up on his site.

So not the best authoratative or factually correct site to rely on.

Resp:
ColFord, that is the 'rub' we all are experiencing . . . lack of accurate info. I am not dreaming up what I am seeing (20+ years of searching) and do not expect this situation to fade any time soon. I do appreciate your comments and the work you and drgondog are doing. I am also a fan of the F4U Corsair. Most authorities believe that the -1A was never used to denote the F4U-1A variant. But I have found USMC maintenance forms dated 1944 with the designation F4U-1A at the top of the form. So, I am careful to never say 'never!'
So my question is, who and why has used the designation F-6B, etc to denote a Photo-Recon converted Mustang P-51A? Is in an inappropriate extrapolation?

 

[Dana Bell]

"ColFord, that is the 'rub' we all are experiencing . . . lack of accurate info. I am not dreaming up what I am seeing (20+ years of searching) and do not expect this situation to fade any time soon. I do appreciate your comments and the work you and drgondog are doing. I am also a fan of the F4U Corsair. Most authorities believe that the -1A was never used to denote the F4U-1A variant. But I have found USMC maintenance forms dated 1944 with the designation F4U-1A at the top of the form. So, I am careful to never say 'never!'
So my question is, who and why has used the designation F-6B, etc to denote a Photo-Recon converted Mustang P-51A? Is in an inappropriate extrapolation?"

Designations are a pain in the butt, and the more time I spend in the Archives (will they ever reopen?) the more I find revisions to what we all "know" to be true.

With -1 Corsairs, the BuAer had intended to revise all Birdcage Corsairs to raised cockpit standards and denied Vought permission to use a new designation "-1A" to differentiate the original cockpit from the raised cockpit. However, Vought received permission to use "-1A" in company records to clarify which drawings went with the revised cockpit. The original Birdcages were clapped out by the time the "-1A" started reaching units -- not worth the cost of revision -- so the Vought designation came into common (but not official) use.

Similarly, Vought used the F4U-1B designation for internal records on Brit-modified Corsairs. Then came the question of designations for British -1As - Vought wondered if they should be F4U-1ABs or F4U-1BAs. BuAer cried Nonsense! and reminded Vought that none of these designations was official.

To avoid further internal confusion, the cannon-armed modifications became -1Cs and the twin-pylon mods became -1Ds. The cannon-armed -4s became F4U-4Cs until 1946 when the Navy decided that the "B" suffix would be used for special armament mods and all the F4U-1Cs became F4U-1Bs.

TYPO!!! I should have types that the F4U-4Cs were redesignated F4U-4Bs More below...

The Army was just as bad. The "F-xx" designations originally went for mapping aircraft, but most early war mapping aircraft (such as 1942 versions of the mapping B-17s and B-24s) were not redesignated. Likewise, the tac recon Mustangs flew under their respective P-51 designations. Somewhere along the line headquarters decided to go back and "correct" that oversight. I found some correspondence on this, but never filed it in my Mustang files. (I've a six-foot stack of papers that I'm slowly working my way through, but I didn't really retire to become a file clerk in my own basement!)

One Mustang document that might be of interest here relates to the original P-51B and P-51C designations. The addition of the Merlin engine led to some aerodynamic concerns and minor repositioning of the wing. The P-51B was originally to be produced with the Merlin, but without the repositioned wing; the new wing was planned for the P-51C. Obviously, both models went into production with the repositioned wing, but I've never seen the original designations explained in any of the many Mustang books.

Then there's my all-time favorite Wright Field inter-office memo on the P-51, dated 28 August 1942. It doesn't relate directly to designations, but I'll drop it in here in its entirety:

Left by Alec Burton together with the dope on the Griffin 61, this date. "Dutch" Kindleberger says the Merlin 28 is out for installation in the P-51, but they are going full blast on the Merlin 61. About all the re-design necessary is to move the wing forward 3 inches and down 1 inch; also, the nose will be dropped a little to give better visibility than in the P-51.

If the aerodynamics isn't ruined, looks like they might have a pretty good airplane.

That one should be in the dictionary next to "understatement...

Cheers,



Dana

 

[Dana Bell]

But wait, there's more...

