P40F

[gyrene81]

hmmm...seems the f model was 2 mph faster than the e and 14mph faster than the n, but the ceiling alt jumped from 29,000 (e) to 34,000 and its range was extended to 700mi without a drop tank...the n wasn't as fast as any of its predecessors nor could it fly as high.


i will see your link...

http://www.militaryfactory.com/aircraft/detail.asp?aircraft_id=75

and raise you 3 that are better... 

http://www.acepilots.com/planes/p40_warhawk.html

http://www.warbirdregistry.org/p40registry/p40registry.html

http://www.historyofwar.org/subject_air_P40.html

[oboe]

Honestly think I'd rather have the 'L' than the 'F' - think I read somewhere the 'L' was the main MTO version of the Warhawk.   It's Merlin-powered with the stretched fuselage.

[Krusty]

I'll quote myself:

Turns out the performance gap was smaller than I thought. I was expecting less than 10mph, not "2" mph in most cases.

[...]

P-40B top speed was 352mph (with 1040hp Allison)
P-40E top speed was 362mph (with 1150hp Allison)
P-40F top speed was 364mph (with 1300hp Merlin 28)
P-40K top speed was 362mph (with 1325hp Allison)
P-40L top speed was 368mph (with 1300hp Merlin 28) *
P-40M was a P-40K but went back to Allison engines (Merlins scarce)
P-40N-1 top speed was 378mph (with 1200hp Allison) **
P-40N-5 top speed was 350mph (with 1200hp Allison) ***
P-40N-15 top speed was 343mph (with 1200hp Allison)

Note the Merlins FTH alt was 19k or so, and the Allison alt was 16k or so. The curves wouldn't be too different, just shifted up. Going from 1100 to 1300hp seems to have almost no effect on this airframe. It was draggy IMO, and couldn't get much faster no matter what engine you put into it.

* = The L was a stripped down version. They removed 250lbs of fuel, ammo, and guns, but all this only netted "a mere 4 mph faster" than the previous version. Other wise identical to P-40F-5 Merlin model.

** = The P-40N-1 had a lightened structure, 31 gallons less fuel, only 4 guns, and only 200 rounds per gun. 400 were built like this. It was only about 10mph faster, yet was the fastest production model P-40.

*** = The P-40N-5 put the guns and ammo back, as pilots complained it couldn't get the job done. It added bomb racks and could carry underwing bombs as well as drop tanks. The extra weight not only dropped the speed back down, but it actually was slower than previous models! This model was exported heavily (1000 to the VVS, and a number to RAAF/RNZAF/etc units). It was used for ground attack and bomber escort missions, but in US service it was only used as a trainer according to a couple of things I've read.

[Guppy35]

While there were about 5000 P-40Ns made, almost all of them that served with the US were state-side trainers. We exported a number as ground attack to the RAAF and RNZAF and some others, and naturally to the Soviet Union.

However, by this time the Soviet Union's own home-grown fighter production had taken off and surpassed much of the lend-lease stuff.

Outside of the allied SEA setup, it really wasn't much of an important plane.

Go back and check that again Krusty.  The N was all over the Pacific and the CBI.  I'm thinking you are reading about a different bird.  Don Lopez, who flew both the P40N and P51 with the 23rd FG spoke quite highly of his N model and said that at the alts they fought, in some ways he preferred it to the 51B.

49th FG had theirs well into the Fall of 44.  As for the Merlin P40s.  57th, 33rd, 79th FGs all took them into combat in Tunisia and flew them into 44 in Italy.  99th FS also had Merlin P40s.  USAAF Merlin 40s also on Guadacanal.  The Free French got Merlin P40s too

If you want to do a best representation P40 line up, it would be a redone P40C and E, a Merlin F or L and an Allison N model.  You cover all theaters of war and the skinners could work forever trying to cover the USAAF, RAF, RAAF, RNZAF USSR, French etc P40s that served in combat.

[DeadStik]

P-40L was sometimes nicknamed "Gypsy Rose Lee", after a famous stripper of the era,

EVERYTHING'S COMING UP ROSES, FOR MEEEEEEE!!!

...................Sorry. Immaturity got the better of me.

[HighTone]

If you want to do a best representation P40 line up, it would be a redone P40B and E, a Merlin F or L and an Allison N model.  You cover all theaters of war and the skinners could work forever trying to cover the USAAF, RAF, RAAF, RNZAF USSR, French etc P40s that served in combat.

Woot woot, I like that lineup suggestion. +1

[Krusty]

Go back and check that again Krusty.  The N was all over the Pacific and the CBI.  I'm thinking you are reading about a different bird.  Don Lopez, who flew both the P40N and P51 with the 23rd FG spoke quite highly of his N model and said that at the alts they fought, in some ways he preferred it to the 51B.

