B-25 Mitchell in the USSR

Back to North American B-25 Mitchell

The B-25 Mitchell in the USSR
By Aleksandr Akvilyanov

The first four B-25s, which crews from NII [Scientific Research Institute] and Headquarters VVS had flown in from Basra, Iraq, were at Kratovo airfield. These events occurred in the summer of 1942. 101 B-25s were delivered to the USSR through the Persian corridor in 1942 and 23 in 1943. Several men from these crews had been in the USA, where they had participated in a compressed period of study of the B-25 aircraft at its production facilities. Among them were pilot Lieutenant Colonel Romanov, navigator Lieutenant Colonel Molchanov, and flight engineer Captain Zebin, all of whom were assigned to commensurate positions in our division, 222d Bomber Aviation Division (BAD), for the purposes of assisting our flight crews and maintenance personnel in their transition to the B-25.

The 37th BAP (Bomber Aviation Regiment) of Siberians, which was the first regiment in the 222d BAD, had also just arrived and was stationed at this same airfield. The commander of this regiment was Lieutenant Colonel Katarzhin, the senior regiment engineer was Major of Technical Services Ya. P. Pristup, the deputy senior engineer was I. S. Petrov, the engineer for ESO (special electrical equipment) was Captain Beskorovannyy, and the engineer for armaments was Captain of Technical Services Poprushko. It should be noted that this regiment was a solid organization, a cohesive collective that carried out its military duty in an exceptional manner. It had later been designated the 13th Guards Red Banner Roslavl Regiment.
The ferry crews quickly familiarized us with the aircraft, its engines, equipment, and armaments. They warned us that the red handles, knobs, and levers were emergency control devices and we should better not touch them. They informed us that the on-board documentation from which we could familiarize ourselves with the aircraft was all present. They conducted demonstration flights and then departed. It was left to us quickly to master everything and commence combat operations with this aircraft.

We found that all the required descriptions, instructions, and schematics published by the manufacturer were in the on-board documentation, but in the English language, which we did not know. By all outward appearances, the documentation was exceptional. It was printed on thick glossy paper with colored schematics, sketches, drawings, and so on. The instructions for maintenance of the aircraft were particularly attractive. The text was accompanied by clear color cartoons, which were understandable without knowledge of the English language, and which instructively pointed out the consequences of mistakes and negligence of the pilots in the air and of mechanics on the ground. These visual aids, which often used humor as a tool, were always helpful and certainly deserved duplication in our own renditions of these instructions.

The caricatures were amusing but we had to master the basics. This was a difficult problem, the more so because the 125th BAP would arrive right behind the 37th BAP. Considering all the obstacles, the following method was chosen to master the aircraft. At our request, with the assistance of General Repin, the chief engineer of the VVS KA [Red Army Air Forces], a team of specialists of the New Equipment Bureau (BNT) of the Central Aero-hydrodynamics Institute (TsAGI), along with translators and engineers of the NII VVS KA who were particularly interested in new equipment, arrived at the division. Our maintenance personnel and mechanics from the repair base disassembled one B-25C down to major sub-assemblies in a hangar to permit familiarization with all systems and assemblies, and the best approach to all aggregates and assemblies of construction. A time schedule was developed jointly with the BNT team for the development and compilation, over the course of a month, of all necessary training materials-posters, system schematics, detailed sketches, instructions for flight and maintenance personnel, and so on in the Russian language. In turn, the leadership of TsAGI and NII VVS tasked their specialists who were participating in these efforts to exploit everything that was new that could be of some interest for our own [Soviet] design bureaus. It is clear from this and other similar accounts that Soviet designers and engineers studied every piece of military and non-military equipment they received through lend-lease as part of a rational and purposeful technical intelligence collection operation. We, in turn, requested that they produce materials for our training base.

In order to stimulate the work of the TsAGI team in our interests [222d BAD], we established the following understanding. If the TsAGI team adhered closely to the agreed upon schedule for development and duplication (in blueprints) of training devices, they would be fed in accordance with the no. 5 (aviator’s) rations norm. In the wartime Soviet Union, every category of person was assigned to a rations caloric norm, with front-line military personnel being at the top of this food chain and nonworking civilians at the bottom. Clearly, aviators enjoyed a ration norm of much higher caloric content than the workers from the TsAGI. If they did not meet the schedule, they would all be fed in accordance with the no. 2 rations norm. Viewed in hindsight, this may seem an amusing and, perhaps, despotic method. But in wartime conditions and our circumstances, associated with the time-sensitive preparation of the regiments for combat employment, this was an effective and necessary approach.

The problem of training was resolved, but the no less important matter of providing the regiments with the necessary ground support equipment remained. They had to have lifting devices, trestles and stands, devices to warm the engines, and so on. In addition, each aircraft had to be reconfigured before it was turned over to the regiment. As a matter of fact, in the USAAF a B-25 crew consisted of six men: two pilots, navigator, bombardier, radio operator/gunner, and gunner. Our crew consisted of five men, the functions of navigator and bombardier being assigned to our navigator. The navigator’s working space with his corresponding instrument panel was located in the compartment behind the pilots’ seats. Therefore we transferred all the navigator’s instruments to the nose compartment, where we also mounted our own collimator sight NKPB-7.

The fuel cells were not protected by fire-preventing neutral gases. We considered this to be unacceptable and therefore, with the assistance of the design bureau of NKAP (People’s Commissariat of Aviation Industry) Plant No. 156, a system was rapidly developed to vent spent engine exhaust gases into the fuel cells. At the same time we realized that auxiliary fuel cells holding up to 220 gallons could be installed in the aircraft under the wings and in the bomb bay.

Soviet aviation production facilities had their own enormous production schedules and difficulties. Therefore, in order to ensure that these modifications to the aircraft were accomplished in a timely manner, I personally appealed to the chief of the aviation department of the Central Committee of the Communist Party (TsK VKP(b)), who at that time was Major General of Aviation N. A. Shimanov. He listened very attentively to our requests and literally in my presence passed down by telephone his decisions regarding these issues. A large number of aircraft production facilities located in the western portion of the Soviet Union had been evacuated to Soviet territory east of the Ural Mountains during the first year of the war. The design bureau engineers and team of workers of a plant that had remained in Moscow very quickly developed and produced everything that was required for the reconfiguration of the aircraft. These same personnel, along with workers of the Monino repair base and VVS maintenance personnel carried out the reconfiguration of the regiments’ aircraft. The order was also issued for the development and production of auxiliary external (wing-mounted) and internal (bomb bay) fuel cells with the exhaust-gas protection feature installed.

B-25D30, Alaska

Now a few words regarding the characteristics of the B-25. This was a twin-engine, by American standards medium bomber with tricycle landing gear. It had a maximum take-off weight of 32-34,000 pounds (16 tons). Its engines were Wright Cyclone R-2600-13/29 twin-row 18-cylinder radials with a maximum rating of 1600 h.p. They burned only 100-octane fuel, which until 1944 was delivered by sea from the USA in 5-gallon cans! Imagine what kind of difficulties were experienced by our support personnel during the refueling of this aircraft from cans, especially in winter conditions. This aircraft differed markedly from Soviet-produced aircraft in the proliferation and complexity of its electrical, radio, special equipment, and armaments. It had a vast array of communications and radio-navigational gear, electro-mechanical instruments, and automatic devices. The remote-controlled guns and bomb-release devices were totally electrically controlled. The aircraft was well armed with paired heavy (12.7mm) machine guns in mounts (Bendix Amplidyne turrets) that we encountered for the first time. They had servo-electrical motors with synchronized meters and electro-mechanical boosters. Among the radio and radio-navigational devices, I should point out the SCR-274 transmitter-receiver, SCR-269 Bendix radio compass, and Norden bombsight. The engines had a system for reducing viscosity of the oil with gasoline [necessary to simplify cold starts]. The nose gear had a shimmy damper and a number of other innovations (for us).

Despite the number of the B-25’s technical advances, the first incidences of freezing temperatures showed that this airplane was not equipped for utilization in Russian winter conditions. We experienced massive numbers of failures of individual components of the aircraft: electrical instruments, armaments, frozen and burst hydraulic brake lines, the controls for raising and lowering the landing gear, flaps, and bomb bay doors. Oil coolers cracked, engines misfired because of spark plug failures, cracks appeared in the leads to the plugs, and the carburetors failed.