I just dug out the 28 July 1942 Wright Field memo asking to use the designation XP-78-NA for the "new" North American Fighter, Interceptor. Washington responded on 20 August:

Classification as Experimental is approved for the P-51 Airplane with Packard Rolls-Royce Merlin 61 engine installed. It is most desirable that the production airplane be given a model designation which will definitely identify it as one of the P-51 series. Although the different engine definitely changes the performance of the airplane, it will still remain basically a P-51. Due to the work which the British are carrying on with this airplane and engine, and the very optimistic view of the project held by Materiel Command, the classification Limited Procurement might well apply and is hereby approved provided the airplane be called P-51 with an appropriate suffix added.

By command of Lieutenant General Arnold.

That doesn't clarify just why the P-78 designation wasn't accepted, but at least we know who made the decision.

Cheers (again),


Dana

 

[drgondog]

Resp:
I will wait for your book. Please finish it soon. Thanks.
Just FYI: The Yanks Air Museum of Chino, CA lists their Allison engined P-51A in the write up as "The only surviving F-6B of the 35 modified."

The book was at the presses in Feb for June release. I think Covid issues will delay but Amazon has been taking orders since November

But wait, there's more...

I just dug out the 28 July 1942 Wright Field memo asking to use the designation XP-78-NA for the "new" North American Fighter, Interceptor. Washington responded on 20 August:

Classification as Experimental is approved for the P-51 Airplane with Packard Rolls-Royce Merlin 61 engine installed. It is most desirable that the production airplane be given a model designation which will definitely identify it as one of the P-51 series. Although the different engine definitely changes the performance of the airplane, it will still remain basically a P-51. Due to the work which the British are carrying on with this airplane and engine, and the very optimistic view of the project held by Materiel Command, the classification Limited Procurement might well apply and is hereby approved provided the airplane be called P-51 with an appropriate suffix added.

By command of Lieutenant General Arnold.

That doesn't clarify just why the P-78 designation wasn't accepted, but at least we know who made the decision.

Cheers (again),


Dana

XP-78 was accepted as of May 1942 when the paperwork for NA-101 was negotiated to install the Merlin (unspecified whether 1650-1 or -3 at that time. Between the time NA-101 was executed in July and NA-102 P-51B-1 contract in late August, the name was formally changed by Materiel Command and the decision to install the Merlin 61 was made. It was also at this time that the NA-99 P-51A contract could cancelled and balance of 1200 a/c be switched to NA-104 P-51B-5

 

[MIflyer]

I thunk I know where some of that info came from. William Green's little book on fighters Vol 4 says that No 2 Sqdrn RAF was the first to operate the Mustang MKI, getting them in April 1942 and the first sortie being 27 Jul. It also says that in Oct 1942 the Mustang MKI first penetrated the German border with a raid on the Dortmund-Ems Canal.

 

[Zipper730]

Designations are a pain in the butt, and the more time I spend in the Archives (will they ever reopen?) the more I find revisions to what we all "know" to be true.

Okay, so the F4U-1A was a designation that was created by Chance Vought itself, but ended up in official use through some kind of osmosis? I'm guessing F4U-1B was for British, as it wasn't official but also internal.

From what I remember, the USN used the -C as sub-variant indicating cannon armament. Did the USN have a -D designation?

The cannon-armed -4s became F4U-4Cs until 1946 when the Navy decided that the "B" suffix would be used for special armament mods and all the F4U-1Cs became F4U-1Bs.

So that just leaves F4U-1 (birdcage), F4U-1A (non-birdcage), F4U-1B (special armament)?

The Army was just as bad.

The photo-recon designations (F) were a pain in the ass. It was just a hodge-podge group of fighters and bombers that were used as reconnaissance birds (except the XF-11 and XF-12). To make it more interesting the P-38 had two designations (F-4 & F-5).

I didn't know some B-17, B-24, and P-51 variants flew without an "F" designation.

One Mustang document that might be of interest here relates to the original P-51B and P-51C designations. The addition of the Merlin engine led to some aerodynamic concerns and minor repositioning of the wing. The P-51B was originally to be produced with the Merlin, but without the repositioned wing; the new wing was planned for the P-51C. Obviously, both models went into production with the repositioned wing, but I've never seen the original designations explained in any of the many Mustang books.

I thought the wing position was needed to be moved forward and down for the Merlin 60's to work? Did the original plan call for the Merlin 28 in the B?

 

[Dana Bell]

Okay, so the F4U-1A was a designation that was created by Chance Vought itself, but ended up in official use through some kind of osmosis? I'm guessing F4U-1B was for British, as it wasn't official but also internal.

