F.A.Q Section Q: Do you take aircraft requests? A: I have a list of aircraft I plan to cover, but feel free to add to it with suggestions:) Q: Why do you use imperial measurements for some videos, and metric for others? A: I do this based on country of manufacture. Imperial measurements for Britain and the U.S, metric for the rest of the world, but I include text in my videos that convert it for both. Q: Will you include video footage in your videos, or just photos? A: Video footage is very expensive to licence, if I can find footage in the public domain I will try to use it, but a lot of it is hoarded by licencing studies (British Pathe, Periscope films etc). In the future I may be able to afford clips :) Q: Why do you sometimes feature images/screenshots from flight simulators? A: Sometimes there are not a lot of photos available for certain aircraft, so I substitute this with digital images that are as accurate as possible. Feel free to leave you questions below - I may not be able to answer all of them, but I will keep my eyes open :)
I am particularly interested in naval aviation; I have read footnotes about night-fighters on carriers, like the F6F-3/5N or the F4U-2. Will you cover naval night-fighters (like in overall videos on aircraft like the Hellcat or Corsair) or have good sources (books, articles) on naval night-fighting in WWII?
As Meat Loaf would have sung "Two out of three ain't bad" I'm a scaffolder, the idiot running around 30-60' up in the air putting the scaffold together 😁😁
@@russell4718 the liberator had better range , better speed and better bomb load compared to the fortress but could fall out of the sky if you looked at it funny whereas the P-40 is a folk hero.
Sadly this iconic fighter workhorse is overlooked these days. I visited a workmate a few months ago & he had inherited his father's model aircraft. When I commented on the P40 model he said I was the only person who had ever identified it.
"The P-40 was a high speed, low altitude sledgehammer of a plane." -Best description ever. I have for many years been smitten by this plane. Thanks for the in-depth review, as well as the defense of her honor.
P-40N could reach 410mph at 2200HP in 1944. P-40 was not that bad of an airplane. the XP-40 flight test data was tested at only 1000HP. And yet she was still 10mph faster than aP-47B at 5k ft. And in 1942 the US and UK pilots were already pushing their engines to 1800HP in combat, at 72-75" MAP. Allison then tested their engines at 70" MAP upon hearing this from both US and UK officer's reports. And Allison ran the engine at 70" for 20min and 1800HP for 20min without issue. Inspection of the engine showed no abnormal wear. If flown to her strengths, a P-40 could defeat any Japanese fighter (and did), and could defeat a P-47 or Me109. The P-40 was the RAF's 3rd most successful fighter of WW2, behind the Spitfire and Hurricane for total number of kills scored in RAF service. And this while the RAF bad mouthed the airplane and claimed it was crap. Yet they shout down thousands of airplanes with them anyways.
@@SoloRenegade 2200 HP? not reliably from any Allison. The high MP used by the Aussies also blew the engines, caused engine fires. The pilots requested that boost because they needed more performance out of the high drag, heavy P-40's to save their lives. A reasonable exchange - lives trumps engines.
@@bobsakamanos4469 cite your sources, as I know of no such cases nor reports. AVG and USAAF had no issue killing zeroes in China, New Guinea, Alaska, etc. The RAF and US also slayed Germans in North Africa. P-40 was the 3rd most successful RAF fighter plane of all of WW2. I guess the Aussies were incompetent pilots according to you.
@@SoloRenegade you're not listening, and putting lies in my statement reveals the true you. The drag of the P-40 design rendered it heavy and slow with lack of climb and acceleration, so starting in North Africa they began to overboost the engines to give the pilots a fighting chance, but it also caused engine fires and blown rods. They continued the practice when returning down under. You don't seem to understand that the USAAF commandeered the better P-40F deliveries for Op Torch. They also flew Spits in the Med, both of which provided better alt performance and top cover for other P-40k's. At least the K finally had auto boost control, although the pilot workload was still a pain with constant trimming and gill flap management. Nevertheless, the US has always shied away from publishing the USAAF/Army deeds in N.Africa because it was they who were less capable, even against a retreating Afrika Corps. They flew bombers at 12,000' where the Allison powered P-40's could provide escort. Wright engines weren't the best either. I wonder how many poor lads were sacrificed under that strategy. Once they received the -81 engined P-40, overboosting wasn't authorized because of higher CR. Also nice that Curtiss finally installed dust filters on the M model. That only took several years! Now do some proper research and stop with the jingoism.
The wildcat, P-40, and Sherman tank may not have been the best, but when needed in quantity it was all we had. They were good enough to get us through when we desperately needed them..
Just like a living situation before you get your stuff together. Not the best conditions or most favorable, but it got you through those rough days before better days came with improvement.