We also had many problems with the rubber fuel and oil cells, which were made from several layers of rubber with varying physical characteristics. The manufacturer had calculated that if a projectile or shell fragment penetrated a fuel cell, the middle layer of raw rubber would swell upon contact with the gasoline or oil and seal up the hole. However, with the onset of sharply falling temperature of the surrounding air, which happened frequently in our part of the world, the inner layer of the fuel and oil cells began to crack, and under the influence of the gasoline (and oil) the rubber in the middle layer ‘gave way’. Pieces of dissolved (jelly-like) raw rubber found their way into the fuel (oil) cell and, more importantly, plugged the holes in fuel and oil lines and the fuel filters. The replacement of these fuel cells was quite complicated, time-consuming, and backbreaking work, particularly when there were no exchange cells, and if the work had to be accomplished in cold temperatures or when snow was falling. Because of the technical characteristics of these ‘Americans’, in the winter our maintenance personnel as a rule experienced frozen and wind-burned faces and swollen and cracked hands and fingers.

Despite all the difficulties and the shortages of adequate quantities of ground support equipment for the aircraft, the order to send the regiment off to combat duty with these new aircraft was carried out on time. The first to execute their combat missions were the crews of the 37th BAP, followed 2-3 weeks later by the remaining regiments. The entire division was flying combat sorties and at the same time intensively continued to upgrade their technical service of the aircraft. The air and ground crews polished their skills in flying the aircraft and working on it at any time of the day or night and during poor weather conditions. It should be stated that this improvement continued until the end of the war, due not only to better mastery of and employment of the aircraft in combat but also to the receipt of new and more modern versions of the aircraft: B-25C, B-25D, B-25J, and B-25G. We also continued to receive combat aircrew replacements.

Before the end of 1944, our 4th Guards Gomel Air Corps, created on the basis of 4th Guards Long-Range Air Division practically had a monopoly on the demand for B-25s, and therefore we were keenly aware of the tempo of their delivery via lend-lease. Spare parts, aggregates, hoses, tires, engines, and other materiel were delivered to us in quite limited quantities in 1942-43. New difficulties were added to those already listed. These included the premature failure in winter of the outer casings of the tires and disk brakes, the constant demand for auxiliary fuel cells, and local manufacture or supply of specific engine parts, specialized ground support equipment, spark plugs, and plug wires. The pilots used the hydraulic brakes on the Mitchell just like the pneumatic brakes on their Soviet aircraft. This resulted in rapid failure of the friction linings of the pads.

Guided by support of the Central Committee in the form of General Shimanov, and commensurate directorate of the VVS KA, we appealed directly to the management of NKAP plants. Despite their exceptional war production obligations, these manufacturing enterprises responded rapidly to our requests. Representatives from the serial design bureaus came to us and we showed them examples of what we needed. When we did not have examples, we drew up sketches of what was required. In short order we established and qualified the technical requirements for the manufacture of all these items. After an agreed upon time, followed by inspection of the developmental examples, we began to take delivery of fuel cells, rubber tires, cranes, and a series of spare parts for engines and aircraft. It must be said that our improvised production fully justified itself and when mounted on the aircraft these parts were more reliable than the American components they replaced. It must also be noted that technical agreements signed by us as users and the representatives of the production facilities, by which serial production of all these items was realized, were executed without unnecessary ratification ‘at the top’, as was required before the war.

In the same vein, later we learned that bureaucracy was also not in vogue in the USA. From documents that came with the aircraft we learned that the wartime commander in chief of the USAAF, General Hap Arnold, issued an order that empowered a certain Major Brown to make decisions regarding the B-25 and to pass them down in the form of requirements to the manufacturer – North American, which was a lead supplier (general contractor). This major also issued instructions to military units who were using the aircraft. We considered this procedure to be fully justified.

As we gained experience in the combat employment of the B-25 aircraft, we discovered specific deficiencies in the design and construction of several of its components. Our own engineers and mechanics came up with corrective suggestions. We discussed these among ourselves and periodically sent them off to the chief of the import commission of the VVS KA, General Levendovich. And wouldn’t you know, two or three months later we would receive B-25 aircraft in which our complaints and recommendations, as a rule, were addressed. This responsiveness of the manufacturer is explained by the energetic actions of the corresponding representatives of the Soviet Union in the USA and the significant authority given to the above-mentioned Major Brown. This system that functioned without official stamps and countless authorizing signatures also proved itself regarding foreign orders. The war could not wait for rank bureaucracy.

Our RGK (reserve of the supreme high command) division conducted intensive combat work with all three regiments day and night, primarily supporting Western Front: 37th, 16th, and 125th BAPs. Unexpectedly, at the end of 1942 they assigned us to the 1st Bomber Corps of the VVS, which at that time was commanded by Major General of Aviation V. A. Sudets. His deputy for IAS (aviation engineering service) was Engineer Lieutenant Colonel A. P. Shepelev. Working conditions for the division were not improved by this change, the more so because some of the documents for the ‘top’ we now were required to sign at the corps level. And we frequently were summoned to corps headquarters to give reports on how we were working.

The corps specialists, naturally, were not familiar in depth with our foreign equipment. The 1st BAK did not have its own technical repair units and they were unable to provide us with technical advice or assistance at the required level to repair our aviation equipment. Taking into consideration the capabilities of the corps chief engineer, and in the interests of the required rapid response, as before we turned to the services of the VVS KA, to industry, and when special problems arose, also to the Central Committee and Comrade Shimanov. Strange as it may seem, these circumstances became more frequent with our transfer to the 1st BAK. If the delivery of new B-25 aircraft from the USA was more or less normal, then the situation in spare parts, engines, aggregates, and equipment grew steadily worse. The Americans had put us on short rations; choke points were experienced for the first time because of a number of our transgressions in the employment of as yet insufficiently mastered equipment.

B-25D30, Alaska

Now a few words regarding the ferrying of the B-25 from the USA. Early in the war, about to the end of 1942, B-25 aircraft were flown by American crews from the USA via the southern route across northern Africa, Syria, and Iran to an airfield at the port city of Basra, where they were received and ferried to our division. The first B-25s arrived at Basra on 12 March 1942. But this route was long and its traverse of a number of other countries was in itself a cause of difficulty and delay. In response to requests by our representatives in the USA, the ferry route was shifted to the north. The Americans flew the aircraft to an airfield at Fairbanks, Alaska. Here, under the leadership of Hero of the Soviet Union I. P. Mazuruk, was based a group of Soviet ferry pilots. These pilots flew the B-25s onward to the Krasnoyarsk airfield. Our division pilots received the aircraft at Krasnoyarsk and flew them to our division base. The multiple-stage northern route made great demands on Soviet maintenance personnel, especially in the winter, regarding receipt and inspection of the aircraft and all of its on-board equipment, instruments, emergency supplies, and so on. There were some instances when a portion of the emergency equipment (rubber rafts, rifles, down-filled sleeping bags, rations, and so on) was missing, and engineering-technical personnel of the division had to scurry about and locate them.

From all of this it is obvious that the serviceability of the aircraft pool and the combat readiness of the division’s units were entrusted to us, beginning with the ferrying itself and ending with the repair of the aircraft from combat damage in conditions of persistent shortages of parts and particularly of engines. At the same time, the command element of 1st BAK, aware of the division’s high level of combat readiness, employed it intensively. The division commander systematically assigned missions not only for bombing enemy strong points and airfields but also to work over the forward edge of the front line, and in daylight, no less. Because it was not a dive bomber, the B-25 was somewhat lethargic at low altitudes and the regiment began to experience significant losses, which were not being replaced by new aircraft. In a short time the number of combat ready aircraft available fell sharply.

We were faced with a difficult problem. Either we would soon become ‘horseless’ and after such gigantic effort to master this foreign equipment they would send us to the rear for reconstitution on other airplanes, or we had to find another method of employment. It was common practice in the Soviet Air Force to employ an air regiment until its combat strength in aircraft and crews was almost gone, then send it to a rear-area reserve base where the regiment was replenished in both crews and aircraft. In many cases this opportunity would also be used to transition the unit to a new type of aircraft. Division commander Titov called together the division’s command personnel to discuss this problem. By this time, during the ferrying of the aircraft on the long sections of the route, using American flight computers we had begun to figure out the most efficient flight regimes for flight range and duration. This was a slide-rule-type device common to all USAAF aircraft, known as a computer, air navigation, dead-reckoning. Analyzing these ferry flights, we came to the conclusion that if we mounted auxiliary fuel cells in the B-25, it could and should be employed as a long-range bomber. From this we decided that our real role was in long-range aviation (ADD). Our opinion was backed up by the experience of the combat work of ADD units that flew the Il-4, which were based along side us at Monino airfield. All the time we had been looking at their flights and comparing them with our own. Considering and analyzing all of this information, the commanders’ conference made the following decision: without advertising or reporting it to the staff of 1st BAK, conduct an experimental flight into the rear of the country to a specific range in a combat profile, with a bomb drop at the turnaround point of the route. Division commander F. V. Titov took upon himself the responsibility to clear the flight with PVO strany [national air defense] and we, the headquarters specialists of engineering, navigation, and flight services, took care of preparing the crew and aircraft for this experiment.

