- Thread starter
- #721
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
- Status
Shortround6
Major General
If you pick and chose you can find heavily defended locations anywhere.
There might very well have been a few locations in Italy that as much or more flak than anywhere in France/low countries.
However the British had been bombing/strafing German targets in France and the Low countries as far back as the BoB, they sent night intruders over German bases in during the night Blitz over the winter of 1940/41. After a good part of the Luftwaffe went to Russia the British tried any number of raids/tactics to get the remaining German fighters to come up and fight during the whole "Lean forward into France" fiasco.
The British and later the Americans pretty much treated the coast from Brest to Emden as an advanced training ground. Many bomber squadrons/groups doing their first few missions on coastal targets before going further inland. By the Fall of 1943 the Germans had 3 years to fortify and set up AA guns in this stretch of the coast. Yes there were areas with less flak than others but on average would you think that this area of occupied territory had more or less Flak guns than Yugoslavia? Or large parts of Italy?
We are also getting a bit mixed up about the P-40. I, for one, don't really care why the British passed on using the early Tomahawks in England in late 1940/early 1941 if what we are discussing is what it did (or was capable of doing) in late 1942 and 1943. That is like saying the Spitfire MK IX was no good in 1943 because squadron XXX couldn't do something in 1940 with their Spitfire MK IIs.
On the other hand don't tell me about the bomb loads the late P-40Ns could carry in late 1943/44 (and it was substantial) if what we are discussing is the P-40F and (I assume) the Typhoon of 1942/43.
There is/was an awful lot of grey in what these planes did or could do (or how they were used) and picking/choosing certain instances to demonstrate overall ability is a little too black and white.
Flying in the Med, even in the south of France, in winter is not like flying out of England (or not flying due to weather) in the winter. Sure, there days when the weather was bad, buton average there were more flying days per month in the Med than in NW Europe. Visibility may have been better on average. and so on.
There might very well have been a few locations in Italy that as much or more flak than anywhere in France/low countries.
However the British had been bombing/strafing German targets in France and the Low countries as far back as the BoB, they sent night intruders over German bases in during the night Blitz over the winter of 1940/41. After a good part of the Luftwaffe went to Russia the British tried any number of raids/tactics to get the remaining German fighters to come up and fight during the whole "Lean forward into France" fiasco.
The British and later the Americans pretty much treated the coast from Brest to Emden as an advanced training ground. Many bomber squadrons/groups doing their first few missions on coastal targets before going further inland. By the Fall of 1943 the Germans had 3 years to fortify and set up AA guns in this stretch of the coast. Yes there were areas with less flak than others but on average would you think that this area of occupied territory had more or less Flak guns than Yugoslavia? Or large parts of Italy?
We are also getting a bit mixed up about the P-40. I, for one, don't really care why the British passed on using the early Tomahawks in England in late 1940/early 1941 if what we are discussing is what it did (or was capable of doing) in late 1942 and 1943. That is like saying the Spitfire MK IX was no good in 1943 because squadron XXX couldn't do something in 1940 with their Spitfire MK IIs.
On the other hand don't tell me about the bomb loads the late P-40Ns could carry in late 1943/44 (and it was substantial) if what we are discussing is the P-40F and (I assume) the Typhoon of 1942/43.
There is/was an awful lot of grey in what these planes did or could do (or how they were used) and picking/choosing certain instances to demonstrate overall ability is a little too black and white.
Flying in the Med, even in the south of France, in winter is not like flying out of England (or not flying due to weather) in the winter. Sure, there days when the weather was bad, buton average there were more flying days per month in the Med than in NW Europe. Visibility may have been better on average. and so on.
The whole Battle of the Bulge took place because allied aircraft couldn't support the US ground forces, as soon as the weather changed so did the battle.
Shortround6
Major General
I would also view the ability of the P-40 to dive to catch faster aircraft with a bit of suspicion. I am sure it was done, but perhaps not at the speeds given in this thread? or as easily as it is being presented?
we already have a debate about whether the P-40 could dive at 480 mph IAS or at 500+ mph IAS.