@@cattledog901 all variants of the Sherman were quite good but if we are deciding the best I would go off of the best for its time as the M4A3 76w HVSS large hatch with the one piece transmission casing came in really really late and was competing against the Pershing (admittedly the Pershing in its initial deployment had a significant number of issues but the vehicle was a significant improvement in firepower, range, and protection) and for its time the early M4 variants were the best in the world (all M4 variants were produced effectively simultaneously with the M4A2 actually being the first variant to enter production baring that except for the A1 with its cast hull the only thing the A2/A3 etc designated was the engine it was using) as at the time of introduction it had a very potent gun in comparison to anything else in the world. Incredibly thick armor for a medium tank and excellent mobility and reliability. In 1942 the M4 was an incredibly potent vehicle especially for its primary use and in fact the primary use of all tanks that being infantry support. The later variants with 76.2mm guns were an improvement against tanks but the HE shells the 76 fired were less potent (higher velocity and more spin forcing the projectile to have thicker casing therefor reducing its capacity) I think in 1942 there was nothing in the world better than a Sherman but by 1945 even with all its improvements there were some things there were at least as good if not better
Great analogy. All three examples were easy to build and maintain in large numbers, and were tough and reliable. (I would include the Hurricane in that list.)
Hey Rex, if you ever decide to cover historical squadrons instead of just planes (kinda like Drachinifel covering entire battles or campaigns), i suggest you do a video on the Normandie aviation regiment of the free french air force, a squadron of absolute madlads who went to fight with the soviet air forces from 1943 onwards.
As aviation was evolving at such a rapid pace I feel like it was the first really cool and tough looking fighter of that time. Being so cool and versatile it flew in every theater of the war from day one to VJ Day and beyond
One point of order: The Royal Australian Air Force P-40s were not replaced by P-38s. The RAAF only received 3 Lightnings, variously described as P-38Es or F-4 reconnaissance Lightnings.
"A high speed, low-altitude six-gun sledgehammer..." It's turns of phrase like this that keep me coming back. I feel you could easily become the Drachinifel of the Skies, in this respect at least. 41:59 I note what look like Beauforts in the background. One of the songs on Icehouse's "Code Blue" album ("Charlie's Sky"), and the focus of the cover art, was IIRC a reference to lead singer Iva Davies' grandfather, who flew in Beauforts in this theatre of the war. Makes me wonder if one of the aircraft in the background might have been his...
If anybody living in London wants to see a P-40 in real life, take a trip to the RAF Museum in Edgware, they have one at the entrance near hangars 2, 3 and 4. Unfortunately they don’t have the small model die cast Warhawks with the desert camo print anymore, I went there yesterday just to get one but had to settle for a Lancaster.
This is far and away the best treatment of the P-40 I've seen, and I watch a lot of YT aircraft videos. You present a great mix of technical and historical info, putting both in context. P.S. The C-46 Commando may have had a big role in the demise of Curtiss. An ambitious and capable design that may have been too much for a small company to finish off properly.
Extremely well done! I will definitely be watching part 1 and part 2 over and over. Not only are your programs well written and easy to follow your delivery is very clear and erudite.
Supposedly there are approximately 30+ P-40s in known models flying, with multiple being located and in states of various repair, but with most hopeful that they’ll be airworthy again.
This a superb overview. Such good research across so many fronts. I love the time you devoted to the RAAF and you captured the attitude of Australians to this plane.
I think what doomed Curtis Wright was the early version of the R-3350 in the B29 and the infighting and jealousy of the power-plant's design team that resulted in initially nixing the modifications that were eventually used anyway to keep the damned thing from being a firetrap. But only after the loss of more B29s from engine fires than anything the Japanese could do.
Actually what really doomed the company was bribery. In 1943 their management and several military procurement officers were implicated in a pay-for-play scheme that had been cooked up by several members of the former, and Congress and Joint Chiefs went ballistic. Curtiss was allowed to complete their wartime contracts, but they were permanently tarnished.
You mentioned that you aren't super in the know on the actual mechanics of aircraft. A good channel that I also enjoy watching is Greg's Airplanes and Automobiles. He primarily talks about the technical parts of the aircraft, rather than their history like you do. I find his videos really compliment yours when they happen to line up on the same vehicles
A brilliant conclusion to a fantastic history of a wonderful underrated workhorse that did far better than ever expected and plugged more holes than any little Dutch boy ever did!!!!
In my hometown area the big technical college has a mascot and its named the Flying Tiger. Both in honour of the schools aviation focused nature and that the local airport is named after Claire Lee Chennault. I've always found that awesome and its my wish they get a replica or real P-40 to display at the school. If they ever had a football program, winged helmets with tiger teeth would be really cool.
Nice job. I'm glad you included those Aleutian P-40s in your overview. I've always loved that spin on the classic shark mouth art. And you're right that Curtiss were victims of their own success. And not just with the P-40, but going all the way back to the line of Curtiss Hawks of the 20's and 30's. You get the sense they became somewhat ossified and beholden to their more senior management, much in the way American auto manufacturers did in the 1970's and 80's. So they never had the vision or willingness to really shake things up internally.
Curtiss Wright did an excellent job in shooting themselves in the foot during WW II. They designed and produced the Curtis Helldiver which had numerous design flaws. They helped produce the P 47 which were so badly constructed they never went overseas. They were also routinely investigated for the poor quality of their workmanship. Quite frankly the company was a mess from top to bottom. The P 40 saved them for half a decade it did not destroy them.
