This article is within the scope of theMilitary history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see alist of open tasks. To use this banner, please see thefull instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history
This article has been checked against the followingcriteria for B-class status:
This article is within the scope of theAviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists ofopen tasks andtask forces. To use this banner, please see thefull instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation
This article has been checked against the followingcriteria for B-class status:
Furthermore, the Boeing link gives the internal North American designation of the production BT-9 as the NA-19. Do you have a source for the NA-57 designation?--Robert Merkel12:13, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
This variants issue is quite confusing. In French service (1939-42), an early model with fabric-covered rear fuselage was designated as NAA-57 while the later, fully-metallic model (still with fixed landing gear) was designated as NAA-64.PpPachy17:55, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That is because the main source is so tertiary it doesn't know it doesn't have a clue about the subject - about one step below even an encyclopedia as a source. BT-9 is the USAACs designation for the several variants of theNA-16 family it specifically used, which comprised a much larger number of variations. To make matters more confusing, North American identified its aircraft in several different ways, so the NA-16-2H was the same as the NA-20 (which was a variant for Honduras) - but then they dropped the NA-16-# codes for later members of the family such as the NA-57 for France. The whole series (including the later AT-6) was designed in such a way as to allow interchangeable components, so that a wide variety of engines could be used, as well as fixed or retractable undercarriage, fabric or metal fuselages (of different lengths) several different outer wing panels (as a result of problems with spinning), round, square and triangular rudders, and either armed or unarmed, with several different canopy designs. A lot of mixing and matching occurred, with types like the NA-57 and NA-64 using a mixture of new and old parts. The NA-16 page is the place for clearing all this confusion up (there being basic trainer, advanced trainer, bomber, fighter and observation variants), not the BT-9 page, which should just be about the USAAC's basic trainer.
