America's Hundred Thousand Production Totals

This will probably appear in the wrong place thanks to a buggy news server.

Cub Driver wrote in message ...
On Wed, 26 May 2004 16:34:02 +1000, "Geoffrey Sinclair"
wrote:

the P-40Gs
are counted as production not conversion and some of the lend
lease allocations are double counted, so subtract 44 P-40G and
250 Kittihawk IIs and you end up at 13,753. Most of the rest of the
difference is Dean stating there were 4 less P-40N-40s, the last
version, than the serial number lists.

I'm delighted someone is working this out. Will it be published
somewhere, as website or article or book?

well there are websites already with the serial numbers, for
example http://www.uswarplanes.net/p38.htm

I must admit to assuming others had done the work or something
similar, I expect keeping the results as a spreadsheet is a good
contribution. The spreadsheet means you can do things like sort
the serial number blocks and look for holes for example. In the
US case with numeric serials you can subtract the first and last in
the block and see if it matches the number said to be produced.

The sorting is very useful where production of different subtypes
in interleaved or things like the way the P-38 line was producing
a mixture of P-38 and F-4 or F-5.

(I think Northrop made a vow that there would never be production
of two in a row for the different P-61B sub types (-1, -2, -10, -11,
-15, -16, -20, -25). They really tried for a while.)

Whether there is enough interest to make it worthwhile to have the
spreadsheet available on a web site is something I am unsure of.
In any case it is currently a work in progress, just the big 7 USAAF
fighters done, P-38, 39, 40, 47, 51, 61 and 63.

(Of course, most historians would be content to round it up to 14,000
aircraft. I follow a rule that once you get past 100, it's very
difficult to be precise about anything.)

Obviously you try for as much accuracy as possible. I have a basic
rule of thumb that 5% error is not too bad when it comes to using
the figures, given all the other imponderables in WWII. It is not
like the people involved had the view, paperwork first, war second.

As an example, P-38 production, 1) was 40-762 built as a P-38 and
then converted to the XP-38A or delivered as an XP-38A, 2) was
42-13558 delivered as the XP-38K or was it converted from an
earlier P-38 and given a new serial 3) Were all the RAF's order
for Lightning IIs given USAAF serials or was the only one to be
given an RAF serial (AF221) not given a USAAF serial, 4) was
42-1257 an F-4 or an F-5?

Looking at the serial numbers gives answers of 1) unknown, 2)
probably new (it would be unique for an aircraft to be given a new
serial) also 42-13557 last model G in the batch with 42-13559
the first H, 3) probably no, as then the RAF order is an exact match
for the relevant P-38F sub types, 4) unknown, but the serial is in the
middle of an F-4 batch, it still might be an F-5 prototype.

Francis Dean thinks 10,038 P-38 and F-4/5s were produced, but
the USAAF statistical digest and Lockheed say 10,037. It comes
down to that Lightning II and the XP-38K. I think the Mark II did have
a USAAF serial and the K model was either delivered as a G and
converted with the K serial or delivered as a K and this means it was
not double counted as a G under one serial and the K under its new serial.

Geoffrey Sinclair
Remove the nb for email.

On Fri, 28 May 2004 01:27:55 +1000, "Geoffrey Sinclair"
wrote:

1) was 40-762 built as a P-38 and
then converted to the XP-38A or delivered as an XP-38A,

Well, all I can say is, better Geoff than me! I am full of admiration
for anyone willing to bend his mind around these things.

(Isn't it an odd usage to have an XP-38A? The only time I've seen
something similar is the YP-59A, which of course was a "black"
project, the turbojet P-59A having no similarity to the piston-engined
P-59.)

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (put Cubdriver in subject line)

The Warbird's Forum www.warbirdforum.com
The Piper Cub Forum www.pipercubforum.com