Overlooking much? There was a two-stage supercharger available in 1940, it was just too big to fit anywhere on the P-40 as designed. If you designed the airplane with the superchargers in mind (P-38) then you end up having a plane with power and performance to be front line the entire war. The replacement of the V-1710 with the V-1650 with 2 stage mechanical supercharger was as much for space availability, and cheapest and quickest way to get there, as anything. Witness the use of V-1710s that could be hopped up th a greater degree than the Merlins in Unlimited Air Racing after the war when you didn't need guns and as much fuel. When you took the P-40 anywhere but northern Europe to face airplanes that had to be topicalized (North Africa, SE Asia) and engaged infighting that tended to stay low (not baby sitting bombers at 25K) then all of a sudden the fighting was more a contest of pilots and not airplanes.
The V-1650-1 in the P-40F was 2-speed, not 2 stage and gave it the much needed performance at higher altitudes where the LW perched. The P-40s in the desert suffered horribly due to lack of induction filtration. The M was the first to rectify that fault starting in about mid 1943. Over-boosting during the war caused shortened engine life and engine failures, but some Sqns felt that risk was less than losing pilots in the under performing P-40s.
My mother worked on P-40s at the Curtiss plant in Buffalo NY. All 13,738 P-40s were built there. Also in Buffalo Bell Aircraft built the P-39s. Most were shipped to Russia. The Russians liked P-39s for ground attack against German tanks. Consolidated developed the PBY in Buffalo but moved production to San Diego to be near it's customer the Navy
I once read about a P-40 pilot who's desert squadron was ordered to attack a German supply stronghold. They dove in from high altitude (they'd argued against it but -- orders) and the German defense quickly sighted them in. Some of the plilots completed their bombing and strafing, some were shot down. On his second run his P-40 was hit and the engine began it's sputtering death throes. He decided to land and be at the hands of the enemy; probably shot. On final approach he found his gear would not extend. Then suddenly the Allison leaped back to life, seemingly to full power! He turned and hot-footed it out of there at treetop level, heading in the general direction of US held territory. Many miles distant, the Allison gave out a screaming howl and seized up. The pilot managed to bring his P-40 to a skidding crash landing. As the plane slowed, he was beginning to congratulate himself on a safe crash. But the plane could not completely stop before reaching a shallow ravine. It went over the edge, the prop dug in and and the plane flipped over on it's back. The pilot regained consciousness in the dark of night to see flashlight beams all around and English being spoken. Back at base later, he learned he'd been badly injured. Eventually he was well enough to be sent home to the USA. But to his eventual dying day (early-1970's), he credited the remainder of his life being saved -- to his P-40.
HJ Marseilles, considered the best pilot to ever serve in the Luftwaffe built his reputation shooting down way more P-40's than any other plane. Had he not died bailing out of a Bf 109G in the fall of 1942 he most likely would have had a higher kill count than Eric Hartman.
Rommel's supply lines were compromised by the RAF in Malta and the RN after 2 years fighting there. The LW in N.Africa were undersupplied and out numbered by the time of Marseilles death, but he was indeed a gifted pilot and an excellent deflection shot.
Imagine United States without P-40. In early Pacific campaigns P-36 and Seversky P-35 fighting against Japanese A6M. It was P-36 fitted with Allison engines. An pretty ancient design. But it was there in numbers when needed, during first 18 months of war for United States.
Greg at the Greg’s Aircraft and Automobiles RUclips channel has a great video comparing the Allison and Merlin engined P-40s. In a nutshell, he concludes that the Allison engine was rated ata manifold pressure well below its capabilities, and when flown at higher manifold pressures there was no practical difference in performance between the Allison and the Merlin.
@@stevehofer3482 he has a good presentation and delivery, but his "facts" are selective and omit important realities and details. People tend to buy into his nice delivery as being the same as full truths. He also refuses to amend his mistakes. It's all about the "likes" and $$.
@@stevehofer3482 fair enough Steve, but I think he relies on readers not having researched the material. You know, model builders or airshow shutterbugs, etc. I just wish he'd respond or amend his work when faced with researched counterpoints. Cheers.
The thing to remember about the P-40 was that it was really a P-36 (which first flew in 1935) with a new engine. Here - by using a largely existing airframe they were able to create a serviceable fighter in a shorter time than designing a new one from scratch. And - this stop gap fighter - lasted throughout the war. Very much an achievement. It may have not been as good as later fighters but when it was so desperately needed - it was there. The thing about the Pacific - was that the P-40 and F4F - were the planes that stopped the Japanese and turned them back. By the time later, better, fighters became available -the Japanese had already been defeated and were retreating. P-40's and F4F's did that. They took on the cream of Japanese pilots - and killed them. They suffered for it - but they did it - and while the Allies could replace their losses - the Japanese could not. One thing about the P-40's and the Russians - was that the Russians liked to have their armament in the fuselage. Look at their own aircraft designs. With the P-40 - like the Spitfires and Hurricanes - the guns were in the wings - where the Russians didn't like them. With the P-39 - the _main_ armament was in the fuselage where the Russians liked it. They just took the guns out of the wings - and they had exactly the kind of aircraft they liked. .
It’s strange, the radial engined original P-36 was sort of attractive but the shorter nose Allison P-40s were definitely not pretty planes. Looks contribute to moral and perception.
