5
$\begingroup$

Both were made by North American Aviation and the planes were almost twins - the A-36 having a ground attack role while the P-51 was a fighter. Are there any noticeable differences between the two?

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ You probably meant Piper (Apache). $\endgroup$
    – John K
    Feb 13 '19 at 22:00
8
$\begingroup$

They were largely the same aircraft but the first line of the A-36 wiki sums it up nicely

the ground-attack/dive bomber version of the North American P-51 Mustang, from which it could be distinguished by the presence of rectangular, slatted dive brakes above and below the wings

later in the article they go on to list some more features

The contract for 500 A-36A aircraft fitted with bomb racks, dive brakes, and heavier-duty wing, was signed by Kelsey on 16 April 1942,[6] even before the first flight of the first production P-51 in May 1942.

This website also lists the same mods as well as some other fun facts.

This website lists two other features noteably the vent window which is not mentioned elsewhere.

...and the installation of small vent windows in the windscreen side panels. In addition, two Browning M2 .50 caliber machine guns were mounted in each wing, and two more .50 cal. guns were mounted in the lower nose to fire through the propeller.

$\endgroup$
3
$\begingroup$

Please ... the A-36A has to have more wrong "information" on it both in print (as in books and magazines) and online in articles, photos and videos, than ANY other WWII aircraft.

First it is NOT a "derivative" or "version" of "variant" of the P-51A Mustang. It's actually the other way around. The P-51A is an offshoot of the A-36A - the last of the 500 A-36As rolled out of NAA Inglewood before the first P-51A was built.

Next, and THIS one is, for some reason, the most-repeated mistake of them all: It's called the "Apache" in books, magazines, the Internet and on videos (and, as a result, in conversations between warbird nuts in person and in social media). The National Museum of the U. S. Air Force even had their A-36A "mislabeled" on the sign in front of it, until after I contacted them. They corrected it to the only official name that it ever had, "Mustang," in September, 2018.

Here is an article that I wrote earlier this year. Right after it was published, I received even MORE documentation from the Boeing Historical Archivist that, while it was superfluous (as in, "not really needed"), it verified beyond ANY shadow of a doubt, that "Mustang" is the only official name that the A-36A ever had.

Check it out: http://www.thehangardeck.com/news/2019/3/16/the-a-36-by-any-other-name

OH, and the only armament on the A-36A was the .50 Cal Browning Machine Gun - two were mounted in the nose/cheek position, and two in each wing. The 20 mm cannons were installed ONLY on the NA-91 aircraft, the first aircraft actually designated "P-51" (no suffix letters or numbers at first). THEIR official name, in the USAAC/USAAF from late 1941 until 13 July, 1942 was "Apache." After that date, anything made by NAA that even "looked like a Mustang" was called "Mustang," officially. The A-36A came along AFTER that date in July, so it was a "Mustang" from "birth."

emphasized text strong text

If I knew HOW to attach images of documents to this post, I'd gladly do it. The "Images" thing above seems to be only for images that are online, and my images are on my hard drives.

I will state that my documentation includes: scans of North American Aviation documents and newsletters and a Telegram from Dutch Kindelberger to Col Ennis, dated 13 July, '42, before the first A-36A was built; references from the most-respected "Mustang Authors" (Robert Gruenhagen and Ray Wagner); references from the US Government.

I'm actually a humble person, so if someone would tell me how to attach MY images (without first getting them online, but directly from my HDDs), I'd be most appreciative.

