AHC: P-40 lasts the whole war

[marathag]

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.

It was far more maneuverable than the 109, but was hampered from the supercharger, and was heavy enough that the poor rate of climb even at low levels where the supercharger was providing enough boost made things rough on the pilot

 

[Belisarius II]

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.

Yes it did, but isn't a reason to not get something better. The P-40 using the right tactics could deal with the Zero, or Oscar with Zoom & Boom tactics, because it had a higher dive speed, but you couldn't always do that. If you didn't start with an altitude advantage, or were fighting a low altitude you could be in trouble. The IJN was stuck with the Zero, because they couldn't spare the time, and disruption in production to transition to something better, but the IJAAF did. The Tony, Frank, and Tojo were much more formidable opponents then the Oscar.

USAAF pilots in the Pacific were very happy to transition to P-38's. The greater speed, rate of climb, range, fire power, and better high altitude performance, along with the safety of two engines were greatly appreciated. The P-38 was also more versatile, being a better fighter/bomber, recon plane, and radar equipped night fighter. Later in the war when the P-47 & P-51 became available the improvements were even more marked. No one wanted to go back to the P-40, when such superior fighters were available.

 

[Johnrankins]

Yes it did, but isn't a reason to not get something better. The P-40 using the right tactics could deal with the Zero, or Oscar with Zoom & Boom tactics, because it had a higher dive speed, but you couldn't always do that. If you didn't start with an altitude advantage, or were fighting a low altitude you could be in trouble. The IJN was stuck with the Zero, because they couldn't spare the time, and disruption in production to transition to something better, but the IJAAF did. The Tony, Frank, and Tojo were much more formidable opponents then the Oscar.

USAAF pilots in the Pacific were very happy to transition to P-38's. The greater speed, rate of climb, range, fire power, and better high altitude performance, along with the safety of two engines were greatly appreciated. The P-38 was also more versatile, being a better fighter/bomber, recon plane, and radar equipped night fighter. Later in the war when the P-47 & P-51 became available the improvements were even more marked. No one wanted to go back to the P-40, when such superior fighters were available.

I never said the US shouldn't get anything better, but that it would need to take time to do so. How fast it should have converted over is subject to debate. "Good enough" today is better than "not enough today but better in six months". If the US tried to convert to P-47s overnight it might have had to spend 3 or 4 months retaking what it lost during the time they were being built because it didn't have enough planes to stop a Japanese counterattack.

 

[ShySusan]

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.

That's why I suggested a gradual phase out taking over a year. So enough airframes are built to supply the groups already using it with attrition replacements, while increasing production of superior aircraft to allow new groups to be formed with those aircraft instead of the obsolete P-40

 

[Johnrankins]

That's why I suggested a gradual phase out taking over a year. So enough airframes are built to supply the groups already using it with attrition replacements, while increasing production of superior aircraft to allow new groups to be formed with those aircraft instead of the obsolete P-40

I agree with you there.

 

[JEF_300]

None of which was on topic. Frankly, I know that keeping the P-40 is a poor idea and unlikely. That's why this is a challenge.

 

[naraic]

None of which was on topic. Frankly, I know that keeping the P-40 is a poor idea and unlikely. That's why this is a challenge.

Are you happy for the p-40 to be reengined? Either an Allison with 2 stage superchargers (which they didn't get historically) or a Merlin would improve things.

 

[CalBear]

The REAL problem with the P-40, one that couldn't have been corrected if you hung a pair of J-33-35 turbojets under the wings, was range.

The U.S. REQUIRES a deep escort fighter. Without one, be it the P-51 or the later P-47N or any of the other very long range fighters that were in the pipeline, the Luftwaffe doesn't get decimated. A Luftwaffe that hasn't been gutted over the Reich by Browning M2s and suffered severe production dislocations by heavy bombing (even if those dislocations were measured in days or weeks rather than months) at the same time as it is experiencing unsupportable losses in the air is a Luftwaffe that can maintain, at minimum, air parity over the Continent.

Air Parity means no Overlord. Full Stop. No real Second Front.

Best result in this scenario is if the Red Army stops at the French Border and not the Channel Coast.

 

[JEF_300]

Are you happy for the p-40 to be reengined? Either an Allison with 2 stage superchargers (which they didn't get historically) or a Merlin would improve things.

Absolutely. Anything that was done to a Spitfire or a BF-109 is fair game I think. The real important thing for me is that it has to still look like a P-40. Despite basically every part of the Spitfire being changed or outright replaced between the Mk.II and the Mk.XXIV, they both look like Spitfires. Similarly, the late-war P-40s should still be recognizably P-40s. And a think that was true of the real life XP-40Qs btw.

