AHC: P-40 lasts the whole war

[JEF_300]

The challenge is simple; make the US Army Air Force use the P-40 as it's "primary" fighter for the whole of the second world war, similar to how the Spitfire and BF-109 were used by Britain and Germany respectfully.

The XP-40Q prototypes were the most advanced P-40s made in real life, and will probably serve as a good reference point.

 

[ShySusan]

The problem is, the P-40 is just simply outclassed by the fighters that supplanted it. It topped out at 424 MPH using War Emergency Power and Water Injection (for the XP-40Q). The P-51 could do 440 at Military Power, the Corsair could do 449, the Lightning could do 414 on Military Power. Then you get into the issue of range. The P-40 just didn't have the legs to escort bombers over Europe from the UK.

 

[bsmart]

That is going to be tough. The P-40 was really just a re-engined P-36 which was first flown in 1934. That puts it in the same group as the Hawker Hurricane. The BF-109 was also a member of that class but it was kept in service because the needs of the luftwaffe didn't change and the need for interceptors remained desperate. Was the Spitfire the primary fighter for the RAF by the end of the war? They were running so many types by 1945 that I'm not sure they had a 'Primary' type.

 

[Peg Leg Pom]

You'd need traitors handling US aircraft procurement throughout the war. The P40 was already obsolescent in 1941 and should have been out of production by the end of 1942.

 

[GrahamB]

The comparison to the Hurricane is quite apt so I could see some later versions of the Warhawk being designed from the outset for the ground-attack/close-support role like the Hurricane did.
Then again, the Warhawk served through the whole war as it was, so I'd actually say the Warhawk was America's primary fighter, depending on the theatre (practically anywhere other than Europe).

 

[marathag]

From the wiki
Frustrated with a lack of official backing for a new development of the P-40, Berlin left Curtiss-Wright in December 1941,[22] and, at the request of the federal government, in 1942, he became Director of the Aircraft Development Section of the Fisher Body Division of the General Motors Corporation in Detroit.
There's your PoD
Curtiss lost what little they had of their mojo after he left.

The Hawk 81, that worked out at the P-40A thru C, had little commonality to the Model 87, or P-40D, that first flew in May, 1941, three months after the XP-46 did it's disappointing early flights.
USAAF wanted the Model 90, that was the Model 87 fuselage with a Laminar Flow Wing, to use the Continental Hyper engines that never would work right.

Lets massage things, that NAA misses the deadline for the British Purchasing group , and Curtiss upsells them the Model 90 with a RR Merlin, calling this the P-40F with Berlin still designing at Curtiss

Is it as good as the OTL P-51?
No, but NAA isn't making those in this TL, so nones the wiser. It's good enough to last the war

 

[JEF_300]

From the wiki
Frustrated with a lack of official backing for a new development of the P-40, Berlin left Curtiss-Wright in December 1941,[22] and, at the request of the federal government, in 1942, he became Director of the Aircraft Development Section of the Fisher Body Division of the General Motors Corporation in Detroit.
There's your PoD
Curtiss lost what little they had of their mojo after he left.

The Hawk 81, that worked out at the P-40A thru C, had little commonality to the Model 87, or P-40D, that first flew in May, 1941, three months after the XP-46 did it's disappointing early flights.
USAAF wanted the Model 90, that was the Model 87 fuselage with a Laminar Flow Wing, to use the Continental Hyper engines that never would work right.

Lets massage things, that NAA misses the deadline for the British Purchasing group , and Curtiss upsells them the Model 90 with a RR Merlin, calling this the P-40F with Berlin still designing at Curtiss

Is it as good as the OTL P-51?
No, but NAA isn't making those in this TL, so nones the wiser. It's good enough to last the war

Once it's accepted that the British engines are performing better, would the American's stick with the Merlin powered P-40, or would they push for a Griffon-powered version? I've heard that the British sent tooling for the Merlin and the Griffon to Packard, but only one set of equipment would fit on the floor at a time. And unlike the P-51, the P-40 has a need for the extra power.

Then again, I have no idea if a Griffon powered P-40 could even be made to work.

 

[marathag]

Then again, I have no idea if a Griffon powered P-40 could even be made to work.

Curtiss P-60C with R-2800 and contra-rotating props Engine 53" diameter
Centaurus was 55"
Was to have had the Chrysler IV-2220, a V-16 that was45 inches longer than the Griffin

but wasn't ready in time, so used the R-2800 above

 

[Naval Aviation Fan]

The challenge is simple; make the US Army Air Force use the P-40 as it's "primary" fighter for the whole of the second world war, similar to how the Spitfire and BF-109 were used by Britain and Germany respectfully.

