P40 Vs all other fighters in Europe
- Thread starter denny
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
fastmongrel
1st Sergeant
The P40 did get a Merlin (actually a Packard v1650). Look up the P40-F and L variants.
It always suffered from being a year behind its contemporaries a P40 from the Mediterranean theatre in late 1941 would have been a killer aircraft over Britain a year earlier. Not that it was a bad fighter iirc over 200 Allied pilots became an ace in one and it was a very sturdy bird that could take a lot of punishment.
It always suffered from being a year behind its contemporaries a P40 from the Mediterranean theatre in late 1941 would have been a killer aircraft over Britain a year earlier. Not that it was a bad fighter iirc over 200 Allied pilots became an ace in one and it was a very sturdy bird that could take a lot of punishment.
By the time Packard started production of the 2 stage supercharged Merlin engine in May 1943 it was being reserved for the P-51B/C Mustang. Production of the Merlin powered P-40F/L line had ceased several months, if not nearly a year previously. Allison by then was producing more than enough of more powerful variants of the V-1710 motor to keep everyone happy.
Shortround6
Major General
This covers a lot of area/time.
Actually the P-40Ls were produced from Jan 1943 to April of 1943.
Allison was not producing enough more powerful engines. The 1943 engines had about 4,000ft more altitude than the 1942 engines. Change over was actually at the end of Nov 1942 with the P-40M model. But 15,000-15,500 altitude for an 1150hp engine wasn't good enough for a general purpose fighter in 1943. It was good enough to fill in and it was good for low altitude work.
The P-40 could be improved but it was going to take a lot of work and it wasn't going to be as good as the P-51B.
As I understood the main reasons it could not compete with the P-51 were inferior range and worse aerodynamics when using the same engines.
Wasn't it possible to install large enough tanks to make it a long range escort fighter?
I wonder how it would have performed when a Rolls Royce Griffon engine had been installed to make the P-40 a point-defense interceptor in the vein of the Spitfire Mk 14.
The aerodynamics were not worse than the Spitfire's and the weight was not much higher.
Guess it could compete with the Spit 14 and the Dora-9
Wasn't it possible to install large enough tanks to make it a long range escort fighter?
I wonder how it would have performed when a Rolls Royce Griffon engine had been installed to make the P-40 a point-defense interceptor in the vein of the Spitfire Mk 14.
The aerodynamics were not worse than the Spitfire's and the weight was not much higher.
Guess it could compete with the Spit 14 and the Dora-9
varsity07840
Airman 1st Class
- 176
- Jun 25, 2013
The P-40 was a very heavy aircraft with an obsolete airframe. The 2 stage 2 speed Merlin would have bettered its altitude performance but increased the weight at the same time thus mitigating the performance increase. Climb rate probably would not have been significantly improved. The P-51D was not a great climber. Range would have remained too short for escort missions. So, why bother with further development? Development funds be better spent on the P-38K.
Th P-51 was designed to be better than the P-40 and others and it was. By 1943 in Europe N Africa the theatres that planes could be used in was diminishing. You could make a better P-40 with a two stage Packard (Merlin) but it wouldnt be as good as a P-51 so it would be a waste of engines and P-51 fuselages which were waiting for engines.
SaparotRob
Unter Gemeine Geschwader Murmeltier XIII
The Mustang was offered to the British Purchasing Commission by NAA as something better. It was.
Sometimes not having a contract is an advantage, the P-51 could incorporate British requests before production started, The P-39 and P-40 were already in late design or production which makes things a whole lot more difficult.
- Thread starter
- #12
While the P-51D wasn't a great climber compared to it's peer Spit, 109 or 190, it could however fly from bases in the UK to Berlin, fight for 20 minutes, and fly back (something even the vaulted P-39 couldn't do). What it didn't have in climb it more than made up for with aerodynamics / fuel load that gave it unbelievable range.
The P-51 did its climbing early, it was already up there.