 

[Stardude82]

If you ask my opinion, the P-51B looks more like a P-40N than a P-51D. There is circumstancial evidence NA used technical date from the P-40 to develop their fighter. So, maybe the P-40 was the frontline fighter for the entire war.

 

[tomo pauk]

There is circumstancial evidence NA used technical date from the P-40 to develop their fighter.

Just a myth.

 

[Father Maryland]

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.

I think the Hondurans ended up using P-26 "Pea Shooters" into the early 60's.

The Brazilian's also for whatever reason used some pretty strange upgraded M3 Lee light tanks into the 80's.

 

[Belisarius II]

That's why I suggested a gradual phase out taking over a year. So enough airframes are built to supply the groups already using it with attrition replacements, while increasing production of superior aircraft to allow new groups to be formed with those aircraft instead of the obsolete P-40

That's basically what happened. The Truman Committee looking into waste, and inefficiency in war production thought the P-40 should've been phased out earlier. Hard to say, with precision, but it needed to be phased out during 1943, and I think it was. Were there any USAAF P-40 fighter groups in service at the end of 1943? Axis fighters were improving, and the USAAF needed a long range escort for the bombing of Germany, and the P-40 certainly wasn't up to the job.

 

[Llewwyy]

I thought that one of the reasons that they kept producing the P40 was that it was cheap to make. Most of the tooling for it was the stuff that was used for the P36.

 

[marathag]

Just a myth.

yet NAA did buy data from Curtiss.
Of course they would say it was of little help. of course.

 

[Belisarius II]

If you ask my opinion, the P-51B looks more like a P-40N than a P-51D. There is circumstancial evidence NA used technical date from the P-40 to develop their fighter. So, maybe the P-40 was the frontline fighter for the entire war.

That's because the P-51B had the same razer back canopy as the P-40, rather then the Bubble canopy of the iconic P-51D. The P-51B was a superior design with it's laminar flow wings, and better general aerodynamics then the P-40 could ever be. Esthetically I always thought the less well known P-51C, with the Spitfire like Malcom Hood was very cool, but the Bubble Canopy gave the pilot better visibility. http://www.aircraftresourcecenter.com/Rev5/4201-4300/rev4266-Lifelike-32015/01.jpg

 

[marathag]

Were there any USAAF P-40 fighter groups in service at the end of 1943? Axis fighters were improving, and the USAAF needed a long range escort for the bombing of Germany, and the P-40 certainly wasn't up to the job.

1944
P-40 Kittyhawk – 44,900 dollars
P-39 Airacobra – 50,700 dollars
P-51 Mustang - 51,571 dollars
P-63 Kingcobra - 59,966 dollars
P-47 Thunderbolt – 85,578 dollars
P-38 Lightning - 97,147 dollars

And that's all less GSE, too

 

[ShySusan]

That's basically what happened. The Truman Committee looking into waste, and inefficiency in war production thought the P-40 should've been phased out earlier. Hard to say, with precision, but it needed to be phased out during 1943, and I think it was. Were there any USAAF P-40 fighter groups in service at the end of 1943? Axis fighters were improving, and the USAAF needed a long range escort for the bombing of Germany, and the P-40 certainly wasn't up to the job.

Actually, there were a bunch of groups still flying the P-40 then. The 81st Pursuit Group actually converted TO P-40s in 1944! The 80th converted from P-47s to P-40s in 43 for use in the air to ground role. So a bunch have were still in service

 

[bsmart]

That's because the P-51B had the same razer back canopy as the P-40, rather then the Bubble canopy of the iconic P-51D. The P-51B was a superior design with it's laminar flow wings, and better general aerodynamics then the P-40 could ever be. Esthetically I always thought the less well known P-51C, with the Spitfire like Malcom Hood was very cool, but the Bubble Canopy gave the pilot better visibility. http://www.aircraftresourcecenter.com/Rev5/4201-4300/rev4266-Lifelike-32015/01.jpg

The Malcom canopy was not a feature of only the P-51C. They were refitted on B models also. The only difference between the B & C model was where they were produced. B models were produced in Inglewood, C models in Dallas.

 

[Belisarius II]

Actually, there were a bunch of groups still flying the P-40 then. The 81st Pursuit Group actually converted TO P-40s in 1944! The 80th converted from P-47s to P-40s in 43 for use in the air to ground role. So a bunch have were still in service

Thanks. That's very surprising. Why convert from P-47's to P-40's for ground attack missions? The P-47, with it's radial engine, heaver bomb, & rocket load, and 8 x 50 cals" was much better at ground attack then the P-40. German ground troops were rightly more afraid of P-47's, P-38's, A-20's, and the amazing A-26 then the P-40. Did they want the P-47's for air to air missions? Early 1944 was the time when the P-51 was displacing the P-47 in the air to air role in the 8th Air Force, and the P-47's were being sent down on the deck.