Top 3 best decisions per country, in field of military aviation

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

Britain
1. Dowding System it was so much more than the Radar
2. Shadow Factories impossible to hit all sources of production when they were so spread out
3. Not wasting the RAF in France

USA
1. Utilising the skills of the Automobile industry
2. Prefab ships like the Liberty ship, no point building all those planes if you cant get fuel, spares and ground crew to the theatre
3. .50 Browning it might not have been the best airborne gun but they produced the snot out of it. They could have gone for the cruddy US built Hispano
 
The USA:

1. Developing the B-29
2. Developing the Bomb
3. Funding the Mustang after Ben Kelsey saw the potential. There were no funds left in Fiscal Year 42 for fighters, so the USAAF funded it as a fighter bomber to keep the plane in production, and got the A-36 funded in FY'42. I think that turned out to be one of the best decisions of the War for the USAAF.
 
Last edited:
In a nutshell, the NA-73X was North American's response to the British Purchasing Commision's request that they make P-40s.

It was intended to be a fighter because that is what the British needed the most at the time.
 
NA 73 was spawned by the belief by the Anglo-French Purchasing Commission that NAA could build a better fighter than the P-40. With the Allison in the specification there was no hope of a high altitude interceptor until they finally developed a two stage/two speed supercharger in 1945.

The 180 gallons in the wings combined with good fuel consumption of the Allison provided the long (medium by later standards) range at medium altitudes but the early P-39 and P-40 were comparable to the P-51. All front line US fighters in 1941 had greater range than their Axis/Allied counterparts. The aerodynamic advantage was significant and prepared the path toward very long range when the additional internal fuel (85 gal) plus external pressurized tanks extended combat radius from 400 miles to 1000 miles.

The air superiority Mustang, in the shape of the first Merlin (NA 104 P-51B) equipped P-51, was the product of three parallel developments. 1.) the high altitude thoroughbred Merlin, 2.) pressurization for external drop tanks, and 3.) increasing internal fuel by 50% and still retain excellent combat performance. Operationally, all three combined for Big Week deep penetration target escort delivery - the fundamental key to achieving POINTBLANK objectives.
 

That might be a little simplistic. Major Kelsey, soon to be Colonel Kelsey started the ball rolling by sneaking funding into ferry tanks when ferry tanks were deemed too dangerous to flight safety - just before Pearl Harbor. That said, he was more aligned to the P-38 program management out of Wright Pat. The 'drivers' to jump start the P-51B were 1.) Major Tommy Hitchcock Liaison to RAF in UK who closely monitored the development of the RR/RAF Mark X/Merlin hybrid, and 2.) Major General Barney Giles who was Director of Military Requirements and Asst Chief of Air Staff for operations, and 3.) Major General Oliver Echols - Director Material Command. Both Mark Bradley (P-47 PM) and Ben Kelsey (P-38 PM) reported up through Echols as Flight Test also reported to Echols.

It is true that AAF wanted more P-51s and had run out of FY42 funding and that Echols Pentagon staff and including Kelsey from Wright Pat, engaged Kindleberger to get funding of the NAA Mustang line by execution of a purchase order for a fighter with bomb racks and dive brakes.

Col Mark Bradley was liaison to MGeneral Giles when Hap Arnold gave Giles the order and responsibility to have the P-51B operational by the 'end of the year' ater the February 1943 Long Range Fighter conference. Bradley gets some of the credit for helping NAA agree to a fuselage fuel tank (July 7) which resulted in first flight (July 21). God knows what the Mod looked like - and I have not seen any photos.

Echols was the lowest level guy in AAF that could approve funding for a 'new' aircraft.
 

Either way, a good decision, and I think ranks in the top 3 for the USA. I don't think they knew they were making a legend back in 42
 
Last edited:
Great info Bill! At times it seems that some folks lose sight of how complex the US acquisition system could be even in time of war. Many tend to blame the manufacturer for delays and lack of initiative, but more times than not, it's the customer inducing the drag.
 
