Author Topic: Differences between the P40's ???  (Read 375 times)

Offline cajun

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1112
Differences between the P40's ???
« Reply #15 on: June 13, 2002, 09:58:47 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Octavius

Woooohooooooo!!!


Older model, weaker engine.  The cowl MGs are in place because of the smaller engine .. I think.


What country are those markings from?


Thats Chinese markings.

Offline K West

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1445
Differences between the P40's ???
« Reply #16 on: June 13, 2002, 10:09:55 PM »
CC Jordan on his web page fills us in on this model;

"Recent research appears to support Erik Shilling's strong argument that the AVG aircraft were very close to the P-40B configuration, which the British designated as the Tomahawk IIA. The history of the AVG fighters is nearly as interesting as the story of the AVG itself.
 When the Chinese asked the U.S. for assistance, they asked for fighters and bombers. For political reasons, FDR would agree only to fighters, and U.S. law at the time allowed only for cash & carry sales to beligerents. So, a China based corporation was formed to purchase aircraft. However, virtually all U.S. production capacity was allocated for our own build up and existing contracts with friendly nations such as Britain. In order to free up some aircraft for China, the U.S. asked the Brits to exchange later model P-40Ds (Kittyhawk I) for currently ordered Tomahawk IIB fighters. The Brits agreed and 100 of the contracted Tomahawks were transferred to a Chinese contract.
 Curtiss saw an opportunity to utilize stock of enternally sealed fuel tanks that had been used on the Tomahawk IIA. The Brits did not like the external sealing and specified internal sealing for future builds. This left Curtiss with over 100 sets of obsolete fuel tanks. This was their chance to use these, and they had already been written off. This would enhance profits. In addition, the Chinese contract, unlike that with the Brits, did not specify plumbing or shackles for an external fuel tank, so this was deleted from the Chinese aircraft. Again, this simplified production and increased the profit margin. The net result is that even though the 100 fighters carried Tomahawk IIB serial numbers, these fighters were very much like the IIA, except that they had IIB armor.
 Allison was running at 100% capacity. Simply stated, there weren't any extra engines to be had. Every block and cylinder head was already allocated to an existing contract. But, wait a minute, there were plenty of rejected blocks, cylinder heads and such. Allison realized that most of the rejected engine components were usable if the various parts were hand matched and fitted. They set up a production line and began assembling these engines. Individual parts were reworked and carefully matched. The results of this procedure were engines built to very tight tolerances. Essentially, these were 'blueprinted' engines. Dyno tests revealed that they produced as much as 220 hp more than the production line V-1710-33s going into the RAF Tomahawks and USAAF P- 40C fighters. Allison had produced some very powerful and very expensive engines. Fortunately they were allowed to bury the extra cost into contracts for U.S. aircraft. These engines certainly account for the performance of the AVG's Tomahawks. In general terms, the AVG fighters could pull up to 370 mph in level flight, which is reasonable considering that these aircraft had 20% more power and less weight than the British Tomahawk IIB. Another fact not picked up on as significant by historians was the high rate of reduction gear failures in the AVG aircraft. This is easily explained when you realize that the older style reduction gear was rated for no more than 1,100 hp. With as much as 1,250 hp on tap, the reduction gearbox was over-stressed and frequently stripped gears. Later models, with 1,200 hp engines were fitted with a much stronger spur gear design that could handle up to 1,600 hp. This is the major reason that the nose is shorter from the P-40D onward.
 Now that the Chinese had airframes and engines, they needed to purchase guns for the fighters. Once again, all production was allocated for existing contracts. Nonetheless, CAMCO (the China based front company) managed to purchase enough .50 caliber Brownings for all 100 Tomahawks. Finding .30 caliber guns (installed in the wings) was more of a problem. Eventually, the 100 Tomahawks were fitted with a mixture of guns. Some were fitted with 7.92mm caliber wing guns, others carried British specification guns in .303 caliber. Still others were armed with .30 U.S. caliber Brownings. This complicated logistics somewhat, but all three calibers were readily available, even 7.92mm, which was the standard for the Chinese Army.
 Within the context of this knowledge, we can understand that the AVG fighters were a unique model. For that reason, Curtiss gave them their own special designation. Originally contracted for as the Curtiss H81-2A, these fighters were designated as the H81-3A. Many historians and authors have confused the various Curtiss designations, or figured that these were Tomahawk IIB aircraft based upon the serial numbers. We now know that these were a special model. It should also be noted that the serial numbers were assigned months before actual manufacturing began.
 So, a unique group of fighter pilots flew an equally unique version of the Curtiss H81/Tomahawk/P-40."

