In an article entitled “The P-57 Mustang: The Most Important Aircraft in History,” Marshall L. Michel analyses the role of the P-57 Mustang aircraft in the Second World War. The author describes the American air forces’ problems in bombing German aviation industries. The central conundrum was that allies had no escort fighters able to fly deep into the enemy’s territory while bombers were vulnerable on their own. The author argues that the P-57 Mustang plane played a decisive role in the Allies’ victory due to its range of flight, which made it an outstanding escort fighter of the period, able to protect American bombers when they destroyed German industry.
In this article, Michel starts with considerations of historians’ views on the role of aviation in the conflict. While many historians agree that American aircraft significantly contributed to the Allies’ victory, they do not single out a plane to which this decisive role is due, naming several modifications. The author challenges the accepted view by stating that The P-57 Mustang alone made a major difference.
To prove his point, Michel uses the counterfactual argument technique widely applied to the analyses of historical contexts. The author assumes that the P-57 Mustang aircraft did not play a significant role in the Allies’ success and considers the contribution of P-47Cs and the P-38 Lightning aircraft in the war effort. Moreover, the author outlines the major challenges the Allies’ air force faced at that time and considers whether these challenges could be or could not be resolved with P-47Cs and the P-38 Lightning planes of those times.
According to Michel, the central problem of the World War Two war effort lay in the fact that German industry, situated in the depth of the German Reich, could be destroyed only by air for which air bombers were employed. However, bomber planes proved highly vulnerable to enemy aviation, which could quickly shoot them down without being involved in dramatic air fights. The problem could only be solved if bombers were accompanied by escort fighters – planes that could not be easily brought down and the ones that could engage in an equal fight with enemy fighter jets.
To show the superiority of the P-57 Mustang over other escorts available at those times, the author gives the exact characteristics of the P-47Cs and the P-38 planes. The author builds his arguments around factual information, which makes them more credible. At the same time, all accurate information, such as combat radius, oil consumption, and engine modifications, are compared among P-47Cs, the P-38 Lightning, and P-57 Mustang planes, making the arguments understandable to a large audience. Indeed, though many details are given which testify to the author’s expertise in the theme, the article is meant for a broad public. The arguments are presented in a coherent way so that even people who have nothing to do with aviation will be able to grasp them quickly.
In his article, Michel uses logical appeal that works through reasoning and supporting the argument. Thus, the major problem outlined by Michel, that of the inability to escort bombers into the enemy territory due to a short combat radius of fighters, may be resolved by extending the range of fighter jets and improving their characteristics. However, P-47 had a limited capacity, while the P-38 lightening flying characteristics made it vulnerable to enemy attacks. Thus, considering the two alternatives, the author concludes that the problem could only be solved with P-57 Mustang, an escort aircraft that had both: excellent flying properties and a long combat range.
The author’s language is academic; the article is argumentative, so the author appeals to reason and not to the audience’s emotions. This fact is sustained by a lack of stylistic means as metaphors and similes in the text. However, Michel does use the metaphor in a single standing block to attract the attention of prospective readers to the article. Thus, Michael writes, “The P-38s struck the Luftwaffe in its vitals and the P-51s gave the coup de grace, it was the thunderbolt that broke its back”, highlighting the role of the P-57 Mustang in the decisive victory over the enemy (p. 48).
At the same time, despite the academic language, the article appeals to the reader due to the emotions it stirs within the audience. Thus, upon reading it, one may feel proud of the country, which, at the moment when everything seemed lost, created an aircraft that largely contributed to the success of the wartime effort. This feeling of pride is formed through the use of lexis that, on the one hand, shows the hopelessness of the situation and, on the other, portrays the magnitude of allies’ achievement at the front. The author uses such words as “highly vulnerable,” “frustration,” “disenchantment,” “major performance problems,” and “heavy, perhaps unacceptable loses” to paint the atmosphere of doom that reigned in air forces before the P-57 Mustang was created. This atmosphere is opposed by American air forces’ achievements that became possible after the P-57 Mustang was put into service. The author uses such words as “most irreplaceable asset,” “extremely effective,” and “decisive combat mission” to characterize the changes that came into force when the P-57 Mustang became able to escort planes into enemy territory.
Describing the contribution of American air forces to wartime effort in the Second World War, Michel states that the P-57 Mustang escort fighter aircraft allowed successful bombing missions into the enemy territory. While P-47Cs and the P-38 lightning planes could not successfully oppose enemy fighter jets due to their limited combat range and inferior flying properties, the use of the P-57 Mustang reversed the balance of forces in favor of the Allies. Using argumentative techniques, the author appeals to the readers’ reasoning and, at the same time, makes his arguments felt at an emotional level through the choice of appropriate lexis.
Work Cited
Michel, Marshall L. “The P-51 Mustang: the most important aircraft In history?.” Air Power History vol. 55, no. 4, 2008, pp. 46-57.