Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
The only RAF Mustangs I have ever read about doing escort were those that escorted the attack on Shell house in 1945.
20 Mosquitoes from RAF 2nd TAF (Tactical Air Force) escorted by 28 Mustang Mk. IIIs from the 11th Group
From 27th Aug 1944 to 24th April 1945 Bomber Command heavies flew 153 daylight raids, sometimes putting over 1,000 bombers over a target, that all required escort.Of course MkI and MkIA were not built to carry bombs or drop tanks as built at the factory. First to carry underwing stores was the A-36, but the RAF only had about two of those.
So RAF Mustangs did escort bomber missions, although it was Boston, Mitchell, and Marauder and not he+avies. The only RAF Mustangs I have ever read about doing escort were those that escorted the attack on Shell house in 1945. I have even read of Mossies being used to escort Lancs in daylight raids, but not RAF Mustangs doing that. The book D-Day Fighters mentions RAF fighter bomber strikes with Mustang III quite a bit, and of course they were not above shooting down enemy aircraft if they found them, either, even knocking down a couple of LEO45 in German markings.
North American Mustang Mk.I (NA-83) AM106/G at A&AEE UK for trials of the "Low Attack Wing" conversion of the Mustang Mk.I to allow it to carry underwing stores, including long range drop tanks, stores containers, bombs and SCI cannisters. Also trials for 40mm 'S' gun pods and four rocket rails mounted under each wing.
Hence why in the instances when the RAF Mustang Mk.I and Mk.IA were used for bomber escort duties, they were primarily used for the escort of 2Group Bostons, Mitchells and Venturas on low level bombing operations.
2TAF and RAF Tac/R tactical doctrine was not to use drop tanks on Tac/R aircraft when conducting low level Tac/R operations due to the excessive risk and danger to the aircraft if the drop tank were to be hit by light or medium flak whilst still on the aircraft. Tac/R versions of the Spitfire did not have the range and did not perform as well at the lower altitudes required in the Tac/R role;
The FR versions of the Spitfire also had more limited camera fitment options, basically a single sideways oblique, unless fitted with additional camera(s) by such means as cameras mounted in modified drop tanks or similar. Whereas, the Tac/R Mustang Mk.I and Mk.IA were initially single oblique, then upgraded to oblique plus vertical, then dual oblique with vertical and a later modification implemented onto a number of Mustang Mk.II of four oblique and one vertical - all mounted within the available space in the Mustang airframe without negative impact on fuel able to be carried or performance.
Okay, let me spell it out."In the ETO they were heavily used for fighter bomber duties in the run-up to 6 Jun 1944. " by another member here.
I would suspect the other poster was referring to the RAF's use of Mustang IIIs in the fighter bomber role in the lead-up to D-Day and the period up until the end of September 1944 when the aircraft swap between AGB/FC and 2TAF occurred.I'd say that there is a lot of difference with a test mule carrying bombs vs. a claim "In the ETO they were heavily used for fighter bomber duties in the run-up to 6 Jun 1944. " by another member here.
I would suspect the other poster was referring to the RAF's use of Mustang IIIs in the fighter bomber role in the lead-up to D-Day and the period up until the end of September 1944 when the aircraft swap between AGB/FC and 2TAF occurred.
If the Mustang Mk.I and Mk.IA had been re-engined as you proposed, it may have thrown the War Office and British Army into another of their frenzied demands for the creation of their own dedicated Squadrons of specialised CAS aircraft, which may in turn have been used as an excuse to delay the invasion until 1945 as the required squadrons were formed and equipped............what if............
