<p>Stretching back over a period of many years, it had become traditional to utilize light two-seat biplanes for primary flying training. While this meant that the inexperienced pilot began his tuition in what was generally accepted to be the most easily mastered of all airplanes—slow, stable, and forgiving of errors and hard treatment—there was a school of thought which suggested that this bred overconfidence, making the next stage of training more difficult. This latter school thought that a reasonably stable aircraft should by all means be used, but why not a monoplane with higher wing loading which needed to be thoughtfully flown for more of the time, thus ensuring that the step to be climbed from primary to advanced training was not quite so high, and less likely to cause a tumble.
</p>
<p>This was the line of thought which led to a break with tradition so far as the US Army Air Corps was concerned, and with a need for more primary training aircraft in 1939, it carried out an evaluation of the Fairchild company's M62 two-seat monoplane. By comparison with the US Army's most advanced biplane trainer then in service (the Stearman PT-13), maximum speed, rate of climb and service ceiling were very nearly the same. The wing loading of the M62 was almost 43 per cent higher, however, which meant that its stalling speed was also higher and its low-speed handling characteristics just that little more critical. It seemed to be exactly what was needed, and in 1940 an initial order was placed for these trainers under the designation PT-19.
</p>
<p>Construction of this aircraft was fairly typical of its type and period, the cantilever monoplane wing mounted low on the fuselage being a conventional two-spar wooden structure with plywood skins. The ailerons comprised light alloy frames with fabric covering, and manually-operated split type trailing-edge flaps were provided. Fuselage structure was of welded steel tube, with mainly fabric covering, but the tail unit was all-wood, except for metal-frame fabric-covered rudder and elevators, and landing gear was of the nonretractable tailwheel type. The powerplant of the initial PT-19 version consisted of a 175-hp (130-kW) Ranger L-440-1 inverted inline engine, driving a two-bladed fixed-pitch propeller. Two open cockpits accommodated pupil and instructor, and although dual controls were standard, instrumentation of the PT-19 was only very basic.
</p>
<p>Delivery of PT-19s began in 1940, and the aircraft soon proved that they were not lethal instruments of destruction in the hands of embryo pilots. With the expansion of flying training in 1941, Fairchild rapidly discovered they had contracts for more airplanes than they could possibly build in their existing factory. Steps were taken to double the capacity of their plant, and arrangements made with Aeronca Aircraft Corporation at Middletown, Ohio, and the St Louis Aircraft Corporation at St Louis, Missouri, to initiate production on their behalf. At a later stage the Howard Aircraft Corporation of St Charles, Illinois, provided an additional source of production.
</p>
<p>A total of 270 PT-19s was built before a new PT-19A version was introduced on the production lines of Fairchild, Aeronca and St Louis, these companies turning out 3,182, 477 and 33, respectively. The only significant change in this version was the introduction of the slightly more powerful Ranger L-440-3 engine and some refinements in detail. The PT-19A, like the original version, had only basic instrumentation and so was unsuitable for blind-flying or instrument flight training. This shortcoming was rectified in the subsequent PT-19B, which was provided with full blind-flying instrumentation and a hood to cover the pupil's front cockpit when such training was in progress. Production totalled 774 by Fairchild and 143 by Aeronca.
</p>
<p>The combination of production contracts covering numbers far in excess of those which Fairchild had anticipated with the urgency of the US Army's requirements, resulted in 1942 in a famine of Ranger engines. To resolve the situation the company produced an XPT-23 prototype by the installation of an uncowled Continental R-670 radial engine and, after evaluation, this was put into production with the designation PT-23. A total of 869 was built by Fairchild (two), Aeronca (375), Howard (199) and St Louis (200), as well as 93 by Fleet Aircraft Ltd of Fort Erie, Ontario, for use in the Commonwealth Air Training Scheme which had been established in Canada. A version of the PT-23, with the blind-flying instrumentation and hood which had been introduced on the PT-19B, was built by Howard (150) and St Louis (106) under the designation PT-23A. This was the last version to be built for the USAAF in America, with almost 6,000 delivered before the production lines closed down.
</p>
<p>The PT-23s which Fleet in Canada had built for service under the Commonwealth Air Training Scheme had resulted in the request for a slightly more advanced version, and this reverted to the use of a Ranger L-440-C5 engine. Improvements included a continuous transparent canopy covering both cockpits, with all controls and blind-flight and navigation instruments duplicated in each. And since the temperature in Canada could often be lower than in the USA, cockpit heating and ventilation was provided. Fleet built 1,057 of these in Canada under the designations PT-26A and PT-26B, while Fairchild built another 670 for supply to the RCAF under Lend-Lease: designated PT-26, these had the name Cornell II in RCAF service.
<item><hi format=bold>Performance:</hi> maximum speed 122 mph (196 km/h); cruising speed 101 mph (163 km/h); service ceiling 13,200 ft (4,025 m); range 400 miles (644 km)
<item><hi format=bold>Weights:</hi> empty 2,022 lb (917 kg); maximum take-off 2,736 lb (1,241 kg)
<item><hi format=bold>Dimensions:</hi> span 36 ft 0 in (10.97 m); length 27 ft 8 in (8.45 m); height 7ft 7 in (2.32 m); wing area 200 sq ft (18.58 m<su>2</su>)