I wonder why the 332nd fighter group is not mentioned here. She has also flown the P-40. First in Africa and then in Italy before being converted primarily to the P-51 Mustang. From their base in Ramitelli, the pilots accompanied the bombers to Germany. It was the Tuskegee Airmen, the only unit composed entirely of black pilots. They did a really excellent job. They shot down 112 aircraft, destroyed 150 on the ground and damaged 148. They were also credited with shooting down 3 Messerschmidt 262s. Lieutenant Colonel Lee Archer was the Tuskegee Airmen's only ace with 5 kills. 🙂
The British pilots in North Africa were disappointed at first being issued P-40's yet soon changed their minds since those were less affected by MG and rifle bullets when doing strafing runs and held together when a belly landing was required. Their mechanics loved the P-40 since it was easy to work on and repair due to any new replacement part fitting perfectly and that the Allison had 50% fewer parts than the Merlin. Later on, the P-40's in Europe were fitted with the Packard Merlin.
P-40Fs (Merlin engine) were the predominant mount for the USAAF in 1942 in Africa. They could fly top cover for the Allison P-40s along with their Spitfires.
An excellent informative well researched video. An underated work horse aircraft not flown to its strengths initially , nor developed to its true potential due to the pressing need for planes in the air when nothing else comparable was available in the necessary numbers. The contribution it made is now being recognised, and without it the Allied cause would have been in a far worse state than it found itself at that point in time.
The Spitfire, Mustang and Corsair get all of the hype but the Hurricane, Warhawk/Kittyhawk/Tomahawk and the Wildcat are the planes that really won the war and did the heavy lifting when the Allies were most desperate.
Sadly, the attrition of pilots was certainly higher in the obsolete Hurricane. The P-40 was a nice stopgap (replacing Hurricanes) if deployed in large quantity to outnumber the enemy.
The P-40 was good enough up to 15,000 when flown right all it needed was more speed and supercharger to allow more altitude. Later models were definitely improvements, but speed never reach competitive ranges to make it a contender against the newer models of the enemy. Like any fighter, when flown right it works ok.
The P40 claims a 15 to 1 kill ratio Strange when the Zero out performed the Spitfire in the early war years. The Brewster Buffalo had a kill ratio of 42 to 1.A record for a piston engine aircraft. Just some context.
Australian pilots came to love the Kittyhawk. Ex Spitfire pilots who had served in Britain came to appreciate their robustness and reliability in the Pacific theatre. This video has some of their impressions and assessments of the P-40E at Milne Bay ruclips.net/video/Y5UP97oIZF0/видео.htmlsi=m2xOmmCKFdwZcI47
P-40F production started with the Merlin XX, but GM influence had the Allisons replace them. Packard was then committed to building the Merlin 60 series for the Mustang.
As a little kid in the early 1970s the P40 was my favorite fighter of course because it had that shark nose art that appealed to me as a kid cause I thought it looked cool. Then as I got older I fell in love with the Mustang for a very long time, learning everything I could about it. In the 1970s and 80s there were still alot of information and books about these aircraft like they were still in service, I was born 20 years after the war ended but remember all the stories my grandmother and my mother and uncle's would tell me stories and what it was like during WW2 and I loved listening! After the Mustang I discovered the P47, or I should say, we were not told the truth about the P47 for political reasons. I was always told and read that until the later Mustangs were available, we could not escort the bombers deep enough into Germany until the Mustang came and saved the day! They could make it all the way to Berlin! What the top brass fails to mention is that the P47 had that capability from the beginning! The top army airforce brass, also known as the bomber mafia forbid drop tanks from being installed on the P47s, they made it a rule, even though the 47s were built for them to be installed. They wanted to prove the bombers could do it on their own with no escort fighters! They were not fans of the fighter escort and had made up their minds before the war that bombers could do it themselves. And it took them a while to see what everyone else had seen a while ago, but they cost the lives of over 250,000 bomber crews and the aircraft themselves. Around the same time the new Mustangs were coming out, so they spun the story and said now we can escort the bombers deeper into Germany with this new plane that has the range in order to fool everyone that it was there incompetence that killed all those men and made it look like the P47 couldn't make it to Germany. Some enterprising young men could not understand why they were forbidden to install the drop tanks so they asked the British if they would make some. And our friends, the Brits immediately made some out of that paper mixture they were known for. To save metal, the British came up with these paper mashay drop tanks that could be pressurized. The Americans tested them out, and they worked perfectly!!! They were able to fly a good distance past Berlin and could reach the majority of Germany and come home. That means the P47 could have escorted the bombers anywhere they needed to go from the very beginning that the 47 was introduced. The majority of those bomber crews didn't have to die! Even without the drop tanks though they managed to clear the skies of the best German pilots flying the best quality aircraft. By the time Mustangs got over there, all the aces and best German pilots and planes had been taken out by P47s!! That's why it's my favorite now! If you want to become an ace and make it home to tell about it, this is the plane for you! I didn't realize this was the fastest piston plane in the war and that more aces survived to go home flying 47s than any other plane because it was the hardest to shoot down.
