The Strategypage is a comprehensive summary of military news and affairs.
 News As History - November 25, 2009




New Strategy - Wargames at Discount Prices
1.Modern Air Power: War Over the Middle East
2.Commander: Napoleon at War
3.Close Combat: Watch am Rhein
4.Gallic Wars
5.Fast Action Battle: The Bulge

100+ Computer and Board games all with free shipping.
 
 
 
Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use
How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Fighters, Bombers and Recon Discussion Board
Sign In   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Ultimate piston Figher/Bomber, circa 1946, the P/F-82, Twin Mustang
RockyMTNClimber    9/6/2009 8:56:00 PM
This bird might just be the ultimate, WWII fighter. Except that it's war ended before it had a chance to fly against the Japanese home islands. Faced with the challenge of fighting a long range conflict against the Japanese home islands, the US realized the P-51's range and single crew status simply would not allow it to reliably reach most of the Japanese home territory with a single pilot/ single engine aircraft. The answer was to develop the P/F-82 which would allow two pilots share the 7-10 hour mission's, pilot and navigation duties.

The F82 became a hero of the Korean War, but if required, it would have been the "Mustang" of the Pacific theater.

Pretty interesting story.

Check Six

Rocky
 
Quote    Reply

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Sort in Reverse Order Posted

RockyMTNClimber    Killing the enemy and a nap on the way home....., a story of shared duty:   9/6/2009 9:00:09 PM
ht***tp://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/f-82.htm


The immense distances between islands in the Pacific Theater required a fighter type that could fly for hours between islands, yet have its pilot fresh for combat at any time. The P-38 only had one pilot, so a new plane was needed. North American?s solution was its XP-82 Twin Mustang, essentially two modified P-51H fuselages combined in a twin-boom configuration, carrying two pilots to share the tasks of flying and fighting. Although the Twin Mustang arrived too late for World War II, it joined the Air Force as the F-82 escort fighter and night fighter, and went on to a successful combat career in the Korean War.

As a double fuselaged P-51 Mustang, the post World War II P-82 in reality reached back to October 1940, when the P-51 prototype first flew. (The North American P-51 Mustang was developed in record time to satisfy British WWII requirements for a fighter that would take into account the early lessons of aerial combat over Europe. Among the aircraft's most notable features were a laminar flow wing section, aft mounted ventral radiator for minimum drag, and simple lines to ease the production that began in late 1941. A year later, the Army Air Forces adopted the P-51 for its own use. It ordered some 2,000 P-51Bs, a ground attack version of the Royal Air Force P-51 singleseat fighter.)

Since North American used some Curtiss P-40 technical data to quickly develop the YP-51, the P-82's ancestry may even be traced to 1937, when the experimental P-40 Warhawk was ordered. During May 1939, in competition with other pursuit prototypes, the Curtiss Warhawk was evaluated at Wright Field. This plane. was immediately selected for procurement under a first contract of nearly $13 million-largest at the time for a US fighter. The first P-40s (of 12,302 produced) were delivered in May 1940.

A special escort plane was needed. The ADO of 1942 responded to the AAF's 1941 air war plans that "urged development of special escort planes [even though] bombers for the moment could rely on current interceptor type models for support, especially the P-47. Since Republic's incoming P-47s also served as fighter bombers, these plans suggested employment of a modified bomber type for the escort role. The 1941 air war plans sounded a discordant note at a time of overwhelming faith in the bomber's supremacy. Moreover through the late summer of 1942, WWII experience tended to confirm that escorts were only necessary to support bombers past enemy fighters along the coasts of France and Belgium. Once the "fighter belt" was crossed, little if any German opposition would be met.

With even longer range than the latest P-51 then in production the new plane was to penetrate deep into enemy territory. This was a requirement learned the hard way. Two 1943 missions (17 August and 14 October) over Schweinfurt, Germany, had resulted in the loss of 120 B-17s (more than 25 percent of those engaged) and death or capture of 1,200 airmen. In the P-51's case, this had prompted the AAF to rush modification of the plane's fuselage to insert an extra tank that would extend range to more than 800 miles.

This P-51D, like the later P-51H and P-51K, closely resembled the P-51B and P-51C, both of which could carry 184 gallons of fuel internally, 150 gallons in external tanks, and remain in the air 4 hours and 45 minutes. In November 1943 (1 month before the first P-51Bs entered service with the British based Eighth Air Force), the AAF chose the P-51B and P-51C for escort duty over the battletested P-47 and Lockheed's slightly older P-38. This step was meant to stop the soaring bomber losses due to escorts being too short ranged even with extra fuel tanks. (The use of extra fuel tanks for longer range dated back to WW I, when it first proved a definite fire hazard. It was also long resisted on the grounds that interceptor type fighters weighted with fuel would be more vulnerable to enemy aircraft.)

The new plane's immediate role would be to escort the B-29 bombers used in the Pacific against Japan.

On 7 January North American presented a bold design based on the successful P-51. North American's idea of joining two standard, well proven, P-51 fuselages (complete with engine) was not unique. It was reminiscent of the Heinkel 111Z transport and glider tug, a "Siamese Twin" arrangement of two Heinkel 111 bombers, built by the Germans earlier in the war. In any case, North American's plane proved to be the sole American example.

