Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
absolutely, and I think that the P-40 would have been remembered as a GREAT fighter, in-between the Spitfire and the Hurricane. It's sad that so many people think it's a dog.
I'd never suggest that a P-40 could outperform a P-51 on its' best day. But could it fight a 109-E on equal terms, that's my question.Undoubtedly, a Merlin engined P-40 would not outperform the P-51. I just wonder what the speed would have been at altitude for a P-40 with the 2 stage / 2 speed Merlin. Maybe 400 mph at 25 thousand feet?
I'd never suggest that a P-40 could outperform a P-51 on its' best day. But could it fight a 109-E on equal terms, that's my question.
We did see thisLets see if this works. I didn't work tonight, so I played on the computer. I think we would have liked to see this:
I take some issue with your view that people viewed the P40 as a dog. The P40 was there when it was needed but the war kicked off and requirements ran away from the P40 design, something else was needed; it doesn't make the P40 a dog any more than the same near-obsolescence made the Hurricane a dog at the end of the Battle of Britain.
.
Im a P-40 fan, overall favorite aircraft
I think down low it can take on a Bf 109
Weeeell OKHm, I disagree with that. As long as the pilot can trade altitude for airspeed, he has more options and accordingly more opportunities to use skill.
If you're on the deck, you either have the raw power to fly a manoeuvre, or you don't - no way to drop a bit to borrow the energy.
Accordingly, near the ground aircraft performance becomes more important, not less
Below: The 420mph XP40-Q offerred too little too late [USAF]
There weren't that manyDid the XP-40Q have the same external 2nd stage supercharger as the P-63? And is the same arrangement that the F-82 had (later models)?
So basically, if Allison had developed a 2-stage supersharger sooner, the P-40Q could have been the definitive P-40 and would have been a good second-best inline dogfighter to the P-51.There weren't that many
but the second ZP-40Q was a P40-K, s/n 42-45722 that had a reduced chin cowl installed, four blade propeller, clipped wing tips (at a later date), with an Allison V-1710-121 fitted with a 2-stage supercharger and water injection that was capable of 1425hp and powering the aircraft up to 422 mph. The third XP40-Q was a P40-N, s/n 43-24571 and basically had the same modification as the second.
XP40-Q Specifications:
Span: 35 ft 3 in
Length: 35 ft 4 in
Height: 12 ft 4 in
Wing Area: n/a
Empty Weight: n/a
Loaded Weight: 9,000 lb
Max. Speed: 422 mph
Cruise Speed: n/a
Ceiling: 39,000 ft
Rate of Climb: 3,000 fpm
Range: 650 to 1,400 miles
Powerplant: Allison V-1710-121 of 1,425 hp
I don't know how that compares with the P63 or F82
So basically, if Allison had developed a 2-stage supersharger sooner, the P-40Q could have been the definitive P-40 and would have been a good second-best inline dogfighter to the P-51.
Question answered!
There weren't that many
but the second ZP-40Q was a P40-K, s/n 42-45722 that had a reduced chin cowl installed, four blade propeller, clipped wing tips (at a later date), with an Allison V-1710-121 fitted with a 2-stage supercharger and water injection that was capable of 1425hp and powering the aircraft up to 422 mph. The third XP40-Q was a P40-N, s/n 43-24571 and basically had the same modification as the second.
XP40-Q Specifications:
Span: 35 ft 3 in
Length: 35 ft 4 in
Height: 12 ft 4 in
Wing Area: n/a
Empty Weight: n/a
Loaded Weight: 9,000 lb
Max. Speed: 422 mph
Cruise Speed: n/a
Ceiling: 39,000 ft
Rate of Climb: 3,000 fpm
Range: 650 to 1,400 miles
Powerplant: Allison V-1710-121 of 1,425 hp
I don't know how that compares with the P63 or F82
I wouldn't anticipate its use as a bomber escort unless they also got large drop tanks and perhaps a reduction in armor and guns to save weight. (not a bad idea anyway).Clay if your figures are correct on range the P-40Q would have been inadequate for primary USAAF doctrine for bomber escort (I'm pretty sure the 1400 mi range was with ferry tanks - but not sure about this) but pretty decent in continued TAC role. But would you want it in lieu of the P-38 or P-47 at same stage of development - leaving it to compete with P-51B going forward?
I wouldn't anticipate its use as a bomber escort unless they also got large drop tanks and perhaps a reduction in armor and guns to save weight. (not a bad idea anyway).
On the other hand I believe that it would have been much more effective fighting A6Ms in the pacific and possibly (with folding wings) a replacement for the F4F.
On the other hand, had Allison had the -100 and -123 available for the P-51A in 1940-41 - the Mustang would have overwhelmed the USAAF and likely been ready for 8th AF in 1942..
I doubt that the P-40Q could have made the Mustang's emergence difficult. If Curtiss had been able to produce more P-40s the British wouldn't have been interested in North American's alternate idea. For the same reason I don't think the P-51A with the two-stage Allison could have totally beaten the P-40 any more than the Spitfire really beat out the Hurricane. For production reasons those two great fighters served concurrently.I agree.
The basic issue with the P-40 was that it was a draggy a/c relative to the 51 re: range and top speed.
USN didn't take an inline engine in WWII for anything important - but had they been presented with a P-40Q in 1940, it might have easily replaced the F4F.. and made the emrgence of the Mustang difficult.
by 1942 the F4U was coming off production and the F6f was in test so the P-40Q as a contemporary would not have been suitable given USN preference for radials
On the other hand, had Allison had the -100 and -123 available for the P-51A in 1940-41 - the Mustang would have overwhelmed the USAAF and likely been ready for 8th AF in 1942..