Glue Sniffer
Airman
The P-40 is in my honest opinion the most under rated fighter in the entire war...and there were lots of under rated fighter...F4F anyone? Considering it held the line before the war even started...its kill ratio is amazing...and it was flown against other nations at their peak by inexperienced American airmen unlike the P-51D that got to hold the trophy after the p-47 and Spitfires had already demolished the Luftwaffe.
The P-40 was not great at altitude...but it was an absolute workhorse and could turn better than most would think. Its not fair to compare a 1930s design to a 1945 design...just like it not fair to compare a king tiger against a M4a1 or T34
It never ceases to amaze me how we can glorify the Hurricane and yet badmouth the P40. Both great aircraft for the record.
The P-40 was not great at altitude...but it was an absolute workhorse and could turn better than most would think. Its not fair to compare a 1930s design to a 1945 design...just like it not fair to compare a king tiger against a M4a1 or T34
It never ceases to amaze me how we can glorify the Hurricane and yet badmouth the P40. Both great aircraft for the record.
Glue Sniffer
Airman
"While the P-51D wasn't a great climber compared to it's peer Spit, 109 or 190, it could however fly from bases in the UK to Berlin, fight for 20 minutes, and fly back (something even the vaulted P-39 couldn't do). What it didn't have in climb it more than made up for with aerodynamics / fuel load that gave it unbelievable range."
Agree completely
Agree completely
I dont think many do. Although the P-40 was a better aircraft the difference is in time. In 1939 it was the only allied fighter in Europe in numbers. Without it the Battles of France, Britain and Malta could not be fought in the air and North Africa without it would have been hard work if not complete disaster waiting for the P-40 and Spitfire to arrive.
P-40 gets the fair shake on this forum IMO. At least it does not get compared with designs from 1945, people mostly compare it with Spitfire, Bf 109, Zero, P-51, P-39 and/or Fw 190. What crystalizes at the end was that P-40 lacked a good engine in order to be comparable vs. the best the West had; against the Zero it was just fine. The speed and rate of climb were a bigger asset than the turning abilities in the ww2.
Unfortunately, there was no P-40s holding any lines before the war started, the 1st combat use was probably in the winter of 1940/41?
Glue Sniffer
Airman
You're correct...I was speaking from a strictly American prospective in regards to "holding the line". I would do well to remember that war was happening prior to US entry. Our war started...at least officially w/Pearl Harbor (Dec 41).
Hurricane was a great fighter...one of my favorites. As was the Spit...as was the Mustang...as was the...well I love them all HAHAHAHA.
Their is a romance to the darkest hours however...and for me that means the P-40, F4F, Spitfire, Hurricane. Those planes will always hold a special place in my mind.
Those were brave Men
Hurricane was a great fighter...one of my favorites. As was the Spit...as was the Mustang...as was the...well I love them all HAHAHAHA.
Their is a romance to the darkest hours however...and for me that means the P-40, F4F, Spitfire, Hurricane. Those planes will always hold a special place in my mind.
Those were brave Men
Thumpalumpacus
Captain
Yeah, it did get a Merlin in a couple of models.
As a boy, I read and absorbed the idea that the P-40 was quite craptastic, but in the many intervening years I seem to get that like many overlooked airplanes, in the hands of a decent pilot using good tactics it was a dangerous opponent. Relatively maneuverable, good dive characteristics, limited in altitude performance in most cases, but well-armed and rugged.
Maybe not the prom queen, but a good date to dance with if that's what you've got.
As a boy, I read and absorbed the idea that the P-40 was quite craptastic, but in the many intervening years I seem to get that like many overlooked airplanes, in the hands of a decent pilot using good tactics it was a dangerous opponent. Relatively maneuverable, good dive characteristics, limited in altitude performance in most cases, but well-armed and rugged.
Maybe not the prom queen, but a good date to dance with if that's what you've got.
