Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Looking at the Thunderbolt graphic for the fuel system my reaction is "ye gods and little fishes"... 990 gallons! Plus the ability to carry the 300 gallon wing tanks instead of 165's, yikes!The P-47N additional fuel tanks in the wings were located at the leading edges, aft the wheel bays, and between the wheel bays and fuselage. The LE tanks and the ones located aft the wheel bay were probably not requiring the wing 'plugs' (as featured on P-47N) like the ones next to the fuselage did.
(attached is the diagram of fuel system of the P-47N)
View attachment 661312
If you look at the original strength figures note the decline of Mustang I numbers in 1943, and there will not be 500 in squadrons at any one time. In terms of combat effectiveness and strength.'500' is a bigger number than '100'. Five times as big.
Where does this figure come from?Luftwaffe's 'West' and 'Reich defence' lost 2100+ fighters from Sept 1943 to Dec 1943 (another 454 in Italy & Balkans).
If you keep going into 1944 the monthly percentage loss of 8th Air Force Bombers, January to April was 19.5%, 20.2%, 23.3% and 24.4%, given the larger numbers on strength that meant 211+299+349+409 = 1,268 from all causes. The 1944 raids certainly had escorts, and over twice the number of bombers had to be lost to have the same percentage effect as a loss in 1943, so why are the losses still in the region of 20% or more if 100 to 200 fighters could cut the losses to 15% in 1943?Going by this graph, the monthly loss rate average was a bit greater than 20% from May to October of 1943 (~640 A/C total). Providing a decent escort and thus cutting the loss rate to 15% from July to October (when the 8th AF lost ~550 bombers) saves ~140 bombers.
There cannot be several hundred Mustang X in the front line in 1943, dropping the idea and using the engineering effort elsewhere, like the rear fuselage tank on a Spitfire VIII, or quicker fitting of larger tanks to the P-47 will provide a much better return. As for the oil campaign the allied bombers are in no real position to systematically attack the refineries in 1943, they lack the bomb lift for a start, plus the defences are too strong.I'm all for the Spitfire VIII with the aft tank, ditto for the P-47 with wing drop tanks. Combine these with several hundreds of Mustang X in 1943 and Luftwaffe will not just be in bad shape hardware-wise, but also with the question of whom to seat in a fighter that is just delivered from a factory. Longer range escorts enable the bomb runs against the German fuel infrastructure - another weak link for the Nazis.
Understood, but the Allison engine conversion to Merlin is not a viable solution.With that said, we've discussed the long-range fighter options as were the suitably modified Spitfire and P-47 ad nauseam in this forum for the last 15 years. Hence this thread.
Is point 1 the 1942 start for the US external tank program and 2 the additional internal fuel? Thanks for the Mustang X range estimate.Sinclair misses two key points with a suggestion that 'efforts to increase combat tank capacity for P-47 and internal fuel for Spitfire would be better than up-engining the Mustang X. Combat tanks were already a high priority in February 1942 following the Arnold Hosted Fighter Convention and the Fairchild led FAREP to expedite production features to extend escort fighter combat range, including adding internal fuel and external combat tanks. Despite the priorities set in 1942, Materiel Command dragged its feet until General Barney Giles lit a fire under Echols in June-July 1943.
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 Mustang X on internal fuel only would not have been as capable - range wise - as the P-47C/D with 75 gal C/L tank.
The Spitfire VIII was the export model, dust filters fitted as standard.
'Can not accept the aircraft as a one hundred percent success' is a far cry from 'prototype unacceptable in current form'. pg 46 "Rolls-Royce and The Mustang" David Birch.The Spitfire VIII was the export model, dust filters fitted as standard.
Looking at the Mustang X going through the British test process.
3 conversions ordered on 15 June 1942, first flight in October, 10 foot 9 inch propeller, considered too small, flush under cowl, sealed radiator scoop, more intercooling but frequent engine cutting between 20,000 and 24,000 feet. 11 November, prototype using bigger propeller, another conversion was soon to fly, a third conversion complete, 2 more conversions planned to be done in early 1943. Conference 2 February 1943, prototype unacceptable in current form, insufficient directional stability, large change in directional trim with power, objectionable due to heavy rudder forces involved. The aircraft easily slipped sideways while manoeuvering. A fin fillet helped the stability.
I am running a book on my messages, the moaning of the message, whether the complaint is too little or too much information plus option 3, the whole message is ignored.
From a recent thread on US operated Spitfires, Mk IXs and Mk VIIIs were still being issued to US squadrons in late 1943. US SpitfiresNot sure about that, the A-36 was a pretty valuable CAS asset in the Med from what I've read. I doubt the Spitfire could take over the A-36's job anymore than the reverse would be true. As for Merlin Mustangs, I'd expect they'd get there according to the historical timeline.