A flight route was selected to the target some 1500 kilometers distant with a bomb load of 2000 kilograms. The aircraft was outfitted with a locally produced 220-gallon fuel cell in the bomb bay. This covert flight was flown at an altitude of from 3000 to 4000 meters with an average cruise speed of 300-330 km/hr to the bombing range. The results of this experiment confirmed our calculations. Yes, the aircraft by its equipping and configuration was fully capable of employment, particularly at night, as an effective long-range bomber. The results of the flight were written up in a summary that presented the basic parameters of the aircraft and its characteristics and showed all the calculations and data that were collected during the test flight. Colonel Titov, based on our suggestions, made a wise decision: that I, as his deputy, would go to the ADD headquarters and attempt to make the case. It was obvious that the division commander himself did not have the right to do this without permission of the corps commander. And we knew that General Sudets would never give this permission.
Executing this mission, I arrived at the office of the chief engineer of ADD, Lieutenant General of Engineering-Technical Services I. V. Markov, and reported that my visit was unofficial and I was asked to deliver a report about our long-range flight. We believed that having done so would further enable us to suggest ourselves, the 222d BAD, as a candidate for assignment to ADD.

I.V.Markov smiled understandingly, and said that the essence, and not the appropriateness, of our actions was paramount. Give us your summary report, we already also know something about your division. He studied the report closely and asked several questions regarding the qualitative and quantitative indicators of the division. He suggested that we leave the material with him for the commander in chief of ADD, General A. E. Golovanov. Several days later the commander, division navigator, and senior engineer were invited to General Golovanov’s office, where we reported in detail about the basis of the data, how we obtained it, and what remained unobtainable. After this we received an instruction from the GKO (State Defense Committee) that literally said, 222d BAD (division commander Titov, V. F.) is transferred to the forces of Long-Range Aviation. The entire personnel component of the regiments and division command element received this pronouncement with great satisfaction. Thus, having spent less than three months assigned to the 1st BAK, as of 29 September 1942 we became the 222d BAD of ADD.

North American B-25 Mitchell / PBJ

B-25J

Built as a private venture, the NA-40-1 prototype flew in January 1939. The design was extensively modified as NA-62 after Wright Field testing and 1700hp R-2600s installed.

North American B-25 Article

Ordered into production in 19 August 1939 it took just fifty-three weeks after receiving the initial contract before the first prototype took to the air. The initial order for 24 as B-25: 40-2165 to 40-2188. The prototype of the B-25 was flown for the first time on August 1940. The first of these 184 B-25 Mitchell entered service in 1941.

North American B-25 Straight-wing, narrow tails 40-2165

Flying the B-25 Mitchell

It and the first few B-25s off the production line had wings with a constant dihedral from the fuselage to the tips. Only after the 10th one were the wings redesigned with the characteristic gull configuration. Its armament included four .30-caliber machine guns, one in the nose and three amidships, and a single .50-caliber gun in the tail. The usual bomb load was 2,000 pounds with a maximum overload of 3,600 pounds. Large scale production began immediately and early models were in service by the time America entered the war in December 1941.

North American B-25A

The B-25A was fitted with self-sealing fuel tanks and armor for the pilot. The B replaced the midship and tailguns with electrically operated turrets. Each turret had two .50-caliber machine guns. The lower turret was remote-controlled. 120 of the 1941 B-25B (NA-62B) were built; 40-2229 to 40-2242, and 40-2244 to 40-2348, of which 23 to went to the RAF/RAAF.

North American B-25B 40-2321

The C and D were provided with automatic flight control equipment.

North American B-25C 41-12800

The B-25C was the first version of the Mitchell to be mass-produced. Following the completion of the initial B-25, B-25A, and B-25B contracts, a number of contracts were awarded to North American for 1625 B-25Cs to be built at its Inglewood factory. At the same time, an additional contract was issued for 2290 essentially identical B-25Ds, to be built at a new North American plant in Kansas City, Kansas.

The first B-25C contract was approved on September 24, 1940 for 863 aircraft under the company designation NA-82. On June 24, 1941, the Netherlands government ordered an additional 162 aircraft under the designation NA-90 which were later built as the B-25C-5. Lend-Lease funds financed contracts signed on January 23, 1942 for 150 NA-94 (B-25C-10) for Britain and 150 NA-93 (B-25C-15) for China. However, these allotments were not followed in the delivery of actual aircraft.

The B-25C was outwardly almost identical to the B-25B. It introduced the R-2600-13 Double Cyclone engine with Holley 1685HA carburetors in place of the earlier Bendix Stromberg PD-13E-2 units. The Bendix carburetors were favored because of their easier maintenance, but they required more careful anti-icing procedures. De-icer and anti-icing systems were added, and a Stewart-Warner cabin heater was added in the left wing. A 24-volt electrical system was also added.

The armament of the B-25C was the same as that of the B-25B, namely a single 0.30-inch machine gun in the nose, two 0.50-inch machine guns in the dorsal turret, and two 0.50-inch machine guns in a retractable ventral turret. The ventral turret was often removed in the field.

The B-25C introduced a new type of tail skid underneath the extreme rear fuselage, a solid unit which replaced the spring-loaded tail skid of earlier versions. This type of tail skid was retained throughout the Mitchell production run.

On the earlier B-25s, the exhaust pipe coming out of the back of the engines extended all the way to a position underneath the forward leading edge of the wing. On the B-25C, the exhaust pipes were considerably shortened, and terminated immediately behind the engines.

The fuel was carried in four tanks in the inner wing panels, with a total capacity of 670 US gallons. In addition, a 515-gallon tank could be installed in the bomb bay for ferrying purposes, bringing total fuel capacity to 1255 US gallons.

Beginning with B-25C serial number 41-12817, a small transparent scanning blister was installed above the navigator’s station. At this time, the turrets were changed to Bendix Amplidyne type, and a carbureter air filter was added. Changes were made so that an additional 304 US gallons of fuel could be carried in auxiliary cells in the outer wing panels, for a total of 974 US gallons.

The B-25C-1 production block introduced under-wing bomb racks which could accommodate six to eight 100- to 325-pound bombs. In addition, provisions were made for a rack underneath the fuselage capable of carrying a short 22.4-inch torpedo weighing 2000 pounds. If the torpedo was carried, no bombs could be, although a bomb bay fuel tank could be used. The Mitchell was employed only in limited numbers as a torpedo plane against Japanese shipping. However, extensive use was made of the external wing racks, which could carry six to eight bombs of 100-325 pounds in weight.

Beginning with the B-25C-5 production block, the 0.30-inch nose gun was removed and replaced by a flexible 0.50-inch machine gun in the extreme nose and a fixed 0.50-inch machine mounted on the starboard side of the nose and firing through a hole cut into the side of the Plexiglas glazing. At the same time, better winterization provision were made.

The B-25C-5 production block also introduced a new type of engine exhaust. The B-25B and earlier C versions had a problem with bright spurts of flame being emitted from the exhaust, a dead giveaway during night operations. This problem was so bad that the Mitchell had to be restricted from night operations where enemy aircraft could be expected. In these earlier versions, the exhaust from each cylinder head was gathered by a collector ring, which directed the exhaust to the outside via a single pipe on the side of the nacelle away from the fuselage. Several different exhaust modifications were tried out in an attempt to alleviate this problem. The most effective arrangement was found to be a the replacement of the single exhaust pipe by a set of “finger”-type flame dampening exhaust collectors which ported the exhaust through groups of small rectangular outlets that stuck out underneath the trailing edge of the cowl flaps. These “finger”-type flame dampeners were installed on the production line beginning with the B-25C-5 production block. These were fairly effective flame quenchers, but they suffered considerable cracking and few B-25Cs reached combat zones without the replacement of these finger exhausts by full collector rings or by the later Clayton S-shaped stacks that were introduced on the -15 production block.

