Author Topic: a little P-40 speculation (what if?)  (Read 661 times)

Offline KG45

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 435
a little P-40 speculation (what if?)
« Reply #15 on: November 14, 2002, 09:15:08 AM »
pony had laminar flow wings, the radiator scoop that actually added thrust, cleaner aerodynamic design, D version had bubble canopy for better vision, wide track landing gear, much higher fuel capacity/range.

upgrading the p-40 engine would have got a few more mph, but it would not have been a leap forward in technology that the pony was.
all you fascists, you're bound to lose...

Offline davidpt40

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1053
a little P-40 speculation (what if?)
« Reply #16 on: November 14, 2002, 11:53:58 AM »
P40 never worked well with merlin engine because air scoop was positioned wrong.  It wasnt until AFTER WW2 that the designers realised that the airscoop needs to be a few inches below the airframe.  FYI, the P51 had the exact same problem and was solved by a frenchman.

Offline GRUNHERZ

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 13413
a little P-40 speculation (what if?)
« Reply #17 on: November 14, 2002, 12:02:28 PM »
People knew about boundary layer turbulannce before or at least during WW2. Thats why the P51 had the offset scoop, why the Bf109F introduced its new supercharger intake and new radiators designed to overcome the negative effects.

Offline ergRTC

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1632
      • http://bio2.elmira.edu/DMS/index.pl?table=content&faculty=1&page=1
a little P-40 speculation (what if?)
« Reply #18 on: November 14, 2002, 02:50:04 PM »
I think the reason you would want to put a big engine in a p40 is to have a fast plane (like the p51) that handles better than the p51...

Jeff Ethell's P-40 Flight
In 1988, Col Jeff Ethell*, well-known aviation author and pilot, had the opportunity to fly Bill Anderson's P-40E Kittyhawk at the National Warplane Museum.

Having never flown a P-40 before, Ethell recounts the exciting adventure, describing the challenges and unexpected trills of piloting one of World War II's most recognized fighters for the first time.
Settled into cruise, I glanced at the coolant temperature (a constant exercise) - upper green just short of 110 degrees C, then at the oil pressure and temperature - in the green. Ever so slowly the temperatures on the Allison engine crept down while the speed crept up. At last I could grab the big tractor brake type handle for the cowl flaps, squeeze the release and raise it to neutral. The slipstream, pushing for all it was worth, caught me by surprise - I had to push down on the lever to keep it from banging to closed. The P-40E Kittyhawk immediately responded by gaining speed. Those "cooling gills," as the British call them, produce a great deal of drag when opened on the belly of the fighter but are the only recourse to cooling a hot engine alter a climb at military power.

A quick glance around the cockpit proved I had to tidy things up. The P-40 is a genuine product of the 1930s - with levers, switches, pumps and gizmos all over. In order to fly one it would help if the pilot had a steamship captain's license or doubled as a concert organist on one of those massive multiple register instruments which require all kinds of pulling and shoving of stops and levers.

With all in place, I tried a few turns and was surprised by the rapid ailerons. By comparison, the P-51 is locked in cement. A glance down the nose gives the pilot a more pronounced feeling of sitting far back behind things than the Mustang due to the pronounced carburetor scoop atop the cowling. And slightly to the right, atop this impressive nose, is a genuine ring and bead fixed gunsight, straight out of "G-8 And His Battle Aces." A glance out the sides of the canopy was another shock - there was hardly any wing out there. No wonder the ailerons are so responsive.

As the adrenaline from my first takeoff was reabsorbed, I took time to drink in my surroundings. I was flying the first fighter my Dad checked out in at Luke Field in 1941. Not only that, it was painted in the colors of Flying Tiger ace R.T. Smith, a good friend who had flown with Dad later in the war. In spite of being surpassed as World War II went on, the P-40 Hawk series became America's symbol of determination to beat a tenacious enemy as Spitfire was to the British.

After takeoff, I climbed to a safe altitude, leveled off with the power back to 30 inches and 2,000 rpm, and began to get the feel of the Kittyhawk. The more I handled the fighter, the more pleased I became with the plane. Though the elevators tend toward being heavy, they are certainly no heavier than a Mustang. The best test I could give the ailerons was a roll. Nose down to get above 200 mph, nose up and . . . wham! I was caught completely by surprise at the extremely rapid roll rate. Before I quite knew what was happening, the fighter went all the way around. Roll again - same thing, less surprise. Again - exhilaration, freedom. Again - sheer joy. I had discovered the most delightful aspect of the P-40 without having heard about it.

