Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
I think you're probably correct with the P-40.Wasted production.
Better question is: Why it was produced years after it became obsolete (July 1944)
It was not the only , though:
P-39 production ended August 1944
P-40 production ended November 1944
FM-2 production ended May 1945
The Spitfire was a far better machine. So why expend scare resources in building the Hurricane? Especially in 1940?
Awareness of the Hurri's limited future potential compared to the Spitfire would come, but certainly not in 1940.
The Hurricane had stressed skin wings before the outbreak of the war which were both stronger and lighter, the original design allowed it to get into production and sort out a stressed skin wing and how to make it. From wiki An all-metal, stressed-skin wing of duraluminium (a DERD specification similar to AA2024) was introduced in April 1939 and was used for all of the later marks.[12] "The metal skinned wings allowed a diving speed that was 80 mph (130 km/h) higher than the fabric-covered ones. They were very different in construction but were interchangeable with the fabric-covered wings; one trials Hurricane, L1877, was even flown with a fabric-covered port wing and metal-covered starboard wing. The great advantage of the metal-covered wings over the fabric ones was that the metal ones could carry far greater stress loads without needing so much structure beneath."[39] Several fabric-wing Hurricanes were still in service during the Battle of Britain, although a good number had had their wings replaced during servicing or after repair. Changing the wings required only three hours work per aircraft.[39]The factory (ies) were geared to producing that sort of construction, not stressed metal skin construction?
They may have been aware of the limitations of the Hurricane as to future potential in 1940. However there was, in Aug/Sept of 1940 the future potential of Oct-Nov-Dec of 1940 (and spring of 1941) and the Future potential of the Hurricane to carry on into 1942/43. Two different things. The Merlin XX and the Hurricane II took care of the immediate future and the relative production ability to make both Hurricanes and Spitfires. Cutting back on Hurricane production in fall/winter of 1940 was not going to happen. The introduction of the 109F returned the Hurricane to the 2nd rank after the Hurricane II had brought it to near equality to the 109E.
However without knowing in advance that the Typhoon would not be available in numbers in late 1941 and early 1942 I doubt that anybody would sanction the desperate move to transfer Hurricane production to Spitfire production and the disruption of total production that would entail.
There probably was, but I think even in Rolls Royce any talk of the Merlin producing a reliable 2000 BHP within 4-5 years would have been whispered quietly. If a watercooled engine is having trouble its hard to make an argument for an air cooled one like the Centaurus even if the arguments were completely valid.I think there might have been a "glimmer"of doubt by late 1939 when the Sabre started having production woes. Which does beg the question of what might have happened had the Centaurus been given the green light as an alternative.
Cutting back on Hurricane production in fall/winter of 1940 was not going to happen. The introduction of the 109F returned the Hurricane to the 2nd rank after the Hurricane II had brought it to near equality to the 109E.
I think you're probably correct with the P-40.
The Hurricane was very briefly very glamourous, until the Spitfire appeared on stage and showed an elegant leg to the audience.Available, easy to maintain and much easier to repair, just slower and had similar problems with carby feed on engine as well. Spitfire was better overall though and the hurricane provided the unglamorous backbone much like B24 and B17.
Can't agree, sorry. The P-40 was still in service in numbers for US allies, such as Australia and New Zealand. When production of a type ceases, parts unique to that aeroplane stop also. Units operating these aircraft would then have to ground aircraft to scavenge for parts. Supply chain was the one thing the US has consistently got right during the war and subsequently; had P-40 production ended, hundreds of aircraft at the front line against Japan would have been hamstrung by a lack of serviceable parts.
There probably was, but I think even in Rolls Royce any talk of the Merlin producing a reliable 2000 BHP within 4-5 years would have been whispered quietly. If a watercooled engine is having trouble its hard to make an argument for an air cooled one like the Centaurus even if the arguments were completely valid.
I just wouldn't have liked to be in the shoes of the men making those decisions how do you dicide?I think Fedden would argue with you!
One does have to wonder how much hostility the Centaurus encountered because of the issues with getting the Hercules into production along with manufacturing priorities. But, it does appear that the Centaurus had a much more trouble free beginning than either the Sabre (Or the R3350)
With the Centaurus you had a 3270 cubic engine (53,6 liter) engine, and that should have take care of any difference between air cooled and liquid cooled Merlin.There probably was, but I think even in Rolls Royce any talk of the Merlin producing a reliable 2000 BHP within 4-5 years would have been whispered quietly. If a watercooled engine is having trouble its hard to make an argument for an air cooled one like the Centaurus even if the arguments were completely valid.
I was just speaking generally, at the time all engines were having some troubles, how do you tell which were resolvable, did they know for sure sleeve valves could be made to an acceptable quality in mass production. I said whispering quietly because translating a short term test into long term reliability isn't always as easy as people think. I am sure they already knew what was required to produce 2000BHP from a merlin, just a question of keeping it together for a few hundred hours, that's all.With the Centaurus you had a 3270 cubic engine (53,6 liter) engine, and that should have take care of any difference between air cooled and liquid cooled Merlin.
Unfortunately the Centaurus used the same diameter cylinders as the Hercules, it used 1/2 in longer stroke. If you can't make Hercules cylinders (sleeves) in quantity at acceptable quality then the Centaurus is a non starter.
Taurus problems with overheating weren't helping the sleeve valve cause either at this point.
RR may have been whispering quietly about 2000hp seeing as how they already had experience with the engine for the "Speed Spitfire" and having it run at 1600hp or better (I forget) for ten hours on the test stand.
Taking all the information you can and knowing that in a few months or a few years when more info is available, someone is going to second guess your decisions.I just wouldn't have liked to be in the shoes of the men making those decisions how do you dicide?
With the Centaurus you had a 3270 cubic engine (53,6 liter) engine, and that should have take care of any difference between air cooled and liquid cooled Merlin.
Unfortunately the Centaurus used the same diameter cylinders as the Hercules, it used 1/2 in longer stroke. If you can't make Hercules cylinders (sleeves) in quantity at acceptable quality then the Centaurus is a non starter.
Taurus problems with overheating weren't helping the sleeve valve cause either at this point.