helmitsmit
Airman 1st Class
Heard the P-40 was faster, better turn and rate of roll at low level (5,000ft) than P51D. Would a P-40F with merlin 60 series and longer nose but minimal changes to airframe beat 437mph at 25,000ft?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
P-40 had a 37% higher CDzero than the P-51. It was never going to be faster. Turn rate is good but the history of the fighter was for better speed not turn rate. Pilots have always claimed that speed is life. Turn rate has not been called that.
P-40 had a 37% higher CDzero than the P-51. It was never going to be faster. Turn rate is good but the history of the fighter was for better speed not turn rate. Pilots have always claimed that speed is life. Turn rate has not been called that.
Shortround6 ...But aside from the nameplate and a few screws/rivets it wouldn't be a P-40
DEPENDS WHO WAS FLYING EACH AIRCRAFT!
The P-40 you are referring to was a stripped down model. It turned out not be practical for combat and that is why so few were
built and many of the ones that were built were modified in the field to heavier weights. Weight savings used were aluminium radiators and oil coolers
instead of copper/brass, magnesium wheels which are not bad but more of the weight savings came from cutting the guns for 6 to 4 and limiting ammo to 201
rounds per gun. More weight was saved by leaving out one fuel tank and cutting internal capacity to 120 US gallons. The empty tank was about 100lbs, more
weight was saved by leaving out the battery and electric starter for the engine. And the wing bomb racks were left off.
Even if the engine would stand 75in of pressure that is going to last only a very short while. The supercharger was maxed out at 9500ft at 57in. above that
the pressure fall so f and below that the pressure will increase until you get your 74in but that is going to be down around 1000ft or so. Great performance
if the engine will last at 0-5000ft but not better than normal from 5000ft up with no difference from 9500ft up. What is the point?
The P-40 never received the same Power as the spitfire even when the P-40 was for a short time given the Merlin 20 it was an earlier lower powered version not that latter 1600hp ones. A Merlin 20 or 60 series engined P-40 would match the Spitfire V and IX respectively in maneuverability and speed, beat it in terms of roll rate, dive rate and range and be slightly inferior in climb rate.
Sounds like a description of the P-51H.Well, if you changed the wing airfoil, and the plane form and the landing gear retracts. Then changed the fuselage, radiators and tail. Just a few more modifications to the canopy and cockpit you could get the "P-40" to beat the Mustang. But aside from the nameplate and a few screws/rivets it wouldn't be a P-40