After years of reading that the P-40 could not maneuver, particularly with a Zero, and that it had to make diving slash attacks to be effective, I had come to accept the general opinion that it was outclassed by almost everything else flying. Sitting in the cockpit, with the controls in my hands, having written a book about the aircraft and said all those things, the accepted history in my brain was wrestling with the seat of my pants. No question it did not have the top speed and high altitude performance to disengage targets at will, but it was certainly more maneuverable than other American fighters, particularly the P-51.

One other thing to check out - I shoved the nose down. Within a few seconds speed was picking up rapidly until I was approaching 400 mph with no effort. The drawback to all this speed is having to virtually stand on the left rudder to keep the ball centered. Every power or speed change brings an immediate trim change with the pilot must either counteract or trim out. It can be a real handful in a dive or a loop. A gradual pull out was a fight with very heavy elevators but no question the P-40 could rip through an enemy formation and get away. If the Zero was more maneuverable it must have been fantastic. I began to appreciate Saburo Sakai's comments in his book "Samurai." Of the fighters he faced during 1942, he considered a well-handled P-40 to be among the most formidable. I now understood why. Of the many types I have flown, this Curtiss product is among the most enjoyable to fly.

By my third flight, several days later, I eagerly headed out and jumped into the cockpit, ready for some genuine aviating. This would be my first flight from a paved runway so I had some apprehension. Without exception wartime and current pilots have said it behaves badly when away from the grass, particularly in a crosswind, as the manual makes very plain - "Avoid cross-wind landings whenever practicable." No advice on how to handle them - just avoid them. There was a constant crosswind around 15 degrees from the right at 10 knots or so. With assurances it could be handled, I leapt off again to patrol the skies and chase imaginary Zeros with my ring and bead sight.

Back to the field, left break and around onto final with gear and flaps down. As the long nose settled toward the runway it was clearly pointing to the right as I corrected for the crosswind. Right wing down, left rudder and I brought it down onto the runway with no bounce - I was on and tracking straight! What a relief. The tail came down and she was still going straight.

Slowing down to under 40 mph, just as I started to let out the breath I had been holding, the Kitty darted to the right quicker than I could respond. The runway edge had quickly disappeared beneath the right wing by the time I stabbed left rudder - it was so stiff that it felt as if I had kicked a brick wall. Once straight, she went for the right again. This time I had to tap left brake while stabbing left rudder and fight her all the way down to a stop. Even the last few miles an hour were a workout.

As I pulled off the end of the runway and braked to a stop, my legs were jumping on the pedals and I noticed the sweat under my flight suit. Almost in a stupor I raised the flaps and cranked the canopy back, then checked the coolant temp - YOW! She was at redline again and the red warning light was flickering. Cowl flaps were open but facing downwind no air was coming through the radiator. Without enough time to feel sorry for myself, I taxied back to parking and shut down, then lapsed into a state of semi consciousness after making sure mags and battery/generator switches were off.

On the last roll-out the P-40 of landing legend rose up and bit me in the hind end, just to let me know who had tamed whom. Suitably chastised, I sat still in the cockpit for a few minutes, basking in the experience of having flown an airplane and not having simply driven one like a car. That is what continues to attract me to these great warbirds of the past. Not only were they part of what won World War II, but they had to be flown by men who relished the challenge for its sake. To have been a part of that, even though it has been so many decades ago and is but a shadow of actual combat with its horrible realities, causes me to admire the men who flew. There will never be another breed quite like them.

Copyright © 1996 by the Confederate Air Force, Inc. and Jeff Ethell. All rights reserved.

*Jeff Ethell was killed on June 6, 1997, while flying a P-38 in Tillamook, Oregon.

Offline paulieb

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 239
      • http://www.airmafia.com/index2.html
a little P-40 speculation (what if?)
« Reply #19 on: November 28, 2002, 09:42:28 PM »
I've seen that article before, and it was part of the reason I posted this thread. From everything else I've read, it seems the P-40 had 2 basic problems: not enough power, and too heavy for the power it had. The P-40 N was quite a bit faster than the E model we have in AH, but with roughly the same power. So why not do a little Monday morning quarterbacking? If Curtiss had put 1600 or more horespower in the N model airframe, I have to think it would have been almost as fast in level flight as the P51, but still have had better handling. Every article or interview I've ever read indicates that the pilots thought very highly of the P40, arguably even more so than the 51. But the question remains... if you were on Curtiss' design team, what would YOU have changed to make this plane better?

