Best ETO fighter from 1939-1942

[wmaxt]

For what its worth my order would be

Equal First Spit 9 and 190
they were to close to call and it depended on the pilot and strategic position. If pushed, I would give it to the 190 for its versatility.

Close second P38. - I haven't seen any example of a P38 outfighting a Spitfire in a trial. Robin Olds was an exceptional pilot who could do things that most pilots couldn't. An exceptional pilot in any of the above planes would almost certainly beat an average pilot in any other.

Third 109F
It couldn't match the above three planes but was better than the P40. The Spit 5 was a good match for the 109F but the Spit 9 beat it.

Fourth P40
Sorry but I believe it to be well outclassed by the others unless at low level. It could take damage, but so could the 190 and P38. Its armament was better than the 109F, about the same as the Spit and worse than the P38 and 190.

Happy to be proved wrong in any of the above

I can understand where your comming from.

Beneth 15,000ft the P-40 was a good match for the Bf-109F as a fighter and better tacticaly. I stand on what I said earlier, it's as much a matter of who your fighting for. The aircraft were that close in performance.

Its true the P-38F were the begining but they were also in service making elimination because they were relatively few is not fair. Were loking for the best that were there, not the biggest impact. The F,G and H were very compettitive with their contemporary rivals, though above 20k it took the J/K models to be truly competant against them every where.

There is a story about a P-38H and a Griffon Spit where the Spit gave up after the P-38 was able to get firing position several times and the Spit none. I've seen tests where the Spit could out turn it but mostly just comments like 'Even the Spitfire pilots consider their mortality when faced with a P-38'. And finaly Gunther Rall comparing a Spit to a P-38 "it maneuvers about as well". No reference to models. Once again a lot is due to pilot experiance/prefference.

wmaxt

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Despiste all of this, the P-40 could absorb more damage and still dish more out than any of the mentioned fighters. It may not have been the most glamorus, but it got the job done, and it worked well as a fighter bomber/close support aircraft.

More than a Fw-190A? Whatever, you are smoking crack!

 

[lesofprimus]

Try sending a P-40 to attack a box of B-17's, then we'll see which can absorb more punishment...

Dish out more punishment???? Doubt that..... 2x 20mm, 2x 30mm, 2x 15mm wins hands down....

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Try sending a P-40 to attack a box of B-17's, then we'll see which can absorb more punishment..

 

[MacArther]

if it was as bad as you say, then why did America produce it even when its successors were in large enough numbers to take its place? My theory is that the P40 had proven itself as a tough machine, and only the increasing speed of arial combat forced it to be phased out.

 

[Gnomey]

That is going to hurt!

 

[syscom3]

if it was as bad as you say, then why did America produce it even when its successors were in large enough numbers to take its place?

Upon America's entry into WW2, the P40 and P39 were the only two fighters in mass production (I'm not talking about naval aircraft either). Since you have to go to war with what you have, the P40 was thrust into the front lines. In the Pacific, the P40 performed decently because of the nature of the war. In Europe, it was different. The 109/190/Spit could outperform it under nearly all conditions.

Once the P38 and P47 were under production, the P40 was pushed aside. But, as many people understand with weapons manufacturing, once a plane is in full scale production, its hard to "just" stop it.

 

[MacArther]

So maybe I'm a bit biased. I personally believe that not enough credit is given to the P40, and that the last prototype model could have given the P51 a run for its money, if not beat it.

 

[Glider]

Be fair everyone. The 190 with 2x20, 2x30 and 2x15 wasn't 1942 and being so loaded, is probably the one 190 that the P40 could take on.

As long as the P40 didn't wander in front of it.

 

[syscom3]

I didnt think the P40's could fly up to 30,000 ft, let alone fight it out up there.

 

[MacArther]

They couldn't, but the Fw-190 was used in the raider role early on, so the P40 would have a chance to nail 'em at the lower altitudes where the P40 held the marginal advantage.