My father armed P-47's and P-51's in Europe, during WWII. He was trained on P-38's in the US. He had no idea that the aircraft he worked on were in any way superior to the P-40. If you were not a pilot, you just didn't know the weakness of the lack of a multi-stage supercharger. The USAAF was so enamored with the advantages of the exhaust driven turbochargers that they discouraged the development of a multi-stage mechanically driven supercharger. Allison started to develop turbocompounding system, where exhaust gas would be used to help turn the crankshaft. This was abandoned, in favor of developing a conventional two-stage system, but that work was not completed in time for the improved engine to be incorporated in any WWII designs.
Allison used the Turbo-supercharging in the P-38, although it had many issues. Allison first proposed the 2 stage s/c by simply tacking on an auxilliary s/c in early 1941 for the Mustang. NAA rejected it immediately and started looking for an alternative engine for the Mustang. In March 1941 NAA acquired the Merlin XX documents from RR. In April RR started bench testing their 2 stage Merlin, which NAA adopted in 1942.
The P-40 could really be called the Workhawk because while not a glamorous top of the line fighter like the Mustang and Spitfire she did soo much for winning the war all around the world. Take a moment and consider how things would've gone if there no P-40s in various theaters and no or only inferior fighters would've been available. She was available at the most critical and desperate times the Allies faced. And continued to serve throughout the war.
I read somewhere that Curtiss engineers accused North American of using the airframe design of the P-40 a little too closely when they designed the P-51/Mustang.
Imagine millions of pounds of lead and copper and other metals scattered all around Europe, Russia, Etc. Imagine the millions of pounds of unexploded ordinances still buried. Apparently- there has been a couple major explosions- one caused by a lightning strike from a buried ww1 line breach attempt. Imagine how much lead and other metals, thermite, cordite, and other chemicals are still undiscovered.
They almost got all the way through the alphabet! After Z, they would have had to build the "Now I know my ABC's" and "Next time won't you sing with me" models.
Given air superiority and top cover, the P-40 was effective in the hands of an experienced pilot (and there was a lack of those). It was rugged enough to be used in the muddy Milne Bay environment (with Marston Mats), but the pilots benefitted from the lack of Japanese fighters/ carriers, which were previously lost at the Battles of the Coral Sea and Midway. Aussies have a fondness for the P-40s because the vast majority acquired by the RAAF were P-40N's. In the african desert, neither the earlier versions, nor the N were a match for the LW fighters.
It was NOT the USAAF that had Packard build the merlin !!! It was the British purchasing commission that search out a supplier, having first talked to Chrysler, who refused, later building the Wright R3350 for the B29 then Ford Dearborn , Edsel, agreed then Henry refused, later building the PW R2800 and also B24's. The Brits went to Packard, who they had been in talks with for components for the Merlin but Packard would only agree to build the complete merlin, and no less than 1000. Rolls Royce agreed and placed an order for 6,000 engines FOR THE BRITISH !!!! and as a side to help things along Packard was also given an order for 3,000 merlins this being the V1650-1 single stage units, and the USAAF had no plane for the merlin so it was decided to put them in the 1311 P40F' and 600 P40L'sfor a total of 2911 planes using most of the 3,000 V1650/1 merlins, why there were NO MORE P40's built with the Merlin because PACKARD had developed the V1650-3 the 2 stage high altitude version and they ALL went to the P51 B/C & D/K Mustangs. and now you know the real story according to Packard !!! Besides the Merlin version P40F was no faster than the Allison version, did not climb as fast and rolled faster, all this verified by USAAF and RAF flight tests !!! Most Brits are to this day unaware that PACKARD built the Merlin for the Brits, but 37,137 were deliver to the Brits...1/2 of the Lancaster bombers the Mk BIII had the Packard merlins as well as 1500 Mossies 1200 Hyrricanes and 1040 spitfires MkXVI. just the facts less the hype and British BS !!!
Great uncle was a mechanic in north africa and italy. He worked on p 40s dc3s and p51s. Regarding the 2 fighters he worked on... he said the mustang was a hotter plane but the Warhawks were more like a brick s house. As for the dc3 or c47 he said it was boring to work on as nothing ever went wrong with them. He passed on in 2005 and that was about all he said of the war other than italy was shittier than north africa as it was almost as hot and more humid
The P-40 wasn't that great at all of a fighter plane. Even it's strength, having a fast dive, wasn't even anything special against anything other than Japanese fighters. The P-40 was trash but the pilots who flew it deserve all the credit for making it competitive.
The P-40 and a couple of Mustangs made up the first WWII fighters that I saw at airshows in California in the mid-sixties. a seriously underrated fighter.
The P-40 wasn't the best plane but if used to it's strengths was a legend, it could take incredible battle damage, had good firepower, good range, carry bomb's, good speed- couple of examples the Aussies used them against the Japanese defending Port mornsbe and gave them a bloody nose while also supporting the army, when the Japanese invaded chine they were unstoppable then they crossed paths with the flying tigers who gave them a right good kicking and a very, very bloody, nose !!!, So it wasn't the most advanced fighter around or the most revered but was a warrior who got the job done with an attitude to match and finally you gotta love an underdog who refuses to give up.