US:
1. to adopt the use of long range bombers with a fairly decent payload
2. to finally come to their senses and give said bombers escorts
3. to keep pilot training cranking out large classes of both ME and SE pilots to meet or exceed the need.

RAF:
1. to keep the BoB over the UK
2. to understand the importance of radar and adopt tactics that take advantage of it
3. to adopt airframes that had a lot of room to be built upon ( the spit unlike the 109 )

VVS: to flood the skies with enough fighters, whether good or not, to overwhelm the enemy and win a war of attrition

Japan: to see the importance of carrier born ac
 
yulzari said:
Not to knock the 0.5" Browning but could the USA not have got the Hispano right? Just as everyone else did.
Click to expand...

Apparently the problem was a combination of several things, when translating the blueprints to US standards someone got the tolerances wrong and the chamber was slightly too long letting the round sit slightly too far forward. This led to lots of light strikes on the primer that put a too shallow dent to light the powder. US ammo either had a harder primer or the primer was slightly more recessed (I have read both) than British ammo adding to the problem with the light strikes.

The only aircraft to succesfully use the US Hispano was the P38 which had a recocking mechanism. The RAF even when short of guns and ammo didnt use the US guns, a quarter of a million rounds and several hundred guns were scrapped in Malta 1942 when they were short of everything.

The answer was obvious but for some reason it took the US years to listen to what their own ordnance experts and the British were telling them.
 
fastmongrel said:
Georege M Chinn wrote an official history of machine guns post war for US ordnance. If you scroll about half way down to chapter 14 page 561 there is a very interesting section on the Hispano.

HyperWar: The Machine Gun (Vol. I/Part V)
Click to expand...

Fascinating reading thank you fastmongrel.

I hope that the Hispano section is not as inaccurate as the COW section where I am fascinated to see that, when morphed into the Vickers S gun, he could only find 'reports' that it was fitted to some Hurricanes (and there was me thinking that it was a standard option for the later Hurricanes and used in North Africa and in Burma until 1945) and that the 57mm gun fitted to the Mosquito was an enlarged S gun and not a ROF 6 pounder. Was the option to rebarrel that to 75mm not the ROF tank upgrade but yet another enlargement of the COW gun?................... To be fair there was a 57mm series trialled but this was not the guns fitted to Mosquitos but an S gun successor for underwing use on Tempests.

I suspect that the good Colonel Chinn drew upon information he found in US records for his monumental work and was unable to research original sources in 1950/1 nor, as a USN document, could he have it checked by foreign sources. So the M2 information is probably good: but the Vickers S is questionable I think.

Reading the wider full document I noted the success of recoil operated machine guns (Maxim) with black powder cartridges. I had previously presumed that to be impractical. Thank you for that reference.
 
Your right it is a bit vague on non US equipment some of the European information sounds like he got it from a man in the pub. On US equipment I would say he is very good but it would need an expert like Tony Williams to proof read it. He should have used Google
 
When I was at Bell Helicopter we installed a 'Chinn inspired' 30MM to replace the GE 3 barrel 20mm but the firing rate was very close to the natural frequency of the Model 209J (AH-1J). We had a rear facing camera because I was concerned about that. Hovering just off the ground at Yuma - you could see the tail boom deflections with just a 2 second burst. We shut the tests down, check the tail boom attach for obvious stress - and came home the next day.

IIRC the 30mm was a derivative of the Mk 108...
 
The Tizard mission ranks high. The resonant cavity magnetron has been called the most important cargo to cross the Atlantic
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

A
Best WW2 Seafire vs. best A6M Zero
Replies
9
Views
1K
Shortround6
S
Best "general purpose" prop fighter also capable of best high altitude performance
2
Replies
31
Views
3K
PAT303
P
Making the best use of Jumo 211 series?
2
Replies
21
Views
1K
peceed
P
Best piston engined fighter of 1945?
7 8 9
Replies
168
Views
15K
PAT303
P
Z
Weather limitations in carrier aviation in the interwar and WWII eras
5 6 7
Replies
126
Views
9K
RCAFson
R
Menu
Log in
Register