I don't see those numbers showing an advantage for the P-36. IIRC, the P-36 did not have armour and self sealing tanks. Add those and there's no contesting that the Hurricane1 was superior.
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
General feelings are that the P36 was too slow and obsolete to fight in WW2, yet the Hurricane has a loyal following especially up through the Battle of Britain.
Yet, I was looking at the specs on wwiiaircraftperformance and the P36 was 17 mph faster than the Hurricane at 10,000 feet. It was equal in top speed to the Hurricane at 17,000 feet when equipped with the P&W R-1830-23 engine. It could beat the Hurricane in a time to climb to 23,000 feet and it could easily out turn it under any conditions. The Hurricane had 8 .303 machine guns, the P36 either 1 .50 and 5 30's or, I understand the later models had 2 .50's and 4 30's.
So why was the Hurricane ok and the P36 was obsolete? If the P36 had the 1830-23 engine or later, I don't see what the Hurricane had over it at all.
Altitude can be converted to speed. So if Zero has an altitude advantage then P40 might not have a speed advantage when the turning & burning begins.
Weight gain would have been much higher.
The R-1830 engine/s used in the P-36 were single speed engines. the -17 used a 7.15 supercharger gear and the -23 engine used a 8.0 supercharger gear. More power higher up but it cost 100hp at take-off or low level (1100hp for take-offat 2700rpm) .
-17 engine weighed 1403lbs, -23 engine went 1436lbs. The -33 engine used in the P-66 and early non-turbo B-24s was a two speed engine that went 1480lbs. gear ratios were 7.15 and 8.47. engine would give 1000hp at 14,500ft (no ram) compared to the -23 engine 950hp at 14,300ft, both at 2700rpm.
Only one P-36 was ever fitted with four wing guns in US service.
Tomo is quite correct in the weights for the self sealing tanks for the P-40s. I would also note that the fuel tank behind the pilot was referred to as a ferry tank or overload tank. In other words, much like the rear tank on the Mustang, full combat maneuverability was not AVAILABLE with the rear tank full.
You want four wing .30s? Add 222lbs to the US weight figures for guns and ammo.
You want four .50 cals? rip out the 100lbs of gins in a P-36/A and put in 314lbs worth of guns, 214lb increase. Instead of 83lbs worth of ammo even 200rpg for the four .50s is 200-240lbs
Wildcat engine used a two stage supercharger. it weighed 1550/1560lbs and needed inter-coolers.
The XP-40 was the 10th P-36 pulled off the production line.
Why is it so hard to understand that just about any "improvement" done to the P-36 would track the same sort of improvement done to the P-40 almost pound for pound?
Allison went about 1350lbs with a 290-295lb cooling system.
The P-40 gained around 150lbs of weight in the wing group compared to a Hawk 75. (P-36 weight unknown) Hawk 75 with P&W engine was about 300lbs heavier than a P-36 with both holding 105gals of fuel. P-36s had some trouble with wing skin wrinkling or buckling in the wing root landing gear area.
I don't see those numbers showing an advantage for the P-36. IIRC, the P-36 did not have armour and self sealing tanks. Add those and there's no contesting that the Hurricane1 was superior.
I don't see those numbers showing an advantage for the P-36. IIRC, the P-36 did not have armour and self sealing tanks. Add those and there's no contesting that the Hurricane1 was superior.
Not really - the Zero cannot out dive a P-40 and its ailerons become bricks at speeds above 250
And the Hawk H75s supplied to France? I believe the Hawk Hawk 75A-2/3 had armor and self sealing tanks - and again they accounted for a third of the kills during the Battle of France.
I assume he means the P40 is flying level when the Zero bounces him, not that they were diving together. The Zero in a dive from altitude is faster than a P40 flying flat out straight and level
I don't think by much - the Zero was a poor diver - if you can't control an aircraft in a dive, what good is the tactical advantage?
How fast was the Zero?
Another interesting thing about the Hawk in Finnish service is that the highest scoring "Suusu" was a four gun H-75A-6. So more guns doesn't necessarily mean better success. The Finnish aces preferred the four gun models because they were more maneuverable than the heavier six gun models.
The H-75A-6 as supplied to Norway was supposed to have 4 x 7.9mm Brownings. I believe that in Finnish service they carried 7.7mm Brownings, though in 1942 Hawks began to replace one or both nose guns with .50 caliber Brownings, or sometimes captured UBSs.What guns was that plane equipped with?
I didn't realize they had self sealing tanks. I knew they had seat armor. If they had the -23 engine, giving them 317 mph at 17,000 and a pair of synchronized 50's instead of 6 light machine guns they might have done even better. Pilots talked about having to get within 50 yards/meters of a bomber before the light machine guns would have any effect
They didn't have SS tanks, nor armoured glass and the armour on the pilot's seat was "optional". Here's the detailed specs:
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/P-36/Curtiss_Hawk_75-A_Detail_Specifications.pdf
The fastest fully armed, large production rtun version I can recall went 31 mph at the company trials.
Somebody's smoking weeds; not saying it is Greyman, either.
The Hurricane was never a 327 mph fighter in combat configuration. Operational examples in the BOB could not even hit 300 mph. Most topped out at 288 - 294 mph, and that was at full throttle, best height. We all know how long full throttle can be used, so most were basically 275 mph airplanes in combat trim, with a little "extra" if badly needed for a short time.
At least they were in the combat reports I have read and the books I have seen. The only 300+ mph Hurricanes I can recall were unarmed prototypes. The 327 mph variant was ONE mark in unarmed fitment, IIRC. The fastest fully armed, large production rtun version I can recall went 31 mph at the company trials. In service they lost a bit of speed and were down to sub-300 mph performance, too.
If you want more powerful engines and more guns/ammo, armor/protected tanks something has to give. Either less fuel or you need heavier structure if you are going to keep the same flight safety margins. There is no free lunch.