The B-25C-10 production block introduced an AM remote reading compass, provisions for additional cabin heating, and an improved scanning lens for the sig.

Beginning with the B-25C-15 production block, the exhaust collector ring was replaced with Clayton “S”-shaped flame dampening stacks attached to each individual cylinder. Cutouts and fairings were added to the cowling panels where each of the stacks protruded, creating a rather cluttered cowling shape. These protrusions introduced a slight speed penalty, but this was considered an acceptable tradeoff in view of the better flame dampening that was achieved. This feature was provided on all subsequent Mitchells. However, the new exhaust system was not all that popular with Mitchell crews, since it resulted in an increase in cockpit noise as compared to the old arrangement in which collector rings ported the exhaust to the outboard side of the nacelles.

At the same time, emergency hydraulic landing gear lowering devices were provided. The fuel capacity consisted of four tanks in the inner wing panels, with a total capacity of 670 US gallons. In addition, a 515-gallon tank could be installed in the bomb bay for ferrying purposes, bringing total fuel capacity to 1255 US gallons. Later versions had additional auxiliary fuel tanks in the outer wing panels. Later versions could also have 125-gallon tanks fitted in side waist positions, a 215-gallon self-sealing fuel tank installed in the bomb bay, and provisions could be made for a droppable 335-gallon metal bomb-bay fuel tank. Armament: Two 0.50-inch machine guns in dorsal turret. Two 0.50-inch machine guns in retractable ventral turret. One 0.30-inch machine gun in flexible mount in the nose. Starting with B-25C-5 the 0.30-inch nose gun was removed and replaced by a flexible 0.50-inch machine gun in the extreme nose and a fixed 0.50-inch machine mounted on the starboard side of the nose and firing through a hole cut into the side of the Plexiglas glazing. Normal bomb load was 3000 pounds but could be increased on the B-25C-1-NA with external underwing racks to a maximum of 5200 pounds.

Deliveries on a new contract (NA-96) began in February 1943 with the similar B-25C-20.

Beginning with production block B-25C-25, a “clear-vision” windshield was installed. Provisions were made for the fitting of additional fuel tanks for ferrying purposes. 125 gallons of fuel could be carried in side-mounted tanks in the waist position. A 215-gallon self-sealing fuel tank could be installed in the bomb bay, and provisions for a droppable 335-gallon metal bomb-bay fuel tank were made on every second airplane.
B-25C serial number 43-32732 was fitted with a special bomb bay rack to carry an airborne flame thrower. The results of tests with this unusual feature are unknown.

The first B-25C was accepted in December of 1941, with the 1619th and last one being delivered in May of 1943. The B-25C; 42-32233 to 42-32280, 42-32282 to 42-32383, 42-32389 to 42-32532, 42-53332 to 42-53493, and 42-64502 to 42-64901, were built as NA-82, NA-90, NA-93, and NA-94. The NA-93 and -94 were exports to China and RAF, respectively.

B-25 Mitchell in the USSR

The 1942 XB-25E and -25F were fitted with experimental deicing equipment. One each were conversions from -25C with new s/n; 43-32281 and 43-32282.

The G was the first model to carry a 75mm Army M-4 cannon in the nose. One conversion from a B-25C with new s/n, 43-32384, was completed in 1942 as the XB-25G.

North American B-25G Cannon installation

The B-25G (NA-96) of 1942 was a four-crew production model with the M-4 cannon. 405 were built; 42-64902/65201, and -64802/65201.

North American B-25G 42-65128

The 1943 B-25H (NA-98) increased its armament to four .50-caliber guns in an armored nose and two pairs of .50-caliber guns on each side of the fuselage. It was the precision bomber version of the H; the crew increased to six to include a bombardier.

North American B-25H

1,000 B-25H were built: 42-4105/5104.

The B-25J, built at the Kansas plant, was the most widely produced version, 4318 being produced 1943-45.

More than 700 B 25s were acquired by the U.S. Navy and Marines, as the PBJ. USN/USCG transfers of USAAF B-25 for use in mine-laying, harassing night raids, and bombing and torpedoing ships in the Southwest Pacific theatre.

The US Marine Corp operated B-25s as the PBJ-1C (1943 50 ex-B-25Cs; 34998-35047), PBJ-1D (1943 152 ex-B-25Ds; 35048-35096, 35098-35193, 35196-35202), PBJ-1G (1 ex-B-25G; 42-65031/35097), PBJ-1H (248 ex-B-25Hs; 35250-35297, 88872-89071), and PBJ-1J models (255 ex-B-25Js; 35194-35195, 35203/35249, 35798-35920, 38980-39012, 64943-64992).

North American PBJ-1H

The Royal Air Force received about 800, and the airplane was flown more than a dozen other countries. Top speed only reached about 270 mph but the Mitchell’s 1,350 mile range made it very useful.

The Americans did not use Mitchells operationally from the United Kingdom but based them with the 12th United States Army Air Force in the Mediterranean. However the British, Dutch and Russians received large numbers.

Mitchell II

Training aircraft were the AT-25, later designated the TB-25.

All B-25 models were powered by Wright R-2600 Cyclone 14 engine. More than 12000 aircraft built.

In April 1942 sixteen Mitchells, operating from the American aircraft carrier USS Hornet, made one of the most daring bomber raids in the Second World War, on Tokyo.

In 1955 large numbers of these wartime medium bombers were still used by the R.C.A.F. for a variety of duties. The target towing version shown here is powered by two 1,700 h.p. Wright R2600-13 engines.

B-25D

About 100 B-25Js, with glazed noses, are used for all weather crew training and guided weapon development. Other B-25Ds and Js were used by Reserve squadrons. TB-25s were in service with the U.S.A.F.

The Mitchell was used in all theatres and a total of 9816 were built, essentially unaltered in airframe and engines, but revised in armament, armour and fuel. There were 1619 B-25C built, and 1000 B-25J. A total of 9,816 were delivered to USAAF, and about 2,000 more exported to Allied air services. The USN version was the PBJ. The last, a TB-25, was finally retired from USAAF duty in Jan 1959.

Serials of North American B-25C Mitchell
B-25C
41-12434-13038 / c/n 82-5069/82-5673
B-25C-1
41-13039-13296 / c/n 82-5674/82-5931
B-25C-10
42-32233-32382 / c/n 94-12641/94-12790
B-25C-15
42-32383-32532 / c/n 93-12491/93-12640
B-25C-5
42-53332-53493 / c/n 90-11819/90-11980
B-25C-20
42-64502-64701 / c/n 96-16381/96-16580
B-25C-25
42-64702-64801 / c/n 96-16581/96-16680

Gallery

B-25
Initial model

B-25A / NA-62A
Max speed: 315 mph
Cruise speed: 262 mph
Stall: 90 mph
Range: 1350 mi
Ceiling: 27,000 ft

B-25B
Dorsal & ventral turrets

B-25C / PBJ-1C
Engines: Two Wright R-2600-13 Double Cyclone, 1700 hp takeoff, 1500 hp at 2400 rpm.
Wingspan: 67 ft 67.7 in
Length: 53 ft 0 in
Height: 15 ft 9 in
Wing area: 610 sq.ft
Empty weight: 20,300 lb
Maximum weight: 34,000 lb
Maximum speed: 284 mph at 15,000 ft.
Cruising speed: 233 mph at 15,000 ft.
Initial climb rate: 1100 fpm
Time to 15,000 ft: 16.5 min
Service ceiling: 24,000 ft
Range: 1500 miles with 3000 lb bombs.
Internal fuel capacity: 670 US gal
Ferry fuel capacity: 1255 US gal
Opt fuel later mods: 800 US gal
Armament B-25C: 4 x 0.50-inch machine guns, 1 x 0.30-inch machine gun
Armament B-25C-5: 6 x 0.50-inch machine guns
Normal bomb load: 3000 lb
Underwing bomb load B-25C-1-NA: 2200 lb
Max bomb load B-25C-1-NA: 5200 lb

B-25D Mitchell / PBJ-1D
Ventral bomb racks
Engines: two 1,700 h.p. Wright R2600-13
Span: 67 ft. 7 in
Max Weight: 33,500 lb
Max Speed: 303 m.p.h.

