What happened to the Curtiss P36/Mohawk?

[Juha]

Was this typical for French fighter aircraft or only for the H75?

At least Morane-Saulnier MS 406 was unarmoured but its lower fuel tank had at least rudimentary self-sealing.

Juha

 

[Shortround6]

What choice does the USA have during 1940? The P-38 was problem plagued and wasn't originally designed for mass production. All you've got are the P-36, P-39 and P-40.

For France the situation is different. They already have several hundred P-36 aircraft on hand or on order from the USA and they've got the 38.67 liter Gnome-Rhône 14N engine. So if France isn't defeated during 1940 they may as well attempt to upgrade existing P-36 aircraft with a more powerful engine.

Except the 38.67 liter Gnome-Rhône 14N engine ISN'T more powerful. And it cannot be made more powerful. It is very close to the Russian M-88 engine, both were developed from the 38.67 liter Gnome-Rhône 14K series engine. Without changing to the "R" series with the 3 bearing crankshaft and crankcase the "N" had gone as far as it could go.

 

[oldcrowcv63]

What choice does the USA have during 1940? The P-38 was problem plagued and wasn't originally designed for mass production. All you've got are the P-36, P-39 and P-40.

pretty good site for P-40 variants and history:

Index of /Variants

From the P-40 page of that site:

"In the late 1930s, the USAAC was planning to expand its force, and on January 25, 1939. manufacturers were invited to submit proposals for pursuit aircraft. The Army was still thinking in terms of low-altitude, short-range fighters. Among the contenders were the Lockheed XP-38, the Bell XP-39, the Seversky/Republic XP-41 (AP-2) and XP-43 (AP-4), and no less than three planes from Curtiss, the H75R, XP-37, and XP-42."

That is, three in addition to the XP-40 which had first flown October 14, 1938 compared to (according to wikipedia:
XP-38, first flight January 27, 1939
XP-39, first flight April 6, 1938 (1939 according to America's Hundred Thousand)

"Although the XP-40 could not match the performance (especially at altitude) of the turbosupercharged types, it was less expensive and could reach quantity production fully a year ahead of the other machines. In addition, the XP-40 was based on a already-proven airframe that had been in production for some years. Consequently, on April 26, 1939, the Army adopted a conservative approach and ordered 524 production versions under the designation P-40 (Curtiss Model 81). At that time, it was the largest-ever production order for a US fighter, and dwarfed the service test orders placed that same day for YP-38 and YP-39 fighters. A couple of weeks later, 13 YP-43s were also ordered."

The first of roughly 200 production P-36As had begun reaching USAAC operational units in April 1938 so it was evidently considered an aerodynamically mature design by the January, 1939 request.

The first production P-40s were apparently reaching units by June, 1940.

Seems to me this text pretty much validates:

OK guys, The is no magic about the P-36 and P-40.

In some sense much of the DNA of the P-36 was preserved and went on to greater glory in the form of the P-40
In a similar way, the legacy of the P-35 was evident in the successful P-47.

 

[tomo pauk]

What choice does the USA have during 1940? The P-38 was problem plagued and wasn't originally designed for mass production. All you've got are the P-36, P-39 and P-40.

For France the situation is different. They already have several hundred P-36 aircraft on hand or on order from the USA and they've got the 38.67 liter Gnome-Rhône 14N engine. So if France isn't defeated during 1940 they may as well attempt to upgrade existing P-36 aircraft with a more powerful engine.

USA (USAAF?) has almost no choice, if we are talking about the planes to enter service from mid-1940 to mid-1941. Only thing they have is P-40, and it was comparable with Spit 109 of BoB era. The main quality of P-40 was, indeed, suitability to be produced, while closing the qualitatively gap vs. Germany UK.

Several hundred of P-36 in French service are, with France surviving into 1941, to be either destroyed, or relegated for secondary duties. With advent of Bf-109F-0/-1/-2 and Ju-88, they need upgrades in engine power, armament and armor. I don't think the effort to make a substantial upgrade would've been worth it. Especially if we consider this: the French have 3 major lines of fighters worth producing improving (D.520, VG.33, MB-152), with import scheduled from USA (P-40, F4F).

 

[oldcrowcv63]

USA (USAAF?)

according to Wikipedia:

USA-AS-SC (Aviaton Section-Signal Corps) from July 18, 1914 - May 20, 1918 to
USA-AS (Air Service) May 24, 1918 - July 2, 1926 to
USA-AC (Air Corps) July 2, 1926 to March 9, 1942 to
USA-AF (Air Forces) June 20, 1941 to September 17, 1947

the occasional organizational underlap and overlap are explained in the wiki text.

 

[tomo pauk]

'USAAF' meaning 'not US Navy'; the original poster listed only Army fighters under USA

 

[Juha]

...Several hundred of P-36 in French service are, with France surviving into 1941, to be either destroyed, or relegated for secondary duties. With advent of Bf-109F-0/-1/-2 and Ju-88, they need upgrades in engine power, armament and armor. I don't think the effort to make a substantial upgrade would've been worth it. Especially if we consider this: the French have 3 major lines of fighters worth producing improving (D.520, VG.33, MB-152), with import scheduled from USA (P-40, F4F).

IMHO P-36/Hawk 75A was better in air superiority role than MB-152, only plus for MB-152 was its cannon armament. It would have been easy to istall .5 hmgs as cowling guns into Hawk 75A, after all standard cowling armament in P-36s was one hmg and one lmg and Finns also changed the cowling armament to 1-2hmg(s). And Hawk 75A was the most succesfull French AF fighter in May-June 40. Finnish AF Hawks had pilot's back armour and self-sealing fuel tanks. Originally the fuel tanks were unprotected but some of Hawks arrived to Finland with self-sealing wing tanks and in Finland all fuel tanks got their self-sealing also the fuselage tank.

Juha

 

[Shortround6]

In some sense much of the DNA of the P-36 was preserved and went on to greater glory in the form of the P-40
In a similar way, the legacy of the P-35 was evident in the successful P-47.

It is not just DNA in the case of the P-36 and P-40. It may have been possible to actually swap parts like elevators, rudders, ailerons and some other fuselage and wing parts between the P-36 and the early P-40s. Fuel tanks until the self-sealing ones came along. I don't know how much of the P-36 was left by the time you got to the P-40N though

 

[oldcrowcv63]

'USAAF' meaning 'not US Navy'; the original poster listed only Army fighters under USA

Sorry, I thought you were wondering the same thing I was wondering: "When did all these successor organizations come into existence and what was their tenure." Especially USAAC and USAAF which apparently had some administrative overlap