This design promised range, reliability, and less pilot fatigue (the two pilots could spell one another). The AAF endorsed it at once. In fact, a February letter contract to construct and test three experimental P-82s gave way in the same month to an order for 500 productions.

The XP-82 made its first flight on 6 July 1945.

The AAF accepted this XP-82 in August and a second one in September. Both were equipped with Packard Merlin V 1650 23 and 25 engines. (British Rolls Royce type engines built in the United States) The third experimental plane, designated XP82A, had two Allison V 1710 119 engines. It was accepted in October.

The Air Force accepted a grand total of 272 F-82s (including 22 prototype, test, and early productions received by the AAF). Specifically, the F-82 program consisted of 2 XF-82s, 1 XF-82A, 19 F-82Bs (known for a while as P-82Zs and all allocated to testing), 4 F-82As, 96 F-82Es, 91 F-82Fs, 45 F-82Gs, and 14-F82Hs.

The Caribbean Air Command was the first to receive F-82s, 15 by year's end. Fifth Air Force was next, with one squadron (the 68th) soon flying F-82s out of Itazuke Air Base in Japan. Another squadron (the 4th) was in place at Kadena Air Base, Okinawa, before the Korean war. It was part of the Twentieth Air Force, which once had directed the worldwide operations of all B-29 Superfortresses.

Few of the 40 F-82s available to the Far East Air Forces in mid 1950 were combat ready. In July, Fifth Air Forces (The Fifth was the largest air force under FEAF) spared three F-82s of the 68th Fighter All Weather Squadron for operations over Korea, but the planes proved of little value except against known and fixed targets. In addition, FEAF's F-82 operations (like ADC's, ADC resumed major air command status in January 1951) were hampered by parts shortages and maintenance troubles. If Fifth Air Force continued to use F-82s over Korea, only 60 days of extra supply support could be expected. Hence, although a few of SAC surplus F-82Es went to FEAF, all F-82s were withdrawn from combat in February 1952. Despite limited use, the F-82s managed to leave a solid war record. They destroyed 20 enemy planes (4 in air fights, 16 on the ground). They scored the first aerial victory in Korea on 27 June 1950, downing a Soviet built Yakovlev-11.

 
Quote    Reply

RockyMTNClimber    Shared duty....   9/6/2009 9:03:16 PM

Picture of the North American F-82 / P-82 Twin Mustang

 
Quote    Reply

Heorot    Ultimate piston Fighter/Bomber, circa 1946 ? De Havilland Hornet   9/7/2009 6:16:08 PM

I would suggest that the Hornet was a better candidate for the long range role and the Sea Fury as the Ultimate single engine piston fighter

 

The De Havilland DH 103 Hornet was a British long-range fighter and medium range carrier-borne single-seater strike aircraft. Two 2030 hp Rolls-Royce Merlin 130/131 or 133/134 engines provided a top speed of 472 mph and a range of 4022 km. It was armed with four 20 mm Hispano cannon in the nose and had provision for 2000 lbs of bombs or eight 60 lb rocket projectiles beneath the wings.

 

Test pilot Eric Brown said of the Hornet

?In level flight the Sea Hornet's stability about all axes was just satisfactory, characteristic, of course, of a good day interceptor fighter. Its stalling characteristics were innocuous, with a fair amount of elevator buffeting and aileron twitching preceding the actual stall"...

"For aerobatics the Sea Hornet was absolute bliss. The excess of power was such that manoeuvres in the vertical plane can only be described as rocket like. Even with one propeller feathered the Hornet could loop with the best single-engine fighter, and its aerodynamic cleanliness was such that I delighted in its demonstration by diving with both engines at full bore and feathering both propellers before pulling up into a loop. Climb with 18 lb (8.2 kg) boost exceeded 4,000 ft/min (20.32 m/sec)?

 
Quote    Reply

reefdiver    RE: Hornet   9/8/2009 12:17:43 AM
But didn't the Hornet have only 1 pilot? The idea mentioned was to have 2 pilots to endure very long range flights.
 
I wonder if the P-61 "Black Widow" might fit the category, or is it too slow and large?
 
Would the A/B-26 qualify? It was used for attack, bombing, and as a night fighter as well.
 
 
Quote    Reply

doggtag    if you think the F-82 Twin Mustang was impressive,...   9/8/2009 8:24:39 AM
...then let's play the What-If card and suppose twin configs of other excellent fighters.
 
Though I'd never consider a twin Corsair because of how awkward a center wing section might be pieced together,
a Twin Thunderbolt or Twin Hellcat/Bearcat would've been impressive indeed.
Seeing as the later P-47 developments such as the XP-72 had considered cannon armament of 37mm guns, that could've been an impressive tank buster in the Korean War (something that Twin Mustangs needed unguided rockets and bombs for).
 
As impressive as many WW2 German secret aircraft designs were, it's surprising they never further explored such a configuration, other than the He-111 Zwilling used to tow heavily-laden Me-321 gliders into the air.
A twin Fw190 could've proven very deadly (cannon equipped with a combination of perhaps up to a dozen 15-30mm guns),
if only the Germans had the production facilities to build them in sufficient numbers, if even only several dozen.
Just such a circumstance over Europe might've brought the Twin Mustang into existence sooner...
 
