In another thread, there is a mention that XP-46 have had laminar-flow wings. How fast was with full military load? Joe Baugher (link) states that 'barely 410 mph' was attained in the flight by a light weight prototype (ie. no protection, no guns, no radio). So I'd love to see some reliable data on the Curtiss XP-46; people, please feel to contribute.
XP-46: facts, figures, myths
- Thread starter tomo pauk
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
wuzak
Captain
I don't think that the XP-46 had laminar flow wings.
Instead it was the XP-53/60 that had the laminar flow wings.
Also, the XP-46 didn't proceed because its performance was barely any better than the P-40.
Instead it was the XP-53/60 that had the laminar flow wings.
Also, the XP-46 didn't proceed because its performance was barely any better than the P-40.
Wuzak is correct about which ones had the laminar flow wings, my error.
I have never read a reliable report where the P-46 flew faster than 355 mph, although I believe the first unarmed one was ten mph faster than the second fully armed one if I remember reading correctly.
I have never read a reliable report where the P-46 flew faster than 355 mph, although I believe the first unarmed one was ten mph faster than the second fully armed one if I remember reading correctly.
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
From Joe B's site...
"Even with all the military equipment taken off, the XP-46A was just barely able to achieve 410 mph at 12,200 feet, the required maximum speed when fully equipped. When the fully-equipped XP-46 flew for the first time on September 29, 1941, the additional weight of the military equipment slowed the fighter down to only 355 mph at 12,200 feet."
"Even with all the military equipment taken off, the XP-46A was just barely able to achieve 410 mph at 12,200 feet, the required maximum speed when fully equipped. When the fully-equipped XP-46 flew for the first time on September 29, 1941, the additional weight of the military equipment slowed the fighter down to only 355 mph at 12,200 feet."
- Thread starter
- #5
It's from Joe Baugher's site, not from Joe Brennan's (JoeB's site) 
The 'barely 410 mph' looks like a vast exagerration - the military load to be 'guilty' for 50+ mph loss? We can recall that V-1710-39 was capable for only 1150 HP at about the quoted altitude. We can also take a look at the smaller MC.202 - 370 mph with 2 HMGs.
The 'barely 410 mph' looks like a vast exagerration - the military load to be 'guilty' for 50+ mph loss? We can recall that V-1710-39 was capable for only 1150 HP at about the quoted altitude. We can also take a look at the smaller MC.202 - 370 mph with 2 HMGs.