Yes, and No. The P-51B was assigned to TAC by Air Defense Directorate in approximately May 1943. That said, while the 354th, 357th and 363rd were originally assigned to 9th AF, several key actions changed the course. First, Eaker appealed for Mustangs and Lightnings in July 1943 - ASAP. Second, Arnold changed priorities for new P-38 FGs (55th and 20th) from MTO to ETO. Third, he asked Portal to trade Mustang III delivered through 1943, for future deliveries. Fourth, authorized 8th AF Operational control over IX FC (ALL IX FC including P-51B/P-47D) which extended through April, 1944. Fifth, while 8th was not able to acquire 354th and 363rd FG outright, Spaatz was able to trade P-47D 358FH for 357 FG (P-51B) effective Jan 31st, 1944. The 355th FG was tasked for P-47D to P-51B after 56th FG turned down the conversion, and received about 20 P-51Bs. Last, Blakesleee convinced Doolittle that the 4th should be next - and committed to on the job 'education' as you stated above. The 355th turned over their consignment after Big Week and flew its first P-51B mission on Feb 28th. The 4th returned their 'laners' back to the 355th on the 8th of March and the 355t flewits first 'all P-51B' op on March 9th.Okay, let me spell it out.
1. You were talking about Mustang X's. I was talking about P-51B/Mustang III, obviously. The reason for the comparison is obvious. Of course the P-51B originally was assigend to 9th AF until Blakeslee made his famous "We will learn to fly them on the way to the target." and that, combined with the Munster and Black Thursday 1943 missions, changed everything.
To further clarify the Mustang III 'role' in RAF. It's first and primary mission was TAC under Leigh Mallory - but Arnold persuaded Portal to continue loaning RAF squadrons to mid-range daylight escort of 8th AF (no 85 gallon fuselage tanks until the P-51B-10s started arriving). IIRC they returned to TAC command and control near the end of April when the Rail Campaign took very high priority.2. Missions: The units equipped with Mustang Mk I were TAC/R. Refit their airplanes with 2 stage Merlins and their mission would not change. They would not change over to dueling with the Luftwaffe at 25,000 ft just because they could. Admittedly, the Mustang X could still do the TAC/R job, probably even better than the MKI, but it did not need those cpabilities.
3. In the book 'D Day Bombers" they describe a daylight mission to the Cherbourg Penn where the Lancs were escorted by Mosquito, presumable MKVI. I do not know how often this occurred; I had never heard of it before. By the way your comment remphasizes what I said about unit missions.
I got the engine back on my airplane yesterday, so I have to go off and accomplish the rest of the w ork to get her back in the air. Bye.
From memory, there were four, maximum six, Mustang Mk.I used for weapons trials including the trials of the "low attack wing". (I have the details of the aircraft involved somewhere in the copies of the relevant AM files that I have). The reduction in the wing armament to the single machine gun was similar in concept used for the Hurricane equipped with the 40mm cannon pods, to assist with aiming the larger cannon and minimal self defence capability. Ditto for the aircraft fitted with the rocket rails. The removal of the nose guns was a weight saving measure and they were also not considered essential to be fitted during the trials. As it was, the trials showed that whilst the Mustang equipped with the "low attack wing" would be an improvement over the Hurricane, the negative impacts on the performance of the Mustang would make it vulnerable operating in a highly contested environment. As it was, they were already looking at the Typhoon as the best alternative for the CAS role, given its greater engine power and more rugged airframe.There may have been only a few (or one?) Planes with the "low attack wing".
The Mustang was not purchased by the AM or RAF for Army Co-operation. They were purchased as another fighter type aircraft, likely to be useful in the defence of the UK or as a fighter type in RAF service in overseas commands. At the time they were ordered in 1940, the RAF was looking for fighter aircraft from all sources to increase the available numbers and offset potential for shortfalls in UK production due to German attacks on aircraft plants in the UK. At the time the Mustang was ordered, the standard aircraft for ACC Squadrons was the Westland Lysander and the RAF had not yet experienced in the Battle of France what would happen to aircraft like the Lysander when they came up against enemy fighters and flak. What types of higher performance aircraft might be of use in future Army Co-operation Squadrons given what happened in France did not start to occur until August-September 1940 - the time when you see consideration of equipping the Army Co-operation Squadrons with Fairey Battles or B.P. Defiants, or even specialist types capable of dive bombing to answer the British Army's demands for a Stuka equivalent to support them (Chesapeakes, Bermudas, Vengeances) but a preference was being shown for Hurricanes, which were not available at the time because of the demands made by FC. The Tomahawk which was coming through from the French orders and early RAF orders was considered a suitable alternative to the Hurricane and so that is why the AC Squadrons started to receive them. Even as late as mid to late-1941 before the first Mustangs arrived in the UK, the then formed ACC was lobbying for the release of Hurricanes to be used for AC Squadrons and repeatedly being rejected by FC. Of note, at the time the Mustang made its first flight, Army Co-operation Command had not even been formed (formed 1 December 1940, first Mustang flight 26 October 1940), and what was the Army Co-operation Group, 22 Group, still resided within Fighter Command.The Mustang was purchased for Army Co-operation missions and replaced Tomahawks, Whirlwinds, and Kittyhawks for those missions.
