Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
500 A-36s built yet popular history books seldom mention A-36 in combat. One of the few mentions I've seen and it's just a low level supply drop!
One might also check it's record. One source claims "The type flew over 23,000 combat missions, dropping 8,000 tons of bombs, and claiming 84 enemy aircraft in aerial combat. Only 177 A-36s were lost to enemy action, a loss ration of under 1%, very impressive for a ground attack aircraft."
Which seems a far cry from dropping supplies.
Only 177 A-36s were lost to enemy action, a loss ration of under 1%, very impressive for a ground attack aircraft."
there were instances in Italy where they were supposed to have carried a pair of 1000lb bombs.
I thought the P-51 had a larger radiator area to take advantage of the ram compression+diffusion ducting arrangement, though that would be more relevant to vulnerability from behind and not so much below.One 'theory' was that the ground gunners didn't lead the target enough and planes were more likely to get hit from mid-point to tail than from nose to mid-point. Another may be the shorter coolant pipes as you say although the coolant pipes don't take up a lot of room.
Is the issue the plane or the tactics?
Were P-40's dived from the angles and speeds that A-24's, A-25's, A-31's and A-36's were?