What if the USAAF scrapped all their C-45, C-46 and C-47 transport planes in 1946?

R

riggerrob

I really should change my personal text
Senior Member
Joined
11 March 2012
Messages
3,016
Reaction score
2,692
What if the United States Army Air Force/Corps scrapped all their surplus Beechcraft C-45, Curtiss C-46 and Douglas C-47 cargo planes in the aftermath of World War 2?
How would this affect airlines during the 1940s and 1950s?
How would this affect aircraft manufacturers during the 1940s and 1950s?

Forget about China or Russia returning Loan-Lease airplanes. Britain was bankrupt by 1946 and would be forced to return all of their American-made airplanes, trucks, ships, etc.
 
How many C-47's did the UK have at the end of the war and how quickly were they returned? Also how many C-54 had been received, and did they have be returned (I know one was used as a personal transport by Churchill)?
 
The RAF received 22 C-54D cargo planes, all of which were returned at the end of WW2.
 
The Dakota C.Mk.4 (C-47B) was still in RAF frontline service as late as 1950 (7 UK, 3 Middle East and 3 Far East squadrons). They were then replaced by the Valetta. But some hung on in training and hack use for a while, the last Royal Aircraft Establishment example being retired in 1970.
Only one squadron operated the C-54D, being used by No 232 Squadron in India but quickly returned, they didn't even gain an Air Ministry name or designation/ mark number.

Most Lend Lease aircraft were returned, dumped or scrapped under the terms of the agreement before the end of 1946, but a few were retained where there was a need. Some P-51 Mk.IV and IVA lasted until 1947, the Dakota (as above), some C-45F Expeditor Mk.II aircraft were used by the Fleet Air Arm for training until 1955, some Vultee Vengeance target-tugs lasted into 1947; I think most of the Harvard's retained were of Canadian manufacture so probably don't count.
 
What actually happened: termination of Lend/Lease was because it was an Act for the Defense of US, which by 9/45 had been defended. The world was littered with US kit. C-54s were wanted by USAAF, not much else, so they set up as is, where is disposal auctions. Most went to the highest-bidding scrappie because they were offered with no documentation - to prevent uncontrolled arms trading. (In the Philippines the Jeep was esteemed, so to this day the urban taxi is the jeepney, rebuilt just as lovingly as Spitfires). Nearly-free C-45s were mildly helpful - UK had its Ansons and Oxfords, Canada its Cranes, France had comparables. C-46 was unloved by the civilised community.

And then there was the C-47.

What US could have done was same - auction for scrap. But they knew what that clever Scotsman, Mr Douglas, had created, so set up Depots all over the world, offering as is, where is, $50,000 with pedigree documentation: flat rate price, choose the ones you want and twist our arm for a pile of spares.

The A to the Q is that if US had scrapped or extradited all C-47s...life on earth today would be different and worse. The Dak ranks alongside the Hoover and Biro as key to civilised existence. Entire Nations could be managed from a central capital due to Dak. Am I right it is the sole type Declared by FAA to have no finite fatigue life? No DC-3 Replacement ever replaced - ask SAAF, operating them today. Some sales might have been won by SAAB Scandia, CASA Azor, HP Marathon, then Piston-Herald; Vickers might have actually sold some Vikings for money (most were Aid)...but...No. A civil C-117 Super-Dak would have been offered by Douglas, the Finance Industry finding ways to spread cost over a decade or so.

There would have been no missed opportunity to, for example, sell 672 new-builds to us. So important was it to the British Empire that, when we sent Keynes to negotiate out of the Lease-bit of Lend/Lease, we told him to come back with “an agreed number” of T-6s {US-built: Hood is right that more were under the different UK:Canada deals}, 18 transport B-24, 25 C-45F...and 672 C-47 (72/civil, 600/Empire military) H.D.Hall, Official History,N.American Supply, HMSO, 1955, P480; P.Butler,Air Arsenal N.A,Midland,2004,P39. For all this we "paid": a L/L Settlement net of Reverse was arrived at (after we had dredged records for spark plugs, £-sourced POL, victuals) of $650Mn. UK had received $27Bn., gross of $6Bn. Reverse. R.S.Sayers, Financial Policy, HMSO, 1956,P498/52. That was rolled into 15/7/46 $3.75Bn. Reconstruction Loan (extinguished in 2007).

All these financials were on the basis that "Govts. have taken full cognizance of the benefits already received (in) defeat of their common enemies (enduring value of) exchange of scientific and technical data could not be expressed in figures” Hall,P.480. So next time someone whitters about US theft of our Bomb, radar, all-flying tail, just dig out these numbers.
 
So to determine the effect we need to know just how many of the approx 10,000 C-47 US built variants and approx 3,200 C-46 actually entered airline service around the world. Anyone know?

I understood not very many C-46 joined the airline fleets as they were costly to run compared with a C-47 due to high fuel consumption.

Without cheap war surplus aircraft, the cost of entry to the airline market would have been much higher. So what happens? More bomber conversions (or are these being scrapped as OTL)? More chance of multiple warbird B-24 today? Result! More likely just slower development of the industry in the US.

Or increased production of immediate postwar civil types? More Connies anyone? Not so keen on Boeing Stratocruiser though. Without the cheap competition maybe the British aircraft industry could get its collective act together and produce a decent immediate postwar civil prop aircraft, not withstanding the Brabazon Cmtte categories, starting with one designed with a nosewheel! Or would all the govt contracts for next generation jet fighters and bombers absorb all the design capacity?
 