P.S. Thanks for the go between Glider

 

[Glider]

Intersting point, but could a 190 lugging that lot? B17's cruised at 25,000ft and P40 could make 30,000, just.

That said you missed the point of my posting.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

if it was as bad as you say, then why did America produce it even when its successors were in large enough numbers to take its place? My theory is that the P40 had proven itself as a tough machine, and only the increasing speed of arial combat forced it to be phased out.

Yeah the P-40 was a good aircraft at the beginning of the war, however a Spitfire or Bf-109 would outperform or outfight a P-40 anyday and anytime of the war. An Fw-190 would outperform a Bf-109 and would out arm a Bf-109 so it certainly would outtfly and outfight a P-40. The P-40 is not even in the same class as a Fw-190, Spitfire, or Bf-109. You can be biased all you want but facts are facts.

 

[MacArther]

Some one look up the XP-40Q, that is the model that I think would have given the P51 a run for its money.
P.S. If you could post the stats or pictures (cause I cant find any aside from kotfsc.com) that would be helpful and really nice.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Some one look up the XP-40Q, that is the model that I think would have given the P51 a run for its money.
P.S. If you could post the stats or pictures (cause I cant find any aside from kotfsc.com) that would be helpful and really nice.

Don't think so!

It only had 4 .50 guns, was slower and not as maneuvable. Here's some other info...

"The XP-40Q Was elvulated by the USAAF But the end of the war led to cancellation of development of the Warhawk and the second XP-40Q prototype ended its carrer as a postwar air racer.

On October 1945,a Curtiss XP-40Q suffered an engine failure during a test flight near Muroc,California and belly landed in a sweet patato field.The pilot was not injured.

XP-40Q Max Speed was 422 mph at 20,500 ft.
Service Ceiling was 39,000 ft. "

http://www.pioneeraero.co.nz/xp-40q_version.htm

Not a bad plane, it wasn't close to the P-51.

 

[wmaxt]

The Fw-190A was very effective below 20,000ft and better than the P-40. The Me-109E/F was better at altitudes of 20,000ft and over, by 15,000ft and below the P-40 was a decent match performance wise had heaver armment and was both tougher and more versatile. After the 109G and later planes came out a gap in relative performance P-40 vrs Me-109 showed the 109 had a more adaptable airframe.

wmaxt

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Some one look up the XP-40Q, that is the model that I think would have given the P51 a run for its money.

I dont think the P-40 anything would have given the P-51 a run for its money. The P-40 was outclassed by aircraft on all sides of the war by 1942.

 

[Jabberwocky]

In terms of speed the best P-40 was the P-40F/L with a Packard Merlin V-1650-1. It could get to about 365 mph at 20,000 feet. Most of the 1300 produced were sent to Russia as Lend-Lease, but about 120 served with the RAF, RAAF and SAAF.

The P-40L was a lightened version intended for short-ranged interception. They stripped out most of the armour, some fuel tanks and deleted the out two wing-guns. The result was a modest increase in climb and level speed.

If you look at speed, climb and time to height the P-40 was never really competitive. Still, it could outroll anything short of a 190 or a clipped Spitfire and was decently manouevrable below 15,000 feet. It also had a good reputation as a fighter bomber, begause it was rugged and nice to fly at low altitudes.

Against a 190A any P-40 is outclassed in terms of speed, accleration, roll, climb and armament. The Allison and Packard Merlins thst it used were probably more susecptibale to damage than the radial BMW of the Focke-Wulf.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

I personally think it was outclassed by the Fw-190, Bf-109, Spitfire, P-38, P-51 and I htink most people will agree.

 

[wmaxt]

I personally think it was outclassed by the Fw-190, Bf-109, Spitfire, P-38, P-51 and I htink most people will agree.

After '42 no doubt it was as developed as it could be. Prior to that it was fairly compettitive with the 109 and early Spits at lower altitudes. It was always better than the P-51 at ground attack - same armament less vulnerability.

wmaxt