Warbird Information Exchange

I seriously doubt that.

Why in the world would NAA care about, an aircraft they had built and already sold, pushing the P-51 back into combat?

That really makes no sense.

Shay
____________
Semper Fortis

Actually, in the Grand scheme of Military Contracts it makes perfect sense. The tooling for spares was more than paid for by that time and any company that could make money on "OLD" Technology would certainly do it so that their R and D Folks could move on with the new JET technology, which would be their future. You could also call back some of your work force that did the job for you in WWII and keep them around till such times as you went into production for the JETS.

The biggest problem for High Tech Aerospace Companies is keeping their people through the highs and lows of Government Contracts. I worked in my company's Government Systems Division for 9 years. When times were good, they were VERY Good! When things were slow, work was non-existent. In the 40's 50's and 60's they would try and keep you employed so you would not jump ship to another firm. In the 80's and 90's, it's layoffs and company greed over the safety and security of their work force.

Chris

Chris

I have no doubt that that is the SOP these days. But back then I can't imagine that there was much of anything that the USAAF/USAF needed from the North American, with regards to F-51.

With almost 16,000 being built, at the end of the war and the Mustang being operated up to 1957, the national stock system would have been well supplied and stocked with parts to maintain and operate the type for years to come.

In fact this was one of the reasons that the Piper Enforcer came about. By the late '60s and early'70s there was a quite a considerable amount of mustang parts still stockpiled. Piper had an idea for the PAVE COIN program, which was for a low cost high performance counter insurgeny attack aircraft. The idea was to design a new aircraft along the lines of the mustang which would be able to use the already avilable parts. Although a beautiful plane, in the end the aircraft was engineered beyond this requirement and was only able to incorporate about 10 percent original Mustang parts.


Regarding the P-51 H discussion. I would be more inclined to go with low number of aircraft being the deciding factor in it's not being used. But I do think the thunderbolt might have been a better choice, it would be nice to know for sure what it wasn't considered.

With the F-51s succumbing to the MIG 15s as much as they did. Is there any reason to believe the F-47s would have done better?

Shay
____________
Semper Fortis

The reasons the H was not used in Korea was a result of a number of factors.
Economic: RR wanted full royalties for continued production of H's engine (1650 -9). Lend Lease ended with the close of WWII. further, there were relatively few H's compared to D numbers quickley available, which used readily available -7 spares.

Tactical; Though rapidly nearing its operational life H was still considered a front line fighter and stayed active in the defence of US mainland via its role with stateside NG units. It was not removed from operations until mid 50's.

Maintenance: The H is so radically different than any other production Mustang, it has no airframe parts interchangability with earlier a/c. Spare parts definitley finite as compared to almost limitless parts availability of D.

Could the H been used in Korea? It should be noted that the Pilot's Handbook and other official USAF publications stresses its use in the ground attack role. Though a lighter airframe the H could carry a bigger external payload than its earlier bretheren and with more emphasis on deliverable ordenance. I don't think it was seen as weaker or lease suitable than the D at all. I believe it was simply a numbers thing and where best to use the aircraft.

As for any aircraft used in the ground attack role, I don't think the numbers shot down have anything to do with where the radiator is located or if indeed if the aircraft is liquid cooled. I think its just a very dangerous job. Someone should talley some real numbers of when P-47's, Corsairs. etc. were used and see if there is a connection to engine type, but don't forget ALL of Britain's WWII single engine ground attack airft were liquid cooled.

_________________
Charles Neely

While we're on the subject, does anyone have a multi-view drawing of the P-51H with cross-sections?

Ryan

_________________
Aerial Photographer with Red Wing Aerial Photography currently based at KRBD and tailwheel CFI.
Websites: Texas Tailwheel Flight Training, DoolittleRaid.com and Lbirds.com.

The horse is prepared against the day of battle: but safety is of the LORD. - Prov. 21:31 - Train, Practice, Trust.

AFAIK- the best P-51H drawing yet published apeared in the American Aviation hHstorical Society Journal. I have it somehere. That being said, there are some blatant errors regarding the cross sections particularly the nose/cowl etc.and the airfoils. If you need a copy contact me via e-mail.

I am currently revamping my B-D drawings and am adding earlier types. when I finish these, I hope to eventually do XP-51F and a definative H scale drawing. I'm working from NAA parts drawings reports etc.

Charles Neely
visaliaaviation@sbcglobal.net

_________________
Charles Neely