Metal Mosquito built massively in the US

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

What I notice about almost any discussion such as this, is the Mosquito is almost never discussed alongside the Aircraft probably most similar in size and role which is the A20. If the USA are going to build any version of the Mosquito in either metal or wood then it's the A20 which is most likely to be replaced together with large portions of the B25/B26 operations. It isn't going to replace the B17.

With that view then I would suggest that building the Mosquito in the USA in theory made a lot of sense. Please note the 'in theory'. It would never happen because it wasn't invented there. Now that may sound a little bitchy, which isn't my normal style. However, I once read the official review of the Mosquito by the USAAF and they concluded that it wasn't suitable for night operations.
To come up with that conclusion despite all the evidence would indicate pretty strongly that there was a certain amount of bias in the report

edit - apologies Shortround our postings crossed. All bar a small handful of Mosquitos had a 2,000lb payload
 
Last edited:
Were there any American designs that came close to the Mosquito concept? Something like a twin engined Rainbow that wasn't followed up with? There seemed to be a lot of interesting "never to be" planes.
 
swampyankee said:
they had quite a few aircraft manufacturers capable of producing high-speed, two-engine aircraft, even though the only one to actually enter service was the P-38.
Click to expand...

Yup, the P-38 could do a lot of what the Mossie could and it was identified as an aircraft that made the Mosquito redundant in the eyes of US manufacturers, although Gen Arnold himself agreed that the Mosquito was a better recon aircraft than the F-5 and this is how the USAAF got the type to begin with.

Entirely agree with the premise about the A-20. It's highly unlikely that the US are going to employ the Mossie as a bomber.

SaparotRob said:
Were there any American designs that came close to the Mosquito concept?
Click to expand...

Not really. The Mossie wasn't just conceived as an unarmed bomber, but an unarmed bomber made from non-strategic materials by manufacturers outside of the normal supply chain. That bit is often forgotten in analysing the Mossie and its place in the war.
 

In broad terms I understand your point, especially with respect to the USA. However, the evidence is that the British certainly DID know in the Summer of 1941 just how good it was going to be:

("It is the best thing of its kind in sight" - Air Chief Marshall Ludlow Hewitt)

 


Having the Mosquito been designed, as stated by nuuumannn, to be "made from non-strategic materials by manufacturers outside of the normal supply chain", was a weakness by the point of view of a huge development in production numbers.
One thing is a production of a substantially hand-crafted airplane, another one is an industrial production of an airplane assembled with thousands of aluminium parts, each one made from a subcontractor that barely knew where the part he was producing had to go.
A proverb here says "you can't have your barrel full and your wife completely drunk" that in English is I think "you can't have your cake and eat it too"...
Probably RAF planners regretted for not having a metal Mosquito, but but it has to be seen whether a metallic Mosquito would have been as efficient as a wooden Mosquito: instead to leave alone the designers of the de Havilland factory, Top Brass probably would have requested an higher safety factor, the temptation to add things like pressurization, the surfaces of the airplane would not have been so smooth as flush rivets were "too much expensive" and so on...
 
That proverb deserves a bacon.
 
Being "the best thing of its kind in sight" is very close to being condemned by faint praise. The Mosquito had been discussed since 1938 and flew in November 1940. If there was something remis in the USA not recognising how brilliant it was then obviously the same is true in the UK, it had been put on a back burner and even in 1941 all stops were not being pulled to get as many as possible as quickly as possible. There is a lot of hindsight involved with the Mosquito.
 
pbehn said:
Aluminium makes up 8.1% of the earths crust.
Click to expand...

According to one author, this was known but "decent quantities of high grade bauxite existed (1940) only in British and Dutch Guiana and in a small area of Arkansas".
I don't know how true that is.
Alcoa had the monopoly on aluminium in the USA to the point where Thurman Arnold of the Justice department called Alcoa "one of the worst monopolies that had been able to fasten itself upon American life".
Towards the end of 1940 Martin and Northrop reduced work shifts by up to 20% due to a lack of aluminium.
 


We also have to consider what was "in sight" at the end of June 1941.

The British had around 800 Lockheed Venturas on order by the end of 1940, the first would not fly until about one month after that report was written and it would not be until 1942 that they would see combat.
The Martin Baltimore had been ordered by the French and orders taken over by the British. the first Baltimore flew about 2 weeks before the report was written.
While a small quantity of North American B-25s were delivered starting in August 1941 they were used as trainers in the Bahamas. British would not fly a B-25 in combat until 1943.
British got three B-26s in late 1941 but the first unit to use them in combat was not until Oct of 1942. hardly in sight in June of 1941.