Always a mystery to me, with the obvious advantage that the Mustang had in range, why didnt the USA order it for high altitude bomber escort in 1940?
The difference in NAA Delivery of P51A versus P-51B-1 was about four weeks. The difference between first flights were more than 3 months due to the aforementioned delays to provide NAA the Packard Merlin 1650-3.There may have been only a few (or one?) Planes with the "low attack wing".
Photos do show 40mm cannon like the Hurricane, they do show rocket rails like the Hurricane and one or more photos do show bombs.
However, on the photos where details can be made out (or serial numbers seen) the fuselage guns are plated over and only one gun port is visible in each wing.
This sort of makes sense if they were looking at a faster Hurricane IV for ground attack but that is not a conventional fighter bomber.
I don't know if this guess is correct or what the goal of the "low attack wing" was.
On a trials aircraft the reduction in machine guns might make sense to reduce weight for the trial installations.
Another guess.
But trying to convert already existing airframes to heavier power plants and drop tanks and keep usable firepower might be more trouble.
The P-51A already has the underwing racks and the higher gross weight, it just doesn't speed up the delivery time by more than a few weeks, if not actually be later than the P-51B.
Always a mystery to me, with the obvious advantage that the Mustang had in range, why didnt the USA order it for high altitude bomber escort in 1940?
100 longer range fighters in the west are not going to do a lot to the Luftwaffe, the Mediterranean and Red Air Forces did a lot of the damage July/August 1943 part of the reason for the German pull back, as well as the raids launched from Britain. And there are not 500 spare two stage Merlins available without disruption to Spitfire output. As of 30 June 1943 the Luftwaffe quartermaster recorded 1,849 single and 194 twin engined fighters on strength, total 2,043 as of 30 November it was 1,789 single and 315 twin, total 2,104.Idea behind Mustang X in few hundreds by Summer of 1943 was not that they still roam the French countryside between SL and 15000 ft, but to do the escort at 25000 ft, and from position of superior performance hit Luftwaffe. The ~540 Mustangs available for conversion is a fine number, way better than my 200 of converted airframes for Summer or 1943.
Strength of Luftwaffe will be also diminishing from July-November of 1943 in an even greater rate.
Actually given what the 8th was doing at the time and where its losses were being taken your statement is incorrect. How many of the bomber losses is a Mustang X force expected to save versus historical losses?Work will return assets invested in a major fashion. Like the survival and greater experience of the 8th AF bombers' crews (and their A/C), enabling them to do more damage, all while inflicting an even greater casualty list for the Luftwaffe.
100 longer range fighters in the west are not going to do a lot to the Luftwaffe, the Mediterranean and Red Air Forces did a lot of the damage July/August 1943 part of the reason for the German pull back, as well as the raids launched from Britain. And there are not 500 spare two stage Merlins available without disruption to Spitfire output. As of 30 June 1943 the Luftwaffe quartermaster recorded 1,849 single and 194 twin engined fighters on strength, total 2,043 as of 30 November it was 1,789 single and 315 twin, total 2,104.
Actually given what the 8th was doing at the time and where its losses were being taken your statement is incorrect. How many of the bomber losses is a Mustang X force expected to save versus historical losses?
The USAAF statistical digest reports to end 1943 the 8th Air Force had lost 1,078 heavy bombers on operations, 737 to fighters, 228 to flak, 113 to other causes. The incomplete loss list I am working from identifies 1,223 losses on operations, including 642 to fighter, 255 to flak, 103 to flak and fighter, in reasonable enough agreement for losses considered caused by the defences, then comes 55 battle damage, 51 lack of fuel, 47 collisions, 37 mechanical failure and other various causes. A loss is defined as failed to return or written off.