The manual that says 480 IAS was the red line also says that 5000-8000ft of altitude is needed to recover from a high speed dive.
So how much higher does the P-40 have to start out to be able to hit even 450mph in it's dive to catch the tip and run raiders?
Not every dive is vertical dive (or close to it) and considerable speed can be picked up in a less than 45 degree dive.
Perhaps a speed of only 420mph was needed to catch some of those planes, I don't know, but lets stop quoting max possible from a higher altitude than most P-40s aside from the F and Ls flew at.
we already have a debate about whether the P-40 could dive at 480 mph IAS or at 500+ mph IAS.
The manual that says 480 IAS was the red line also says that 5000-8000ft of altitude is needed to recover from a high speed dive.
So how much higher does the P-40 have to start out to be able to hit even 450mph in it's dive to catch the tip and run raiders?
Not every dive is vertical dive (or close to it) and considerable speed can be picked up in a less than 45 degree dive.
Perhaps a speed of only 420mph was needed to catch some of those planes, I don't know, but lets stop quoting max possible from a higher altitude than most P-40s aside from the F and Ls flew at.
michael rauls
Tech Sergeant
- 1,679
- Jul 15, 2016
I must admit most of us Americans, or at least most of the ones I've known use " Britain" and " England" interchangeably. Thanks for clearing that up.
Learned an interesting statistic piecing together data about the P40 and Me109. The Me109 shot down more P40s than P40s shot down all German Aircraft. Something like that. P40 Pilots were used for bombing missions as well as fighter only missions. Loaded with bombs they became easy and numerous targets for the high flying German fighters. From reading all kinds of books the Germans rarely used the Me109 for bombing missions. So all their pilots racked up good air to air scores as they were not faced with bomb load like a P40 or for that matter subject to anti aircraft batteries and gun placement. Have not found a clear number of P40 losses but something in the order of 1500 planes in the MTO.
That means a lot of budding P40 aces were lost to bombing missions. Where the German pilots could rack up huge scores as they were only used as fighters. Fighter to fighter...P40s to Me109 would have been a near 1-1 ratio, probably favoring the Me109. However the P40 caused massive havoc to German airfields and Rommel's Army. A lot of P40s got through to hit the Germans successfully. German pilots became masters of the sky because they survived more battles and not subject to the effective ground fire attacking Allied positions. That was left to other German aircraft. Kind of stark to see the highest Allied Pilots having a maximum of 20 kills. Yet the Number of German pilots with 50 or more kills was huge in comparison.
Another reason P40 had more losses was they had the range to attack Germans and Italians and not the other way around. The ability to loiter over in enemy territory provided targets of opportunity but potential for damage. Landing or bailing out someplace along the way back to base. Here the P40 wrecked a lot of parked German aircraft. Which imho made the P40 a more versatile and dangerous combat plane than the Me 109. I do not think the Me109 had a large enough wing to carry 1000lbs of bombs.
That means a lot of budding P40 aces were lost to bombing missions. Where the German pilots could rack up huge scores as they were only used as fighters. Fighter to fighter...P40s to Me109 would have been a near 1-1 ratio, probably favoring the Me109. However the P40 caused massive havoc to German airfields and Rommel's Army. A lot of P40s got through to hit the Germans successfully. German pilots became masters of the sky because they survived more battles and not subject to the effective ground fire attacking Allied positions. That was left to other German aircraft. Kind of stark to see the highest Allied Pilots having a maximum of 20 kills. Yet the Number of German pilots with 50 or more kills was huge in comparison.
Another reason P40 had more losses was they had the range to attack Germans and Italians and not the other way around. The ability to loiter over in enemy territory provided targets of opportunity but potential for damage. Landing or bailing out someplace along the way back to base. Here the P40 wrecked a lot of parked German aircraft. Which imho made the P40 a more versatile and dangerous combat plane than the Me 109. I do not think the Me109 had a large enough wing to carry 1000lbs of bombs.
fubar57
General
I have 110 Bf 109E-1/Bs and 226 Bf 109E-4/Bs produced. Looking for Bf 109E-7/B numbers. Where do you get rarely used and the other made up info from?
В Съветска Русия P-40 ви лети !!
