Which is the better fighter, P-40F or Typhoon?

P-40 or Typhoon

  • Total voters
    25

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ah, no because drag. Generally big wings = good turn but high drag (think Hurricane) small wings = less turn but low drag... all depending on weight as well of course. The unique thing about the Spitfire and a major part of what made it so special was it had a pretty big (36' span, 242 sq ft area) wing but it was so aerodynamically efficient it had quite low drag.

If a Fw 190 could out turn a Spit V that is news to me. I know they were dominating Spit V but I always understood that was due to speed (and roll) basically boom and zoom.

Fw 190 out turns a Spit V?

Googled it just now - found this post by our very own eagledad:

Spitfire Mk. V turn performance

From a British test in late 1942 with a clipped wing Spitfire, standard wing spitfire and FW-190:
Turning circle at 20,000 feet:
Spitfire V, standard wing 970 feet
Spitfire V, clipped wing 1025 feet
FW-190 1450 feet (RAE Farnborough figures)
No info on time or speed however.

Maybe he has a link to the test?
 
It's a good example though of how a fast BnZ plane can dominate a slower good-turning plane, if the speed advantage is sufficient.
 
Sure could be, depending on the version. That is what I was getting at. Or to be more historical, Typhoon vs. 109, or Fw 190 vs P-40. A lot of it depended on the context of the Theater.

But the Typhoon had one major flaw that would make it a little less effective at BnZ, i.e roll rate.
 
BnZ effectiveness has nothing to do with roll rate.
 
Disagree. Speed is the most important thing, - dive speed especially. Climb too. Firepower of course. But all good BnZ fighters I know of had good roll rates.
 
boom and zoom
A style of fighter attack utilizing energy as opposed to maneuverability. The method consists of "booming" the target by diving on it from a higher altitude, and then after the firing pass "zooming" back up to relative safety. Also called B and Z.
An Illustrated Dictionary of Aviation Copyright © 2005 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved
 
Totally disagree. Rolling and turning are different things. You can roll without losing speed. Rolling (and turning, slightly) allows the attacking fighter to keep targets lined up.

Think of the good (i.e. successful) BnZ fighters:

Fw 190 - fastest roll rate in the war basically
P-51 - excellent roll rate
P-47 - good roll rate
F4U Corsair - excellent roll rate
Ki-44 - (I just learned this) excellent roll rate

and in the early war -I-16 (excellent roll rate)



Just googled this and it's from a dubious source but it is a good summary of how I see it:

"Once the pilot reaches a significantly higher altitude than the opponent, the pilot should dive to transform the potential energy into speed. Usually the plane is now close to its maximum speed, but will retain its velocity for a long time. To maintain energy, only conduct gentle curves and rolling maneuvers in this state. Thus, an outstanding agility and roll rate at high speeds is required of the plane, such as the characteristics of the Focke-Wulf series.

The attack itself can occur while diving or zooming and also usually more than one target can be attacked, because turning targets are difficult to hit and therefore the success rate is low. A good fire power is a help.'
 
Even a broken clock is right twice a day. That is how BnZ works. What is a good Bnz plane with a bad roll rate? Only one I can think of is a P-38 but they didn't really do Bnz it was attack and climb away in a high speed climb...
 
Schweik said:
Even a broken clock is right twice a day. That is how BnZ works. What is a good Bnz plane with a bad roll rate? Only one I can think of is a P-38 but they didn't really do Bnz it was attack and climb away in a high speed climb...
Click to expand...
I admit to being interested as to what you see as the difference between the two. You dive make the attack and then use your energy to get away, you can continue the dive, use it to climb do almost anything you like with it.

Typhoon see P40, gets above it, dives, attacks and then does what he wants, dive, run away or climb. Probably climb and make another pass. What he will not do is to roll and turn.
 
Well roll comes in if your dive isn't perfectly lined up, like if you or your target moves slightly in some way that makes it hard to line up a shot. A fighter can dive at high speed into an enemy formation, and attack targets of opportunity, rolling to pick a target and turning slightly or climbing or diving to line up a shot. To break off another roll and pick another target. Then use momentum / speed to safely dive past the formation followed by a zoom climb and another pass.


P-38s couldn't safely dive very fast so from what I understand their strategy against Japanese fighters was a little bit different... fly up at maximum speed shoot, and immediately shift into a shallow high-speed climb. An A6M could climb well but not at a very high speed and would soon be left behind to their immense frustration.