My only goal here is to help my fellow warbird nuts be as correct as possible when talking about our beloved warbirds - REALLY

$\endgroup$
5
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ This would be a far better answer if it read less like a rant and more like wisdom from an expert. $\endgroup$
    – T.J.L.
    Dec 11 '19 at 13:42
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Both this answer and the linked article (very interesting!) would be far better if they sited and linked or reproduced some of the sources for the claims. I'm not implying you're wrong (I wouldn't know it if you were), but if you're going to contradict "conventional wisdom" it's often considered helpful to show some evidence to backup your claims. $\endgroup$
    – FreeMan
    Dec 11 '19 at 14:19
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ This doesn't actually answer the question asked but is instead what appears to be a personal attack on other answers/comments. The OP asks what are the differences between the P-51 and the A-36. Instead of deriding 'wrong information', how about specifying the differences between the two aircraft? $\endgroup$
    – CGCampbell
    Dec 11 '19 at 18:11
  • $\begingroup$ TJL, FreeManand and CGCampbell ... thank you for your comments. I did not intend that ANYONE would see this as a "rant." In the limited time that we all have for our "hobbies," we cannot be singularly "devoted" to one point. I apologize if my writing style seemed to HINT that I was ranting. I'm a retired hospital pharmacist and I can type as fast as I can think - it came from being in that profession since the early 1970s. I have < 160 characters left in this "Comment" but if anyone is interested, I can EDIT the above and attach more documentation that what is really necessary. $\endgroup$ Jan 11 '20 at 13:10
  • $\begingroup$ @TomGriffith To add an images just click the "image" button in the editor's toolbar. A little window will appar in which you can simply drag-and-drop your local image or hit the "browse" button to locally browse for your images. Maybe you want to read the help page, section Images at the bottom. $\endgroup$
    – PerlDuck
    Jan 11 '20 at 15:16
1
$\begingroup$

The A-36 was a P-51A configured for ground attack with minor add-ons like the dive brakes and bomb racks (and 20mm cannon on some). Both had the Allison engine which was not suitable for high altitudes. The P-51 B and later had the RR Merlin. Lots of other detail differences, but the engine is the main one when thinking of the A-36/P-51A vs P-51B and subs.

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ I'll try to NOT be a "rant" due to any perceived "sensitivity" on my part: The P-51A was a derivative of the A-36A, if we're going to call the next aircraft the series a "derivative." The A-36As finished production runs before the P-51As began to be manufactured by NAA. It's even indicated in their NAA Model Numbers: These numbers are consecutive, chronologically. The A-36A Mustang was "NA-97" and that of the P-51A Mustang was "NA-99." BTW, the "P-51A" designation is NOT a designation of all Allison Mustangs that were NOT A-36As. It was the 5th production model of this "family." $\endgroup$ Jan 15 '20 at 19:25
  • $\begingroup$ @Tom Griffith, The A-36 is technically a variant of the P-51. It is heavily modified but remains extremely similar. Also, contradicting your claim, the first P-51A flew on October 26th, 1940. The A-36A apache, on the other hand, was first flown in 1942, meaning that the P-51 was actually built before. Also, have you ever heard the saying "outrageous claims need outrageous evidence"?, I recommend backing your answer with evidence. $\endgroup$
    – J Lopez
    May 19 '20 at 17:14
0
$\begingroup$

I have a link to my article from almost 2 yrs ago at TheHangarDeck.com. I shall try - TRY - to attach scans of images of Primary Source Documents that firmly establish the "Mustang" name for the A-36A, that are actually ADDITIONAL documents that substantiate my point that the A-36A was never called "Apache" officially - EVER - during the WWII years. Certainly, the pilots and groundcrew of the A-36A in the 27th Fighter-Bomber Group serving in the MTO called the A-36A "Invader" and actually petitioned NAA to change the official name to "Invader," but THAT name was already given to Douglas Aircraft Company for their A-26 Attack/Light-Medium Bomber. I've reread the above and I do NOT see anything insulting or condescending --- if anyone's offended, then I did NOTHING to try to do so.

Let me try to attach those two images - scans of an NAA document in the form of a Telegram directly from Dutch Kindelberger, HIMSELF, to the USAAF's Chief of Public Relations, and the cover of the Parts Catalog for the A-36A.