49th FG had theirs well into the Fall of 44.  As for the Merlin P40s.  57th, 33rd, 79th FGs all took them into combat in Tunisia and flew them into 44 in Italy.

I haven't seen any US P-40Ns so far that weren't state-side trainers. I suppose it is possible some did (as some went "backwards" to P-39s instead of going to P-47s or P-51s, late in the war). However, all the MTO ones I recall reading about switched from P-40s to P-47s while still flying the F/L/K models.

As for the Merlins: I know they were in use. However, when you compare a P-40F and a P-40E, the FTH change doesn't really make much of a difference because of the dogleg power curve. I never said it wasn't wide-spread, just that if you're looking for a decent lineup it would be redundant, as the F can stand in for the E or the E can stand in for the F. There's no real improvement.

I think it might be nice to split up skins though (long tail vs short, merlin vs allison, etc). I don't really count it as vital, myself.

[Guppy35]

I haven't seen any US P-40Ns so far that weren't state-side trainers. I suppose it is possible some did (as some went "backwards" to P-39s instead of going to P-47s or P-51s, late in the war). However, all the MTO ones I recall reading about switched from P-40s to P-47s while still flying the F/L/K models.

As for the Merlins: I know they were in use. However, when you compare a P-40F and a P-40E, the FTH change doesn't really make much of a difference because of the dogleg power curve. I never said it wasn't wide-spread, just that if you're looking for a decent lineup it would be redundant, as the F can stand in for the E or the E can stand in for the F. There's no real improvement.

I think it might be nice to split up skins though (long tail vs short, merlin vs allison, etc). I don't really count it as vital, myself.

As I said previously the MTO squadrons were Merlin P40s

As for the combat N models.  I really think you are confusing it with another version as the N was everywhere.  Since a picture is worth a thousand words, here's 8000 words on Combat N models  I could from just the books on my shelves post another 30,000 words at least of combat Ns from all over the map

49th FG as they arrived, June 43  PTO


49th FG as they finished up, September 44.  No this is not a hack, but a frontline bird just before they gave them up. PTO


RAAF P40Ns PTO


15th FG P40N in Coral camo.  PTO


P40N with DT and rocket tubes.  CBI


Line up of 51st FG P40Ns  CBI


80th FG P40Ns  CBI.  The skinners would have a field day with the N model


Heavily loaded Aussie N flying with the RAF in the MTO

[cactuskooler]

As I said previously the MTO squadrons were Merlin P40s

As for the combat N models.  I really think you are confusing it with another version as the N was everywhere.  Since a picture is worth a thousand words, here's 8000 words on Combat N models  I could from just the books on my shelves post another 30,000 words at least of combat Ns from all over the map

...

Don't forget the 35th FS P-40Ns too. They had the best nose art of any P-40N.

[Krusty]

You're just biased, cactus! 

Guppy: Discounting the RAAF and 80th FG pics, those 49th and 15th FG pics are the first I've seen it in real use.

I don't quite count the 80th FG as they were based in india barely able to fly over the hump. They escorted the supply lines, but were very removed from the majority of the fighting. I read a description where it sounded like (my interpretation) the planes meant to be used originally, and the planes trained on, disappeared or were reallocated, so they diverted an export shipment of P-40Ns and just dumped the US pilots in them with little or no warning. Interesting story, but to date was the only incident I'd seen of P-40Ns in US active use (although I don't consider that front line use, personally).


Those 15th and 49th FG pics are interesting. Thanks for proving me wrong!

[Guppy35]

I can see I'm going to have to keep the scanner going with more combat Ns.   Don't forget the 23rd FG, descendants of the Flying Tigers.  I can give ya shark mouthed Ns belonging to them.  There are other PTO combat P40N groups as well.

[Infidelz]

+1 for the H-87 

[Krusty]

I can see I'm going to have to keep the scanner going with more combat Ns.   Don't forget the 23rd FG, descendants of the Flying Tigers.  I can give ya shark mouthed Ns belonging to them.  There are other PTO combat P40N groups as well.

I take your word for it! Any scans you provide will be thoroughly enjoyed, but you don't have to convince me

[Guppy35]

For what it's worth, the 80th FG was much more active in the drive through Burma then you are giving them credit for too.  Had to double check first, but they were definately flying combat and lugging bombs in support of the drive into Burma.  Those paint jobs would be worth having the N for on their own

[DemonFox]

I not saying we shouldn't have more models of the P-40 but I'd rather see out current P-40 re-modeled. I know that P-40E that served in north Africa had bomb racks to carry 6 250lb bombs.
  either way I'd be happy more aircraft!