Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
A couple of things -I think that is overstating the case quite a bit, both A6M and Ki-43 were still shooting down Corsairs, P-38s, Kittyhawks, Airacobras, etc. even Hellcats in 1943 and 44. It was nice that it was possible to dive away and extend, (or in the case of a P-38, go into a shallow high speed climb to disengage) and with some types it was certainly easier than others. But there was nothing automatic about it, and in fact the Ki-43 was not as "easy" to dive away from as a Zero since it didn't have the same stiffening of controls in a dive that the Zero did.
Seems like some of y'all are losing the spirit of this thread, and are just trying to find something to fight about. So I think I am 'done' discussing all this. "What if" threads seem to just make some people angry for no real reason.
As for the Wildcat vs. P-40 discussion, I was treating it (and you) respectfully, even though it's pretty obvious.
Depends on the "what if"Seems like some of y'all are losing the spirit of this thread, and are just trying to find something to fight about. So I think I am 'done' discussing all this. "What if" threads seem to just make some people angry for no real reason.
I wonder what the includes or what the exchange rate wasaround $42,500
I am not trying to fight and I am not angry, I am trying to get this thread back on track. If you see that as angry fighting, ok.
I am not done with that discussion because I am angry or something, I am done because it leads nowhere, we will just agree to disagree no matter what we will wrote.
I wonder what the includes or what the exchange rate was
P-40K had US cost of $42,490 in 1942 but I don't know it that was the total cost or what Curtiss was paid. The engine, prop, guns, radios etc were Government Furnished Equipment after all?
When did Australia have a chance to obtain P-36 in mid or late 1940? Curtiss were building P-36 from May 1938 to July 1939, then February to August 1940, December 1940 as well as January, March and April 1941.Australia got chance to get them (or at least try to get them) after fall of France in summer 1940. But as I wrote before, nobody in Australia wanted single seat fighters before Pearl Harbor (at least not officialy). RAAF insisted on two seat fighters, that is why they ordered Beaufighters.
Wiki has problems."In December 1942, the Australian War Cabinet made arrangements for the local production of the P-51D Mustang. These arrangements were finalized in November 1943, with Commonwealth Aircraft Corporation to build 690 aircraft through kits supplied by North American Aviation (NAA).[2] Only the first 100 unassembled aircraft were delivered, and four reportedly had the "razorback" style canopy of the P-51B/C variant. 80 of the kits were assembled under the designation CA-17 Mustang Mk 20 with Packard V-1710-3 Merlin engines, the remainder being used for spare parts"
Northern or southern summer or fall? It makes a 6 month difference.Some "want if" discuses what options the Australians had in the summer to fall of 1941 to try to set up a production line for fighters in Australia,
From the late 1930's and into 1943 Australia had to take less than it wanted or build its own. Requested allocation amounts were cut or delayed with little chance of appeal. P-40s lost en route were not replaced, early Spitfires en route were diverted to the Middle East.The Government didn't even want it by mid/late '43 and were aghast when Wackett wanted to produce another 200 just to keep the CAC factory running.
They only agreed to 50 to placate Wackett - keep the factory open and retain the skilled workers in preparation for the Mustang.
Accountants were shocked at the end of the war. The Boomerang programme was $2,900,000 over budget with a unit cost, plus spares, of around $42,500.
At that price, could we have just bought something? Or would postage/packing and availability with the World burning be the biggest issue?
USAAF P-40 contract AC-12414 on 26 April 1939 for 134 P-40 serials 39-156 to 289, then 390 P-40 serials 40-292 to 681. Production from May 1940. In 1939/40 France added 100 P-40 to their P-36 order, production from June 1940.When were the first large P-40 orders placed?
A number of people over the years have come up with an idea and then tried to force it to fit when the original time line turned out to be on the outer edges.I wasn't trying to wiggle out of a timeline, though I guess I can see why some people got that impression. I was trying to 'funnel into one'.