Note that the first A-36A was not built until 2 or 3 months after the date of this Telegram. The first P-51A was not built until after the A-36As had been rolling out the doors at NAA Inglewood. The last A-36As, the first P-51As and strangely enough, the first P-51Bs had production dates that overlapped each other. THAT is an interesting fact.

enter image description here Left Side: Telegram dated 13 July, 1942 Right Side: Cover of A-36A Parts Catalog (Both supplied by The Boeing Company, owner of both images and all credit due to them)

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ I agree with you about the fact that the A-36's official name is the Mustang. Some pilots and ground crews called it Invader, others even called it apache, but the official name is Mustang. I have changed the name of this question to "What is the difference between a p51 mustang and an a-36 mustang" instead of A-36 apache. However someone needs to review and approve it, and nobody has done that yet. $\endgroup$
    – J Lopez
    Jan 5 at 19:08
  • $\begingroup$ However you incorrectly stated that the first P-51 was not built until after A-36 were being built for some time. This is inaccurate because the first P-51 entered service with the RAF in April 1942, and the first flight of the A-36 Mustang wasn't until September 1942. $\endgroup$
    – J Lopez
    Jan 5 at 19:11
0
$\begingroup$

The A-36A's main differences from the P-51 or Mustang 1 are the dive breaks, reinforced wings, nose mounted browning 50 cals, and others. The A-36 is technically a variant of the P-51. It is heavily modified but remains extremely similar. Also, contradicting @Tom Griffith, the first P-51 flew on october 26th, 1940. The A-36A apache, on the other hand, was first flown in 1942, meaning that the P-51 was actually built before. The later models of the p-51 (B,C,D,k, H...) used the merlin engine, the apache however retained the allison.

$\endgroup$
4
  • $\begingroup$ J Lopez, et al. I am "spread too thin" I guess, and I have not had a chance to come back to this website to talk about the A-36 story, the P-51A story and other more "general" Mustang stories. I don't know why my works seem to seem like "rants." The only thing I can say is that when some folks (such as I) state something that goes against the most-often-repeated "story" or "concept" or "idea" --- whatever --- it may sound like a rant. The aircraft that flew in Oct, 1940 was not a P-51 at all. I was the concept aircraft built by NAA, to demonstrate to the RAF as a P-40 replacement. $\endgroup$ Jan 4 at 1:43
  • $\begingroup$ @TomGriffith, the aircraft that flew in October 1940 was a prototype, there is a difference between a concept and a prototype. And that prototype was the P-51s prototype and was designed as a fighter. The A-36 prototype first flew in september 1942. The P-51 entered service with the RAF in April 1942. The A-36 entered service in June 1943, according to the national museum of the USAF, and many other websites. This proves that the P-51 was designed and built before the A-36, because it was first flown first, and entered service first. $\endgroup$
    – J Lopez
    Jan 4 at 17:27
  • $\begingroup$ J Lopez...I tried to send a reply, and this comment box said it was too long, even after I "trimmed" it to the point of ridiculousness. I feel that YOU really want to know the facts - the truth as it were - about the designations and the order of production of the various production Mustangs. I really want to help you with this. I've done it wit a number of folks that I've met through Facebook. Get back to me, please. We have much to share and learn (I admit that I'm still learning after > 50 yrs of seriously LOVING Mustangs! $\endgroup$ Aug 27 at 0:34
  • $\begingroup$ you're "splitting hairs." I used the term "concept" a year and a half ago (I need to come here more often!😢) for this reason: the NA-73X aircraft was built as a "civilian" aircraft - it had NO USAAC (or other government's) serial number. Indeed, it had a CAA registration number, equivalent to a "Tail Number," but it was a CIVIL aircraft. Once again - the Mustang Mk I that entered RAF service was NOT a "P-51" at all. "P-51" was a USAAC/USAAF designation for the third NAA aircraft of the Mustang family to be built, and the RAF's first Mustang is an earlier aircraft. $\endgroup$ Aug 27 at 11:18

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.