The P-40...

[ickysdad]

Well the P-40 seemed to be equal to the '109(even the '190) at altitudes below 15,000' at least. In the book "Luftwaffe Fighter Planes & Aces" several German pilots say you definately didn't want to turn with a P-40 or dogfight in any sort of way or try to out-roll at lower speeds. They also said trying to dive away was a big mistake ,you would want to dive & zoom climb or use the 109/190's superior speed,or climb ability, to get away but definately don't dogfight. They also testified to it's robustness almost in legendary terms. Several sources say it could out-turn/out-roll a P-51 ,at least at low speeds & lower altitudes.In diving I'm not for sure,but probably only the P-47 would clearly out-dive it ,but not saying it's superior or equal in this regard to a P-51,P-38,F4U, or any other of the great USAAF divers.It's probably safe to say it's a superior diver compared to just about any foriegn design.
Against the Zero well if used as an energy fighter it could be considered to be superior to the IJN plane. It was faster ,could out-roll ,and out-dive it plus was far more rugged/had far more firepower(at least compared to the A6M/2-3 with low velocity cannons & .30 caliber MG's). Now the IJN plane was a far better turner especially at low speeds, a far better climber , and had better acceleration though a P-40 could increase it's accelerate by just putting it's nose down a little. In other words the P-40 if handled right could be a formidable problem for the Zero as evidenced by the Flying Tiger's.
All in all the P-40 has been over maligned and if the production versions would have been given the turbo-charger that the proto-types had you would have had a truly 1st. class fighter period, not just a 1st. class plane under 15,000'.

[ickysdad]

This reply above was supposed to be in the "Curtiss P-40" thread,but I hit the wrong button.

[simon]

Thanks Ickysdad, that's interesting indeed.

I did used to have a book on the Desert war in which an RAF squadron refitted with P-40s from Hurricanes complained bitterly about the type, especially they found the controls to be overly heavy.

A lot with this kind of thing depends on what you're used to of course, quite famously one RAF squadron converting from Hurricanes to Spifires around the time of the Battle of Britain tried to stop crews taking their Hurris away, doesn't make the Hurricane a better fighter necessarily, just that they were experienced with them, knew their quirks and felt comfortable with them.

Could well have been the same with the P-40 squadron.

[ickysdad]

Simon,
It's gets down to the old "Burner" verses "Turner" debate. RAF pilots were of the turner type while the USAAF belived in burning.Either would be disdappointed with the other's aircraft.Look at the Spitfire verses Zero debate we had a while back how the Zero got the upper hand because the IJAAF/RAF were fighting the same ,however once the RAF pilots resorted to the Flying Tiger style of fighting the Spitfire clearly got the upper hand. Look at it another way take the the F4F Wildcat against the Zero it wants to burn not turn ,however against a '109 or '190 it wouldn't want to do that except that it could out-dive both but would want to turn against those 2 Luftwaffe planes and would be a very capable turner against those 2. AS far as how a plane is used just look at P-40's/P-39's on the Eastern Front they held thier own against german fighters that are considered quite superior to them,why? Because most combat there occured at very low levels and that evened the playing just enough.

[Romantic Technofreak]

I am glad that the discussion already went into a direction of laying a good light on the P-40. I have no idea how many kills this plane received, and how good this was compared to others. But I know that the plane did its job when it was placed into frontline service. The Flying Tigers were already mentioned. It also contributed a lot to stop the Japanese offensive in the South Pacific of 1942/43, being flown in Australian and USAAF hands. At the same time, it did a very important job on the frontier in North Africa. Over Italy, I think it was in service even during most of 1944. Maybe its performance was not overwhelming, but it was the best to get on a point of time when it was needed.

[GregP]

I have an interesting sidebar concerning the P-40.

As some of you know, I lived in the Phoenix, Arizoina, U.S.A. area for more than 20 years. As it happens, Doug Champlin's Fighter Museum, also the home of the US Fighter Aces Association for many years, was located in Mesa, Arozona for many years, too.

At an airshow in the early to mid-1980's, Doug allowed many of his planes to be flown in a racetrack pattern around Falcon field during the show. Some of the aircraft flown were the P-51, P-47, F4U, Spirfire, and the P-40.

Doug's P-40 had a VERY interesting history. Itr was built and flown straight to an aircraft storage facility where it was stored for many years. At the time Doug allowed it to be flown in the airshow, the total airframe time was only some 40 hours or so, and it showed.

I admit that these rare fighters were being flown very gently by the pilots allowed to drive them around the pattern, but the P-40 was by far the most impressive aircraft in the flybys. At the relatively low-power airshow settings, the P-40 was much faster than the other fighters, rolled faster and with better roll acceleration and, in all, was simply a crisper-looking craft in the air. When it flew by at low speed and accelerated, it was noticeably quicker in acceleration than the others, too. Many people around me commented on it at the time.

Mesa, Arizona's airfield altitude is about 1500 feet NSL and is right square in the best part of a low-altitude fighter's performance envelope, but the P-40 as flown in Arizona at that time impressed much more than the others. The P-47 sounded somewhat wounded by comparison, even though it MUST have been running correctly or Doug would NOT have allowed it to fly. The P-51 flew fine, but did not impress as much as the P-40. Perhaps the novelty or a flying P-40 made me notice more, but others around me made the same observations.