B-25G / PBJ-1G / NA-96
Length: 51’0″
Max speed: 281 mph
Cruise speed: 248 mph
Stall: 105 mph
Range: 1560 mi
Ceiling: 24,300 ft
Armament: 75 mm M-4 cannon
Crew: 4

B-25H / PBJ-1H / NA-98
Improved B-25G
Engines: Wright R-2600-13 Cyclone, 1700 hp / 1268 kW
Wingspan: 67 ft 7 in / 20.60 m
Length: 51 ft 0 in / 13.34 m
Height: 15 ft 9 in / 4.80 m
Wing area: 610,0 sq.ft / 56.67 sq.m
Empty weight: 19,975 lb / 9061 kg
MTOW: 36,047 lb / 16,351 kg
Max speed: 275 mph / 442 kph at 13,000 ft / 3960 m
Cruise speed: 230 mph
Stall: 105 mph
Climb to 15,000 ft / 4570 m: 19 min 0 sec
Service ceiling: 23,800 ft / 7255 m
Range: 2700 mi / 4344 km
Armament: 1 x 75mm T-13E1 cannon, 12 x .50 in mg
Bomb load: 3200 lb / 1452 kg or 1 x 2000 lb / 907 kg torpedo
Seats: 5

B-25J / PBJ-1J
Improved B-25H initially with B-25D glazed nose, later solid 8 gun nose
Engines: 2 x Wright R-2600-92 Cyclone, 1268kW / 1700 hp
Wingspan: 20.6 m / 67 ft 7 in
Length: 16.13 m / 52 ft 11 in
Height: 4.98 m / 16 ft 4 in
Wing area: 56.67 sq.m / 609.99 sq ft
Max take-off weight: 15876 kg / 35001 lb
Empty weight: 8836 kg / 19480 lb
Fuel capacity: 811 gal
Max. speed: 237 kts / 438 km/h / 272 mph at 13,000 ft
Cruising speed: 200 kts / 370 km/h
Ceiling: 7375 m / 24200 ft
Cruising altitude: 12992 ft / 3960 m
Wing load: 57.4 lb/sq.ft / 280.0 kg/sq.m
Range: 2173 km / 1350 miles with 3000 lb bombload
Armament: 12 x 12.7mm / .50 machine-guns, 1300-1800kg of bombs
Crew: 5

TB-25

North American NA-40

North American NA-40-1 NX14221

A twin-engined Attack Bomber was produced in 1939 and was available for export as the NA-40 series. A single prototype was built.

The NA-40-1 NX14221 was first flown in January 1939 by Paul Balfour, powered by two 1100hp P&W R-1830. It was re-powered on factory model NA-40-2 with 1350hp Wright GR-2600.

North American NA-40-1 NX14221

Designed by Howard Evans and team, NA-40B NX14221 crashed during Wright Field tests, but the shoulder-wing, twin-tail, tri-gear design eventually led to B-25.

NA-40
Engines: 2 x P&W R-1830-S6C3, 1100hp
Wingspan: 66’0″
Length: 48’3″
Useful load: 5780 lb
Max speed: 309 mph
Cruise speed: 282 mph
Range: 1200 mi
Crew; 5

NA-40B
Engines: 2 x Wright R-2600-A71, 1600hp
Wingspan: 67’7″
Length: 54’1″
Crew: 3-6

North American NA-21 / XB-21

Similar in appearance to the Douglas B-18 Bolo, but intended to achieve significantly improved performance, the North American NA-21 bomber was developed at the company’s Inglewood, California plant during 1935-3, the prototype being completed in March 1937 at a cost of $122,600.

North American XB-21 38-485

Powered by two 895kW Pratt & Whitney R-1820 Twin Hornet engines with F-10 turbo-superchargers, the XB-21 carried a six-man crew and armament comprised single 7.62mm machine-guns in nose and dorsal turrets, plus a similar weapon in each of the ventral and two waist positions. Short-range bomb load was 4536kg, reducing to 998kg over 3058km.

North American XB-21 Nose mod at Wright Field

Only the prototype was built, 38-485, as XB-21 Dragon, an unofficial title, with no appeal to the USAAC despite a second attempt the following year by Douglas to use it for their B-23, which led to the NA 40 prototype, which led directly to the B-25.

XB 21
Engines: 2 x Pratt & Whitney R-1820 Twin Hornet 1200 hp
Wingspan: 28,96m / 95 ft 0 in
Length: 61’9″
Max weight: 18144 Kg / 40001 lb
Useful load: 8171 lb
Power loading: 7,560 Kg/hp
Max speed: 354 kph / 220 mph
Cruise speed: 190 mph
Ceiling: 25,000 ft
Range: 3060 km
Armament: 3 x 7,62 mm mg
Bombload: 4535 kg
Crew: 6

North American NA-50 / NA-68 / P-64

P-64

North American engineers designed two variants of the BC-1 to sell to overseas buyers as fighters and attack planes. One was a single-seat fighter and the other a two-seater; both had five .30-caliber ma¬chine guns in the wings and nose.

Conceived as a low-cost fighter for use by smaller nations demanding comparatively simple warplanes, yet embodying such modern features as an enclosed cockpit and a retractable undercarriage, the NA-50 was a single-seat derivative of the NA-16 tandem two-seat basic trainer. Of all-metal construction with semi-monocoque fuselage, the NA-50 was powered by an 870hp Wright R-1820-77 Cyclone radial.

First flying on 1 September 1940 piloted by Lewis Waite, one prototype was built for the USAAF (NX25607).

North American P-64 NX25607

The first order, from the Siamese air force, was for 10, including both versions. Brazil, Peru and Chile ordered 49 single-seat fighters.

In January 1938, a contract was placed on behalf of the Cuerpo de Aeronautica del Peru for seven NA-50s, delivery being completed in May 1939. In Peruvian service, the NA-50s were equipped with racks for up to 249kg of bombs, and the type saw active service in 1941 during a conflict with Ecuador. The last Peruvian NA-50 was withdrawn in 1961.

North American NA-50

The company Model NA-50A P-64 ordered by Siam on 30 December 1939, was little more than a single-seat pursuit ship patterned after the Harvard trainer and developed from the NA-50 used by Peru. Tension was increasing at the time between Siam and French Indochina, and the State Department prohibited the transfer. The six examples of this strictly export craft were built at Inglewood and painted in Siamese markings, and were en route to Siam when the US Army confiscated them. The aircraft were diverted to the Philippines, where they were taken over by the U.S. Army Air Corps (41-18890/18899). They removed the armament, and assigned them to training duties at Luke Field, Arizona, designated the P-64.

North American P-64 8300

A widely-published report that the Siam-bound aircraft were caught at Pearl Harbour during the 7 December 1941 Japanese attack is inaccurate: the NA-50As were apparently embargoed in October 1940 and a camouflaged example in USAAF markings was noted at Luke as early as 16 September 1941.

Never really a fighter in USAAF service, the six P-64s were essentially base ‘hacks’ and possibly never received American serial numbers. A privately-owned survivor in civil registry as N840 was airworthy in the US as recently as 1975.

North American NA-68

One survives in the EAA collection (41-19085, NX37498, XBKUU, N686220).

Courtesy Don Stits

In early 1964, a North American P64 was ferried from San Diego to Flabob Airport in Riverside Ca. Once we realized it’s rarity, Ray contacted Paul Poberezny and a deal was made to acquire the P64 for the EAA Museum. I spent over two months working on the P64 to get it airworthy so Paul could ferry it to Wisconsin. Attached pictures are the P64 as it sat on Flabob Airport and after Paul finished the restoration (Paul in uniform with his pride and joy). Don Stits

Courtesy Don Stits

Gallery

NA-50
Max take-off weight: 2585 kg / 5699 lb
Empty weight: 2028 kg / 4471 lb
Wingspan: 11.35 m / 37 ft 3 in
Length: 8.21 m / 26 ft 11 in
Height: 2.67 m / 8 ft 9 in
Wing area: 21.93 sq.m / 236.05 sq ft
Max. speed: 475 km/h / 295 mph
Range: 1038 km / 645 miles

NA-50A
Engine: Wright R1820-77 Cyclone 9, 870 hp
Wing span: 37 ft 3 in
Wing area: 236 sq.ft
Length: 26 ft 11 in
Empty weight: 4470 lb
MAUW: 6800 lb / 3084 kg
Max speed: 270 mph at 9500 ft
Cruise: 255 mph at 16,500 ft
Range: 645 mi
Armament: 2 x .30 mg & 2 x 20mm cannon + 4 bombs underwing.