I am not at all trying to say that any of these aircraft were directly comparable to the Mosquito. However the British had no prototype light or medium bombers (whatever may have been on paper) of their own at this time so whatever twin engine light/medium bombers or multi role aircraft was "in sight" (squadron service in 1-2 years?) were going to come from America.
The Beaufighter was already something of a known quantity.

None of the American planes were suitable for replacing the Mosquito in most of it's roles.
 
pbehn said:
Aluminium makes up 8.1% of the earths crust.
Click to expand...

Which is not particularly evenly distributed in terms of viable mines. Virtually none in Germany, and
literally none in the UK. Here is a German Air Ministry evaluation of the main ore sites in 1939.

(Bergwerksproduktion von Bauxit = Bauxite mine production, NOT production of finished Aluminium itself)

One key strategic reason for German interest in occupying France will become evident from study of the chart -
they extracted nearly a fifth of global Bauxite production before the war.

I suspect that "Amerika" here probably means the entire northern american landmass, and hence
almost certainly includes Canada.

 
Elmas said:
was a weakness by the point of view of a huge development in production numbers.
Click to expand...

Well, depends on what your reality of mass manufacture was at the time the aircraft was being built. There's no evidence it took longer to make Mosquitoes once production lines were established than any other of its type in the UK. There were around 7,700 Mosquitoes built, in the UK, Australia and Canada, this exceeded the number of Lancasters built within the same time period by a few hundred and exceeded the number of Blenheims by a few thousand. The fact that it was designed to be made by factories and workshops outside of the aviation industry meant that it could be made by firms not overburdened by other work. This was the key to its success under its original premise.

Also, lets not forget that at the time before it entered mass manufacture, the benefits of its excellent performance and just how much other commands wanted it were not exactly known to the rest of the RAF - it was an outsider to existing plans, rather than a pre-destined choice. It replaced Blenheims in service, which in late 1940 through 1941 when Mosquitoes began production, were being built in significant numbers. Once the prototype demonstrated its excellent performance though, then everyone wanted it. In this case, then perhaps you're right Elmas, there weren't enough being built, so manufacture was undertaken in Canada. Australian production was largely for RAAF needs, rather than supplying RAF needs.

gumbyk said:
Cabinet-makers, and skilled woodworkers they had.
Click to expand...

Yes indeed, why the Mosquito concept was as much of a success as it was, not just because of its performance, but the idea as a whole.
 

USAAF Generals were at first very "picky" about P-51, ( or whatever it was called at an early stage of its production...) but, after the airplane had clearly shown his potential, there were no problems for increasing in short time the production not only for the RAF needs, but also for USAAF needs, which were far superior to the English ones.
The production of a Lancaster and the production of a Mosquito are not comparable, they are too much different kinds of airplanes and for the Blenheim, once that the chain of production has been established, there were no problems to cranck out airplanes whose design was pre-war.
I'm not telling that the production of a Mosquito was difficult: like the conteporary production of wooden airplanes in Italy, say Savoia Marchetti, CANT and Piaggio, it had some "industrial" bottlenecks not easy to overcome to increase the production to huge numbers in short times. For example, for the Germans ( who can say the Germans have not a tradition in wood industry?...) the bottleneck for the production of TA 154 were the factories producing the glue: and it was sufficient for the Allied to destroy those factories (very lucky shot!) to stop the production of the airplane.
 
Last edited:

We can see that Italy had a huge production of bauxite but, in 1940, the vast majority of the Italian airplanes were, fully or partly, wooden made. Why? Because there was no coal to produce the vast amount of the energy needed to transform bauxite in aluminium.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

Favorite plane never built (or perhaps as a prototype).
6 7 8
Replies
152
Views
13K
Thumpalumpacus
Making the best use of Jumo 211 series?
2
Replies
21
Views
1K
peceed
P
An early 'Me 209' instead of the Me 309?
2
Replies
21
Views
1K
TM06
SMGs in ww2 with much smaller cartridges?
2 3
Replies
53
Views
2K
Admiral Beez
A
DH Mosquito and Hornet with metal airframes--possible performance advantages?
Replies
9
Views
1K
BarnOwlLover
Menu
Log in
Register