не понимаю!
- иван
Hello Elmas,
At low altitudes, most models of the P-40 from the D/E series onward were actually faster than the Spitfire Mk.IX.
The Spitfire Mk.IX had much better altitude performance but wasn't very fast at low altitudes.
Hello Schweik,
The Merlin P-40F/L may not have been as effective as the Allison P-40 on the Eastern Front.
It was slower at low altitudes by quite a lot because the Allison tolerated quite a bit more "overboosting" and would not have climbed quite as fast because it had less engine power and more weight.
The Merlin did give an advantage but it was above about 15,000 feet or so.
My own opinion is that the P-40 was a second rate Air Superiority fighter by 1942 and treated accordingly:
In other words, in places where it continued to serve as a front line fighter, it was because the opposition was not considered of the highest caliber or where there simply wasn't anything comparable that was available. If there was anything else available, it got a secondary role.
Note that by the time the P-40M and P-40N came out, the P-40M was not even in use by US forces except as trainers. The ones that did enter combat did so as Lend-Lease aircraft.
This is getting a bit off topic from the discussion of Merlin P-40's though.
- Ivan.
- Thread starter
- #730
Try looking at the US P 40 units records against the Bf 109 as distinct from RAF / Commonwealth. I think you will find it an eye opener.
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
michael rauls
Tech Sergeant
- 1,679
- Jul 15, 2016
Yes the enduring criticism of the p40 as being slow has always puzzled me. The Spitfire V witch seems like a fair mark to use as comparison to the best of my knowledge had a top speed of about 370. The Bf109 E slightly less, the F slightly more. The A6m 335 to 350 depending on subtype and whose numbers you believe.
All in the balpark of the p40 F/L or most models for that matter. Some a bit more, some a bit less but I have never heard criticism that the A6m or the Spitfire MkV for example were" slow".
There certainly are some lagit criticisms to be made of the p40 but I don't see how being slow is one of them.
Last edited:
It is understandable because many things didn't change, the King of Scotland became the King of both England and Scotland but Kings are still referred to as King/Queen of England. I was looking at a timeline of USA history. It mentioned the act of union in 1707 then in 1715 said emigration from Scotland started because of high rents, that emigration wouldn't have taken place without the act of union. In any case most of the people are from England but should be called British. It is similar with Holland and Netherlands, Holland is part of Netherlands, not all of it but many think they are one and the same.
Kevin J
Banned
Add to that, no criticism to Allison for not developing a 2 speed V-1710 because the US Gov could have Merlins licence produced by Packard without having to pay Royalties to Rolls Royce, so it didn't need them.
Thanks for the explanation. I would have made the same mistakes / been oblivious as well and I have passed through several RAF bases!
Cheers,
Biff
Navalwarrior
Staff Sergeant
- 764
- Jun 17, 2018
Resp:
Ops! Not so. The P-51B did not enter combat until last month (or two) of 1943! Yes, they were coming off the production line in mid 1943.
It makes no difference to my point, once the two factories were producing the days were numbered for the P40.
The late model P40s went to Russia and China as a front line fighter.
Chennault And Chinese used them to the end even though P38s P47s and P51s systematically replaced them.
The higher altitude combat benefited the newer types.
At Low altitude the P40 was still preferred.
Just a more maneuverable veritile low altitude fighter.
However the emphasis was about producing the new Jets.
So eventually alll prop planes were replaced.
Under 10,000 feet the Spitfire IX (Merlin 61, +15 lb-boost) appears to have roughly 20-30 mph on the Kittyhawk (v1720-39, 42-in boost).
With the Merlin 66 (+18-lb boost) it's around 30-40 mph.
- Thread starter
- #740
Yes but hes talking about P-40E or K (V-1710-73) at 60" boost or more. As I'm sure you know 70" was not unheard of especislly for V-1710-73 (but also -39s) in both P-40s and Allison engined Mustangs.
42" was military power...
56" was standard WEP for all 1710-39 and -73 by mid 42 and Allison aircraft company acknowledged they were alloweling 60" boost as a standard WEP setting in that infamous memo.
- Status
