Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
It just dawned on me, what secondary designation do I give my wife's mini van with
all the four rear chairs out and a queen size mattress added? I mean in a PG-13 sort
of way so that we can keep this a family friendly site.
GrauGeist,
I agree 100% that the British didn't ask for a low-level ground support aircraft, but they new
that was exactly what they were ordering from North American when they stipulated the Allison
engine. That was their call and like it or not the Mustang was designed and accepted as a low-
level air superiority fighter. I also agree that they were hoping to get something along the lines
of the Spitfire. So was every other nation in 1940.
I still stand by my original post, probably dumber than squat, Jeff.
Well, we have difference in "successful" and "renowned".
For example the Lysander gained quite a bit of "renown" for it's missions as an agent dropper/retriever but with only a few dozen used for that role out of over 1750 built one wonders about the "success"
PO-2 was built in large numbers, somewhere between 20-30,000? how many were used as night raiders? A few hundred?
The Germans pulled He 46s and HS 126s from training schools and used them for similar night attacks, I am not sure this turned them into "successful" aircraft.
Shortround,
Only one engine in service in early 1940 had a significantly higher critical altitude than the
Allison...? What about the Daimler-Benz DB-601Aa in the Bf.109E-3 introduced at the end of
1939?
I am not trying to be combative in any way. What was, was. No amount of argument can
change that.
May God bless us all and let the truth (even if I am absolutely wrong) come out, Jeff.
GrauGeist,
I agree 100% that the British didn't ask for a low-level ground support aircraft, but they new
that was exactly what they were ordering from North American when they stipulated the Allison
engine. That was their call and like it or not the Mustang was designed and accepted as a low-
level air superiority fighter. I also agree that they were hoping to get something along the lines
of the Spitfire. So was every other nation in 1940.
I still stand by my original post, probably dumber than squat, Jeff.
Fastmongrel,
I agree, but that doesn't change the abilities of the NA-73 and that both North American
and UK were aware of those abilities at the time of delivery.
If I knew what was happening 18 months ahead I would be stinking rich and have Scarlett Johansenn keeping my bed warm.