Yes, the Douglas A-20 was a great example of an essentially pre-war design, which excelled as a ground- (and sea-surface) attack bomber for all the allies - Brits, Ozzies and Ruskies - right alongside many, many later designs which didn't add anything particularly more than what the A-20 could already do. So, it doesn't surprise me (though I didn't know about this - thank you!) that the RAAF also had great results with 'em in tank-plinking.
In fact, the more I learn about the history in this country of weapons and their procurement, the more I am ready to conclude that all the same things could have been achieved with maybe 25% of the systems/expenses which were actually disposed of.
The even more penultimate example (and another one of my favorites) being the Douglas SkyRaider; a late-WWII design which remained ideal for practically all ground-attack (with the notable exception of Wild Weasel) clear through to the 1970s! I am beginning to suspect that, for ground-attack we could have got by without all those more "advanced" systems; the A-4 (much as I hate to say it); the F-105 (many of which got shot down, anyway) and the A-7 - not to mention a half-dozen more jet fighters inappropriately designated for ground attack - by simply using a smarter combination of SkyRaiders and escorting jets (e.g., Phantom-IIs) for AA supression.
I think the above were primarily the result of business and not military considerations; to keep as many defense contractors going as possible - and so we end up with a permanent, war economy - and the mess we're in today. Eisenhower's farewell "Military-Industrial Complex" warning was more right, IMHO, than even he let on. Too bad he didn't combat the problem harder at the beginning of his time in office. Or maybe by then he was finding that it was already too late...
Oh Jeez - drinking a lot of coffee again this morning!
Anyway, I will always admire the A-20 as a graceful aircraft, (more than) effective at the tasks required of it. And thanks for the encouragement, Donny!