Is the A-36 an Apache or a Mustang?

CraigQ · **Posted:** Fri Aug 03, 2012 6:34 am

JDK wrote:

Hi Craig,
Thanks for that! It rather looks like we are mislead by otherwise reliable sources themselves either disinclined to correct earlier errors (the NMUSAF) or themselves mislead (Bill Gunston and Robert F. Dorr). FWIW, we never refer to Squadron Signal publications. I did discuss several points with Juanita, but the name question was never raised.

Negative evidence is always tricky, I appreciate, and I'd point out Michael Vorassi's paper isn't evidence itself, it's the conclusions - the evidence being referred to within it of course.

It would still be interesting to see an A-36 manual where a name would be expected or where 'Mustang' occurs instead. Likewise that 1940 advert. I noted at the time of editing that the crew reports we used referred to A-36s, not Apaches, but put that down to the usual US preference for designation over name - but that was another clue I should've followed...

However a quick online look finds two contemporary references that support Michael's thesis of the name Apache being a NAA owned one, and redundant for the A-36 variant. A search on 'Apache' between 1939 and 1945 on Flight Global comes up with only two relevant pages (and one non-relevant).
http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/ ... 45&x=0&y=0

The relevant text reads:

Quote:

The Mustang, produced by North American Aviation
Inc., is one of the latest fighters to reach this country from
the U.S. This machine (the N.A.73) was christened the
Apache by its makers, and in the U.S. Army Air Forces
the type is known as the P-51 pursuit.

July 23rd 1942.
http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/ ... rch=Apache

Quote:

MUSTANG
NORTH AMERICAN AVIATION, INC. Single-seater fighter
in service with the Army Co-operation Command of the
R.A.F. and with the U.S. Army Air Force as the P-51; the
makers themselves call it the Apache.

January 21st 1943.
http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/ ... rch=Apache

The late dates are interesting - well on from 1940, but don't dispute Michael's rationale.

I would agree with Michael that there are a number of myths - and to do specifically with the A-36 version of the Mustang; we caught and I think nailed a few (those 'wired dive brakes' and the Invader from Lt. Walsh saga) but you can't win 'em all, evidently.

I will see what we can do regarding a correction for our book, and I would appreciate copies of any source material in the discussion if you can help - you can get me via PM or though my autosig. And again, looks like Jo Baugher's right again, and I withdraw my earlier comment! Thanks again, Craig.

Regards,

Hi James

While Michaels thesis is not perhaps a 'silver bullet' of evidence from start to finish, it does show that the basis for the name Apache for the A-36 was more media driven than factual.

As mentioned, I have yet to see anything NAA documentation connecting the A-36 to the name Apache as far as manuals. have looked over the years.

In the structural repair manual AN-60-3, the first paragraph of section 1 starts out;

"GENERAL CONSTRUCTION- The Mustang A-36A and P-51 series Airplanes are single seat low wing fighters" etc ect.

Will contact you offline further.

Best
Craig

CraigQ · **Posted:** Fri Aug 03, 2012 6:38 am

JohnB wrote:

James

An email is enroute with a copy of that wartime recognition book reference I mentioned earlier.
In another wartime book, this one a 1944 publication from the UK, it mentions the P-51 is "Sometimes called the Apache". It makes no mention of the A-36 at all.

CraigQ: It sems the NMUSAF has had plenty of time (based on your mention of Dave Menard, who has been retired from there for years) to make the change to delete "Apache". Since your conversation, they've changed the museum signage and added a website, and they still call it "Apache".

hi John

Michael Vorassi was the person who made the contact ( as I mentioned) and not myself. And if they still call it an Apache then I guess that is their prerogative. Doesn't make them right but still their prerogative,

Craig

ColFord · **Posted:** Fri Aug 03, 2012 6:40 am

Quite a number of the P51SIG members have participated in the process of "Mustang Myth-Busting" trying to ensure facts prevail over fiction.

As always, names for the A-36 proves interesting.

"Aircraft Recognition Guide" issued by the US War Department dated 15 October 1943, under the outline profile of what is definitely a Mustang Mk.I has the title:

NORTH AMERICAN P-51 "MUSTANG"
Single Engine Fighter
Dive Bombing, Ground Attack
(Dive Bomber version known as A-36 "Invader")
Span: 37 ft.
Length: 32 ft. 3 in.

Original document held in archives of the IWM London and reprinted as part of a D-Day pack they put out in 2004. So for some little time, the name "Invader" did have some official recognition. Also shows up in the commentary of US newsreel footage of A-36s operating in the MTO in 1943.

Also doing newspaper archive searches, I have found references to the use of the name "Invader" for A-36s in the MTO, for press reports in 1943. Source usually seems to be from official press releases put out by the US War Department. So as indicated in Craig's post and Michael's article there was a short period where the 'Invader" name held a temporary connection with the A-36, certainly much stronger than "Apache" ever was.

I think where the problem now lies with the "Apache" name in relation to the A-36, it has been repeated and included in so many publications (in error) that it has now taken on the appearance of fact because, if all the books say it is so, and Wikipedia says it is so, then it must be so.

