What Colonel Gabreski said about the P40

[udet]

one thing is certain: the P40 will NEVER be called a dweeb plane!
I flew it in warbirds 2.7 offline play and I liked the way it handled,pretty much like the hurricane.

[udet]

one thing is certain: the P40 will NEVER be called a dweeb plane!
I flew it in warbirds 2.7 offline play and I liked the way it handled,pretty much like the hurricane.

[Gadfly]

I suck in fighters, and I was always able to hold my own in the P40 in scenario play and early war RPS, even against 109s.

You just have to fly it like a P40, not a spit.

[streakeagle]

Originally posted by beet1e
Of the P40, he said "You know, that wasn't much of a plane", gently shaking his head.

I am sure plenty of P-51 and P-38 aces said the same of the P-47

There were plenty of pilots that did well no matter what plane they flew including the P-40. Liked or not, the P-40 usually did what it was asked to do: held the line and killed the enemy in the air and on the ground until better equipment was available or the enemy surrendered. Gabreski is entitled to his own opinion, but the P-40 was no less of a plane than his trusty P-47.

Of course my fascination and respect for the aircraft has nothing to do with its service in Africa, Australia, or Russia. A handful of Americans with a handful of "obsolete" planes did an awesome job of beating the pants off the much more numerous and experienced Japanese at a time when the Japanese were otherwise kicking our butts. Regardless of the actual facts, the legend of the AVG alone drives my desire to fly the P-40B in "Flying Tigers" markings as much as the legend of the"Black Sheep" makes me want to fly the F4U-1/-1A/-1D.

I will fly the P-40E with the hope that the P-40B in AVG colors will eventually show up handling similarly, but better.

Seeing as how Boyington was the top Marine Corps ace and also flew with the AVG, I think he deserves to have an AH aircraft with his markings. Does anyone know for sure if he ever flew a -1A and have photos to show what its markings were? The only photos I have ever seen of his plane are ones of his last plane, a -1D named "Lulubelle".

[ergRTC]

""The enemy closed the gap to 350 yds. when he began firing at long range.""

Everytime i read this kind of remark I cringe.  What a joke our gun modeling is. 1200 yards and hit with a 50 (hey I am the one firing it so this isnt a whine).  1200 yards, that is over .68 of a mile.  Course we know that 50s can go out to 1400 yards, so that would be .80 of a mile.  This game could be improved if actually hitting anything from that distance was limited.

Thanks for all the great posts on the p40.'

As to uberness,
I fly in a hellcat squad and our little ride has a top speed of 330/no wep at the deck, with a climb of 3k, and accleration is not 'seat of the pants' by any means.  So the p40 at least down there seems like no great loss.

I am a huge fan of the hurri 1 and that beast has a speed of 260 down low, with only a little better climb.  

Course I fly ct so I am not getting bounced by la7s day in and day out.

[-ammo-]

Originally posted by streakeagle
I am sure plenty of P-51 and P-38 aces said the same of the P-47

Actually in the book JG-26, top guns of the Luftwaffe, the author made not of the fact that the pilots of JG-26 didnt fear the P-38, but had a deep respect of the P-47. They enjoyed being able to distringuish the P-38 from long distances. This may have been because the sheer number of P-47 units around in mid to late 43 in the ETO. The  56 FG, 4 FG, 368 FG, all were hammering away at the LW but with losses themselves.  Galland himself stated the P-51 was a fine AC.

Originally posted by streakeagle
Gabreski is entitled to his own opinion, but the P-40 was no less of a plane than his trusty P-47.

Well it may have been his opinion, but it is certainly founded. The P-47 is twice the AC as any model P-40 was. It is better in all catregories, at all altitudes too.

regards

[ergRTC]

Even in turning ability?

[-ammo-]

To be honest I dont know, but I know that the P-40 was tottaly outclassed  in turn capability bny all the Japanese fighters.  The p-47 does not a have a good sustained turn rate, but it does have an awesome instant turn at 275 IAS or greater speeds.

Speed, roll, climb (yes even climb, the P-47 has another AC it can outclimb:)), visibility,  and dive. The Jug can do all of this better than the P-40. Rightfully so, the P-40 was an early design. It was a workhorse that served well in its roll.

[streakeagle]

Originally posted by -ammo-
Actually in the book JG-26, top guns of the Luftwaffe, the author made not of the fact that the pilots of JG-26 didnt fear the P-38, but had a deep respect of the P-47. They enjoyed being able to distringuish the P-38 from long distances. This may have been because the sheer number of P-47 units around in mid to late 43 in the ETO. The 56 FG, 4 FG, 368 FG, all were hammering away at the LW but with losses themselves. Galland himself stated the P-51 was a fine AC.