If i remember correctly, werent the allison engines that was used originally, the same ones used in the PT boats the america used to such good effectz in the pacific theatre?
My great uncle flew P-40's in North Africa (260 Squadron RAF), but disappeared on a mission in 1942 and was never seen again. He was, however, awarded the DFM, (Distinguished Flying Medal) posthumously, for his previous actions in battles, some of which they were outnumbered in by four to one.
I think it was general mismanagement at Curtiss that ruined the company. They had some good ideas but just didn't invest enough in research and development to keep abreast of new tech. The P-40 was a good plane but Curtiss relied too much on that contract. I think the SB2C damaged Curtiss more than the P40 ever did.
@@pandoranbias1622 They're trying to rebuild. They had no R&D so purchased Diemaco Ltd, a first class design house, as Colt Canada so they have improved their ability to provide for militaries around the world. So they still produce a wide range; whether that will be successful remains to be seen.
F.A.Q Section
Q: Do you take aircraft requests?
A: I have a list of aircraft I plan to cover, but feel free to add to it with suggestions:)
Q: Why do you use imperial measurements for some videos, and metric for others?
A: I do this based on country of manufacture. Imperial measurements for Britain and the U.S, metric for the rest of the world, but I include text in my videos that convert it for both.
Q: Will you include video footage in your videos, or just photos?
A: Video footage is very expensive to licence, if I can find footage in the public domain I will try to use it, but a lot of it is hoarded by licencing studies (British Pathe, Periscope films etc). In the future I may be able to afford clips :)
Q: Why do you sometimes feature images/screenshots from flight simulators?
A: Sometimes there are not a lot of photos available for certain aircraft, so I substitute this with digital images that are as accurate as possible.
Feel free to leave you questions below - I may not be able to answer all of them, but I will keep my eyes open :)
Service ceiling, not cervice.
Can you review the history of nose art?
I am particularly interested in naval aviation; I have read footnotes about night-fighters on carriers, like the F6F-3/5N or the F4U-2. Will you cover naval night-fighters (like in overall videos on aircraft like the Hellcat or Corsair) or have good sources (books, articles) on naval night-fighting in WWII?
Kawasaki Ki100
Could you do a video on the MacRobertson air race, or if that's too much to cover in one or two videos, could you do a video on the de Havilland DH88?
'doesn't like high altitudes, has stability problems, a bit fat' - now I see why I relate to the P-40...
Hilarious
As Meat Loaf would have sung "Two out of three ain't bad" I'm a scaffolder, the idiot running around 30-60' up in the air putting the scaffold together 😁😁
El avion de tribilin cuando era pobre .
Could take a Beating!!!
MFS .............but you worked hard , and provided for the good of others !!!!!!
The P40 was the workhorse, never got any attention but it just plugged away and killed many more than it lost. One of the greatest aircraft made
Kind of like the B-24 doesn't get the recognition and respect it deserves one heck of a plane
I don't know how you could get much more glamorized than having John Wayne play Claire Chennault.
@@russell4718 agreed, and the B-24 was much more multipurpose than the B-17. Let’s also throw the b-26 in the underrated category.
@@ridleymain9234 Martin aircraft made one hell of a plane with the B-26 a true hotrod of the air not a plane for the faint hearted b
@@russell4718 the liberator had better range , better speed and better bomb load compared to the fortress but could fall out of the sky if you looked at it funny whereas the P-40 is a folk hero.
I've had a soft spot for the P-40 since I was a kid, and I'm glad you've given it the recognition on a platform with such wide reach that it deserves.
Sadly this iconic fighter workhorse is overlooked these days. I visited a workmate a few months ago & he had inherited his father's model aircraft. When I commented on the P40 model he said I was the only person who had ever identified it.
Was the soft spot on the top of your head?
"The P-40 was a high speed, low altitude sledgehammer of a plane." -Best description ever. I have for many years been smitten by this plane. Thanks for the in-depth review, as well as the defense of her honor.
Not really high speed, but good roll rate and good fighter bomber.
P-40N could reach 410mph at 2200HP in 1944. P-40 was not that bad of an airplane. the XP-40 flight test data was tested at only 1000HP. And yet she was still 10mph faster than aP-47B at 5k ft. And in 1942 the US and UK pilots were already pushing their engines to 1800HP in combat, at 72-75" MAP. Allison then tested their engines at 70" MAP upon hearing this from both US and UK officer's reports. And Allison ran the engine at 70" for 20min and 1800HP for 20min without issue. Inspection of the engine showed no abnormal wear.
If flown to her strengths, a P-40 could defeat any Japanese fighter (and did), and could defeat a P-47 or Me109.
The P-40 was the RAF's 3rd most successful fighter of WW2, behind the Spitfire and Hurricane for total number of kills scored in RAF service. And this while the RAF bad mouthed the airplane and claimed it was crap. Yet they shout down thousands of airplanes with them anyways.
@@SoloRenegade 2200 HP? not reliably from any Allison. The high MP used by the Aussies also blew the engines, caused engine fires. The pilots requested that boost because they needed more performance out of the high drag, heavy P-40's to save their lives. A reasonable exchange - lives trumps engines.