Like most here, I know a few things about WW2 aircraft, but neither the Boomerang, nor the Hawk are subjects I'm deeply familiar with or have a lot of sources for, nor the later models of the Wildcat. I figured this thread would be a good way to learn. Most of the other planes I mentioned in the OP I also don't know all that well, beyond the fact that they looked interesting. I figure somebody here knew various pieces though so we could all find out. Both the Hawk and the Wildcat used both the Wright R-1820 and the P&W R-1830 at different points in their development cycle (which to me was a bit confusing). The former came in a two speed version and the latter in a two stage version - I didn't know the precise details of all these variations until we opened up this thread. I'm still not certain of the precise timeline but it seems like both the two speed 1820 and the two stage 1830 were around from a fairly early date, though they didn't offer much over previous engines besides a moderate increase in operational altitude. On the other hand, it sounds like the water-injected 1820 came too late to be relevant.
The question would then be, could a two-stage 1830 or a two speed 1820 be incorporated into a hypothetical design that was better than a Boomerang, either a Wildcat or a Hawk or something else. Could it then be made combat ready vis a vis SS fuel tanks, armor, and enough guns, ammunition and fuel to be useful. Well we know that we can have a ~7,000 lb Wildcat with all that which will perform reasonably well. I suspect we can have the Hawk as well, especially if we put the same engine in it. But how would it compare to the Wildcat?
Next question is could they make some Hawks, or Wildcats, or Gloster F5s or J22 or pick your alternative, quickly enough to get some into action in early or mid 1943? Reading the Wiki on the Boomerang, I see the following about the early operational history:
"No. 83 Squadron became the first fighter unit to receive Boomerangs, when several were delivered to replace Airacobras at Strathpine Airfield in Strathpine, Queensland on 10 April 1943.[10] A few weeks afterward, CA-12s were also received by a frontline air defence unit, No. 84 Squadron which was stationed on Horn Island Airfield, in Torres Strait. The third Boomerang fighter unit, No. 85 Squadron, like No. 83 Squadron, was performing home defence duties, at RAAF Guildford (known later as Perth Airport); the Boomerangs replaced the squadron's Buffaloes. "
Whether an Aussie Hawk or Wildcat could be ready by mid 1943 remains to be determined. We'd have to get into the weeds on production. What would it cost? How much manpower would they need? How different would the production line be from the Wirraway etc.? What exactly would have to be sent? I know it's not the 21st Century so they didn't have the internet or 3D printers. They'd have to physically send over blueprints, tools, jigs? Probably some people might need to be sent too, I'm not sure. Whatever they needed to get something into production by late 1942 and into the field by mid 1943. Maybe that is impossible. But maybe not.
So I guess the third question is, could one of these other aircraft replace a Boomerang in the home defense role better than Buffalos at Perth or Airacobras in Strathpine? Could one do the more demanding air defense job at Horn Island, where they were much more likely to encounter Japanese aircraft.
This one is really interesting to me, and gets into the whole Wildcat vs. early P-40 debate. I think the P-40 was a better land based fighter than a Wildcat, overall, but I do think (thanks to the two stage engine, and being a bit lighter) the Wildcat, at least the F4F-3, was a better air defense fighter to defend an airfield or port when the Japanese are sending in their twin-engined bombers at maximum altitude. Better for Perth or Darwin, probably better for Henderson field, maybe better for the Horn Island job that the Boomerangs were plugged into in other words. And maybe better at escorting B-24s or B-17s. Maybe not better for the fighting at Milne Bay or low-level raids against shipping or Lae or Truk or Rabaul.
The fourth question is, would a Wildcat or Hawk have any scope for enough improvement to still be useful compared to what the British and Americans were shipping? That is a tougher one. Corsairs, Mustangs, and Spitfire Mk VIII are on the way. The Australians themselves are going to be making Mustangs.