Somewhat similarly, the main strategy used by Bf 109s and MC 202s against Hurricanes was to dive, attack (shoot if possible) then dive through and zoom climb back up to altitude to do it all over again. Against P-40s they could be caught in a dive so instead they would usually dive, shoot, and then do a high speed climbing turn to the right.
 
wuzak said:
I may be wrong here, but the 109 was never great in turns.
Click to expand...

Well, according to Erwin Leykauf, that was not the case...

"During what was later called the 'Battle of Britain', we flew the Messerschmitt Bf109E. The essential difference from the Spitfire Mark I flown at that time by the RAF was that the Spitfire was less manoeuvrable in the rolling plane. With its shorter wings (2 metres less wingspan) and its square-tipped wings, the Bf 109 was more manoeuvrable and slightly faster. (It is of interest that the English later on clipped the wings of the Spitfire.) For us, the more experienced pilots, real manoeuvring only started when the slats were out. For this reason it is possible to find pilots from that period (1940) who will tell you that the Spitfire turned better than the Bf 109. That is not true. I myself had many dogfights with Spitfires and I could always out-turn them. This is how I shot down six of them."
- Erwin Leykauf, German fighter pilot, 33 victories. Source: Messerschmitt Bf109 ja Saksan Sotatalous by Hannu Valtonen; Hurricane & Messerschmitt, Chaz Bowyer and Armand Van Ishoven.
 
If the target moves you either track the change which is normally fairly easy to do as the change to the target is significant but to the attacking aircraft is a very minor change in angle and would normally involve the use of the rudder. If you cannot get a bead on the target as you rightly say, you simply pull up and have another go. Sooner or later one will line up.

A P40 would be a fairly easy target for the Typhoon. It has a massive speed advantage both in a straight line, and in a dive. It also has a massive advantage in the rate of climb. The P40 would have no reply to the Boom and Zoom tactic.
 
As previously stated, wing loading is great starting place, but only tells part of the story. Leading edge devices on the Bf 109, and trailing edge "butterfly flaps" on the Ki-43 and 84, contributed significantly to their respective slow speed handling and turning radius. The 109 was never a slouch in the turning department, if flown correctly. I suspect allied personnel testing captured examples never got the maximum performance out of the machines
 
Glider said:
Typhoon see P40, gets above it, dives, attacks and then does what he wants, dive, run away or climb. Probably climb and make another pass. What he will not do is to roll and turn.
Click to expand...

So this is purely speculative since they never fought so far as I know, but here are two possible alternative scenarios:
  1. Typhoon dives down at P-40L, P-40L pilot doesn't see it, blasted by 20mm cannons torn to shreds. Dies instantly.
  2. Typhoon dives down on P-40L, pilot is warned by his wingman or something, instantly rolls to the left* until he is upside down, and pulls a slight turn so that he's going downward and at an oblique angle to his previous flight path, and firewalls the throttle, picking up speed - Typhoon can't keep him lined up in his sights, no longer has a shot and overshoots, flies by. P-40L pilot keeps rolling until rightside up, puts the nose down and starts shooting as he chases the Tiffy down to the deck...
For a P-40 I'm sure you would assume that scenario #2 would be impossible but it's also probably what Fw 190 pilots did. To visualize scenario #2 start with a more or less linear flight path and then turn it into a cone with the target freeely moving around the edge in a spiral or back and forth. This makes them hard to hit.

However this is all speculative and for amusement purposes only I am not claiming to have any idea what would actually happen if a Typhoon had a dogfight with a P-40. I'm just trying to illustrate how a high roll rate works in these scenarios.

*I don't know how a Typhoon worked but several Axis fighters had a lot of torque going right so if as a US P-40 pilot they were diving on you a turn left was the standard escape technique.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

Paper comparing the flight performance of the P-40E Warhawk and the A6M2 Zero
Replies
8
Views
1K
Ivan1GFP
I
G
Better Dambusters
2
Replies
25
Views
2K
GTX
W
The scarcity of fighter to fighter FW-190A pilot combat accounts...
2 3
Replies
52
Views
4K
GrauGeist
M
P-61 Performance
Replies
15
Views
1K
Snautzer01
Is it possible to access the MAG-23 War Diary online?
Replies
6
Views
166
CHen10
Menu
Log in
Register