I was quoting from Interceptor Fighters for the Royal Air Force 1935-45 by Michael J.F. Bowyer, it would seem some of the test pilots had a different way of expressing the problems. The early 1943 Australian mission to decide what aircraft to build next report notes (MP450/1 58) the handling difficulties "lack of directional stability and adequate rudder control" in the British experimental version, and that these defects were reported by the British as not present in US version. The report also notes the idea of 1,000 sets of components to Britain which was the genesis for the similar Australian proposal.'Can not accept the aircraft as a one hundred percent success' is a far cry from 'prototype unacceptable in current form'. pg 46 "Rolls-Royce and The Mustang" David Birch.
It was not the timing of the kits according the locals.Consider how long it took NAA to deliver 100 kits to Australia under NA 110.
In the timeframe in question, there was no other aircraft with the same capabilities as the USAAF A-36s in the MTO to directly replace it without some loss of capability. Hence why the RAF in the MTO on a number of occasions borrowed P-51 and A-36 aircraft from the USAAF to provide the capabilities the type could give that was not present in RAF aircraft in theatre. By the time the USAAF had other types available in the MTO, the A-36s that were there had already been well used with a number of losses due to various reasons. By the time the USAAF retired the A-36s from operations in the MTO they were having real problems maintaining them due to the lack of spares coming from the USA as the NAA lines had converted over to the Merlin engine Mustangs and the higher priority was attached to supporting them in the ETO. They were combining major components from A-36 airframes to keep aircraft flying. What few A-36s that did remain airworthy were used for a while to assist in pilot transition training for units converting from other types to the first of the Merlin engine Mustangs arriving in the MTO. Some of the borrowed USAAF A-36s that the RAF had in the MTO (about four in total by that stage), were also used to assist in conversion of units from the P-40 to the Mustang III.Following up the earlier posts on the insatiable demands for Allison engined Mustangs for tactical reconnaissance, could the USA A-36s in Italy have been replaced by Spitfires or Merlin Mustangs and back shipped to the UK, if only as a source of spares if not actual conversions to the role? Their operational tasks were within the ability of other types.
David was instrumental in helping me sort out content and timeline for NA-110 Kit and License agreement for P-51D-5 to Oz. Like you, Colin the Aussie content contribution was very important to the "Bastard Stepchild".Best book for the RAAF and RNZAF Mustang story, that utilises the full range of information from sources worldwide (including lots of files not yet digitised by Australian Archives) along with those held in private collections, I can commend the following:
Southern Cross Mustangs by David Muir
Published 2009 by Red Roo, Australia
464 pages, A4 size
Aimed squarely at the enthusiast, modeller and historian, Southern Cross Mustangs is without question the most thorough examination that has as yet been made of the history, technology, camouflage and markings of the Australian and New Zealand Mustangs.
Southern Cross Mustangs is divided into 17 chapters covering different aspects of the story.
BACKGROUND - provides brief overview of the type and its service.
MODELS & VARIANTS - examines the differences between and modifications made to the NAA built Mk III (P-51 B/C), Mk IV and IVA (P-51D and K) and the CAC built CA-17 Mk 20 and CA-18 Mk21, Mk 22 and Mk 23.
OVERALL SCHEMES - looks at the colours and finishes of the military and civilian liveries.
NATIONAL INSIGNIA - charts the evolution of The RAAF and RNZAF insignia.
SQUADRON CODES - identifies the style, size and placement of code letters for each unit.
SERIALS - explores the background, fonts and placement of the aircraft's serials.
SECONDARY MARKINGS - illustrates the stenciling for each variant and service.
OTHER UNIT MARKINGS - describes the designs, logos and badges used by each unit.
SPINNER COLOURS - looks at the designs used on spinners in service.
PERSONAL MARKINGS - covers nose art, rank pennants and non-regulation markings.
INTERNAL FINISHES - describes finishes in the cockpits, wheel wells, engine and gun bays.
SHIPPING AND HANDLING - examines the protection methods used before and after delivery.
THINGS UNDER WINGS - examines and illustrates all the stores, weapons and equipment hung off the Mustangs in service including US bombs, rockets, fuel tanks, napalm tanks, smoke generators and cine camera tanks; British bombs, smoke generators, CLE and Storepedo containers and rockets and the Australian developed fuel tanks, DDT spray rig, Geletrol rockets and bombs, baggage tanks, fire extinguishing bombs, defoliant tanks, cable layer, target towing equipment, high speed releases for bombs, light series bomb carrier and test/trials equipment.
PROFILES - includes 600 profiles in four chapters covering the RAAF Squadrons in the MTO, NAA and CAC built aircraft in Australia, the Pacific, Japan and Korea, the RNZAF aircraft and the civilian operated aircraft of both countries.
The body of the text is supported by eight Appendices
Appendix 1 outlines the history of each unit that operated the type
Appendix 2 lists the RAAF Mustang Orders and Instructions for modifications and updates
Appendix 3 does the same for the RNZAF modifications and updates
Appendix 4 illustrates the RAAF A.5524 painting and marking diagrams
Appendix 5 cross references the serials, registrations and names of the civilian Mustangs
Appendix 6 cross references the RAAF, RNZAF, ML-KNIL & RAF serials and codes
Appendix 7 examines and lists the official colours used in service
Appendix 8 provides a list of selected further reading
View attachment 662541