I can see from the above thread that it is time to clear up some of the long-standing myths about the XP-79.
The AAF NEVER intended for the XP-79 to be a Ram. That said, it does appear that Jack Northrop may have sold the idea of the aircraft with that being one of the features he envisaged. I have seen a reference to being a Ram in at least one of his communications with the AAF, and I suspect that the thus-far completely hidden original proposal by Northrop to the AAF could well have contained that as one of the selling features. And this notion was almost surely repeated by some of the Northrop employees at different times.
However, the AAF had investigated and rejected the whole concept of using aircraft to ram bombers long before the war had even begun. Briefly, on October 31, 1940 a conference with the Secretary of War resulted in a verbal directive issued on November 1, 1940 from General Carl Spaatz, then Chief of the Material Division, for a study to be undertaken on increasing armor on existing pursuit aircraft or those currently under development so the aircraft could ram attack hostile bombardment aircraft in cases of extreme emergency.
The AAF initially chose the P-40D, P-39C and the P-47 (most likely the B) to investigate this idea. The P-47 was quickly rejected because of the difficulty of armoring the engine while still having sufficient airflow for cooling. Drawings were done of the P-40 and the P-39 showing how and where the armor would be mounted. Due to the additional weight, certain of the guns had to be removed, compromising their effectiveness as pursuit/fighter aircraft. By December 31, 1941 the idea had been thoroughly investigated and just as thoroughly discredited.
For those interested in this moment of aircraft history, please see my article with drawings, photos and data in Issue 9 of The Aviation Historian. This article contains all known data about this project and is named America's Ramjaegers.
And now back to the XP-79.
I have done a great deal of research on the XP-79 and have collected all documents that could be found either at the National Archives or the U.S. Air Force Museum (or whatever they themselves now), as well numerous photos of the various stages of development and construction with the help of other serious researchers. My intent is to produce a monograph on this aircraft, both because so much incorrect information has been foisted on the public for so long and because I just love flying wings. There is no publication date at present.
In my research, which included talking to retired Northrop employees, there is no indication whatsoever that the AAF EVER intended to use the XP-79 or any of its rocket-propelled precursors for the purpose of ramming enemy aircraft. As shown above, the AAF had long-since put that idiocy to bed. The armor plate just inside the leading edges of the wings are often referred to as proof of concept. They are not. They were put in to protect the very volatile rocket fuel of the original concept from damage - and a very big boom - from enemy fire. Period.
I do hope this clarifies things. I encourage any serious researchers to spend the time gathering and studying original source documents, not just on the XP-79 but on any aviation project in which they may have interest. The Truth always seems to prove to be even more interesting than the rumors and fantasies.
Submitted for your consideration,
AlanG