Bf-109 vs P-40 (1 Viewer)

[billswagger]

With supercharger gear ratio used in the engines on the "N" aircraft a WER rating of 1410hp was available at 9,500ft (without ram?) which gives the aircraft it's speed of 378mph at 10,000 or 10,500ft? but as the plane climbs above that hight the supercharger looses the ability to supply the extra air and power falls until there is only 1125hp available at 15,500ft. It is at 15,000ft that the "N"s were rated at 343-348mph. This is about 15mph slower than an "E" at the same hight and "E" had even less power at 15,000ft. It's engine maxed out at 11,700ft at 1150hp and lost power above that hight. (it was good for 1490 hp down at 4,900ft though).

Comparisons are also hard to nail down because sources often quote figures where aircraft are tested on different days, giving different ratings and different speeds.

I found a direct comparison of the P-40E to N, putting the N 1000lbs less with the same load (save 30 gal fuel and 6x20lb bombs) as the E.
It noted that the P-40E was made of aluminum alloy, while the N was made of alclad. It had some parts removed such as a pair of 50 cals, but what i found interesting is that the N had an armor protected cooling system, something not found on the E.

They also used different engines but the rated height of the E was considered 15,500 while the rated height of the N was 17,300.
This put rated top speeds of the E at 338, and the N at 364mph at their rated heights.
It is one of the more detailed comparisons that put the N considerably ahead of the E in both speed and climb at rated power.
WER, still becomes a mystery but you can look at engine charts to see the available horsepower at their respective heights and RPMs.
The Allison could shell out 1700+ horses at 3200rpm under 3500ft.
GE also found their Allison F3R (P-40E) and F4R engine could muster as much as 1700 hp at considerably higher altitudes.
My guess would be that the Allison performed generally the same from block to block, but variants differed to accommodate supercharging and reduction gearing as well as propeller types.
The reason WER info is not available to the same extent as other aircraft may have something to do with the lack of any ADI or Water injection system.
Pilot accounts mention running above rated manifold pressure (obviously under FTH) but only pushing the throttle until knocking was heard, and in some cases no knocking occured at all. Pilots reporting 55-60".

I only add to the tangent after reviewing more P-40 data.

This article shares more differences between the variants, and probably uses the same base article I'm referring to as a reference
http://www.adf-serials.com/research/Part2-P40.pdf


Bill

 

[Nxthanos]

I see a lot of votes for the famous 109, and of course technical details and comparisons.

However one fact remains that cannot be disputed.

P-40s almost always got the better of the 109s they fought.

For a plane called 'the best second best' it defeated every plane type it forught from 109 through zeros, and the men who flew it swore by it.

Col Scott of China fame even sugested they build a monument to it including its alison engine at kittyhawk!

Show me all the tech numbers you like, I'll take the winner in combat.

 

[nuuumannn]

P-40 or Bf 109? '109, sorry. That's not necessarily rubbishing the P-40; as there is plenty of evidence that in good hands it was a killer, but we aren't talking pilot skill here; this is a comparison of aircraft types.

Regarding P-40 service; the RNZAF and RAAF used the P-40 right until the end of the war. Despite the Aussies being equipped with Spits, the P-40 was their principal fighter of the war, as with the Kiwis, who employed their Corsairs primarily in ground support and the P-40s as interceptors.

Here's a few notes about the two that might be of interest, although they are not exactly relevant to the argument.

A factor that was a pig about the P-40 was the way it was built; it was over designed and structurally, too many bits were made by hand, so every airframe was definitely individual. The
'109 was well designed for rapid mass production and was far more precisely built.

I've had a peek in the cockpits of both machines; the '109 is snug, to say the least. with my 6 foot plus frame there's no way I could fit in with the canopy closed. By the time the late models appeared the '109's cockpit became real tight with all that extra equipment in there; you wore the Messerschmitt.

The P-40 was like most American fighter cockpits; you could hold a banquet in it. Lots of room, but not too ergonomic. Bits and pieces all over the show. Visibility was surprisingly good from the P-40's cockpit (in my opinion, but then, I'm not a fighter pilot). From the Bf 109 visibility is terrible. Mind you the aircraft was sitting in a ground attitude.

Overall, both aircraft were designed in the Thirties; the P-40 being based on the P-36, so therefore neither type benefitted from direct combat experience. Both were considered the epitome of fighter design by their respective builders and operators when they first appeared, but were in essence very different aeroplanes doing the same job.

The Bf 109 was, for its time a superb design and set a benchmark, but its overall size was its limiting factor; nevertheless, the transformation it underwent due to the needs of war was remarkable and the design proved to be extraordinarily tractable, if not remaining top dog throughout its long and successful career.

The P-40 was of similar vintage, but despite there being many different modifications throughout its career, it never experienced quite the same degree of improvement between variants as the Bf 109; as fighter technology improved, both types struggled to stay relevant; the P-40 more so than the Messerschmitt.

