Keith Willshaw wrote:

"John Freck" wrote in message
om...

snip

The USAF and Strategic Air Command on the other hand ordered
and operated large numbers of strategic bombers including the
B-29, B-50, B-36, B-47, B-52, B-1 and B-2



The B-29 pre-dates 1947. The total number of bombers produced of
B-50, B-36, B-47, B-52, B-1, and B-2 don't add up to 1,000, I don't
believe. The number of fighter bombers built since 1947 is over
10,000 as I recall. The ratio is about the same as I recommend for
SimWWII. I cut back and not out.


Again your lack of a clue is showing

The USA produced 370 B-50's, 380 B-36's, 1300 B-47's

and 740 B-52's

I think your B-47 total only considers the 'E' models (1,341). There were also
10 pre-production B-47As, used for development, and 399 'B's, most of which were
later brought up to 'E' standard. And then there were the various RB flavors:
240 'E's, 35 'H's, and 15 'K's.

snip

My specifics are less important than the overview point, which is that
fighter bombers can bomb very effectively. I could have used just
'Allied fighters' and not 'Mustang' or 'Hurricane' or 'Hurricane Super
Marine fighter'. The generalize point is the subject. My book states
that the Mustang was in service in 1942, and my book states that the
Mustang was great on ground attack, and it could carry a 2,000lbs
bomb.


The devil is in the details, the Mustang was NOT great in ground
attack, it was intensely vulnerable to ground fire and was not
used in that role in WW2.

snip rest of naive claims by John Freck, as there's only so much ignorance I
can take in a single post

Keith, yes, it was used for ground attack in WW2, but a radial-engined a/c like
the P-47 was definitely preferred in that role. However, carrying 2 x 1,000 lb.
bombs that Mustang isn't going very far. Even the P-47 preferred to carry
500lbers, for drag, maneuverability and stress reasons.

Guy