Offline Staga

  • Parolee
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5334
      • http://www.nohomersclub.com/
a little P-40 speculation (what if?)
« Reply #20 on: November 28, 2002, 09:58:23 PM »
Laminar flow wings, low drag radiator/oil-cooler, more fuel in internal fuel cells, wider landing gear... you do know where this leads to :D

Offline paulieb

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 239
      • http://www.airmafia.com/index2.html
a little P-40 speculation (what if?)
« Reply #21 on: November 28, 2002, 09:59:50 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Staga
Laminar flow wings, low drag radiator/oil-cooler, more fuel in internal fuel cells, wider landing gear... you do know where this leads to :D


Yup.... but it would still look way cooler than a 51 with that shark mouth paint job! :D

Offline M.C.202

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 244
a little P-40 speculation (what if?)
« Reply #22 on: November 29, 2002, 12:25:37 AM »
QUOTE
Laminar flow wings, low drag radiator/oil-cooler, more fuel in internal fuel cells, wider landing gear... you do know where this leads to :D
END QUOTE

The low drag oil coolers and radiator were on the Q, the gear was fine, the range was up by 10% or so, and laminar wings are not the end-all-be-all for speed. Get a few bugs on the leading edge, paint flaws or .05" surface irregularities or even rain, and the drag is worse than a good non laminar wing.
A laminar wing was tried on a Jug, it was slower.

Slower than a 51 or Dora, but better climb, faster roll, four 20mm cannon, turning with or near Spit. Not a bad dogfighter.

For "zoom & boom" I'd take the P-72, four 37mm cannon, 500+mph, and 5,280 feet per min climb. Flew in June of '44.

Offline eskimo2

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7207
      • hallbuzz.com
a little P-40 speculation (what if?)
« Reply #23 on: November 29, 2002, 12:44:09 AM »
Compared to other planes that were prototyped in 1938, and first produced in 1939, I don't think it was all that bad of a plane.

eskimo

Offline HeLLcAt

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 375
      • http://www.myspace.com/xiZm04
You can't compare...
« Reply #24 on: November 29, 2002, 08:45:54 AM »
First of all, you can't just compare a plane to a plane. You can't just be like oh yeah, let's just put in a 2,000 HP engine to a Hurricane and see how fast it would go or anything. A bigger engine means some kind of change to the flight model. Yes, I'm sure if you put in the 2,000HP Griffon engine - sure it would be a faster plane, but not nearly as fast as the 51 still. The P40 doesn't have laminar flow wings, low drag radiator/oil-cooler, more fuel in internal fuel cells, wider landing gear, like the P51 does. Yes, I am sure that if you did put the 2,000HP Griffon in there that EVERY American pilot would pick that plane over any other because with a bigger engine it would probably climb very quickly, be very manueverable at high speeds and just overall and probably be able to beat any American plane 1 on 1. I think the only pilot who wouldn't pick the P40 would be David McCampbell, we all know why that is.

Offline hazed-

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2467
      • http://combatarena.users.btopenworld.com
a little P-40 speculation (what if?)
« Reply #25 on: November 29, 2002, 09:10:56 AM »
maybe one day HTC will allow us to fly the p40 with 2000hp? :D

maybe they will give us 190s with 6x50 cals?

who knows ? one day they might add stuff like this to afantasy arena :)


i doubt it though :)

Offline frank3

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9352
a little P-40 speculation (what if?)
« Reply #26 on: November 29, 2002, 12:59:50 PM »
maybe they'll give the spit 4000hp and 8 x .50 caliber guns :D

Offline TheCage

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 236
a little P-40 speculation (what if?)
« Reply #27 on: November 29, 2002, 05:20:09 PM »
I posted this in another thread:

Quote
the Curtis YP-60E, which was a remake of the P-40. It used an R-2800-18, 2000 Hp engine, and had a top speed of 405 at 24,500 ft. It also had a bubble canopy like the P-51, but again it was canceled because they didn't want to disrupt the P-40 line and because the engine used was needed for the new B-29 bomber.

Offline paulieb

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 239
      • http://www.airmafia.com/index2.html
a little P-40 speculation (what if?)
« Reply #28 on: November 29, 2002, 07:12:36 PM »
YP-60E? Never heard of it. Got a link to some info? As far as a "fantasy" arena, dunno if HT will ever do that. I have "flown" a modded P-40K in CFS2 with 1,850 horsepower, and it won a straight line race with a stock P-51D at 12,000 feet. Also the 51 couldn't turn with me at any speed. Of course, this doesn't mean that simply throwing more power at it would have fixed the problems, but it woulda been one helluva start IMO.

Offline TheCage

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 236
a little P-40 speculation (what if?)
« Reply #29 on: November 30, 2002, 01:01:00 AM »
Information on all Curtis aircraft can be found here.

Curtis Aircraft

The P-60E was one of the last versions to update the P-40 line.   It proved to be slower then the P-47 and the P-51 so the project was dropped.   By 1946 there were no more planes built using the Curtis Lable because nothing they designed were ever accepted.

The picture of the last version of the YP-60E is here
YP-60E
« Last Edit: November 30, 2002, 01:07:44 AM by TheCage »