51fixer · **Posted:** Fri Aug 03, 2012 7:54 am

As far as using a combined manual as the Sturtural Repaiar Manual for the P-51 and A-36 as a source for the A-36 name support it doesn't provide the proper timeframe for the name. It would have been written much later after the B, C, D and K had been produced.
The best reference for NAA sourced info would be Pilots handbooks for the A-36 with a early release date closer to initial production of the A/C. They will have revisions after that date.
Other info could possibly be located in the NAA newsletter that was sent around the world to representatives and military personnel.

Stephan Wilkinson · **Joined:** Wed Jun 01, 2011 11:23 am **Posts:** 699

Thank you all for a remarkably complete and apparently authoritative answer to my original question. I really appreciate it.

51fixer · **Posted:** Fri Aug 03, 2012 10:30 am

51fixer wrote:

As far as using a combined manual as the Sturtural Repaiar Manual for the P-51 and A-36 as a source for the A-36 name support it doesn't provide the proper timeframe for the name. It would have been written much later after the B, C, D and K had been produced.
The best reference for NAA sourced info would be Pilots handbooks for the A-36 with a early release date closer to initial production of the A/C. They will have revisions after that date.
Other info could possibly be located in the NAA newsletter that was sent around the world to representatives and military personnel.

The NAA newsletter was titled Weekly Service News. I only have some portions that pertain to the P-51D/K and one for the P-51B/C.

Taigh Ramey · **Posted:** Fri Aug 03, 2012 4:05 pm

For what it is worth this is a document I found at NARA a while ago from the Joint Aircraft Committee about the policy for naming of aircraft dated 1944. It lists the A-36 (P-51) as Mustang in the Bomber group and P-51 (A-36) as Mustang in the Fighter group. Interesting reading.

JFS61 · **Joined:** Mon Apr 30, 2012 12:44 pm **Posts:** 305

See that the Army's names for the A-24 & A-25 (Banshee & Shrike) aren't recognized either.

Flat 12x2 · **Posted:** Sat Aug 04, 2012 10:45 am

JDK wrote:

However a quick online look finds two contemporary references that support Michael's thesis of the name Apache being a NAA owned one, and redundant for the A-36 variant. A search on 'Apache' between 1939 and 1945 on Flight Global comes up with only two relevant pages (and one non-relevant).
http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/ ... 45&x=0&y=0

The relevant text reads:

Quote:

The Mustang, produced by North American Aviation
Inc., is one of the latest fighters to reach this country from
the U.S. This machine (the N.A.73) was christened the
Apache by its makers, and in the U.S. Army Air Forces
the type is known as the P-51 pursuit.

July 23rd 1942.
http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/ ... rch=Apache

Almost the same as
From "Aircraft of the fighting powers" Vol. II, published in Dec. 1941
"the North American N.A.73, which has the manufacturers name Apache and has been ordered in large numbers for the Royal Air Force under the service name Mustang I. In the United States Army Air Corps the type is known as the P-51 Pursuit."

wls3 · **Posted:** Sat Aug 04, 2012 10:54 am

This U.S. Army-Navy journal of Recognition dated November 1943
was just given to me a couple weeks ago.

barnbstormer · **Posted:** Sat Aug 04, 2012 11:31 am

Contemporary Wartime info is quite often confusing. For what it is worth, here is another strange listing for the Mustang. Source is "American Types For The R.A.F"
July 1941. (the Mustang First being ordered by the British)
If small print cannot be seen here, it says
"Maker's No.: NA-73; the Apache. U.S. Army No.: P-43"
Just passing this interesting wartime bit on, as printed. Draw your own conclusions (and
add your own exclamation and question marks..)

CraigQ · **Posted:** Sat Aug 04, 2012 11:52 am

Front cover of the A-36 pilots handbook. The handbook only refers to the A-36 as the "A-36A-1-NA Airplane" or the "A-36A" throughout the text.
The A-36A E&M ( Nov 15 1943/Revised July 10 1943) also refers to the A-36 as "Army Model A-36A-1-NA Airplane, A-36A or A-36A series Airplane through out.

CraigQ

Invader26 · **Joined:** Wed Aug 11, 2010 7:56 am **Posts:** 843

Shades of Messerschmit 109 designation where the Bf109 is referred to as the Me109....even in some German references.

My father was in the RAAF and worked on A-20's which he told me how they turned RAAF Bostons into "Havocs" when they fitted guns in the nose. Nothing official but that was from the horses mouth.

Who cares actually we weren't there!

k5083 · **Posted:** Sun Aug 05, 2012 4:14 am

The subcommittee paper that Taigh posted is interesting in a number of ways.

Note that in keeping with the one-word name policy the B-17 was "Fortress," in keeping with Commonwealth usage, not "Flying Fortress."

Also it is interesting that alternative Commonwealth names were sometimes acknowledged and I would be interested in knowing what the footnote referenced by the asterisks next to "Kittyhawk," "Dakota" etc said about them.

August

JimH · **Posted:** Sun Aug 05, 2012 9:35 am

sign says it all...

Warbird Information Exchange

Is the A-36 an Apache or a Mustang?

Who is online