P-64
Engine: Wright R-1820, 875hp
Max take-off weight: 2717 kg / 5990 lb
Empty weight: 2113 kg / 4658 lb
Wingspan: 11.35 m / 37 ft 3 in
Length: 8.23 m / 27 ft 0 in
Height: 2.74 m / 8 ft 12 in
Wing area: 21.18 sq.m / 227.98 sq ft
Max. speed: 434 km/h / 270 mph
Cruise speed: 235 mph
Stall: 71 mph
Ceiling: 4260 m / 14000 ft
Range: 1380 km / 858 miles
Seats: 1

NA-50
North American P-64

North American T-6 / SNJ / Harvard Gallery

Back to North American T-6 / SNJ / Harvard

1964 South Africa – S.A. Army Pilots (marching) claimed the Airforce pilots (flying) could never make them hit the deck
North American Harvard 3*
North American Harvard 3*
T-6 Harvard 1774
UAS RAF
North American AT-6 Bore-sighting wing guns
North American AT-6 on skis
North American AT-16N Harvard IIB OO-DAF (c/n 106) ex- USAF 43-13195, Royal Air Force FT454, Netherland Air Force B-84
North American AT-6C Harvard IIA OO-GER (c/n 88-12327) – ex-Belgian Air Force H-31
RNZAF 1960s
RNZAF NZ1023
ZK-SGQ, ex-RNZAF NZ1003
Harvard ZK-ENB ex-RNZAF NZ1076, pilot Ross Ewing & Ross Macpherson – August 1985
Harvard ZK-WAR ex-NZ1092, pilot Trevor Bland
Texan N5797 as a Zero for the film ‘Tora! Tora! Tora!’
Bill Waterton’s T-6H N1363R was painted to represent Lockheed Altair VH-USB Lady Southern Cross for a Charles Kingsford-Smith movie. It is seen visiting Ballarat Vic in February 1987, before being registered VH-USR.This was a postwar Canadian production aircraft delivered to the Italian Air Force, salvaged by a US restorer in 1981
Tiger Moth NZ892/ZK-ANQ – pilot Stuart Tantrum & Harvard NZ1033/ZK-SGQ – pilot Matin Burdan
Harvard II
AT-6C Harvard II VH-NZH c/n 88-13908, ex- USAAF 41-33767, RNZAF NZ1051
SNJ-4 Texan VH-XSA c/n 88-9857, ex-SAAF 7667
AT-6G VH-WHF 2007
AT-6 captured November 1943 and delivered to the 2./Versuchsverband Ob.d.L.

North American NA-26 / BC-1 / T-6 / Harvard / SNJ

Harvard Mk.II

Derived from the 1935 NA-16 prototype, the North American NA-26 design was first flown in 1938. This aircraft was designated the Basic Combat Trainer, BC-1. The BC-1 (basic combat, type 1) had the same basic airframe design as the BT-9 but with a retractable main landing gear and more power. It was equipped with one nose-mounted .30-caliber machine gun that fired through the propeller and a second .30-caliber gun on a flexible mount in the rear cockpit.

The first one flew on February 11, 1938. The Edward G. Budd Manufacturing Co. was subcontracted to experiment with stainless steel in the wing panels to determine its structural feasibility in the aircraft. It had seven inches more wing span, larger tanks and a higher gross weight (by approx 155 pounds) when compared to the later T-6.

NA Harvard Article

In 1939, the U.S. Army Air Corps ordered an additional 200 of the advanced BC-1A type, and the U.S. Navy a number of the same type but designated as SNJ-1.

The Navy had been searching for a trainer for pilots destined to fly its scout aircraft, such as the Douglas SBD dive bomber, and it chose the BC-1. The BC-1 was ordered in 1937 to the extent of 41 aircraft with the R-1340-45 radial. Blunt wing tips and a straight-edged rudder characterised the BC-lA, of which 92 were ordered and the last six delivered as AT-6s after a change in designation policy during 1940. AT-6 orders covered an extra 85 aircraft, and production then switched to 1,429 AT-6As with the R-1340-49 engine and modified fuel tankage. The full production flood now saw 400 AT-6B gunnery trainers with the R-1340-AN-1, 2,970 AT-6Cs with a high proportion of non-strategic materials, 3,713 AT-6Ds with the original structure and 24-volt electrics, and 25 AT-6Fs with a strengthened airframe. US Navy variants equivalent to the BC-1, AT-6, AT-6A, AT-6C, AT-6D and AT-6F were the SNJ-1 to -6 respectively, of which 4,765 were delivered.

SNJ-1

The 1937 SNJ-1 was as the Army BC-1A with retractable gear and metal-covered fuselage. Sixteen very operated a 1552-1567.

A total of 2,068 wartime aircraft were remanufactured as T 6G.

North American engineers designed two variants of the BC-1 to sell to overseas buyers as fighters and attack planes. One was a single-seat fighter and the other a two-seater; both had five .30-caliber ma¬chine guns in the wings and nose. The attack version (NA-44, -69, -72) also had a flexible machine gun in the rear cockpit. The first order, from the Siamese air force, was for 10 A-27 (NA-69), including both versions.

North American A-27

Brazil, Peru and Chile ordered 49 single-seat fighters. Brazil received 30 NA-72 with P&W R-1340 in 1940 and one armed prototype NA-44 went to the RCAF in 1940.

Siam never received any of the aircraft, however. Tension was increasing at the time between Siam and French Indochina, and the State Department prohibited the transfer. The aircraft were diverted to the Philippines, where they were taken over by the U.S. Army Air Corps, re-designated A-27 (41-18890/18899), where they were destroyed in Japanese bombings during Dec 1941. Several A-27s saw action in the Philippines on December 8, 1941, against invading Japanese forces. The single-seat version was stripped of armament, returned to the States for fighter-pilot training and designated the P-64.

The Navy later requested several modifications to the SNJ-1, including a more powerful engine. That changed the designation to SNJ-2.

Sixty-one 1940 SNJ-2 were operated as 2008-2043 and 2548-2572.

North American SNJ-2 2040

The 1940 AT-6 (NA-59) first flew on 6 February 1930 and 85 were built, plus 9 from BC-1B (40-717/725, -2080/2164).

A total of 1549 of the 1941 AT-6A (NA-77) were built: 41-148/785, -15824/16228, 16259/16403, -16439/16457, 41-16474/16578, -16616/16653, -16693/16778, -16821/16878, -16924/16939, -16994/17033.

North American AT-6A 41-16087 from Mather Field at Moffett Field CA.

The Air Corps asked for other modifications, and the AT¬6A/SNJ-3 emerged as the standard advanced single-engine trainer for both services. (It was used for basic pilot training and even for primary training toward the end of World War II, when Nationalist Chinese students were sent to the States for pilot instruction.)

North American SNJ-3

270 SNJ-3 were produced in 1941 (6755-7024) plus 296 AT-6 obtained from the USAAF (01771-01976, and 05435-05526). Fifty-five SNJ-3 were converted to SNJ-3C deck-landing trainers.

The SNJ-4 (NA-88) of 1942 were the same as USAAF AT-6C, 2,400 produced (05527-05674, 09817-10316, 26427-27851, and 51350-51676). 85 were converted in 1942 to SNJ-4C deck-landing trainers.

North American SNJ-4

The SNJ-5 (NA-88) of 1943 were 1,573 USAAF AT-6D transferred to the USN (43638-44037, 51677-52049, 84819-85093, and 90582-91101). Some were converted to SNJ-5C deck-landing trainers.

North American SNJ-5 84968

The 411 SNJ-6 of 1944 were from USAAF production of AT-6F (111949-112359).

In 1952 earlier models were modernised to T-6G standards as SNJ-7s. The SNJ-7B was an armed version.

AT-6A SE-CHP

To accommodate orders that amounted to more than 600 aircraft when war began, North American opened a new plant in Dallas in 1942 to supplement the aircraft being turned out in the Los Angeles area.

The Dallas plant became the main point of manufacture – hence the name ‘Texan.” New model suffixes were assigned as minor changes were made. To save alu¬minum, some of the AT-6/SNJs were turned out with plywood fuselages and internal stringers made from spruce. The Navy added tail hooks for carrier train¬ing. Bomb racks and belly fuel tanks were also added.

