Packard P40

m37b1 · Jul 8, 2014

At one time, I was a member of the Geneseo War Plane Museum. (Now defunct). I used to spend weekends there, working on engines and helping with airframes. They had an old P-40 fuselage, wings and tail. Not much else.

Being that I was young and ambitious, I planned to rebuild it to flyable status. Not just any rebuild, but I was going to build my own XP-40Q!

This was in the early 80's and strangely enough, I was just about the only one who knew that an XP-40Q was ever built.

Wish I knew where that shell of a plane was now. (Not that I'd be any further along).

GregP · Jul 8, 2014

Hey count me in! I've been doing restoration at the Planes of Fame for 8 years now, and I know it would take 10 - 15 years, but making an XP-40Q would be great! I'm on two 10 - 15 year projects right now and it aren't anywhere near as sexy as an XP-40Q (an O-47 and now a B-17).

The Museum used to fly at Gensco duing airshows.

Milosh · Jul 8, 2014

Greg, why would the 9AF want P-40Qs when they already had a very capable a/c in the P-47?

GregP · Jul 8, 2014

Never said anyone wanted them, Milosh.

I'd have replaced the standard P-40's with the P-4Q's and sent some of the rest to wherever they also had other Allison powered aircaft. That way there would already be spares in the supply chain. Anybody flying a P-40 earlier than the Q model would have experienced something like a 50% jump in performance. As for the rest, a flying P-40Q beats the crap out of some spare P-51 / P-47 that may or may not ever get there.

And just as a reminder, the USAAF was much like the USAF is today. It doesn't matter what a unit wants, it matters what the headquarters planners assign to a unit. They get what is assigned. Again, Milosh, this event, production P-40Q's, never happened. I do not want to continue to justify anything about it to the forum since I have made almost no claims about the aircraft other than that it made the performance numbers shown in the flight report.

I've said my say on it and really have nothing further to add unless some new information surfaces. That would be nice, one way or the other.

Let's pick out some other obscure aircraft and go after that one. How about the Kaiser-Fleetwings XBTK? There's a neat plane to discuss. Of course it first flew in April 1945, so there's no chance it could make the war ... still, it's a neat subject that isn't the XP-40Q.

wuzak · Jul 8, 2014

How many USAAF front-line units still had P-40s after mid 1944?

GregP · Jul 8, 2014

Good question. I'm sure the USAAF Statistical Digest probably has some tables on it. I'll take a gander and see what I can find.

After mid-1944 I'd think most of the P-40's would be in the CBI, Pacific, maybe the UK as squardon hacks, or back in the States. Australia probably still had some, too. That's one of threason why I wasn't sure where the P-40Q's, had they ever been produced, would be assigned ... I'm not particularly up on what aircraft were based where and when. It's never been much of a subject of interest to me to the point of having the data already in hand but, once I acquire the data, I won't have to do it again.

Computers are good at not forgetting, until they do ... I should know, I was more or less offline for two months ending just a couple of weeks ago when my notebook died along with access to the data. Fortunately, backups come in handy once you are back up and running.

UPDATE:

You asked the number of P-40's on had n in the ETO.

In the Statistical Digest of WWII, Table 89 is the aircraft on hand in the ETO by major type. The units are not listed, but the number of aircraft by type are listed. There were no P-40's until Feb Mar 1943, when there were 15 on hand for both months. I find no other entries for P-40's in the ETO. My conclusion is that the P-40 was not ever going to be deployed to the ETO, whether it was a P-40Q or not.

I expected that.

Table 88 is aircraft in theaters versus Germany and the P-40 does show up there. I'm assuming the delta is the MTO. P-40's ramp up from 44 in Jul 1942 to 259 in Dec 1942, 733 in May 1943, 432 in Dec 1943, to 103 in Jul 1944, and zero after that time.

Had the P-40Q been deployed, with it's attendant increase in performance, the population might well have ramped back up. Also might not have done so. I'd not want to make the call.

