Why are there 2 B-26´s?

[redvanner]

A question I wanted to ask since a long time ago, but maybe it is a dumb one. Why are there 2 different airplane designs with the same designation. I am talking about the B-26 Martin Marauder, and the B-26 Douglas Invader. Is the Invader a development of the Marauder? Is it intentional, or coincidental? I would appreciate your informed answers.

Regards

Michael

P.S.: I know the Invader´s designation was changed later from B-26 to A-26, but IIRC this was just due to cover up it was a bomber.

[Matt Gunsch]

They are two totally different planes, the B-26 Marauder was built by Martin as a medium bomber, The Douglas A-26 Invader was a Attack bomber built by Douglas. After WWII the B-26 Marauder was retired and the A-26 was re-designated the B-26 Invader. During Vietnam, bombers could not be based out of Thailand, so the B-26 Invader was changed back into the A-26.
Clear as mud ?

[JohnTerrell]

Just to go along with what Matt said, when the US Air Force was initiated in 1947, they did away with the "Attack" and "Pursuit" designations. As such, aircraft like the A-26 became the B-26, and aircraft like the P-51 became the F-51, even though nothing changed physically about them in relation to their change of designations (though there were of course to be standard/evolutionary modifications/improvements while in USAF service). Since the Marauder was not in the USAF inventory, it didn't matter that the A-26 was renamed B-26.

(Perhaps also worth mentioning - since the "F" designator in the USAAF was used to designate photo-reconnaissance aircraft, when the USAF started using "F" for "Fighter", the designation for photo-recon aircraft also had to be changed. The result is that they went to the letter "R" for "Reconnaissance". What was designated a F-6D during WWII with the USAAF (the photo-recon version of the P-51D), was designated an RF-51D in USAF (post-1947) service.)

Last edited by JohnTerrell on Thu Nov 27, 2014 10:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.

[Snake45]

They are two totally different planes, the B-26 Marauder was built by Martin as a medium bomber, The Douglas A-26 Invader was a Attack bomber built by Douglas. After WWII the B-26 Marauder was retired and the A-26 was re-designated the B-26 Invader. During Vietnam, bombers could not be based out of Thailand, so the B-26 Invader was changed back into the A-26.
Clear as mud ?

This. Also, around 1947 or '48, when USAF went from P designation to F for fighters and from F to RF for photorecon, they did away with the A-for-Attack designation as they had gotten rid of all the A-airplanes except the A-26. I suppose just so it wouldn't become an A-orphan, the Invader became the B-26 (since the Marauders were all gone). It's a shame they got rid of the As, because the F-105 SHOULD have been an A-something, as that's what it was--it was never a "fighter."

Whether an Invader is referred to as an A-26 or B-26 depends on exactly which version and, more importantly, WHEN you are talking about it.

[SaxMan]

The change in designation from A-26 to B-26 stuck in the craw of a lot of the Marauder vets...in their mind, there could only be one B-26, and that was the Marauder.

It is exceptionally confusing even to people who have some knowledge of aircraft, let alone your average layperson. I remember bumping into it the first time as a boy at a toy store looking for a model to build when I saw Monogram's B-26 Invader. I remember looking at the box very strangely, as I had already built Revell's 1/72 scale Flak Bait, and this was the strangest looking Marauder I had ever seen. At the time, I figured it was some kind of super-duper Marauder. Later, I learned it was a completely separate plane.

As has been stated above, whether you use the A-26 / B-26 designation is more dependent on the "when".

1940s: A-26
1950s: B-26
1960s: A-26

They tend to be used interchangeably when talking about their role as fire bombers in subsequent years. For the restored models, they are usually designated by the way they are restored: Korean War Invaders are referred to as B-26s, World War II and Vietnam era ones are A-26s...French ones tend to be referred to as B-26s.

[Matt Gunsch]

for me, if it is built by Douglas, it is a A-26, Martin is a B-26

[K5DH]

I recall reading that before "R" became the designation for Reconnaisance, it meant Restricted from Combat.

Interesting discussion!

Now... someone's next assignment is to tell us what ALL of the letters mean!

[Ken]

It's a shame they got rid of the As, because the F-105 SHOULD have been an A-something, as that's what it was--it was never a "fighter."

Of course the A's made a comeback around 1962 and a good example is the AD series becoming the A-1. I can't think of any USAF "attack" squadrons though, as A-10s are still in designated "fighter" squadrons.

While you make a point about the F-105, I suspect there would be many to disagree, especially given the MiG kills the F-105 racked up. Then again, so did some Skyraiders ...

Ken

[JohnB]

I recall reading that before "R" became the designation for Reconnaisance, it meant Restricted from Combat.

But that was a status or special purpose prefix...not the type letter/designation. So it would have been RB-17B...not R-17B.


Perhaps a better example is R for Rotorcraft.
In WWII helicopters had the R designation...Sikorsky R-4, 5 and 6.
H for Helicopter came about in 1948.

[GARY HILTON]

It does get perplexing...have a lot of trouble with making some people understand there IS a difference between a PV-2 and a P2V...Oh...and there is an early helicopter call the PV-2....

[Matt Gunsch]

It does get perplexing...have a lot of trouble with making some people understand there IS a difference between a PV-2 and a P2V...Oh...and there is an early helicopter call the PV-2....

What is confusing, one has 2 engines and twin tails,
the other has 2 engines turning, 2 jets burning, and a training wheel under the nose,
and the last one is soo ugly the earth expels it,
seems simple to me

[Snake45]

It's a shame they got rid of the As, because the F-105 SHOULD have been an A-something, as that's what it was--it was never a "fighter."

Of course the A's made a comeback around 1962 and a good example is the AD series becoming the A-1. I can't think of any USAF "attack" squadrons though, as A-10s are still in designated "fighter" squadrons.

While you make a point about the F-105, I suspect there would be many to disagree, especially given the MiG kills the F-105 racked up. Then again, so did some Skyraiders ...

Ken

The A designation never went away in the USN/USMC.

[JohnB]

It does get perplexing...

Nah!!!
Easy stuff, especially if you've been studying it since you're 9.
In fact once a year I try to explain the pre-62 Navy designation system...lots of fun!

Speaking of designations, the number 47 seems popular. B,C,F,H,O,P and T mission types has a "47" model.
I can't think of another number used as much.

[Snake45]

Speaking of designations, the number 47 seems popular. B,C,F,H,O,P and T mission types has a "47" model.
I can't think of another number used as much.

Hmmmm, let's try with "F4": F4B, F4C, F4D, F4F, F4H, F4U, and THEN we finally hit the F-4(B, C, D, E, etc.)...oh, and we almost skipped over the F-4 photorecon Lightnings....

[CraigQ]

Just don't call an Invader a B-26 within earshot of an old Marauder man...

Last edited by CraigQ on Fri Nov 28, 2014 9:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.