Richard Davis notes the 8th Air Force had 10,976 bomber sorties attacking Germany to end 1943, the top 7 targets were
Bremen 2,326, Emden 1,185, Wilhelmshaven 1,005, Kiel 801, Ludwigshafen 653, Miscellaneous 554, so various targets of opportunity etc. by a few bombers at a time, Munster 500, Schweinfurt comes in at 411 attacking, Regensburg at 126.
All up a little over 100 locations identified, most are in Western Germany, so the obvious question is rather than spend all that effort converting Allison P-51 to Merlin why not put it into earlier and bigger drop tanks for P-47 and a wing or two of Spitfire VIII with rear fuselage tank that is a lot less effort.
Back to the loss list, to end October 1943 it says 364 8th Air Force bombers lost to fighters, 111 to flak and 42 to flak and fighters when attacking Germany, total 516, unsurprisingly Schweinfurt tops the list for attacking bombers lost to fighters or a combination of flak and fighters, Schweinfurt 93, Kiel 38, Bremen 29, Munster 26, Wilhelmshaven 24, Regensburg 18, Stuttgart 18, Emden 17, Anklam 17, Hannover 14, Wangerooge 11, Oschersleben 10.
Again, given the targets, using Spitfire VIII and P-47 with drop tanks as escort seems viable for most. Norwich to Kiel is 382 miles, Bremen 314 miles, Munster 273 miles.
I still doubt very seriously that external rack/combat tank capability for 75 and 108 gal tanks could have been 'kitted' along with Depot level 'unskinning, adding structural integrity for external 500/800 pound wing load, re-skinning and flight testing by January 1944
The British might have been able to use 44imp gallon tanks from Hurricanes? but may have been speed restricted.
We also have not addressed the armament situation. I doubt the .50 cal guns in the fuselage would have stayed what with the bigger supercharger and plumbing in the cowl and unless the "allied forces" involved were happy with two .50 and four .303s there was more work that needed doing on wings.
Not hard work or impossible work, but work that could be done while on the "unskinning", structural integrity and fuel lines for the drop tanks.
It is just more work. Change gun bay doors, change ammunition trays/boxes change outer gun gun bay mounts firing arrangements.
As I noted above, installing additional wing fuel capability ranged from zero (P-47D and P-51B) to good (P-38J). Republic was reduced to designing and producing pylon/fuel feed kits while awaiting the production P-47D-15 (added pylon/fuel feed) and the far future P-47N (added wing fuel). The 150 gal 'flat' tank for C/L didn't arrive until early 1944.
The initial oblique camera installations were basically in the areas where the rear quarter windows in the cockpit were, immediately behind the pilot's head's armour plate. Some of the radio equipment and supporting ancillaries got moved from that area for the initial oblique camera installation, so there is in fact little moved into the fuselage where a fuselage fuel tank might go. The vertical camera mount was just in front of the rear tailwheel bay, so again, not where the fuselage tank was placed in the later Mustang models - in fact in the USAAF modified Tac/R Merlin engine Mustangs they could have the cameras and the fuselage tank.One of options is to use the space, previously devoted to the cameras, to install an additional fuel tank.
As noted the NA-91 P-51/Mustang Mk.IA only had 150 delivered, if as you propose a re-engining program were initiated earlier, potentially greater pressure would have been placed to produce more of that model. If the re-engined Mustang was seen as a stop-gap long range escort by the USAAF for their bomber operations over Europe, it may have kept derivatives of the cannon armed Mustang in production longer and in greater numbers than they were. As it was the RAF had been planning on receiving follow on additional orders of developments of the NA-91 but the US entry into the War in December 1941 changed that and other than the 50 P-51A/Mustang II they received in part compensation for the P-51/Mustang Mk.IA they did not receive from the initial order, they never received the Allison engine versions of the Mustang in the quantities they had projected or hoped for - partly due to change to Merlin engined Mustang to meet the long range capable fighter priorities.Perhaps start out with the Mustang IA at 1st, it features 4 cannons by default. 150 were deliveredto the RAFby NAA from July 1942.