RpR · Jul 9, 2014

For the Q to have been built, Curtiss would have had to not waste time on the P-53 and all the 60s that followed when the P-53 died with the engine it was supposed to have.

The P-53 and follow ups were built off of modified P-40 airframes but if Berlin had had his way the P-40 would have had the development that was wasted on the P-46, P-53, etc. had gone into the P-40.
Had Berlin's ideas been followed the Q would probably have been in service by early 1943 at the very latest as Berlin left in December of 1941 due to lack of official backing for an improved P-40.

As the Q was flying at least as early as early '43 even without the blessing of Curtiss, it would be safe to assume the design was probably equally as old as the P-53 etc. but were not worked on till the 53 and follow ups started to cluster-f them selves into being doa.

Brand new N models were being used in the Pacific, including some in bare metal, and had the Q been built it probably would have gone there.
The N was preferred for ground attack due its ability to absorb more ground fire verses the Mustang but I wonder how the Q would have been with its modified design.

There was an article in one of the new Mustangmagazines that new P-40s were flying with new P-51s in the CBI where the ground war was NOT going in the favor of the Allies right up to the end of the war.
They were losing ground.

GregP · Jul 9, 2014

Hi Bob,

I concur that the P-40Q, if developed, would probably have gone to PTO / CBI.

The designer of the P-40, Don Berlin was fed up with the lack of support for improving the P-40 breed, and his son waxed eloquently on that subject for 15 minutes or so in a talk at the Planes of Fame. The potential for development and improvement of the P-40 was ignored by Curtiss Executives and they sold some two years of Don's research to North American who used the data to help develop the P-51. It was with his approval, but Don's son said he either had to approve or be pushed aside. His son said he had been allowed to build one 2-stage, Merlin-powered P-40, but no other evidence of this has surfaced. He oversaw the development of the C-46 and the Helldiver (chief designer Raymond C. Blaylock).

He left Curtiss in Dec 1941 (the P-40 won a fighter competition in 1939) and went to the General Motors Fisher division. He was part of the P-75 design team, and was instrumental in the last variant which was actually practical but not produced.

After the war he designed the McDonnell F6H Demon, the XF-85 Goblin, and the XF-88 that became the F-101 Voodoo. In 1953 he joined Piasecki, rescued the H-21, "ceaned house," and it became Vertol. He was part of the team that designed the CH-47 Chinook that we still fly today. He went back to Curtiss-Wright in 1963, ended his career at E. F. Felt, and died in 1982. He had many awards and the last one to date was on 7 May 2013 when he was inducted into the Niagara Frontier Aviation Space Hall of Fame.

Shortround6 · Jul 9, 2014

Lets think about this one for a minute.

"His son said he had been allowed to build one 2-stage, Merlin-powered P-40, but no other evidence of this has surfaced."

"He left Curtiss in Dec 1941 (the P-40 won a fighter competition in 1939) and went to the General Motors Fisher division."

First 4 Wellingtons with Merlin 60 engines go into service with 109 Squadron in March of 1942. First Spitfire with a Merlin 60 (not 61) is modified in September 1941. The first MK IX Spitfire is being tested by the Air Fighting Development Unit in April 1942.

How and when Berlin and Curtiss got their hands on a two stage Merlin before Berlin left the company would certainly be an interesting story.

He came back in mid/late 1942 or 1943 on week-ends?

They built the first P-40 with 2 speed Merlin in the summer of 1941 and it went into production in Jan 1942 after Berlin had left the company (although preparations had to have begun in Nov/Dec of 1941).

Perhaps it is a question of confusing two speed with two stage?

GregP · Jul 9, 2014

You DO sound confused, Shortround. Don maintained very good relations with Curtiss. He was rehired a bit later if you go recheck his resume. I wasn't there and reported what I heard in a damned speech given by his son. Make of it what you will, at this point, I don't care at all unless the evidence resurfaces. No insult intended, just the truth. I already said there was no evidence of it, but hoped maybe it would surface.

