Curtiss: P-40 and beyond

Discussion in 'Aviation' started by gjs238, Sep 29, 2011.

  1. gjs238

    gjs238 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2009
    Messages:
    1,710
    Likes Received:
    107
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    If Curtiss had really been on the ball, what do you think they could have accomplished after the P-40 entered service?
    It seems that they moved slowly, or pursued dead ends, etc. When they did come up with good ideas, they ended up being a day late and a dollar short.
    There seems to have been so much wasted potential.
    Anyone care to speculate?
     
  2. post76

    post76 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2011
    Messages:
    81
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Didn't Curtiss also scale back so their factories could be used to build newer planes designed by other companies?

    In short, actually helped to produce (rather than develope) new fighters like the P-47 and P-51.

    Also, there developements beyond aircraft were used. Curtiss also designed and manufactored prop blades for various aircraft.
     
  3. Shortround6

    Shortround6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2009
    Messages:
    9,773
    Likes Received:
    802
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    retired Firefighter
    Location:
    Central Florida Highlands
    Curtiss-Wright was a large corporation even before the war. The aircraft, engine, and propeller divisions were in different factories in different locations. The design staffs did not overlap. Curtiss tried but the P-46, P-55 and P-60 just didn't turn out well. The US, despite building a variety of aircraft, did try to standardize somewhat. Curtiss had darn little to do with P-51 and their construction of the P-47 may have been slow.
    Curtiss did build, in addition to many prototypes and the P-40, the SBC series of dive bombers, the C-46 transport, the Seamew and Seahawk floatplanes. they did build over 27,000 aircraft.
     
  4. davparlr

    davparlr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2006
    Messages:
    2,934
    Likes Received:
    105
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Occupation:
    retired avionics engineer
    Location:
    Southern California
    One of the most impressive and underrated of the above is the C-46. If the great C-47 had not been as prolific, it could have replace it with much better performance.
     
  5. Ratsel

    Ratsel Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2011
    Messages:
    798
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Curtis could did make a great P-40. Like the P-40J.. An intrigal super/turbocharged beast, but the USAAF put and axe to that idea. Seems to me that they had the final say on what Curtis produced. Great thing about the P-40 was that it could take as much punishment as a P-47.. The Allison V-1710 could not however.
     
  6. Shortround6

    Shortround6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2009
    Messages:
    9,773
    Likes Received:
    802
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    retired Firefighter
    Location:
    Central Florida Highlands
    Of course the USAAF had the final say, they were the ones paying for the planes. P-40J was a paper project, A turbo may have been delivered to the Curtiss factory but apparently no metal was ever cut. I can't find any drawings or performance estimates or any other information in a quick search.
     
  7. Ratsel

    Ratsel Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2011
    Messages:
    798
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #7 Ratsel, Sep 30, 2011
    Last edited: Sep 30, 2011
    I have a pic of a prototype in a book that I have. If I find it I'll post it up. I say 'IF' becouse my comp crashed, got it fixed, now I havfta find where they put all my PDF books.. Word to the wise, always back up important docs!!

    *edit:

    Shortround6 you are correct, the P-40J was 'on paper' ony.
     
Loading...

Share This Page