That is true because the USAF still had a lot of LIQUID COOLED P-51s vice AIR COOLED P-47s. All three planes I mentioned were AIR cooled, thus would not stop running because of lack of coolent, due to anti-aircraft fire.
Also both of the two planes under consideration are turbo-props, which causes me to wonder if that makes them more vulnerable to a heat seeking missile such as SA-14 or Redeye? To my thinking, air cooled prop jobs don’t have that concentrated heat source. Although overall engine heat may make them vulnerable to IR missiles. I’m no expert on that and perhaps there is a knowledgeble person her on FR that is.
Amen...my old man flew Spitfires for the RCAF during the Battle of Britain and was shot down twice. Both times due to "glycolling", or loss of coolant. The radiator hanging down was one of the cool visuals about the Spit, but it sure was an Achilles heel.
Thanks for the ping. I don’t know about the relative heat signatures of liquid-cooled versus air-cooled aircraft engines. I just hope we don’t give the Afghans any A-10’s.