----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, February 16, 2004 8:10
Subject: [KOREAN-WAR-L:11394] Re:
Shooting Star to Mustang
(My apologies to the list for the
late response, but I've just finally gotten my ISP problems
resolved, and I'm reading the January
I've been reading General
Stratemeyer's Korean War diary, and it has some interesting information about
the F-47 and the Korean War.
On 4 May 1951, General
Stratemeyer, commander of FEAF, sent the following message to General Twining,
USAF Vice Chief of Staff:
"Are there available anywhere
in ZI or its
F-47 aircraft that could be made available to FEAF? It is understood
that there are some 25 in National Guard squadron in Hawaii. Even this
number would be gratefully received. Info here also indicates some 429 in service
with Air National Guard in ZI and 721 in storage. Small arms fire and both light
and heavy flak have increased tremendously along enemy MSRs and at main
bridges in Korea as well as around their supply areas and airdromes.
All here know that F-47 can take it.
Our fighter losses to enemy ground fire during past 33 days total 25 F-51s,
13 F-80s and 2 F-84s. Loss rate of F-51 to ground fire per sortie is
just under 100% greater than the loss rate of F-80 and almost 6 times
greater than the F-84 loss rate during the same period"
On 11 May 1951, General
Vandenberg, USAF Chief of Staff, replied to General Stratemeyer as
"This answers your AX 7149 of 4
May requesting F-47 a/c to replace F-51s in FEAF. After considering
the availability of F-47, the spare parts situation, and the complications
which result from an introduction of an additional fighter type in FEAF, we
fail to see any appreciable results to be gained by the substitution.
It is probably true that the F-47 would confirm its WW II reputation and
prove somewhat less vulnerable than the F-51 to small arms fire and light
flak. I believe, however, that the disparity between the F-47 and your
jet types would be almost as great as the present disparity between the
F-51s and jets. .. The only real solution to your problem is the
replacement of F-51s with jet types. You are familiar with the F-80
situation and realize that beginning in December we must meet your attrition
in F-80s with F-84s. This replacement will continue to include the
replacement of F-51s by jet types as soon as it is physically possible to do
so... I am sure in my own mind that your suggestion of using F-47s in
place of F-51s would require a complete substitution from the CCTS in the ZI
thru to pipeline to your theater, is not a solution."
(omitted sections discuss aerial
combat differences between F-47 and F-51, USAF budget and production
problems, and suggest using more of the F-80s in Japan in Korea
(ZI - Zone of the Interior,
i.e., the United States)
(CCTS - Combat Crew Training School)
Quotations are from The Three
Wars of Lt. Gen. George E. Stratemeyer: His Korean War
Diary. Edited by William T. Y'Blood. Air Force History and
Museums Program, 1999. Available from the U.S. Government Printing
Office. The 4 May 1951 message is on pages 501-502. The 11 May
1951 message is on pages 509-510.
I think the explanation above
speaks for itself. The USAF was phasing out prop-driven aircraft in
favor of jets and was not interested in re-introducing and supporting a second
prop-driven fighter type.
Subject: Re: Shooting Star to Mustang
Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 17:54:06 -0500
DanSources Technical Services, Inc.
Happy New Years
When the USA decided on the Mustang.
I am having a Discussion with the P47
One argument wahy the Thunderbolt was not used in Korea
I believe the following considerations
was made to use Mustangs
instead of the Thunderbolt
Availablility, still being produced in
Australia, well at least until 1949.
Parts availability, Lower Maintenance and
Used less gas, Could takeoff from the Short and Rough
Loitering capability, Better Dogfighting Capability
More pilots trained on the