Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
An unconscious bias that denigrates other aircraft to "improve" the plane they really like?I'm still at a loss as to why some still say Japan had lost all their veteran/good pilots by the end of 1942, which totally denigrates what the P-38 accomplished.
To me that's no different than the nonsense that the P-51 just "mopped up" a bunch of trainees in 1944 in the ETO.
Ah but the P-38 built up a mountain of photos 10 times bigger than all other mountains combined.An unconscious bias that denigrates other aircraft to "improve" the plane they really like?
The Allies lost a considerable number of pilots between 1943 - 1945 in both theaters.I'm still at a loss as to why some still say Japan had lost all their veteran/good pilots by the end of 1942, which totally denigrates what the P-38 accomplished.
To me that's no different than the nonsense that the P-51 just "mopped up" a bunch of trainees in 1944 in the ETO.
The comments by Beech were not worthy of a high school assignment.General Arnold presented drawings of the Mosquito to 6 manufacturers, one responded with comments. If there was really a serious note to procure (more) or produce Mosquitoes by the AAF, someone "would have" put out a solicitation with a dollar amount to manufacturers.
You're right - they gave an opinion about a competitor's product. How do expect them to act? Now if the AAC approached them with a contract ($) to produce the aircraft I think the tone might have been different.The comments by Beech were not worthy of a high school assignment.
"It appears that this aircraft has sacrificed serviceability, structural strength, ease of construction and flying characteristics in an attempt to use construction material which is not suitable for the manufacture of efficient aircraft." Obviously a predetermined result..
There is a linguistic leap that frequently gets made, once you have lost some experienced pilots you only have trainees left. The allies also "lost" a lot of pilots by promoting them to training roles, with a view to making their inexperienced "trainees" much more effective with a better chance of survival from their first mission.The Allies lost a considerable number of pilots between 1943 - 1945 in both theaters.
Those must have been some seriously determined trainees...
On a similar vein, some of the British were upset about the Mustang`s performance compared to the Spitfire with exactly the same engine, when the performance predictions of the Merlin Mustang came in, a lot of British just refused to believe it, and that was a plane the British ordered !You're right - they gave an opinion about a competitor's product. How do expect them to act? Now if the AAC approached them with a contract ($) to produce the aircraft I think the tone might have been different.
Translated "We don't know a.) how to build it, b.) how to hire and train the staff, or c.) How to price it. Go away."The comments by Beech were not worthy of a high school assignment.
"It appears that this aircraft has sacrificed serviceability, structural strength, ease of construction and flying characteristics in an attempt to use construction material which is not suitable for the manufacture of efficient aircraft." Obviously a predetermined result..
Perhaps because they were looking for "A" reason not for a lot of reasons adding up to a total. You can see sleekness and good fit and finish, you cant see the more advanced aerodynamic things like laminar type wings and low cooling drag/ Meredith effect. However I am sure if they asked someone at de Havilland they could have given some pointers.On a similar vein, some of the British were upset about the Mustang`s performance compared to the Spitfire with exactly the same engine, when the performance predictions of the Merlin Mustang came in, a lot of British just refused to believe it, and that was a plane the British ordered !
View attachment 637684
Later when the real Merlin Mustangs DID go about 25mph faster at almost all altitudes than the Spit IX, much eating of words occured, so I can well imagine that if you are asked to give a view on the performance of a plane you have not ordered, unless you have the morals of a saint, you`re just going to find a way to hate it.
It defies logic unless they didnt actually know its flying characteristics. When introduced it was one of the fastest planes in the world in service. Every high speed aircraft makes compromises and sacrificesThe comments by Beech were not worthy of a high school assignment.
"It appears that this aircraft has sacrificed serviceability, structural strength, ease of construction and flying characteristics in an attempt to use construction material which is not suitable for the manufacture of efficient aircraft." Obviously a predetermined result..
I betcha Walter and Olive Ann had their eyes firmly on the postwar market and saw the future in monocoque stressed akin aluminum construction, and thought plywood artwork (which they didn't have the setup or workforce skills to do) would be a post-Mosquito dead end in the US market. They already had the C45/Beech18, from which they would evolve, building block fashion, an entire hierarchy of business aircraft. Even the 1900s I flew had beefed up Beech18 wing center sections.It defies logic unless they didnt actually know its flying characteristics. When introduced it was one of the fastest planes in the world in service. Every high speed aircraft makes compromises and sacrifices
I agree, but to quote "flying characteristics" in the argument doesnt add up. Before and after the Mosquito there were aeroplanes that were really fast that were absolutely lethal, someone did actually land a Mosquito on a carrier and it became a carrier borne aircraft so its characteristics couldnt have been that bad.I betcha Walter and Olive Ann had their eyes firmly on the postwar market and saw the future in monocoque stressed akin aluminum construction, and thought plywood artwork (which they didn't have the setup or workforce skills to do) would be a post- Mosquito dead end in the US market. They already had the C45/Beech18, from which they would evolve, building block fashion, an entire hierarchy of business aircraft. Even the 1900s I flew had beefed up Beech18 wing center sections.
Well, the Beech family were never above exhibiting NIH syndrome.I agree, but to quote "flying characteristics" in the argument doesnt add up. Before and after the Mosquito there were aeroplanes that were really fast that were absolutely lethal, someone did actually land a Mosquito on a carrier and it became a carrier borne aircraft so its characteristics couldnt have been that bad.
All sides are capable of that, they could have chosen better wording to make it less obvious. I could offer the counter argument that the Mosquito was a completely uncompromising design saying "there you have it make of it what you want". The British were forced to make bombs smaller to fit, and make electronics more compact, and introduce navigational and other electronic aids to assist a two man crew which became standard post war.Well, the Beech family were never above exhibiting NIH syndrome.
All sides are capable of that, they could have chosen better wording to make it less obvious. I could offer the counter argument that the Mosquito was a completely uncompromising design saying "there you have it make of it what you want". The British were forced to make bombs smaller to fit, and make electronics more compact, and introduce navigational and other electronic aids to assist a two man crew which became standard post war.
The Beech 17 didn't have much in the way of compound curved sheet plywood structure, which is an art of its own, especially in a stressed skin design like the Mosquito. And it clearly wasn't the wave of the future in the US. I would have made the same decision.View attachment 637706
Beechcraft YC-43
Steel tube fuselage heavily faired with wood. Wing with wooden spars and ribs, leading edge was sheet metal, everything covered in Fabric.
The US ordered a total of 270 during the war in addition to impressing most of the existing civilian versions.
Why Beech said what they did I have no idea, but they were making a mostly wooden, high performance cabin airplane (over 200mph with a 450hp engine) during the late 30s and all through WW II in addition to the all metal Beech 18 twin.
Beech might have been one of the better US companies to under take a Wooden Mosquito project.
785 Beech 17s were built pre-war, during the war and post war (about 20?)