Talk:F-82 Twin Mustang

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

MILHIST This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
AVIATION This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Aviation Portal
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.

[edit] Recent updates

Bill- I'm flattered that you consider the text of this article, which I originally wrote back in 2005/2006, to be so good that you deleted all my recent additions to restore it vitrually intact. Unfortunately you distroyed all the research that I've done in the last few months to update what I had written two years ago. For one thing, some of what I wrote back then now needs to be updated as new information has surfaced. In addition, the surviving aircraft thankfully haven't just sat around gathering dust. I'm extremely pleased to report that Tom Reilly just purchased Walter Soplata's XP-82 airframe and it's now another hulk off his fam and on its way to a glorious restoration (that may take longer than our combined lifetimes, but if anyone can do it Tom Reilly can). If you want references please check out Kevin Tanner's article in the June 2008 issue of Air Classics magazine. He sites most of what I've added. Other information came from David McLaren's excellent book "Double Menace". I got a copy after I had originally written this article and am just now getting around to updating my errors and ommissions (propellers DID interfer with the SRC-720 radar set, which was why the dish had to be positioned in front of the props). "Double Menace" is still the only book ever written about the history of the F-82, though I hope to get with Dave someday and write an updated version, and use a better publisher. I tried looking up the ISBN # for the book, but unfortunately it appears to be so rare I wasn't able to find a seller who listed the book with the #. As far as citing references, I'm sorry but I've never been any good at figuring out how to use Wikipedia's citiong system. I'm not a computer geek, and a lot of this programming language still doesn't make sense to me. I would welcome your help with citing Dave's book and Kevin's article for the updates I've added. I've also sent Tom reilly an E-mail asking him to post a photo of his XP-82 to this article so everyone can see what a task he has ahead of him, god bless em'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ken keisel (talk • contribs) 16:16, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

I wrote a lengthy response, but my computer ate it! Really! I'll try to write it again later, but I have errands to run at the moment. - BillCJ (talk) 18:00, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Bill- Ya, ain't computers wonderful! No problem though, if you want to write to me off Wikipedia you can reach me at kkeisel@gmail.com . Always nice to see another fan of the "Twin". Ken Keisel 11 June 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ken keisel (talk • contribs) 23:43, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Bzuk- Thanks for the fixes!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ken keisel (talk • contribs) 00:35, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The war story

The combat story about engagement with Yaks and Las doesn't make sense. No two-seat Yak-9s were ever produced, which suggests that the target was a Yak-11 (my references also cite a Yak-11 as the first air-air loss of the war). But could a Yak-11 with a mere 570 hp and a single machine gun really engage an F-82 and score hits on it unless the pilots were real buffoons? Or was there a Yak-9 attack followed by the Twin Mustang engaging a Yak-11? Can someone clarify this? - Emt147 Burninate! 04:38, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

  • Yak-11 were trainer aircraft, no fighters. They had provision for two seats.Dirk P Broer (talk) 03:08, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
  • I've seen the photograph taken by Lt. Frazier of the aircraft they shot down (taken from inside the cockpit using a hand held camera). It does appear to be a Yak-11. These planes were designed as trainers, but did have a single machine gun in the forward cowling. There seems to be no dispute that there were two crew in the aircraft, which also pretty much indicates a Yak-11. The North Koreans wern't expecting any air cover over Kimpo that day, so they probably sent up anything that had a gun.Ken keisel 10 June 2008

[edit] Design

Why was it designed the way it was? // Liftarn

The airplane was meant to be a very long-range escort fighter in the Pacific Theatre of Operations. The big "trump card" the US military was intent upon playing in the PTO was the B-29 Superfortress. As soon as that airplane began development, planners began looking at ways to employ it to bomb the Japanese home islands. The entire strategy in the Pacific was driven by efforts to obtain islands to place B-29s within striking distance of Japan. The US Army Air Forces learned in late 1942 & through the first half of 1943 that our bombers, when penetrating deeply into enemy territory in Europe, suffered heavy losses without adequate fighter escort, & it was felt the B-29s would suffer the same fate at the hands of the Japanese. By the beginning of 1944, it was obvious that the US bomber forces in Europe had a winning escort fighter in the Merlin-powered P-51, & efforts were underway at North American Aircraft to improve the design. The problem in the Pacific was distance; the crew members in the B-29s could be expected to share the flying duties on the long missions required to cover the vast distances to reach Japan from their hard-won island bases, but for one pilot in a P-51, those vast distances probably would be debilitating. The thought of "too bad there isn't a second pilot in a P-51 to help the poor guy out as a relief pilot" drove the designers at NAA to take their winning escort fighter & provide just that. The original P-82 concept took 2 fuselages of the "light-weight" Mustangs under development at the time (specifically the P-51F) & joined them on a common wing with proven advanced aerodynamic attributes. The resulting design provided a highly maneuverable fighter aircraft with multi-engine reliability, combined with lots of airframe capacity to carry fuel (in that long wing & in the two fuselages) to provide the extended range required in the Pacific, plus a relief pilot to share in the tasks required to fly the airplane to the target & back (originally, the left fuselage cockpit had a full set of controls for the airplane, while the right side cockpit had just enough controls to provide relief to the left side pilot). The layout of the design itself probably started out as a curiously unusual, albeit appealing, approach to a daunting mission requirement.71.228.225.234 (talk) 09:10, 9 December 2007 (UTC)CBsHellcat