That the P-40 and the '109 enjoyed careers in smaller air forces after they had both been relegated as second rate fighters was not just out of expediency, but also because both were credible fighters, even toward the end, but in my opinion, if I had to make a choice of combat in either one; give me the Messerschmitt and a can of vaseline to get me in the cockpit and I'll see you in Hell!

 

[Njaco]

NMNN, excellent post!

Especially the bit in the beginning about pilot skill. Far too often when these discusions come up, the skill of the pilot somehow always get factored in (along with personal 'favorite' opinion). Its nice to see someone atually remove that aspect from the consideration and speak about the aircraft itself.

 

[post76]

P-40s almost always got the better of the 109s they fought.

There is more about the P-40 I've learned that definitely casts it in a better light than history might suggest.
One thing is for sure, they were usually on the bottom end of a bounce and perhaps that's when the 109 got the best of them.
This was also true in the Pacific where they faced the higher flying Japanese planes.

 

[riacrato]

P-40s almost always got the better of the 109s they fought.

[/img]

That is based on what?

 

[Ratsel]

That is based on what?

Everybody always quotes the Palm Sunday Massacre and automatically think the P-40 was superior.. but few know what really happened.

 

[Njaco]

The Spitfires took on the escorts leaving the P-40 to attack the transports....

18 April 1943 The Palm Sunday Massacre - The effort to re-supply the bridgehead in Tunisia by the Germans is slowly turning into a diaster. Nearly 100 Ju 52s were loaded with German soldiers to be airlifted to Tunisia in an effort to reinforce Rommel. The transport formation was to be escorted by 16 Italian Macchi C-202s and Bf 109s fighters from JG 53 along with 3 Bf 110s. Near Cape Bon, the formation was attacked by 46 P-40s from the US 9th AF's 57th FG, 12 P-40s from the 324th FS and 12 Spitfires from RAF No. 92 Sqdrn. who were providing top cover for the P-40s. The Allied pilots were guided to the Germans by messages recieved from the German enigma codes. The Junkers transports were caught flying about 100 feet above the Mediterranean in 3 'V' formations. Leaving the Spitfires and a squadron of Warhawks to take on the Messerschmitts and Italians, Capt. James Curl led 3 squadrons of fighters into the German transports. After 10 minutes of battle, over half of the Ju 52s were shot down into the sea or crashed on the beaches of Cape Bon. 51 German transports were shot down along with more than 16 fighters. The Allies lost 6 P-40s and one Spitfire during combat.

 

[Kryten]

Everybody always quotes the Palm Sunday Massacre and automatically think the P-40 was superior.. but few know what really happened.

a comment which perfectly explains the difficulty in trying to compare the combat records of different aircraft, the tactical situation at the time was at least equally important as pilot skill and aircraft technical specifications!

 

[Ratsel]

Yes. Reminds me of some famous last words... 'Its a Trap!'

 

[post76]

I find it telling that the Aussies preferred the P-40 over the Spitfire for lower altitude missions.

I think it would be close, giving the 109 better vertical and the P-40 a horizontal advantage.
If you read the comparisons of the Hurricane vs 109, they even give the Hurri more turn up to 5000 meters.
The P-40 matched the Hurricane in turn and had better speed performance, so i think it was more competitive than you might think considering quite a few hurricanes also did a number on 109s. Russian accounts go as far as to say the P-40 outclassed the Hurricane but are also more descriptive about speed and climb comparisons between the Tomahawk and 109Fs and later versions of the P-40E being slightly superior.

The Spitfire vs P-40 comparisons also reveal the P-40 would get whooped above 16,000ft, so i don't see how a 109 wouldn't also own a P-40 in the thinner air.

 

[renrich]

I would be extremely surprised if encounters between P40s versus 109s or versus A6Ms came out in favor overall in favor of the P40.

 

[Ratsel]

I find it telling that the Aussies preferred the P-40 over the Spitfire for lower altitude missions.

I think it would be close, giving the 109 better vertical and the P-40 a horizontal advantage.
If you read the comparisons of the Hurricane vs 109, they even give the Hurri more turn up to 5000 meters.
The P-40 matched the Hurricane in turn and had better speed performance, so i think it was more competitive than you might think considering quite a few hurricanes also did a number on 109s. Russian accounts go as far as to say the P-40 outclassed the Hurricane but are also more descriptive about speed and climb comparisons between the Tomahawk and 109Fs and later versions of the P-40E being slightly superior.

The Spitfire vs P-40 comparisons also reveal the P-40 would get whooped above 16,000ft, so i don't see how a 109 wouldn't also own a P-40 in the thinner air.

Very rarely during WWII would pilots get into a 'true' dogfight.. it wasn't like WWI. Look at the Palm Sunday incident, no way was there any serious dogfighting there. 50+ Ju 52's and 16+ fighters in 10mins.. Bounced from above and behind (or front).

 

[Nxthanos]

That is based on what?

History, and there is plenty of it.

 

[Nxthanos]

I would be extremely surprised if encounters between P40s versus 109s or versus A6Ms came out in favor overall in favor of the P40.

I sugest you read about a group of fellows called the AVG.


they seem and the 23FG that followed seem to have done ok for themselves.

Just to follow up, I think quite a few of you have 'hero worship' of 109s and german fighter training, the fact is only a handful of german pilots ever became experten and shot down many allied planes, on balance P-40s always came out on top.

talking about 'above 15,000' is a non starter as a P-40 was not designed for it, and is really only an issue in the air war over the reich as the desert war, the pacific and the russian front were low level affairs.


So yes, a 109 could perform better then a P-40 above 15,000, below it its a burning wreck and a kill mark on a P-40.

 

[Rogi]

"Just to follow up, I think quite a few of you have 'hero worship' of 109s and german fighter training, the fact is only a handful of german pilots ever became experten and shot down many allied planes, on balance P-40s always came out on top.

talking about 'above 15,000' is a non starter as a P-40 was not designed for it, and is really only an issue in the air war over the reich as the desert war, the pacific and the russian front were low level affairs.


So yes, a 109 could perform better then a P-40 above 15,000, below it its a burning wreck and a kill mark on a P-40"

I think the main problem is that the Bf is "better" up high and could own the P-40 easy, while the P-40 would most likely out class the Bf at low level.

Its mostly dependant on the pilot, if you put Bubi against any P-40 it'd be a burning wreck because hes the fighter pilot of all fighter pilots and has the skill to shoot it down.

There should be a third option of draw :S but since I can't vote for that I'd go P-40 on the low and Bf on the high, assuming the pilots had the same skill level and they were both in the same situations.

 

[riacrato]

History, and there is plenty of it.

What a precise and well-founded answer. Please continue your well established and unbiased assertions, I'm out.

 

[Ratsel]

So yes, a 109 could perform better then a P-40 above 15,000, below it its a burning wreck and a kill mark on a P-40.

Lots of German pilots refered to shooting down P-40's in N.Africa as ' like picking grapes ', ie: easy. The ONLY thing that the P-40 had over the 109 was toughness.. almost as tuff as a P-47. Cept' for the Allison V-1710 which gave up the ghost rather easily. Hans-Joachim Marseille, the ' Star of Africa ' and Otto Shultz would disagree with you I think...

One more thing, the F up series 109 is faster then the P-40 at any altitude.

Kindest Regard

 

[pbfoot]

Lots of German pilots refered to shooting down P-40's in N.Africa as ' like picking grapes ', ie: easy. The ONLY thing that the P-40 had over the 109 was toughness.. almost as tuff as a P-47. Cept' for the Allison V-1710 which gave up the ghost rather easily. Hans-Joachim Marseille, the ' Star of Africa ' and Otto Shultz would disagree with you I think...

One more thing, the F up series 109 is faster then the P-40 at any altitude.

Kindest Regard

And what shot down Otto Shulz ? Stocky Edwards flying a P40 and he didn't seem to have a ptoblem with 109's a P40

March 1942, one Bf.109 destroyed (Kittyhawk AK-K);
23 March 1942, one Bf.109 destroyed, Martuba airfield (Kittyhawk FZ-F)
30 May 1942, one Bf.109 damaged (Kittyhawk HS-O);
8 June 1942, one Bf.109 destroyed, Bir Hacheim area;
14 June 1942, one Bf.109 probably destroyed and
- one Bf.109 damaged (Acroma area);
17 June 1942, one Bf.109 probably destroyed near El Daba;
26 June 1942, one Bf.109 probably destroyed;
6 July 1942, one Bf.109 probably destroyed and
- one Bf.109 damaged (Kittyhawk ET623, "E");
4 August 1942, one Bf.109 probably destroyed (Kittyhawk AL140);
3 September 1942, one Bf.109 damaged (Kittyhawk FL233);
6 September 1942, one Bf.109 probably destroyed (FL233);
15 September 1942, one Bf.109 probably destroyed (FL238);
21 October 1942, one MC.202 destroyed (FL322 ? that could be 233);
22 October 1942, one Bf.109 destroyed (FL233);
26 October 1942, one Bf.109 probably destroyed (FL221);
28 October 1942, one Bf.109 destroyed and
- one probably destroyed (FL221);
1 November 1942 one Bf.109 destroyed (FL305);
16 December 1942, one Bf.109 damaged;
30 December 1942, 1.5 Bf.109s destroyed - (Kittyhawk FR350);
2 January 1943, one Bf.109 destroyed (FR350);
29 March 1943, two FW.190s damaged (FR436);
8 April 1943, one Bf.109 probably destroyed, Sfax area (FR446) -
- one FW.190 damaged (FR436)
15 April 1943, two Bf.109s destroyed and
- one damaged (FR436);

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SmjuuGnUadw

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_umy5aRfLw
22 April 1943, 1/3 Me.323 destroyed (Gulf of Tunis, FR436

 

[Ratsel]

And? Otto was killed behind the controls of his mount. Everybody has a bullit with there name on it. Anyways, I could post all of Marseille's victories against the P-40, it'll make your head spin. Polikarpov I-16 IL-2's shot down Bf 109's too. So did a Willy's Jeep. I'm pretty sure a Bird did too. Superior? Only the bird was.