http://www.geocities.com/pentagon/quarters/9485/P-40C.html

 Westy

Offline Maverick

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 13958
Differences between the P40's ???
« Reply #17 on: June 13, 2002, 10:19:38 PM »
Given the status of armaments in this game the B model P40 will likely se no action outside of scenarios where that is the only choice available. The 4 - 30cal MGs are going to be pretty useless.
:(
DEFINITION OF A VETERAN
A Veteran - whether active duty, retired, national guard or reserve - is someone who, at one point in their life, wrote a check made payable to "The United States of America", for an amount of "up to and including my life."
Author Unknown

Offline cajun

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1112
Differences between the P40's ???
« Reply #18 on: June 13, 2002, 10:31:56 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Maverick
Given the status of armaments in this game the B model P40 will likely se no action outside of scenarios where that is the only choice available. The 4 - 30cal MGs are going to be pretty useless.
:(


Why do you say that?, I'd fly a P-40 in the MA,or any other place, as well as any other plane!, I've dogfought in B26's, TBM's, and Il-2's and gotten many kills.
P40 cant be to much worse than the Il-2 or TBM, and I find those very good dogfighters if flown right.

Offline Turbot

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1122
Differences between the P40's ???
« Reply #19 on: June 13, 2002, 11:39:20 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Maverick
Given the status of armaments in this game the B model P40 will likely se no action outside of scenarios where that is the only choice available. The 4 - 30cal MGs are going to be pretty useless.
:(


Was certainly not the case in Warbirds, I would not expect any different in AH.  You will see plenty of p40's, more probabaly, because of perk system.  (and it did have 2 50's to go with the 303's anyway)

Offline Tac

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4085
Differences between the P40's ???
« Reply #20 on: June 14, 2002, 12:56:01 AM »
P-40B will be my 2nd main ride. Man I love that puppy.

TWO .50 cals and 4 .30's are deadly. Just think about it, you will have the 2 50 cals for the long range work and to make the con turn, and the 4X.303 to NAIL the sucker at close range.

Its gonna be sweet! Long range plink o' death or close range mauling mwahahaha.

Offline senna

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1318
LOL
« Reply #21 on: June 14, 2002, 01:12:25 AM »
In response to kwests post.

>Essentially, these were 'blueprinted' engines. Dyno tests
>revealed that they produced as much as 220 hp more than the
>production line V-1710-33s

haha for once the privateers had the factory ride. Usually its the other way around, if you know what I mean :D

So will HT be giving us these trick Allisons. Plz Plz Plz.

Offline RRAM

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 577
Re: LOL
« Reply #22 on: June 14, 2002, 05:20:55 AM »
can someone post here some information on wingloadings and powerloadings for both P-40s?.

Also some information on its turn rate and turning radious will be most welcome :)...

I want to know how many 40s I'm gonna outturn with my 190 :D

Offline Mitsu

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2763
      • Himitsu no blog (Mitsu's secret blog - written by Japanese)
Differences between the P40's ???
« Reply #23 on: June 14, 2002, 05:57:10 AM »
RRAM is RAM? :)

Offline Daff

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 338
Differences between the P40's ???
« Reply #24 on: June 14, 2002, 06:10:43 AM »
"Was certainly not the case in Warbirds, I would not expect any different in AH."

What made the P-40B viable in WB, was the .50 cals in the cowling, as the .303's were largely useless.

Daff

Offline RRAM

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 577
Differences between the P40's ???
« Reply #25 on: June 14, 2002, 06:19:15 AM »
no, mitsu, RAM is RRAM (lol)


:D

Offline Wilbus

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4472
Differences between the P40's ???
« Reply #26 on: June 14, 2002, 07:13:10 AM »
P40B was more maneuverable and had less armament (smaller guns) as stated above. P40B was most likely the plane I flew most back in WB many years ago, SWEEEEET plane :)

Gonna have to fly it again now :)
Rasmus "Wilbus" Mattsson

Liberating Livestock since 1998, recently returned from a 5 year Sheep-care training camp.

Offline Hristo

  • Parolee
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1150
Differences between the P40's ???
« Reply #27 on: June 14, 2002, 07:20:30 AM »
It used to be opponent to the 109E in some RPS versions. Emils outclimbed and outaccelerated it. P40 was outdiving Emil, outturning and outrolling it at high speeds. Against 109F it is markedly inferior.

Offline K West

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1445
Differences between the P40's ???
« Reply #28 on: June 14, 2002, 08:15:10 AM »
What Hristo said. However the P40 could out turn the 190 and 109 handily.

 Westy