What was the intended use of the '18 - B24, 25 - C45F and 672 - C47?
 
In RAF service, B-24s were valued for their long-range.
A handful of B-24 Liberator transports dropped spies and partisans into Japanese-occupied South East Asia (Burma, Thailand, Vietnam, etc.).
The remainder of RAF Liberators flew from Scotland and Iceland to close the Mid-Atlantic Gap, defeating the U-boat blockade of the British Isles. Early in the war, U-boat captains learned to fear any convoy escorted by aircraft. It did not matter if the escorting aircraft was a slow, Swordfish biplane or the even slower USN Blimps patrolling the American eastern seaboard. U-boat captains did not fear the machine-guns, torpedoes, depth-charges or rockets carried by convoy-escort airplanes half as much as they feared the Aldis lamps and radios that could quickly call on escorting naval vessels (corvettes and destroyers) to rain down depth charges.

Beechcraft C-45 Expeditor light twins filled the same training, liason and light transport duties as British-built Avro Anson and Airspeed Oxford light twins.

The RAF used C-47 Dakotas to transport cargo and troops, drop paratroopers and cargo, tow assault gliders, etc.
 
Most of the transport Liberators went to BOAC*, most of the 72 civil C-47s to BEAC, most of the 25 C-45F to FAA. The 600 military C-47 were divided between RAF*, RAF India and other Empire Air Forces: the sovereign Dominions (Australia, Canada, NZ, SA) had their own arrangements for Mutual Aid, Lend/Lease, Canada's especially complex: they all flew C-47s for years post-War, some in RCAF with RAF serials: I do not know whether some, all, none were in the 600.

(* edit 31/10/20: most BOAC/Scottish Libs were UK cash buys as LB-30s, bar only G-AHDY. BOAC Fleet List 1946 has 2 in RAF marks; College/Cranfield had another. Probably: the 18 were these plus the residue of 21 Mk.IX (single fin) Lend/Lease for SEAC, to 232 Sqd/Ceylon, operated to 13/8/46.

RAF AHB, Br. & the Berlin Airlift,HMSO,98 has RAF with 112 C-47, 7/48, which implies the 600 were largely for overseas Forces of the King).
 
Last edited:
alertken said:
Most of the transport Liberators went to BOAC, most of the 72 civil C-47s to BEAC, most of the 25 C-45F to FAA. The 600 military C-47 were divided between RAF, RAF India and other Empire Air Forces: the sovereign Dominions (Australia, Canada, NZ, SA) had their own arrangements for Mutual Aid, Lend/Lease, Canada's especially complex: they all flew C-47s for years post-War, some in RCAF with RAF serials: I do not know whether some, all, none were in the 600.
Click to expand...

Of the 86 early model Liberators (LB.30 versions) eventually received only 24 were initially transports. These were augmented later by some of the survivors that started their lives as bombers. And yes these mostly went to BOAC. But in 1944 24 C-87 Liberator VII transports were received and in 1945 28 RY-3 Liberator IX transports (although not all of the latter may have been taken into service due to the war ending) which all went to RAF squadrons. It also ignores the large number of GR and B versions converted from May 1945 into transports in the UK and used by some 7 RAF squadrons to repatriate British personnel from the Middle and Far East until scrapped.

The RAF took delivery of over 1200 C-47 under lend lease. From these 32 were passed to Canada during the war and some to the SAAF at the end of the war. Others were delivered direct to Australia (124 for the RAAF plus 12 war weary for civil airlines), Canada (47) and New Zealand (58) on their own lend lease accounts.

Over 400 C-45 of various versions were delivered to the RAF under lend lease, with some subsequently passed on to Canada. The 25 you refer to with the FAA were delivered under lend lease but purchased with dollars at the end of the war as part of the Lend Lease Settlement with some surviving into the late 1950s. All the others were returned to US control.
 
riggerrob said:
In RAF service, B-24s were valued for their long-range.
A handful of B-24 Liberator transports dropped spies and partisans into Japanese-occupied South East Asia (Burma, Thailand, Vietnam, etc.).

It was rather more than a handful involved in "Special Duties". By mid 1945 8, 357 & 358 squadrons were dedicated to the role. 357 with Liberators, Dakotas and Lysanders and the other two wholly equipped with Libs. 160 also became involved in that role, but not exclusively. That from a total of 10 RAF squadrons either wholly of partly equipped with B or GR versions of the Liberator in SEAC at the time.
Click to expand...
 
No, kcg. C-47 was crucial to start up but by 9/48 all US ones were replaced by 225 USAAF (+2 USN Sqdns) of 10-ton C-54s. RAF pressed on throughout with upto 60 C-47 which we had bought within the Lend/Lease Settlement, so not pertinent to OT's Q.

The reverse might be so: some writers have surmised that in July,1948 it was clear that 3.5t loads in winter must fail to heat and feed (?was it 1.5Mn.) people - that was Stalin's perception of Ju.52 efforts to sustain German siege of Stalingrad, so was the reason for merely buzzing Allied a/c in the corridors. He expected our failure, so withdrawal. If US had deployed 10tonners upfront he might have foreseen our success, so...doubled or quit.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom