Bf-109 vs P-40 (1 Viewer)

[MikeGazdik]

How do you expect your chances of survival to be better in a P-40 when you are being raked by rounds?

Operative word "IF". If I get hit by enemy rounds, I would rather be in a P-40 than the Bf 109.

Im feeling the need to jump into the defensive on this subject. My very first comment was that a P-40 wouldn't be easy meat for a Bf 109. I didn't say that a P-40 is superior. Just give credit where credit is due. Yes, I am tainted somewhat because it is my overall favorite. But half of it is simply as a kid I loved the looks of the plane too, and still do. If my life depended on my choice of aircraft, the Bf 109 would be at the top of the list of planes I would want to be in. As much as I love the P-40, it would be nowhere near the top.

I had not seen that link you posted Marshal, thanks. Nor have I seen the one posted by Graeme, but I have read similar accounts before. The P-40 and P-39 were both severly hampered by the US AIR CORPS' concept of Pursuit planes at the time, and that same thinking is what prevented those planes from being developed FROM THE START for working at the same altitudes the B-17 was designed to operate.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Operative word "IF". If I get hit by enemy rounds, I would rather be in a P-40 than the Bf 109.

Im feeling the need to jump into the defensive on this subject. My very first comment was that a P-40 wouldn't be easy meat for a Bf 109. I didn't say that a P-40 is superior. Just give credit where credit is due. Yes, I am tainted somewhat because it is my overall favorite. But half of it is simply as a kid I loved the looks of the plane too, and still do. If my life depended on my choice of aircraft, the Bf 109 would be at the top of the list of planes I would want to be in. As much as I love the P-40, it would be nowhere near the top.

Hey now, chill out...

You do not need to go on the defensive here. I was asking a simple question, and nothing else. All I wanted was for you to explain why anyone would be safer in a P-40 than a Bf 109. It was just a question!

Spend some time on these forums, and you might actually see that I am not someone that you usually need to go on the defensive with.

 

[MikeGazdik]

Hey now, chill out...
Spend some time on these forums, and you might actually see that I am not someone that you usually need to go on the defensive with.

Eagle, I was feeling the need to be defensive about my positions on the P-40, due to several posts, not soley yours. I just chose to answer your question directly. I am not one to get upset, or get stupid on a forum for which I joined to have a good time. I will not flame or attack anyone, and I hope you didn't take it that way. We are talking about common interests we all have. I love this type of debate. And I have read back along way into old posts...but I only have so much time to spend on a computer.

I know I was heavily promoting an airplane that is commonly overlooked. Sometimes you read things that make the P-40 sound like a Cessna 152 with a couple of guns shoved in the wings.

So getting back to answer your question as to why; I feel the stronger structure of a P-40, would give the pilot a better chance of limping home with structural damage, than in the 109.

 

[Soren]

Eagle, I was feeling the need to be defensive about my positions on the P-40, due to several posts, not soley yours. I just chose to answer your question directly. I am not one to get upset, or get stupid on a forum for which I joined to have a good time. I will not flame or attack anyone, and I hope you didn't take it that way. We are talking about common interests we all have. I love this type of debate. And I have read back along way into old posts...but I only have so much time to spend on a computer.

I know I was heavily promoting an airplane that is commonly overlooked. Sometimes you read things that make the P-40 sound like a Cessna 152 with a couple of guns shoved in the wings.

Great to have you aboard. Nice to have another sober member on the forum.

So getting back to answer your question as to why; I feel the stronger structure of a P-40, would give the pilot a better chance of limping home with structural damage, than in the 109.

While I'm not sure wether the P-40's structure is stronger, I'd say that the cannon fire would make just as short work of it as it would with any other fighter (Except perhaps the P-47).

 

[MikeGazdik]

Great to have you aboard. Nice to have another sober member on the forum.



While I'm not sure wether the P-40's structure is stronger, I'd say that the cannon fire would make just as short work of it as it would with any other fighter (Except perhaps the P-47).

Thanks Soren!

I don't have any "proof" data, but in my readings the P-40 wing is incredibly strong. I have never read of a P-40 shedding its wings in a dive. However, if this fight occurrs at low altitude (which would have to happen for the P-40 to even be there), I doubt that either plane would get into enough dive speed to be concerned of structure damage from manuevers. Getting hit by cannon fire is another story obviously. I would still rather be in the P-40 if hit by either cannon or guns from the 109, than being in the 109 being hit by .50 cal fire from the P-40.
Really the only deficiency with the P-40 was the lack of high altitude capability with the engine. IF it had altitude capability, it would be on par with the Spit MkV and 109F. And I am saying the P-40E and later variants. The early B/C Warhawks that had the mix of .50 and .30 cal guns would be at a distinct disadvantage.

 

[Marshall_Stack]

Nikolay Gerasimovitch Golodnikov - Major-General (Ret) Flew the P-40 on the Russian front. His opinion was that it was very good against the Bf-109. It is a long 4 part interview but very interesting and well worth reading.

Conversations with N.Golodnikov

Interesting article, especially how he says that they ran the P-39s and P-40s above their the limits per the manuals. I guess if you are getting aircraft and engines for free you can abuse them all you want.

Does anybody have Clide Caldwell's opinion of the P-40?

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Eagle, I was feeling the need to be defensive about my positions on the P-40, due to several posts, not soley yours. I just chose to answer your question directly. I am not one to get upset, or get stupid on a forum for which I joined to have a good time. I will not flame or attack anyone, and I hope you didn't take it that way. We are talking about common interests we all have. I love this type of debate. And I have read back along way into old posts...but I only have so much time to spend on a computer.