@@bobsakamanos4469 cite your sources, as I know of no such cases nor reports.
AVG and USAAF had no issue killing zeroes in China, New Guinea, Alaska, etc. The RAF and US also slayed Germans in North Africa. P-40 was the 3rd most successful RAF fighter plane of all of WW2.
I guess the Aussies were incompetent pilots according to you.
@@SoloRenegade you're not listening, and putting lies in my statement reveals the true you.
The drag of the P-40 design rendered it heavy and slow with lack of climb and acceleration, so starting in North Africa they began to overboost the engines to give the pilots a fighting chance, but it also caused engine fires and blown rods. They continued the practice when returning down under.
You don't seem to understand that the USAAF commandeered the better P-40F deliveries for Op Torch. They also flew Spits in the Med, both of which provided better alt performance and top cover for other P-40k's. At least the K finally had auto boost control, although the pilot workload was still a pain with constant trimming and gill flap management. Nevertheless, the US has always shied away from publishing the USAAF/Army deeds in N.Africa because it was they who were less capable, even against a retreating Afrika Corps. They flew bombers at 12,000' where the Allison powered P-40's could provide escort. Wright engines weren't the best either. I wonder how many poor lads were sacrificed under that strategy.
Once they received the -81 engined P-40, overboosting wasn't authorized because of higher CR. Also nice that Curtiss finally installed dust filters on the M model. That only took several years! Now do some proper research and stop with the jingoism.
The wildcat, P-40, and Sherman tank may not have been the best, but when needed in quantity it was all we had. They were good enough to get us through when we desperately needed them..
There is a good argument to be made the Sherman was the best medium tank of the war. Specifically the M4A3 76 HVSS.
It's not so much the equipment,it's the men using it.
Just like a living situation before you get your stuff together. Not the best conditions or most favorable, but it got you through those rough days before better days came with improvement.
@@cattledog901 all variants of the Sherman were quite good but if we are deciding the best I would go off of the best for its time as the M4A3 76w HVSS large hatch with the one piece transmission casing came in really really late and was competing against the Pershing (admittedly the Pershing in its initial deployment had a significant number of issues but the vehicle was a significant improvement in firepower, range, and protection) and for its time the early M4 variants were the best in the world (all M4 variants were produced effectively simultaneously with the M4A2 actually being the first variant to enter production baring that except for the A1 with its cast hull the only thing the A2/A3 etc designated was the engine it was using) as at the time of introduction it had a very potent gun in comparison to anything else in the world. Incredibly thick armor for a medium tank and excellent mobility and reliability. In 1942 the M4 was an incredibly potent vehicle especially for its primary use and in fact the primary use of all tanks that being infantry support. The later variants with 76.2mm guns were an improvement against tanks but the HE shells the 76 fired were less potent (higher velocity and more spin forcing the projectile to have thicker casing therefor reducing its capacity) I think in 1942 there was nothing in the world better than a Sherman but by 1945 even with all its improvements there were some things there were at least as good if not better
Great analogy. All three examples were easy to build and maintain in large numbers, and were tough and reliable. (I would include the Hurricane in that list.)
This was probably the best video I've ever seen on the P-40. Outstanding work!
True
Very true
agreed. Very accurate description of its operational capability, rather than chest thumping jingoism.
Hey Rex, if you ever decide to cover historical squadrons instead of just planes (kinda like Drachinifel covering entire battles or campaigns), i suggest you do a video on the Normandie aviation regiment of the free french air force, a squadron of absolute madlads who went to fight with the soviet air forces from 1943 onwards.
Yes, that would amazing.
As aviation was evolving at such a rapid pace I feel like it was the first really cool and tough looking fighter of that time. Being so cool and versatile it flew in every theater of the war from day one to VJ Day and beyond
The story of the Australian 75 squadron was impressive, a rough start ...rough conditions..... tough enemy with excellent planes and experience.
This is a very professional and comprehensive look at this very important aircraft. Thank you Rex!
One point of order: The Royal Australian Air Force P-40s were not replaced by P-38s. The RAAF only received 3 Lightnings, variously described as P-38Es or F-4 reconnaissance Lightnings.
"A high speed, low-altitude six-gun sledgehammer..." It's turns of phrase like this that keep me coming back. I feel you could easily become the Drachinifel of the Skies, in this respect at least.
41:59 I note what look like Beauforts in the background. One of the songs on Icehouse's "Code Blue" album ("Charlie's Sky"), and the focus of the cover art, was IIRC a reference to lead singer Iva Davies' grandfather, who flew in Beauforts in this theatre of the war. Makes me wonder if one of the aircraft in the background might have been his...
This has been an amazing series. Great work on reporting the story of the Curtis P40, the first WW2 fighter I fell in love with.
If anybody living in London wants to see a P-40 in real life, take a trip to the RAF Museum in Edgware, they have one at the entrance near hangars 2, 3 and 4. Unfortunately they don’t have the small model die cast Warhawks with the desert camo print anymore, I went there yesterday just to get one but had to settle for a Lancaster.