A number of Texans were either built or modified for experimental purposes. The Army Air Forces ordered one XAT-6E in 1944 with an in-line, air-cooled engine installed. On test flights it reached a top speed of 244 mph and climbed to 30,000 feet – 50 mph faster and 6,000 feet higher than the Texans flying with radial en¬gines. Unfortunately, the in-line engine proved to be a maintenance headache, and only one XAT-6E was built.
Another experimental Texan was des¬ignated the ET-6F in 1950, when a swivel landing gear was installed to assist in making crosswind landings. The Northrop Co. experimented with automatic pilots in the T-6. Cameras were installed aft of the rear seat in a few aircraft for aerial photography; flares were added to make photography possible at night as well.

When the British realized they could not build enough trainers in the United Kingdom at the beginning of World War II, they ordered the BC-1, which they designated the Harvard Mark I. A single British machine gun for the right wing was specified, as well as British instru¬ments and a circular control stick called a “spade.” The Canadians also ordered the Mark I, and one variant was labeled the AT-16. Since British engine mixture controls were reversed as far as Americans and Canadians were concerned, a warn-ing plaque was installed that read: “This airplane has British carburetor mixture control. Lean—forward. Rich—back.”

The Harvard II was the equivalent to the USAAC’s AT-6A. The Harvard IIA was the equivalent to the USAAC’s AT-6C. Some were overhauled to a Mk.II* standard. This differed from the Mk.II in having a plywood and low alloy steel rear fuselage instead of the previous light alloy monocoque construction. This was said to save over 1200 lb of aluminium. The Mk.IIB was a version of the Mk.II built in Canada by the Noorduyn Aircraft Company, and known in the USA as the AT-16. The Harvard Mk.III reverted to all metal construction and had a 24volt electrical system. Two hundred and thirty five AT-6s were operated by Sweden and designated Sk-16.

The Harvard II (AT-6C), North American NA-16-1A, or North American NA-16-3 has a low-wing cantilever monoplane, the wing section varies from N.A.C.A. 2215 to 2209, in five sections, consisting of centre-section, two outer-sections and two wing-tips. The centre-section has parallel chord and thickness, outer-sections have back-swept leading-edge and straight trailing-edge and taper in thickness. Single-spar structure with spaced ribs and covered with a stressed aluminum alloy skin. Dynamically balanced ailerons, with aluminum-alloy frames and fabric covering. Split trailing-edge flaps inside ailerons and under fuselage. The fuselage is a welded chrome-molybdenum steel-tube framework with fittings integrally welded. The fuselage is constructed in four sections, engine-mounting, control-section, tail-section and monocoque bottom aft of wing. All sections bolted together. Side covering in form of fabric-covered aluminum-alloy frames bolted to fuselage. Cowling all metal and quickly removable.

Fitted with a cantilever tailplane and fin of metal, with sheet covering, the rudder and elevators have light-alloy frames, with fabric covering. Right and left sides of tail-plane and elevators are interchangeable. Metal surfaces are removable by externally-accessible bolts for internal inspection. Non-reversible trimming tabs on elevators. Fixed tab, adjustable of ground only, on rudder.

The undercarriage consists of two cantilever oleo struts, with the upper ends built into the ends of the centre-section by sleeves held by four bolts. The right and left units are interchangeable. Each unit enclosed in duralumin fairing, which does not enclose the streamline wheel, so that it is accessible for brake adjustment or removal. Hydraulically-operated wheel-brakes. Oleo-sprung steerable tail-wheel.

Power is from a Pratt & Whitney 600 hp radial, 9 cylinder or one Pratt & Whitney Wasp S3H1 nine-cylinder radial air-cooled engine, developing 550 hp at 5,000 ft (1,525 m) on welded chrome-molybdenum steel-tube mounting. NACA cowling. Fuel tanks (two), of welded aluminum alloy, in centre-section, one on each side of fuselage. Normal fuel capacity 104 U.S. gallons. Oil tank (9.5 U.S. gallons) in engine compartment and detachable with it. Alternative engines are the Pratt & Whitney Wasp R-1340-S1H1, Pratt & Whitney Wasp-Junior R-985 or the Wright Whirlwind R-975-E3.

Accommodation: Tandem cockpits, with sliding enclosures. Dual controls, with rear control quickly removable. Equipment may be installed to suit machine for training, fighting or light bombing. Provision made for installation of two fixed guns firing forward through airscrew and one gun on a movable mounting in back cockpit, bomb-rack below fuselage.

When it took over Noorduyn Aviation in 1946, CCF also acquired the production rights to the North American AT 16 Harvard trainer. Between 1941 and 1945 Noorduyn produced Harvard IIBs as advanced trainers, used to allow those who had become proficient on elementary trainers to graduate to single engined operational aircraft. At the peak of production 83 Harvards per month were leaving the Noorduyn works and by the end of the war 2,800 had been completed, most being used by the RAF and RCAF, but some going as far afield as India, Australia and New Zealand.

North American Harvard 3*

In 1951, after a gap of six years, the Harvard was again put into production when Can Car’s Fort William plant began to turn out the Harvard 4 to be used in training the pilots who might be needed in the Korean War or its aftermath. In total, 555 were built between 1951 and 1955, initially for the RCAF, but later for the USAF where they were designated T 6J. Some of the T 6Js were subsequently released for service with the West German Air Force.

Harvard 4 / T.6J

The North American Aviation Co. granted rights to the Australians to man¬ufacture the two-seat BC-1, which they called the “Wirraway,” a native word meaning “challenge.” It had twin ma¬chine guns in the nose, a flexible gun in the rear cockpit and could carry up to 500 pounds of bombs on underwing racks. The first Wirraways were rolled out in 1939. They saw heavy service during the first days of World War II as interceptors, fighter-bombers and long-range patrol aircraft, as well as observation craft.

After World War II, the U.S. Air Force changed many of its plane designations, and the “A” was dropped from the Texan’s identification. The T-6s were extremely active during the Korean War as spotter planes. Their pilots were officially known as forward air controllers, but their planes were popularly called “Mosqui¬toes,” since they harassed the Communist forces and specialized in locating enemy targets and guiding fighter-bombers in for airstrikes. They were also flown for air rescues and leaflet-dropping missions. Several were used as interceptors against the North Koreans, who were flying Soviet-made Polikarpov PO-2 night raiders. Numbers of T-6G’s were being converted to LT-6G liaison aircraft by Ternco Corp in 1955. When remanufactured T-6s ar¬rived with improved radios, underwing bomb and smoke-rocket racks and two pod-mounted machine guns, they were designated LT-6Gs. By the end of hostil¬ities, the LT-6Gs had flown more than 40,000 sorties and logged about 117,500 combat hours.

The first Harvard Mk II used by the RCAF was delivered to Camp Borden in the summer of 1940. It was an anglicized version of the AT-6A, the differences being a lengthened exhaust stack, a fixed rear canopy section, an altered instrument panel and a British style control column. The Mk II was also fitted with the capability to hold a .303 calibre air operated machine gun on the starboard wing and a cine-camera in the port wing, with a gun-sight for the front cockpit. The plane was equipped with hardpoints under the wings in order to carry 8 practice bombs. The N.A. Harvard Mk.II was one of the most important single engine training aircraft of the British Commonwealth Air Training Plan. It was known as “the pilot maker” because of its important role in preparing pilots for combat.

After World War 2 the Mk.II Harvard was relegated to armament training and reserve squadron use, as the more modern Mk.IV came along. At the end of WW2, Harvard Mk.II’s were used for Naval training in Nova Scotia. The approval for a Canadian Fleet Air Arm was not given by the government of the day until 1946. In January of 1947 Harvard Mk.II’s began arriving in Dartmouth Nova Scotia for their stint as training aircraft for the newly formed Canadian Naval Air Arm. Much of the training was on gunnery exercises to prepare pilots for the deflection shots necessary with the gyro gun-sight of the Supermarine Seafire. Harvard Mk.II’s were the planes chosen again for the training task. The course was similar to the one used to train RCAF pilots, with the exception of gunnery and formation training which was done on Seafires.

In December 1939, the RNZAF was allocated 105 Harvards, but the first aircraft didn’t arrive until March 1941. The Harvard served in a wide variety of roles with the RNZAF, including flight training schools (2 FTS at Woodbourne being the biggest user), fighter squadrons, fighter operational training units, army co operation squadrons, the Central Flying School and the Fighter Gunnery School. The RNZAF operated Harvard II, IIA, IIB and III as NZ901 to NZ1102 until 1977.