What the hell more do you want? I'm not confused at all. I reported what was said ... that's all. Look him up and ask him, for God's sake. Don't ask me, I never claimed it was true. I claimed I heard it in a speech, stated that clearly, and I damned well did. Most speeches aren't Q A style and this one wasn't, either.

Tell you what. Go back, put yourself in MY place, and me in yours, and then re-read the posts. How would YOU respond?

You continuously ask me about things I didn't claim. It gets very frustrating, and that is NOT what this forum is about. Stick to what was actually said, not what was proposed and admitted as never having happened.

I'm only in here for fun. Please stop attacking everything I post.

wuzak · Jul 9, 2014

BobR said:
The P-53 and follow ups were built off of modified P-40 airframes but if Berlin had had his way the P-40 would have had the development that was wasted on the P-46, P-53, etc. had gone into the P-40.
Had Berlin's ideas been followed the Q would probably have been in service by early 1943 at the very latest as Berlin left in December of 1941 due to lack of official backing for an improved P-40.

As the Q was flying at least as early as early '43 even without the blessing of Curtiss, it would be safe to assume the design was probably equally as old as the P-53 etc. but were not worked on till the 53 and follow ups started to cluster-f them selves into being doa.

From Joe Baugher's site:

"On October 28, 1941, 600 P-40Ks were ordered for Lend-Lease supply to China. It was envisaged that this would be the last P-40 model to be built in quantity, the P-60 replacing the P-40 on the Curtiss production lines thereafter. However, delays in the P-60 program caused the order for P-40Ks to be increased to a total of 1300 aircraft on June 15, 1942."

Note that one of the P-40Q's was a modified P-40K, and the others P-40N's.

Also, given the modifications through the production series, including the lengthening of the fuselage, it would appear that there was some effort put into improving the P-40.

wuzak · Jul 9, 2014

GregP said:
You DO sound confused, Shortround. Don maintained very good relations with Curtiss. He was rehired a bit later if you go recheck his resume. I wasn't there and reported what I heard in a damned speech given by his son. Make of it what you will, at this point, I don't care at all unless the evidence resurfaces. No insult intended, just the truth. I already said there was no evidence of it, but hoped maybe it would surface.

Greg, SR was just pointing out that the timing for a 2 stage Merlin P-40 designed by Don Berlin was problematic.

drgondog · Jul 9, 2014

BobR said:
The P-53 and follow ups were built off of modified P-40 airframes but if Berlin had had his way the P-40 would have had the development that was wasted on the P-46, P-53, etc. had gone into the P-40.
Had Berlin's ideas been followed the Q would probably have been in service by early 1943 at the very latest as Berlin left in December of 1941 due to lack of official backing for an improved P-40.

That is as speculative as postulating NAA having a Merlin 60 in late 1941 for development and test purposes - and the subsequent acceleration of the future P-51B. All they needed was procurement priority, funding and blessing of the USAAF - none of which was made available.

As the Q was flying at least as early as early '43 even without the blessing of Curtiss, it would be safe to assume the design was probably equally as old as the P-53 etc. but were not worked on till the 53 and follow ups started to cluster-f them selves into being doa.

There is a Curtiss Engine test report on ZP-40Q 42-9987 (1st with standard wing and fuselage) which I can't put my fingers on, that is dated in May 1943 for P-40K-10 42-9987. This is the first P-40Q and did not have the extended fuselage, bubble canopy or clipped wings. The XP-40Q from P-40N-25 with all the features flew in February 1944. So speculation that the XP-40Q first flew in it's last and best form as an experimental 'proof of concept' airframe pegs Feb 1944, maybe Nov 1943 (can't find serial number) - a far cry from contract go-ahead and revision of fuselage and wing tooling before production starts.

Brand new N models were being used in the Pacific, including some in bare metal, and had the Q been built it probably would have gone there.
The N was preferred for ground attack due its ability to absorb more ground fire verses the Mustang but I wonder how the Q would have been with its modified design.