Quote    Reply

Beryoza       9/8/2009 10:25:59 AM
Messerschmitt was working on a whole family of Zwillingen, based on the Bf-109, 209, and 309. Let me do some digging and I'll elaborate
 
Quote    Reply

sentinel28a       9/8/2009 3:42:39 PM
I'm not sure the twin concept was that big.  The Twin Mustang came about because of the need for very long-range escort over the Pacific.  When that was no longer necessary, it was turned into a superb nightfighter.  I honestly don't know what its manueverability was like--it's only combat was against poorly-flown North Korean Yaks and Lavochkins, or against Po-2s.  (I imagine it was still very manueverable, but I don't think it was as manueverable as a regular P-51.)
 
I have to go with "ultimate piston-engined" fighter as being the Sea Fury; you could even make a case for the A-1, given its longevity.
 
Quote    Reply

sentinel28a       9/8/2009 3:43:36 PM
I'm not sure the twin concept was that big.  The Twin Mustang came about because of the need for very long-range escort over the Pacific.  When that was no longer necessary, it was turned into a superb nightfighter.  I honestly don't know what its manueverability was like--it's only combat was against poorly-flown North Korean Yaks and Lavochkins, or against Po-2s.  (I imagine it was still very manueverable, but I don't think it was as manueverable as a regular P-51.)
 
I have to go with "ultimate piston-engined" fighter as being the Sea Fury; you could even make a case for the A-1, given its longevity.
 
Quote    Reply

RockyMTNClimber    Ground Breaking?   9/10/2009 7:08:06 PM
 
It is just possible that I was a bit too enthusiastic in declaring the P-82, Ultimate piston Fighter/Bomber, but in my defense, I did qualify it with the "circa 1946" part of the statement. I would remind Herot that the excellent RAF FuryII/Sea Fury II did not arrive until after 1947 and that the very interesting De Haviland Hornet only made it into limited production, but eventually morphed into the Mosquito. WWII's best light bomber and a terrific night fighter, without a doubt but never in contention as an air superiority fighter. Frankly either a Spitfire or P-51 could eat an Mosquito alive in a dogfight (if they could catch it in the first place!).
 
What I found interesting about the P-82 design and what I did not know until recently was that the plans for the P-82 were to crew it with two men, with two sets of equal flight controls, and fight it like it was a Mustang. Escort bombers, hit targets of opportunity on the ground, and secondarily act as an night fighter platform. That is remarkable. Two crew members who could trade off Pilot In Command duty. Imagine the benefits of having a second set of eyeballs and the ability to trade off lead in the cockpits based upon who might have the best overall view of the enemy at any time in a dogfight. There would have been some interesting doctrine evolved out of the use of this weapon in an extended conflict over the Japanese homeland.
 
Answering Sentinel's questions, the P-82 probably had a poor roll rate, that's a long set of wings, but excellent pitch authority (just like the P-38 did), way too much power for play in the vertical, and the ability to call almost the entire Japanese homeland it's own back yard. Not to mention two crew to share the entire flight profile!
 
I think the P-82 would have been very ground breaking if the war had lasted another 18 months or so.
 
Check Six
 
Rocky
 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

sentinel28a       9/11/2009 12:18:42 AM
One correction, Rocky--the Mosquito was the forerunner of the Hornet, not the other way around.
 
Quote    Reply

mabie       10/25/2009 6:36:40 AM
If an enemy fighter downed a twin-mustang, could he claim two kills?LOL
 
Quote    Reply

ens. jack    Black widow reference   10/25/2009 9:35:44 AM
I heard someone remark that the P-61 could have been used for the long range escort . It was by no means too large or slow. If I recall correctly, it outperformed even the Mosquito in all aspects, it had to win a fly off before it  became the lead night fighter over Europe. The reason it wouldn't have been used as a long range escort though, because it was too specialized. It was built around its radar set. It was also produced in ridiculously small numbers. Perhaps if it were produced in numbers closer to those of the Mustang, then they might have been used for such a role. Regardless though, I would count the P 61 C as the best piston fighter of 1946. (The C was effectively an A, but with the dorsal turret locked into the forward firing position, reducing instability and increasing forward firepower).
 
Quote    Reply

LB    Do335   10/25/2009 10:20:19 AM
There were many advanced prop aircraft under development that could have seen service in 1946.   The Do335 was a tad faster than the Hornet and was probably more maneuverable.  I'm not clear twin fuselage designs didn't have issues compared to other configurations such as poor roll rate.  Almost all the best prop fighters of 1946 would have at least flown as prototype in 1944 or earlier. 
 
Was the F-82 even the best twin seat night fighter of 1946?  Was it better than a Tigercat?  Note the F-82 specs do not reflect the night fighter version and the rather large center mount radar pod.  As a day fighter was it better than a Do335 and how well does a 1946 Ta152 perform vs say a follow on to the 1944 P-47M/N?    
 
Quote    Reply



StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2009StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy