Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Although it gained a postwar reputation as a mediocre design, suitable only for close air support, more recent research including scrutiny of the records of Allied squadrons indicates that this was not the case; the P-40 performed surprisingly well as an air superiority fighter, at times suffering severe losses, but also inflicting a very heavy toll on enemy aircraft. Based on war-time victory claims, over 200 Allied fighter pilots—from the UK, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, South Africa, the US, and the Soviet Union—became aces flying the P-40.
It is like the UK Hurricane, later fighters may have been superior, questions would b asked if they werent. Historically the P-40 deserves credit for being there, wherever "there" was.I used to think that the P-40 was basically a mediocre plane that could get good results in the hands of exceptional pilots like the Flying Tigers, but I have been revising my opinion upward in recent years. Note the assessment given in Wikipedia:
Given that more P-40s were produced than any other American army or navy fighter other than the P-47 and P-51, it would seem that the people in charge had a high opinion of the plane at the time.
Your thoughts?
I used to think that the P-40 was basically a mediocre plane that could get good results in the hands of exceptional pilots like the Flying Tigers, but I have been revising my opinion upward in recent years. Note the assessment given in Wikipedia:
Given that more P-40s were produced than any other American army or navy fighter other than the P-47 and P-51, it would seem that the people in charge had a high opinion of the plane at the time.
Your thoughts?
The only model that could get close to 3,000 FPM in a climb at low altitude was the original P-40, no suffix, which pre dated the P-40B.I think the P-40 was a pretty decent fighter for the time it was developed. Later fighters were better but, as suggested above, they darn well SHOULD have been since they were designed to BE better.
The P-40 rolled very well, better than later designs.
It climbed decently at low altitudes, on the order of 3,000 fpm.
It had the same armament as the P-51 / FF, so the guns weren't a negative.
It was limited to about 15,000 feet as a fighter. Could reach the 30,000 feet, but wasn't really performing well there.
Turned well. Not like a A6M, but pretty well.
Main disadvantages were:
1) Restricted to low altitudes. About 15-16,000 feet as a fighter.
2) Not very fast. You had to work to get it faster than 320 mph.
3) Relatively short range ... 850 miles. That means about 350 mile radius if you want some reserve fuel.
4) Relatively poor initial pilot training with regards to combat-readiness.
Main Advantages:
1) Rugged and available.
2) The engine was very reliable.
3) Was available in some numbers early.
Possible:
Had they built the P-40Q, it wouldn't have been a P-51D, but it WOULD have been head and shoulders better than the regular P-40 in the theaters where the P-40 was being used a a primary aircraft.
When you are building up an air force you need aircraft to build it with, if the P-40 didnt exist, what else was there, prior to the new designs that started to arrive from late 1942 onwards?Of course, I have no proof, however I believe the P-40 (and versions) was the WW2 era fighter flown by more pilots worldwide than any other fighter. Most or many USAAF pilots had hours in a P-40. Chinese pilots, some German & Japanese pilots, Russian pilots, UK pilots, Dutch pilots as well as civilian pilots, then & now. My 9th grade history teacher flew P-40s and never left the USA. How many others flew P-40s in the US but never left the country?
There was the P-39, you know.
To be fair, the much-maligned P-39 was very much a 'good pilot's aircraft'* - if somewhat limited in its roles.[Emilia Clarke voice] Best fighter ever! [/Emilia Clarke voice]
A lot of the later ones could manage 3000fpm or even close to 3500fpm. HOWEVER, only over narrow band of altitude.The only model that could get close to 3,000 FPM in a climb at low altitude was the original P-40, no suffix, which pre dated the P-40B.
Was it you who made that brilliant comment about the P40, the aircraft equivalent of the Willy's Jeep?.The P-40's legacy can be seen by the fact that it was one of the only fighters to serve in every single theater of war - ETO, MTO, Eastern Front, Aluetians, PTO and CBI.
It was even used by the Japanese in 1943 for the defense of Rangoon (50th Hiko Sentai).
Yessir, some time back.Was it you who made that brilliant comment about the P40, the aircraft equivalent of the Willy's Jeep?.
I have to say, I recently watched a small town airshow, & was most impressed at how the P-40 performed in the hands of an expert,Was it you who made that brilliant comment about the P40, the aircraft equivalent of the Willy's Jeep?.
Yeah, like how many 'pick up' drivers never really carry a load, so they think they've got a muscle truck?Amazing what a warbird can do when operating at over 1000lbs less weight.
Modern fuel cells, less armor, no ammo (423lbs for 1410 rounds) and less than full fuel tanks?
One of the best comments I've ever read on here.Yessir, some time back.