The very first P-40N-1 started delivery in March 1943.. The P-40Q that first flew between November 1943 and February 1944 was a P-40N-25 43-24571 which was produced around September 1943

There was an article in one of the new Mustangmagazines that new P-40s were flying with new P-51s in the CBI where the ground war was NOT going in the favor of the Allies right up to the end of the war.
They were losing ground.

The last combat operations for US was early 1945.. believe the RNZAF flew to end of war.

Shortround6 · Jul 9, 2014

GregP said:
You DO sound confused, Shortround.

It seems to be OK for you attack me.

Tell you what. Go back, put yourself in MY place, and me in yours, and then re-read the posts. How would YOU respond?

Did I say in my post that YOU were the one claiming or the source for the two stage Merlin P-40.

You have said before that you heard it in a speech, and while an intriguing idea it doesn't seem to stand up to the time line.

Perhaps the son was mistaken, I don't know, but that may be a possible explanation and that is what I was trying to say in the last two lines as Don Berlin was certainly there when the two speed Merlin was installed in the prototype P-40F.

It may not be the answer that P-40 fans are looking for but it seems reasonable.

Heaven knows that there have been plenty of mistakes made in confusing two speed and two stage superchargers in a number of books and articles by authors were being paid money to write them.

Balljoint · Jul 9, 2014

GregP said:
UPDATE:

You asked the number of P-40's on had n in the ETO.

In the Statistical Digest of WWII, Table 89 is the aircraft on hand in the ETO by major type. The units are not listed, but the number of aircraft by type are listed. There were no P-40's until Feb Mar 1943, when there were 15 on hand for both months. I find no other entries for P-40's in the ETO. My conclusion is that the P-40 was not ever going to be deployed to the ETO, whether it was a P-40Q or not.

I expected that.

Table 88 is aircraft in theaters versus Germany and the P-40 does show up there. I'm assuming the delta is the MTO. P-40's ramp up from 44 in Jul 1942 to 259 in Dec 1942, 733 in May 1943, 432 in Dec 1943, to 103 in Jul 1944, and zero after that time.

Had the P-40Q been deployed, with it's attendant increase in performance, the population might well have ramped back up. Also might not have done so. I'd not want to make the call.

Makes sense. In the ETO P-40 genre aircraft wouldn't have the range for high altitude escort duty. In either theater they would be inferior to the P-47/Tempest for CAS. The MTO had minimal fighter opposition against strategic bombing and the P-47 wasn't shoddy against what there was.

As I understand it, during the early P-40 development Curtiss (and Bell) politicked against multistage supercharging for their interceptors. This may well have cast the die for later developments.

rinkol · Jul 9, 2014

I have a distinct impression that Curtiss was no longer seen as a front rank aviation firm by the mid 1940s. Firms such as North American, Lockheed and Republic had successfully developed and placed higher performance fighters into service. Subsequent Curtiss developments, such as the XP-46 and XP-60 went nowhere. The C-46 transport achieved some success, but suffered from a poor reputation in service. On top of this, by 1943, Curtiss had been ordered to produce the P-47. In this last undertaking, Curtiss encountered many problems and the planes delivered established a poor reputation in service. While the P-40Q may have represented a significant improvement over earlier P-40s, I can see that the decision makers would have been loath to be seen rewarding Curtiss by further continuing P-40 production when four other firms (if you include Bell) already had successful designs in production. As it was, even the the P-63s were considered to be unnecessary and were exported.

rinkol · Jul 9, 2014

duplicate post

Packard P40

More options

m37b1

Airman

GregP

Major

Milosh

Senior Master Sergeant

GregP

Major

wuzak

Captain

GregP

Major

RpR

Airman

GregP

Major

Shortround6

Major General

GregP

Major

wuzak

Captain

wuzak

Captain

drgondog

Major

Shortround6

Major General

Balljoint

Senior Airman

rinkol

Airman 1st Class

rinkol

Airman 1st Class

Users who are viewing this thread

Similar threads