Cheers

I know I was heavily promoting an airplane that is commonly overlooked. Sometimes you read things that make the P-40 sound like a Cessna 152 with a couple of guns shoved in the wings.

I too think that the P-40 is an underrated aircraft. However compared to the "top" fighters of WW2 (from any country and side), I do believe the P-40 was a step behind. In the beginning I think she could hold her own against anyone, but by 1943 she was a step behind.

I think if you took a P-40 and a Bf 109, put a pilot in each that was equal and had the same training the Bf 109 would come out on top 7 out of 10 times. Of course this is just my opinion, there is no way to actually prove this. Like I said above, you could trade out the Bf 109 with any of WW2's "top" fighters (Spitfire, P-51, Fw 190, P-47, etc...).

This of course in the end would matter where the fight was taking place. All aircraft had advantages and disadvantages over other aircraft at certain altitudes. It is possible the P-40 had a slight advantage over the Bf 109 at certain (lower) altitudes. Of course a trained Bf 109 pilot will know this and try to avoid getting into a fight at those lower altitudes.

So getting back to answer your question as to why; I feel the stronger structure of a P-40, would give the pilot a better chance of limping home with structural damage, than in the 109.

What gives you the idea that the P-40 had a stronger structure?

 

[Marcel]

I know I was heavily promoting an airplane that is commonly overlooked. Sometimes you read things that make the P-40 sound like a Cessna 152 with a couple of guns shoved in the wings.

I have tried to persuade these nutheads that the Fokker G.I was the best fighter of WWII and they still don't believe me. 8)

 

[Skip M]

Interesting article, especially how he says that they ran the P-39s and P-40s above their the limits per the manuals. I guess if you are getting aircraft and engines for free you can abuse them all you want.

Does anybody have Clide Caldwell's opinion of the P-40?

The other side is if you do not abuse the engines the plane is shot down and you have to replace the whole plane instead of just the engine. This goes along with the Sherman tank that had a gun with a low enough velocity to last 4000 rounds. You replaced fewer guns but more tanks.

 

[Graeme]

I have tried to persuade these nutheads that the Fokker G.I was the best fighter of WWII and they still don't believe me. 8)

C'mon Marcel we all know the Aussie Boomerang was the best

Does anybody have Clide Caldwell's opinion of the P-40?

Of the two (Tomahawk and Kittyhawk), Caldwell preferred the Tomahawk...



Neville Duke (famed post-war test pilot), who at one point served under Caldwell, gives his view thus...



Ability to absorb damage? I think Wildcat posted the story of Jacklin's P-40, but here's the photo again...

 

[MikeGazdik]

Speaking of Messerschmitts, I have been drooling over this video for the last half a year.


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5nj77mJlzrc

Two notes of interest to me: 1) When the pilot first starts the engine, it starts immediately, didn't spin any blades through to prime, no coughing. Is that common to the DB engine, or was it because perhaps it was warm already? That is one sweet sounding engine!!!
2) Most importantly. This pilot is obviously not concerned with the "poor" ground handling of the aircraft!

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Two notes of interest to me: 1) When the pilot first starts the engine, it starts immediately, didn't spin any blades through to prime, no coughing. Is that common to the DB engine, or was it because perhaps it was warm already? That is one sweet sounding engine!!!
2) Most importantly. This pilot is obviously not concerned with the "poor" ground handling of the aircraft!

I've seen white 14 (a 109E) start up and it did the same when it was warm. BTW - I met the pilot of that 109. He was in my pit during the Reno Air Races this year. I even had dinner with him and all the time really didn't realize who he was!

 

[Marcel]

C'mon Marcel we all know the Aussie Boomerang was the best

Boomerang? Isn't that a traiterous piece of wood that'll hit you in the head when you throw it away? :LOL:

 

[Kurfürst]

Speaking of Messerschmitts, I have been drooling over this video for the last half a year.


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5nj77mJlzrc

Very impressive flying... 8)

 

[pbfoot]

Speaking of Messerschmitts, I have been drooling over this video for the last half a year.


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5nj77mJlzrc

1) When the pilot first starts the engine, it starts immediately, didn't spin any blades through to prime, no coughing. Is that common to the DB engine, or was it because perhaps it was warm already? That is one sweet sounding engine!!!
!

they sometimes use Quick Start or ether what ever the local equivilant is

 

[foxrecon19d]

I read in several reports where German BF109 pilots would rather tangle with the British Hurricane than a P40 Warhawk. In fact, some German pilots claimed to have downed P40s during the Battle of Britain (they were mistakenly identified as P40s- actually, the typr shot down were Hurricanes) and the German pilots got considerably more accolades from their comrades. Although no P40s participated in that famous air battle, it would have been interesting to see how the venerable Warhawk would have fared compared to the British Hurricane.

 

[airboiy]

I'd go with the P-40 due to the armament of the kittyhawk, the inherent stregnth, and because it was the sexiest plane during WW2.

 

[Vincenzo]

IMHO 109 it's a superior fighter, with advantage up with years. P-40 would be a best attacker

 

[Coors9]

Beautiful bird, but even if John Wayne was flyin' it, i'd put money on the 109.

 

[airboiy]

C'mon, the P-40 with a good pilot would have totally smoked a 109, especially late in the war-the 109 pilots were ussually green!