Personally, for what it's worth, I think it was worthwhile for the Australians to develop some kind of native aviation industry, even if they made planes that were only really useful in combat for a year or so. A secondary goal compared to protecting the homeland and contributing to the war effort, but a worthy one.
They change the calendar in Australia?Northern or southern summer or fall? It makes a 6 month difference.
Well, if you count the Hawk 75s as part of the P-36 production run (or more correctly if you count the P-36 as part of the Hawk 75 production run) they may have been an opportunity sometime in 1940. That is when Curtiss supplied 54 Hawk 75A-5s to China as part of the scheme to set up assembly in China. The left overs are what wound up in India.When did Australia have a chance to obtain P-36 in mid or late 1940? Curtiss were building P-36 from May 1938 to July 1939, then February to August 1940, December 1940 as well as January, March and April 1941.
When did Australia have a chance to obtain P-36 in mid or late 1940? Curtiss were building P-36 from May 1938 to July 1939, then February to August 1940, December 1940 as well as January, March and April 1941.
Given the expectation Australia would face naval raiding forces the RAAF wanted Beaufighters in 1939 and again in 1941, they were to fly escort to the Beauforts given the possibility the enemy naval forces would have an aircraft carrier, the over water distances involved mandated in RAF/RAAF eyes the need for a dedicated navigator. With logic like naval fighters were inferior to land based ones, Japanese fighters were more inferior again, so a heavy twin engined escort fighter would be quite effective.
Regards Curtiss. Or Grumman.
Do we know if they would have agreed to allow licensed manufacturing of any of their products in Australia?
Licensed manufacturing would be a loss of income to the original firm?
I know Douglas and Boeing refused.
Well, if you count the Hawk 75s as part of the P-36 production run (or more correctly if you count the P-36 as part of the Hawk 75 production run) they may have been an opportunity sometime in 1940. That is when Curtiss supplied 54 Hawk 75A-5s to China as part of the scheme to set up assembly in China. The left overs are what wound up in India.
It make take some fancy foot work and it may depend on the numbers wanted and how much support Curtiss has to give (less than was promised?) but it is not outside the realm of possibility. How likely or how fast any results would show up are certainly questions but Curtiss was selling to anybody who could make it to the door with money in hand.
Hawk 75A-6 Norway
Hawk 75A-7 Netherlands May-June arrived in Netherlands east Indies.
Hawk 75A-8 2nd Norwegian batch.
Hawk 75A-9 Iran (the March-April 1941 production you listed earlier)
Overseas production was different but given the right connections ????
This is hypotetical scenario of course, I am fully aware of RAAF "two seater fighter only" policy before the war with Japan and I even mention it few times in this discusion. Let's asume for a moment that RAAF wanted single seater instead of long range two seaters.
It depends what do you exactly mean by "obtain". Australia have a chance to order P-36s for RAAF in mid or late 1940, in that case they will be delivered sometime in 1941. Summer 1940 in my post was date of fall of France and I wrote about that because Great Britain took over the French orders including Hawks75A-4 (Mohawk IV in RAF). Some of them end up in SAAF service, so I think there is pretty good chance that Australia will by able to negotiate delivery of Mohawks IV too. Another option was to negotiate an delivery of Vultee 48C (P-66) from Swedish order.
Some interesting info is in "War cabinet agendum - No 151/1940" (NAA: A2671, 151/1940), nothing about consideration of P-36 of course, but still interesting.
I don't know about Grumman, but Hawk 75 was manufactured in Argentina so Curtiss will most likely allow it in Australia too.
In June 1940, just a few hours before the French surrender, all the aircraft orders with US companies were taken over by Britain. That included the Hawk 75s which became RAF Mohawks.What about the French Hawks that didn't get delivered?
The French Hawks wound up via Britain in South Africa and India.I think the French Hawks could have been a good start. Maybe P-66 as well though didn't they have the dreaded 'wet wing'?