Osmosis? Yes. It also turned up in manuals, but Vought wrote the manuals. And the B was for British.

From what I remember, the USN used the -C as sub-variant indicating cannon armament. Did the USN have a -D designation?
So that just leaves F4U-1 (birdcage), F4U-1A (non-birdcage), F4U-1B (special armament)?

Mistake/Typo on my part. My note said the F4U-1C became the F4U-1B in 1946 - I meant to type that the F4U-4C became the F4U-4B. Back to the F4U-1s, the -1 and -1B were Vought designations, the -1C was the cannon-armed version (regardless of which aircraft the cannons were mounted in). The Navy used the -1D to designate the aircraft with two pylons because to call those aircraft -1As or -1Bs would have resulted in major confusion inside the Vought plant.

The photo-recon designations (F) were a pain in the ass. It was just a hodge-podge group of fighters and bombers that were used as reconnaissance birds (except the XF-11 and XF-12). To make it more interesting the P-38 had two designations (F-4 & F-5).

I've never found the paperwork explaining why the F-5A designation was assigned - F-4B would have made more sense. I see two possibilities - (1) F-4s were built as such by Lockheed, while F-5s were converted from P38s or (2) F-4 cameras were laid out for recon, while F-5 cameras could also do mapping. Just guesses, but I'd love to find proof of either...

I didn't know some B-17, B-24, and P-51 variants flew without an "F" designation.
I thought the wing position was needed to be moved forward and down for the Merlin 60's to work? Did the original plan call for the Merlin 28 in the B?

Sure did. Notably, camera-armed P-39s, P-40s, and P-47s never received "F-" designations. I'm not sure how far the plans for a Merlin 28 Mustang went, but clearly there had to have been some sort of a plan for the plan to be abandoned.

Cheers,



Dana

 

[Zipper730]

Osmosis? Yes. It also turned up in manuals, but Vought wrote the manuals. And the B was for British.

Okay, that makes a lot of sense.

Back to the F4U-1s, the -1 and -1B were Vought designations, the -1C was the cannon-armed version (regardless of which aircraft the cannons were mounted in).

So, it means it was capable of carrying cannon if need be?

The Navy used the -1D to designate the aircraft with two pylons because to call those aircraft -1As or -1Bs would have resulted in major confusion inside the Vought plant.

So the -D model was created to differentiate it from the corporate F4U-1A/B, and the USN's F4U-1C? It's interesting how convoluted things can get.

Ever heard of the XFY Pogo and F2Y? Ironically, the F2Y was procured and flew first, but got the designation due to some snafu in the in-house designation Convair used.

I've never found the paperwork explaining why the F-5A designation was assigned - F-4B would have made more sense. I see two possibilities - (1) F-4s were built as such by Lockheed, while F-5s were converted from P38s or (2) F-4 cameras were laid out for recon, while F-5 cameras could also do mapping. Just guesses, but I'd love to find proof of either...

That's an interesting point, but I figure whether modified or converted you could just use a different letter regardless.

I'm not sure how far the plans for a Merlin 28 Mustang went, but clearly there had to have been some sort of a plan for the plan to be abandoned.

Makes sense to me, unless time starts flowing backwards.

 

[ColFord]

I thunk I know where some of that info came from. William Green's little book on fighters Vol 4 says that No 2 Sqdrn RAF was the first to operate the Mustang MKI, getting them in April 1942 and the first sortie being 27 Jul. It also says that in Oct 1942 the Mustang MKI first penetrated the German border with a raid on the Dortmund-Ems Canal.

I went and had a look at the publication dates for the series of early books by William Green, his various titles on Fighters of WW2 across a number of volumes and aircraft of WW2 and US Fighters of WW2, and the first has an original publication date of 1957 and the last an original publication date of 1971, all with various republication and reprints by other publishers going to the late 1970s and very early 1980s.

Given the original publication dates, allowing time before then to research, write and publish, these all came out BEFORE the Air Ministry files and RAF WW2 era Operational Record Books relating to the Mustang and RAF Squadrons that operated the Mustang were declassified. So the primary sources available back then would have been official wartime press releases, original newspaper and magazine press clippings and similar.

To get access to the files before the early 1980s, you normally had to be someone serving in the UK armed services with a valid reason for access, or a researcher/writer/author/historian in the "good graces" of the powers that be, usually the RAF Air Historical Branch or someone very high up in the RAF. Even those who were writing the RAF Official Histories of WW2 didn't always have full access to all the relevant files due to the perceived secrecy and sensitivity around some operational, policy and other events and decisions, and had editorial direction to avoid coverage of some items in any detail.