Well it may have been his opinion, but it is certainly founded. The P-47 is twice the AC as any model P-40 was. It is better in all catregories, at all altitudes too.

I have read plenty of German accounts. For every account saying one aircraft was the worst threat, you can find another that names a competing aircraft.

The P-38 was the fork-tailed devil to some. There were plenty of German pilots that feared the P-38 more than anything else they had fought. Likewise, others hated the Mustangs more. One generalized quote of the LW aces' opinions does not make a historical fact that P-47s were more of a threat than P-38s. But I am certain I have never read any German accounts that conveyed any fear of P-40s

Gabreski did not exactly have an unbiased opinion when it came to the P-47. It served him well, so of course he loved it and promoted it, not unlike yourself But your support for the P-47 and Gabreski's opinion of the P-40 is not supported by the combat record of the P-40. It was historically a rugged reliable plane that repeatedly got the job done when there were no other planes to do it. Where was the P-47 when Pearl Harbor was attacked and Japan was overrunning China? It would take dramatic differences in kill, loss, and sortie rates against the same threat level in the same theater to convince me otherwise that the P-40 "wasn't much of a plane" compared to the P-47.

As better planes became available, the "obsolete" P-40 was relegated to ground support. That should sound familiar to P-38 and P-47 fanatics If the P-51 had not appeared, it is entirely possible that P-40 development might have been given the same push that other early war fighters got. As it was, regardless of your opinion or anyone elses, after WW2, all USAAF/USAF propellor fighters were junked except for the P-51, which had been steadily replacing all of them anyway. All of these aircraft arose out of the desire for fighters with the best speed at altitude with the longest range, which the Mustang clearly won in terms of production and service life compared to the P-38, P-40, and P-47 it replaced.

edit: Interesting note, my grandfather bought a P-47 after the war for $50. Unfortunately, he couldn't afford to store and maintain it, so he eventually got rid of it

[Buzzbait]

A P-47 for $50!!!!!!!???????


AAAARRRRRRGGGGHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


I'm gonna have bad dreams for a month...  

[streakeagle]

It was in flyable condition too I still have my grandfather's Wright Engine Corp. 5-year service pin though... he built quite a few engines during WW2.

[M.C.202]

Streakeagle said:
If the P-51 had not appeared, it is entirely possible that P-40 development might have been given the same push that other early war fighters got.

Look up the specs for the P-40Q of early '44

For a one on one dogfight, I'd take it.
422mph, four 20mm cannon, super vis, good climb to 20,000ft of 4.8min, and built like a... er, P-40:D

[Slayer]

50 buc ks!! thats better than my story. My father used to sit in the cocpit of a abandon P-40 at the local airport as a kid. The military left it there after a break down and never returned to pick it up. A few years passed and a guy passed through and asked about the plane. A few days later he took it apart and trucked it out. He had called the military and they had forgot about the plane as well. He bought it from them for $500.00 Every time I think of that story I *slap* me ole man.

[streakeagle]

I have never seen a genuine color photo of AVG P-40s over china.


From the same website:

Another large user of the P-40 was the Soviet VVS. Interestingly, although favoured by USSR pilots, Josef Stalin himself opted for Bell P-39 over P-40 as "more suited for combat against German fighters." On what grounds his opinion was based remains a mystery.

No mystery to me: P-39 had a cannon. VVS believed a fighter was worthless without one.

Contrary to it's opinion of a stop-gap measure, the production of P-40 continued long after more modern types were readily available. The total number of P-40 manufactured reached the third highest total for American World War II fighters, bettered only by the Republic P-47 Thunderbolt and the North American P-51 Mustang. These production numbers can be deemed the ultimate measure of the aircraft's usefulness.

They sure made a lot of them for not being much of a plane.

And besides, do you know any other aircraft that looked better with the sharkmouth?

If you remove the carb scoop and 0.50 cals from the nose... it truly does look like the head of a shark. I think that makes up for being underarmed and dog slow with no acceleration or climbing ability don't you? Afterall, everyone knows looks are more important than substance Otherwise we would have built all B-24s and P-47s rather than comparable numbers of B-17s and P-51s.

[-ammo-]

not to beat a dead horse streak--

In my last post I said the P-40 was a workhorse that served well, and performed its roll as designed.

But the numbers tell the story, the P-40 was mediocre in performance to German mainstay fighters in the beginning of the war, as well as the Japanese mainstay fighters.  In the ground support role, it did well. And with a group like the AVG, they learned to exploit their enemy's weaknesses and used good tactics to beat them. That does not mean the P-40 was a better performer than a KI43.

The P-40 was a good AC, no doubt about it.

streak said Gabreski is entitled to his own opinion, but the P-40 was no less of a plane than his trusty P-47.

I was refering to this comment, which just isnt true:)