No, not inappropriate.. and appreciated.. If there is one thing i would LOVE to do, its would bre to put an end to the bickering between the P-61 camp and the mossy camp once and for all ( but i font imagine theres much possibility at that ). Your defining mossies in such a succinct way has clearly put them in a completely different realm than the P-61. Although there is overlap, the two clearly are not even related, and thats what ive been attempting to say all along ( albeit with zero success.. meh, i'm a number cruncher, not an orator ). They are both splendid aircraft. The only thing they have in common was that they were both purpose designed aircraft that were adapted for other roles. The mossie became a nightfighter and the p-61 became an intruder. Thats really about as close of a comparison as can be made..
Of course, we could compare individual systems, but where would that get us?? The P-61 could carry bombs, but its crews werent trained as bombardiers, sooo,, when it came to dropping bombs, they sucked.. Not the planes fault.. With the P-61s four canon alone its considered to be the most devastating aircraft of world war two. it could shred anything.. Then when they added back the turret on top ( politics again, during the later half of the P-61A cycle and the first half of the P-61B cycle, all turrets being manufactured were slated for the b-29 ) and cemented the title.. The Mossie didnt have that kind of firepower. it wasnt originally designed for it. Not the planes fault..
its like trying to determine which is better, a fast freight locomotive or a bulldozer. The P-61 was a bulldozer. It had two speeds, slow and 421 mph ( although pilots were known to fly it past 470 mph in dives ) but it packed a major wallop in its guns. The mossie was fast freight. It was capable of a lot of devastation, but it wasnt a bulldozer. Speed wise, it didnt fly as slowly as the P-61 but its top end was about the same..
They just arent comparable to each other..