The other problem that then arises is that some of the Air Ministry and RAF files were culled in the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s as a part of the repeated rounds of cost savings, often on the basis that they no longer had any relevance to aircraft types currently in RAF service, were purely technical in nature, purely administrative in nature or similar. Or just costing too much to store. You then end up with gaps in the available records, with surviving files referring to correspondence and documentation in other files that were destroyed/disposed of in the culls.

 

[chipieal]

What is the story of the two pictures of a P - 51 with what appears to be two jets slung under the wing ala Me 262?

 

[MIflyer]

I suspect the "No.2 Sqdrn" in the Green book was a simple typo, leaving off the 2nd digit, and it was then continued by others.

 

[Navalwarrior]

"ColFord, that is the 'rub' we all are experiencing . . . lack of accurate info. I am not dreaming up what I am seeing (20+ years of searching) and do not expect this situation to fade any time soon. I do appreciate your comments and the work you and drgondog are doing. I am also a fan of the F4U Corsair. Most authorities believe that the -1A was never used to denote the F4U-1A variant. But I have found USMC maintenance forms dated 1944 with the designation F4U-1A at the top of the form. So, I am careful to never say 'never!'
So my question is, who and why has used the designation F-6B, etc to denote a Photo-Recon converted Mustang P-51A? Is in an inappropriate extrapolation?"

Designations are a pain in the butt, and the more time I spend in the Archives (will they ever reopen?) the more I find revisions to what we all "know" to be true.

With -1 Corsairs, the BuAer had intended to revise all Birdcage Corsairs to raised cockpit standards and denied Vought permission to use a new designation "-1A" to differentiate the original cockpit from the raised cockpit. However, Vought received permission to use "-1A" in company records to clarify which drawings went with the revised cockpit. The original Birdcages were clapped out by the time the "-1A" started reaching units -- not worth the cost of revision -- so the Vought designation came into common (but not official) use.

Similarly, Vought used the F4U-1B designation for internal records on Brit-modified Corsairs. Then came the question of designations for British -1As - Vought wondered if they should be F4U-1ABs or F4U-1BAs. BuAer cried Nonsense! and reminded Vought that none of these designations was official.

To avoid further internal confusion, the cannon-armed modifications became -1Cs and the twin-pylon mods became -1Ds. The cannon-armed -4s became F4U-4Cs until 1946 when the Navy decided that the "B" suffix would be used for special armament mods and all the F4U-1Cs became F4U-1Bs.

TYPO!!! I should have types that the F4U-4Cs were redesignated F4U-4Bs More below...

The Army was just as bad. The "F-xx" designations originally went for mapping aircraft, but most early war mapping aircraft (such as 1942 versions of the mapping B-17s and B-24s) were not redesignated. Likewise, the tac recon Mustangs flew under their respective P-51 designations. Somewhere along the line headquarters decided to go back and "correct" that oversight. I found some correspondence on this, but never filed it in my Mustang files. (I've a six-foot stack of papers that I'm slowly working my way through, but I didn't really retire to become a file clerk in my own basement!)

One Mustang document that might be of interest here relates to the original P-51B and P-51C designations. The addition of the Merlin engine led to some aerodynamic concerns and minor repositioning of the wing. The P-51B was originally to be produced with the Merlin, but without the repositioned wing; the new wing was planned for the P-51C. Obviously, both models went into production with the repositioned wing, but I've never seen the original designations explained in any of the many Mustang books.

Then there's my all-time favorite Wright Field inter-office memo on the P-51, dated 28 August 1942. It doesn't relate directly to designations, but I'll drop it in here in its entirety:

Left by Alec Burton together with the dope on the Griffin 61, this date. "Dutch" Kindleberger says the Merlin 28 is out for installation in the P-51, but they are going full blast on the Merlin 61. About all the re-design necessary is to move the wing forward 3 inches and down 1 inch; also, the nose will be dropped a little to give better visibility than in the P-51.

If the aerodynamics isn't ruined, looks like they might have a pretty good airplane.

That one should be in the dictionary next to "understatement...

Cheers,



Dana

Resp:
The USAAC/USAAF 'headquarters going back to correct designations' certainly could explain the confusion/agitation. Thanks.