The XP-40Q prototypes were the most advanced P-40s made in real life, and will probably serve as a good reference point.

Here is a link to a webpage about the P-40Q's. It is interesting reading, and as I had never before heard of these versions, it was an enjoyable read. As others have noted already, keeping the P-40's as the main fighter seems to tall an order.

 

[Johnrankins]

You'd need traitors handling US aircraft procurement throughout the war. The P40 was already obsolescent in 1941 and should have been out of production by the end of 1942.

Why? It did just fine against Japan and if it were cut off in 1942 we would have been short planes there. Getting a lot of "good enough" planes in 1943 was more important than getting a considerably smaller number of better planes.

 

[ShySusan]

Why? It did just fine against Japan and if it were cut off in 1942 we would have been short planes there. Getting a lot of "good enough" planes in 1943 was more important than getting a considerably smaller number of better planes.

That had more to do with training than any inherent advantage the P-40 had. In the words of David L "Tex" Hill, an Ace with the AVG in WWII, "you never piloted a P-40 without wishing you had something a little better."

 

[Johnrankins]

That had more to do with training than any inherent advantage the P-40 had. In the words of David L "Tex" Hill, an Ace with the AVG in WWII, "you never piloted a P-40 without wishing you had something a little better."

My point was it is better to have an adequate plane today than a better one in six months. It wasn't the "best" plane but it was the best choice when you consider quality, numbers and time. It takes time to spin up production. What do you do until then when planes keep getting shot down?

 

[Insane Ranter]

The Brazilians used the P-40 until the last was retired in 1954. Weren't they being used to shoot down balloon bombs or something as well? I'm sure there were a few minor countries that wouldn't afford newer planes or were not lend-leased them.

 

[ShySusan]

My point was it is better to have an adequate plane today than a better one in six months. It wasn't the "best" plane but it was the best choice when you consider quality, numbers and time. It takes time to spin up production. What do you do until then when planes keep getting shot down?

I'm not saying they should have shut down production as soon as better planes were being built. But once better aircraft became available, the P-40 should have been replaced. Curtis should have started transitioning their P-40 production lines to Mustangs or Corsairs in 42 with full swap over by the end of 43

 

[tomo pauk]

OP asked for suggestions to keep P-40 viable until 1945, he didn't suggested that P-40 was best. So perhaps we play the ball?
1st step is to cancel the P-63 and use the 2-stage supercharged V-1710s for P-40s instead.

 

[Belisarius II]

View attachment 601737Curtiss P-60C with R-2800 and contra-rotating props Engine 53" diameter
Centaurus was 55"
Was to have had the Chrysler IV-2220, a V-16 that was45 inches longer than the Griffin
View attachment 601738 but wasn't ready in time, so used the R-2800 above

You beat me to it. I was going to suggest the P-60 be developed, and produced as a variant. Others have pointed out that the Germans kept the Bf-109 in production for the whole war, but a Bf-109E is a far cry from a Bf-109G, or K. A Spitfire MK I isn't a Spitfire MK XIV.

 

[Belisarius II]

Why? It did just fine against Japan and if it were cut off in 1942 we would have been short planes there. Getting a lot of "good enough" planes in 1943 was more important than getting a considerably smaller number of better planes.

The P-40 was just adequate to deal with Axis fighters in 1940-42, it fell way behind after that. The P-38 was superior by most measures, and was in production by late 1941. The P-47 entered combat service early in 1943. The P-51, with Allison engines was in production in 1942, as the A-36 Apache Dive Bomber, and even that was a better fighter. The USAAF just had to move forward.

 

[tomo pauk]

The P-60 didn't share wing nor fuselage with P-40 - the two were related far less than Tempest and Typhoon, or P-43 with P-35.

 

[Johnrankins]

I'm not saying they should have shut down production as soon as better planes were being built. But once better aircraft became available, the P-40 should have been replaced. Curtis should have started transitioning their P-40 production lines to Mustangs or Corsairs in 42 with full swap over by the end of 43

Quite likely, the thing to remember though is to remember that these things are tricky in an intense war. Life isn't a video game, it takes time to switch production, train troops to use the new equipment and to establish new logistical chains. Too many people forget that.

 

[Johnrankins]

The P-40 was just adequate to deal with Axis fighters in 1940-42, it fell way behind after that. The P-38 was superior by most measures, and was in production by late 1941. The P-47 entered combat service early in 1943. The P-51, with Allison engines was in production in 1942, as the A-36 Apache Dive Bomber, and even that was a better fighter. The USAAF just had to move forward.

It shot down quite a few Zeros so was quite adequate for the Pacific. You just couldn't dogfight them but that was true of almost any Allied plane.