Test Procedures and Some Initial Data

[F4UDOA]

Heya Widewing,

Do you have any source documents from either manufacture or the AAF on the P-47, P-38 or P-51? I have not been able to find any original docs for these birds. Where as the NAVAIR, Grumman or Vought Docs seem to fall out of the sky. Strange considering how much is written about the "big three" that those docs aren't floating around on a USAF web page somewhere.

Thanks
F4UDOA

[Widewing]

Originally posted by batdog:
I mean I always read that the P-40 had its bellybutton handed to it in the Pacific... and was unuseable in europe as it couldnt fight at high alts...
 whats that song?

If you want several examples of how well the P-40 performed, I would suggest that several theaters be investigated. These being the SWPA (fifth AF), China (CATF) and the MTO. This evening, when I get home, I'll provide a list of "must read" books that will shed some light on the value of the P-40, despite its limitations and aging design. For now, the closest thing to the P-40E available on AH is the Ki-61, which will not roll as well, nor be as rugged. Indeed, the Curtiss held a big edge in reliability as well. By mid 1944, the P-40 was encountering Japanese aircraft that were markedly superior in overall performance. Nonetheless, it still held its own, largely due to the superior training and tactics of USAAF pilots, and the general lack of training that cursed the Japanese in the second two years of the war.

My regards,

Widewing

[batdog]

Works for me. Thanks Widewing  

xBAT

[xHaMmeRx]

Widewing,

I still think you miss the point of my site.  It is for game info.  If someone did a write-up that was accurate to a plane's performance in Air Warrior, it was worth posting.  If there were historical inaccuracies somewhere in there (usually only a paragraph or less devoted to the plane's history), too bad.  There was a site somewhere (don't have URL handy) devoted to the historical aspects of the planes in AW.

Still would argue that the P-40 was obscolecent in 1941.  The fact that it was able to perform in some theatres at some tasks doesn't make it a front-line fighter.  

Westy...yep, been to his site before!  

HaMmeR

[Widewing]

Originally posted by xHaMmeRx:
Widewing,

I still think you miss the point of my site.  It is for game info.  If someone did a write-up that was accurate to a plane's performance in Air Warrior, it was worth posting.  If there were historical inaccuracies somewhere in there (usually only a paragraph or less devoted to the plane's history), too bad.  There was a site somewhere (don't have URL handy) devoted to the historical aspects of the planes in AW.

Still would argue that the P-40 was obscolecent in 1941.  The fact that it was able to perform in some theatres at some tasks doesn't make it a front-line fighter.  

Westy...yep, been to his site before!  

HaMmeR

I realize the purpose of your web site, and I appreciate the effort you put into it.

With respect to the P-40 bio, you should note that I concentrated my comments on the historical facts that are presented, as witnessed by the portions which I quoted.

Lastly, you can disagree if you wish, that's fine by me. However, the fact that the P-40 was, and remained a "front-line fighter" well into 1944 is not debatable. Moreover, the PRIMARY reason it was replaced had little to do with its combat capability. It was replaced because it lacked the range necessary to carry the war to Japan. Both in the SWPA and in China, the over-riding need was for fighters that could cross great distances and attack the enemy in his proverbial "back yard". The P-40 was not able to due so, and thus was relegated to close support work where it still remained in front-line service after the summer of '44.

My regards,

Widewing

My regards,

Widewing

[Jigster]

Ah what is odd is there were one of those little songs for every plane...


And in regards to the P-40 being as tough as the A-26 in AW...thats about right.

They are both made of paper.