I do not claim anything great for the P-40. I am just commenting that in flight, in person, it certainly appeared to be right at home with the other fighters and, as demonstrated, was faster, more agile , and quicker turning.

No other claims implied or stated.

I was left wondering exactly how "obsolete" the P-40 really was.

[JoeB]

"Against the Zero well if used as an energy fighter it could be considered to be superior to the IJN plane. It was faster ,could out-roll ,and out-dive it plus was far more rugged/had far more firepower(at least compared to the A6M/2-3 with low velocity cannons & .30 caliber MG's). Now the IJN plane was a far better turner especially at low speeds, a far better climber , and had better acceleration though a P-40 could increase it's accelerate by just putting it's nose down a little. In other words the P-40 if handled right could be a formidable problem for the Zero as evidenced by the Flying Tiger's."

That was the conclusion reached by US units by say 1943. A 5th AF document on fighting various Japanese types that's often quoted (or included as in appendix of Hess's "Pacific Sweep") outlines tactics agains the Japanese early-mid war radials, and even claims P-40's could contend with Ki-61 (Tony)'s in circular combat.

However on the documentation side of great success v. Japanese type it's a little thinner. The AVG's claims and Japanese losses are well documented, and it achieved a kill ratio of around 3:1, better than any other Allied unit in same period (real, not claimed). However the JAAF fighter opposition it met was mostly Ki-27 (Nate), obsolescent fixed undercarriage monoplanes, some Ki-43 (Oscar) against which AVG did pretty well too though, and even a few Ki-44 (Tojo) and -45 (Nick, twin engine). No documented case of AVG engagement with the JNAF though, so it never fought A6M's.

Vs. A6M's in early '42 P-40's tended to come out on the short end (Philippines, Dutch East Indies) though not to the degree suggested by say Sakai's book "Samurai", if looking at real US losses which were much lower than JNAF claims. Again over Darwin mid '42 both side's claims were quite inflated. Aussie P-40 units alongside US P-39 units in NG in mid '42 had almost certainly less than 1:1 real ratio v. JNAF. When P-40 units fought the JNAF in NG and Solomons end of '42 on the real scores seemed to be at best slightly in their favor. But in this period and later until it was phased out of SWPA the presence of P-38's for top cover was a big help for the P-40. China is the more interesting case IMO, P-40's by themselves into 1944 and with more modern types til virtually the end of the war, apparently meeting types like even the Ki-84 (Frank). But I haven't seen anything for that period (post AVG, July '42 on in China) that gives real Japanese losses and types encountered.

Joe

[ickysdad]

Joe,
Some very good points especially about the AVg not meeting that many Zeroes in China. I'm just pointing out the P-40 vs. the Zero or the German '109's/190's aren't near as hopeless as people use to think. If in fact the P-40 vs. Zero duels in the period of late '42,early '43, before the P-38's really came in force, come out to 1-P40 for 1 Zero ratio,or nearly so, that still kills some of the legendary status of the Zero. Post war evaluations of even the P-39 vs. the Zero show it wasn't near as one sided as once believed. People must also remember that the Japanese pilots at those times had far more expierence so you have 2 variable factors different planes and different levels of expierence.

[Ricky]

Not quite the P-40, but its younger brother, the Hawk 75...

Apparently, in the Battle of France, Hawk 75s scored 2/3 of all French air combat victories (France had 100 Hawk 75s).
There are even tales of Hawk 75s being 'bounced' by superior numbers of Bf109s and getting the better of them!
Werner Molders, top scorer of the Condor Legion, was shot down in this way
Hannes Gentzen, top scorer in Poland, attacked 9 Hawks with his whole Gruppe (a 3:1 advantage, plus they had height & position).
4 109s were shot down, 4 more had to force-land. 1 Hawk performed a belly-landing (pilot unharmed).

Not a bad record, really!

[simon]

Ah, but being on the defensive most types will get the better of the enemy, if for no better reason than they had a shorter distance to limp back to base...

However I have to admit that's a rather impressive record for a plane most accounts consider obsolescent when it was designed, but I can't help remembering that the PZL P.11 did quite well against the Luiftwaffe invaders too, couldn't consider that among the top 10 now could we? :D

I guess as Ickysdad pointed out the training, and perhaps the dedication of the crew counts as well, a pilot fighting for his home country will always fight harder than a pilot fighting for someone else's.

[B-24WillowRun]

I have a question or thought on the P-40 when it was racing at the Airshow. flying at the lower speed and power settings seems to favor it over the P-51 and P-47. They were both designed for power and speed with a hard charging agrasive flyer. Granted I am not shure of the exact specifics, but reading different histories this seems to be the case.

Also when we speek of the P-40s in China, the "Flying Tigers" mostly, they did all that with poor supplies and not a lot of regular support, so that makes the P-40 even more interesting.[:p]

[Romantic Technofreak]

Just found this amazing post on j-aircraft.com: "An American-Japanese film star"!

http://www.j-aircraft.org/bbs/general_config.pl?read=14518