In article ,
(The Revolution Will Not Be Televised) writes:
On Sun, 29 Jun 2003 22:19:23 +0200, "Emmanuel Gustin"
wrote:

Even the Spitfire XVI was powered by the American-built
Merlin.

Yes, but that was the exception. AFAIK most of Packard's
production for the RAF was single-stage Merlins for bombers.

And that was in September/October 1944, on one production line at the
Castle Bromwich factory at a time when the British were still
producing Mk IXs and Griffon-engined Mk XIVs. The Packard-Merlins in
Lancaster B.IIIs and Kittyhawk IIs were much more significant in terms
of their impact on British operational policy.

Gavin,
I don't wish to sound argumentative, but wouldn't it be more fair to
say that the Packard Merlins i Lancaster B.IIIs and various flavors
of Mosquito were more significant. I'm not trying to cut down the
Kittyhawk IIs again, but I think that everybody except, perhaps
those in the CBI Theater had pretty much decided by 1943 that P-40
based airframes weren't the best option available. As a point of
information, how long did teh Kittyhawk IIs stay in service? There
seemed to ba a rapid turnover of fighter types in North Africa in
'42 and '43, and I've seen information that indicates that the
Kittyhawk IIs in the RAAF Squadrons that wwere in North Africa were
replaces with Kittyhawk IIIs (P-40Ks and Ms) in relatively short
order. Could you please shed some light on this?

--
Pete Stickney
A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many
bad measures. -- Daniel Webster