After World War II, T-6s and SNJs were supplied to NATO nations such as France, West Germany, Italy and Bel¬gium. Latin American pilots ferried many of the trainers home after they completed their training in the United States. For use in brush-fire wars, Texans were remanufactured with rocket and bomb racks and designated FT-6Gs. They were sent to such nations as Spain, Por¬tugal, France and Brazil for counterin¬surgency missions.

The Texan was phased out of U.S. Air Force and Navy inventories in 1958, but a number of T-6s were flown by the Civil Air Patrol into the 1960s. Although the American inventory during the Vietnam War showed no T-6s, armed Texans were flown briefly by Laotian and Cambodian pilots against Viet Cong targets along the Ho Chi Minh Trail.

A total of 17,096 of all models were built by North American in California, Texas, Montreal (by Noorduyn), Fort Frances, Ontario (by Canadian Car and Foundry), and in Australia as the Wirraway.

The aircraft is stressed for aerobatics and is capable of most maneuvers with the exception of sustained inverted flight, snap rolls, outside loops, and inverted spins.

The T-6/SNJ/Harvard aircraft have been produced in a number of model designations. Most of the changes are small. Fuel Capacity – The T-6 has 110 gallons on all models except the T-6G and Harvard MK IV, which have 140 gallons. With a cruise fuel burn of 30 GPH, 110 gallons is adequate for most operators. Tail wheel steering/locking systems- The Navy type is lockable only. The pilot is able to lock the tailwheel to a straight-ahead position for take-off and landing. Steering is accomplished by differential braking. The steerable type system (also called P-51 type) uses an inter-connect from the rudder pedals to the tailwheel steering system. This system allows the pilot to steer the aircraft by use of the rudder pedals. Full forward stick movement unlocks this system. When unlocked the tailwheel becomes full swivel and steering is again by differential braking. Either of these systems is adequate for most civilian operators. Hydraulic system – The original system incorporated a pilot controlled bypass. In order to use the gear or flaps, a small button must first be pushed before activation of the system. This button pressurizes the system and a time delay circuit depressurizes the system after approximately 45 seconds. Later aircraft (T6-G/Harvard MK-4) had a modified linkage that engaged the system automatically. For practical purposes, either system is satisfactory. There are several variations in other areas such as instrument panel layout and cockpit glass. Many aircraft have been modified to incorporate various combinations of the above systems.

Variation:
Stroop AT-6
Bacon Super T-6

Gallery

Specifications:

BC-1A
Engine: R-1340-45
Wingspan: 47 ft
Length: 27 ft
Max speed: 209 mph @ 5000 ft

A-27
Engine: 775hp Wright R-1820F
Wingspan: 42’0″
Length: 29’0″
Useful load: 1486 lb
Max speed: 250 mph
Cruise speed: 220 mph
Stall: 70 mph
Ceiling: 28,000′
Armament: 2x .30 nose guns and one flexible .30 rear cockpit
Bombload: 4 x 100 lb bombs underwing

AT-6A (NA-77)
Engine: Pratt & Whitney R-1340-49 Wasp, 600 hp
Wingspan: 42’0″
Length: 29’0″
Useful load: 1255 lb
Max speed: 230 mph / 205 kt
Cruise: 120-145 kt
Range: 630 mi
Ceiling: 24,200′
Seats: 2

Harvard II / AT-6C / NA-16-1A / NA-16-3
Span 42 ft (12.8 m)
Length 27 ft. 5 3/16 in (8.38 m)
Height 8 ft 9 in (2.67 m)
Wing area 248 sq. ft (23 sq. m)
Weight empty 3,340 lb (1,515 kg)
Fuel and oil: 695 lb (315 kg)
Armament 141 lb (64 kg)
Weight loaded 4,556 lbs (2,065 kg)
Wing loading 185 lbs./sq. ft. (90 kg./sq. m)
Power loading 8.3 lbs./h.p. (3.71 kg./hp)
Speed at sea level 200 m.p.h. (324 kph)
Cruising speed at 12,000 ft. (3,660 m.) 185 mph. (298 kph)
Landing speed 61 mph (98 kph)
Maximum rate of climb 1,800 fpm (590 m/min.)
Service ceiling 26,000 ft. (7,930 m.)
Cruising range 680 miles (1,102 km)

T 6 / AT-6 Texan / Harvard
Engine: Pratt & Whitney Wasp R-1340 AN1, 542 hp
Length: 29.003 ft / 8.84 m
Height: 11.483 ft / 3.5 m
Wingspan: 41.995 ft / 12.8 m
Wing area: 252.954 sq.ft / 23.5 sq.m
Max take off weight: 5578.7 lb / 2530.0 kg
Weight empty: 4101.3 lb / 1860.0 kg
Max. weight carried: 1477.4 lb / 670.0 kg
Redline speed: 230 mph / 205 kt
Max. speed: 181 kt / 335 km/h
Initial climb rate: 1358.27 ft/min / 6.9 m/s
Service ceiling : 21654 ft / 6600 m
Ceiling: 24,200′
Wing load: 22.14 lb/sq.ft / 108.0 kg/sq.m
Range: 405 nm / 750 km
Endurance: 3 h
Crew: 2
Armament: 2 MG
Loading: +5.67 / – 2.33G

T-6G
Engine: Pratt and Whitney R 1340 AN 1, 550 hp
Max speed, 212 mph (341 kph) at 5,000 ft (1524 m)
Cruise, 146 mph (235 kph)
Initial climb, 1,643 fpm. (8.3 m/sec)
Ceiling, 24,750ft (7 544 m)
Range, 870 mls (1400 km)
Empty weight, 4,271 lb (1937 kg)
Loaded weight, 5617 lb (2548 kg)
Span, 42 ft 0.25 in (12.8 m)
Length 29 ft 6 in (9 m)
Wing area 253.7 sq.ft (23.56 sq.m)

Harvard II
Engine: P&W R-1340-AN 1 Wasp, 550 hp
Span: 42ft (12.8m)
Length: 29ft(8.8m)
Max wt: 5617 lb (2547kg)
Speed: 212mph (341 kph)
Range: 870 sm(1400 km).

Harvard IIA
Engine: P&W R-1340-AN 1 Wasp, 550 hp.

Noorduyn Harvard Mk IIB
Engine: 600 hp Pratt & Whitney Wasp R-1340-AN-1
Maximum speed: 212 mph (341 km/h)
Service ceiling: 21,500 ft (6553 m)
Empty weight: 4,158 lb (1,886 kg)
Loaded weight: 5,617 lb (2,548 kg)
Span: 42 ft (12.8 m)
Length: 29 ft (8.8 m)
Height: 11 ft 8 in (3.5 m)
Wing area: 253.7 sq ft (23.6 sq m)

Harvard IIB
Engine: P&W R-1340-AN 1 Wasp, 550 hp.

Harvard III
Engine: P&W R-1340-AN 1 Wasp, 550 hp.

Harvard IV
Engine : Pratt & Whitney R-1340-AN-1, 600 hp
Wing Span : 42 ft 4 in
Length : 27 ft 11 in
Speed : 180 Mph (289 km/h)

Canadian Car and Foundry Harvard IV
Engine: Pratt & Whitney R-1340AN-1, 600 HP
Propeller: Hamilton Standard Two Blade 12D40
Wing Span: 42′ 5″
Length: 29′ 6″
Height: 11′ 9″
Normal Gross Weight: 5300 lb
G Loading: +5.67, -2.33
Controls: Dual
Normal cruise: 155 MPH at 8000 ft
Fuel flow at cruise: 30 USGPH

Harvard 4 / T.6J
Basic trainer
Engine: 550 h.p. Pratt & Whitney R1340-ANI
Wingspan: 42 ft
Length: 29 ft.
Loaded weight: 5,617 lb.
Max. speed: 212 m.p.h.
Ceiling: 21,500 ft.
Range: 870 miles at 146 m.p.h.
Crew: 2.

SNJ-5 Texan
Powerplant: l x Pratt & Whitney R-1340-AN-1 Wasp, 410kW (550 hp)
Span: 12.81 m (42ft 0.25 in)
Length: 8.99m (29ft 6in)
Height: 3.58 m / 11 ft 9 in
Wing area: 23.57 sq.m / 253.71 sq ft
Armament: 2 or 3 x 7.62-mm (0.3-in) mg
Empty weight: 1886 kg / 4158 lb
Max T/O weight: 2404 kg (5,300 lb)
Max speed: 330 km/h / 205 mph at 5,000 ft
Ceiling: 6555 m / 21500 ft
Max range: 1200 km / 746 miles
Operational range: 750 miles
Crew: 2