112 Sqn.
This is far and away the best treatment of the P-40 I've seen, and I watch a lot of YT aircraft videos. You present a great mix of technical and historical info, putting both in context.
P.S. The C-46 Commando may have had a big role in the demise of Curtiss. An ambitious and capable design that may have been too much for a small company to finish off properly.
Extremely well done! I will definitely be watching part 1 and part 2 over and over. Not only are your programs well written and easy to follow your delivery is very clear and erudite.
Supposedly there are approximately 30+ P-40s in known models flying, with multiple being located and in states of various repair, but with most hopeful that they’ll be airworthy again.
This a superb overview. Such good research across so many fronts. I love the time you devoted to the RAAF and you captured the attitude of Australians to this plane.
I think what doomed Curtis Wright was the early version of the R-3350 in the B29 and the infighting and jealousy of the power-plant's design team that resulted in initially nixing the modifications that were eventually used anyway to keep the damned thing from being a firetrap. But only after the loss of more B29s from engine fires than anything the Japanese could do.
Problems with other projects did not help either. The c-46 and the helldiver.
Actually what really doomed the company was bribery. In 1943 their management and several military procurement officers were implicated in a pay-for-play scheme that had been cooked up by several members of the former, and Congress and Joint Chiefs went ballistic. Curtiss was allowed to complete their wartime contracts, but they were permanently tarnished.
Thanks for an excellent look at the venerable P-40. Keep up the good work making these videos!
What about P-40 in AVG, Chinese Air Force and their service in burma?
Your voice was fine throughout the presentation! Great job.
I knew a test pilot from ww2. He said the P-40 was his favorite. He also test flew the P-58 night fighter
"Thanks" for doing this, it shed some light on the P-40 I did not know about.
Looking forward to seeing your next video.
As a lifelong p40 fan I just have to say thank you for providing this vindication
You mentioned that you aren't super in the know on the actual mechanics of aircraft. A good channel that I also enjoy watching is Greg's Airplanes and Automobiles. He primarily talks about the technical parts of the aircraft, rather than their history like you do. I find his videos really compliment yours when they happen to line up on the same vehicles
This is my favorite prop aircraft. Great videos on it!
A brilliant conclusion to a fantastic history of a wonderful underrated workhorse that did far better than ever expected and plugged more holes than any little Dutch boy ever did!!!!
In my hometown area the big technical college has a mascot and its named the Flying Tiger. Both in honour of the schools aviation focused nature and that the local airport is named after Claire Lee Chennault. I've always found that awesome and its my wish they get a replica or real P-40 to display at the school. If they ever had a football program, winged helmets with tiger teeth would be really cool.
Great work regarding explanation of connecting changes in construction with problems occured during production and exploatation.
"like a Pitts with a V12" Jeffrey Ethel . Thank you for the video on my favorite plane ever made
Nice job. I'm glad you included those Aleutian P-40s in your overview. I've always loved that spin on the classic shark mouth art. And you're right that Curtiss were victims of their own success. And not just with the P-40, but going all the way back to the line of Curtiss Hawks of the 20's and 30's. You get the sense they became somewhat ossified and beholden to their more senior management, much in the way American auto manufacturers did in the 1970's and 80's. So they never had the vision or willingness to really shake things up internally.
Curtiss Wright did an excellent job in shooting themselves in the foot during WW II. They designed and produced the Curtis Helldiver which had numerous design flaws. They helped produce the P 47 which were so badly constructed they never went overseas. They were also routinely investigated for the poor quality of their workmanship. Quite frankly the company was a mess from top to bottom. The P 40 saved them for half a decade it did not destroy them.
Ah, the Sonofabitch Second Class...
Overlooking much? There was a two-stage supercharger available in 1940, it was just too big to fit anywhere on the P-40 as designed. If you designed the airplane with the superchargers in mind (P-38) then you end up having a plane with power and performance to be front line the entire war. The replacement of the V-1710 with the V-1650 with 2 stage mechanical supercharger was as much for space availability, and cheapest and quickest way to get there, as anything. Witness the use of V-1710s that could be hopped up th a greater degree than the Merlins in Unlimited Air Racing after the war when you didn't need guns and as much fuel. When you took the P-40 anywhere but northern Europe to face airplanes that had to be topicalized (North Africa, SE Asia) and engaged infighting that tended to stay low (not baby sitting bombers at 25K) then all of a sudden the fighting was more a contest of pilots and not airplanes.
The V-1650-1 in the P-40F was 2-speed, not 2 stage and gave it the much needed performance at higher altitudes where the LW perched. The P-40s in the desert suffered horribly due to lack of induction filtration. The M was the first to rectify that fault starting in about mid 1943.
Over-boosting during the war caused shortened engine life and engine failures, but some Sqns felt that risk was less than losing pilots in the under performing P-40s.
@Rex's Hangar >>> 👍👍
@Le Stain Du Poop, Esq >>> I think Rex ALREADY HAS _"amounted to something."_
Good show Rexamillion!
I've a new found respect for the P-40!
My mother worked on P-40s at the Curtiss plant in Buffalo NY. All 13,738 P-40s were built there. Also in Buffalo Bell Aircraft built the P-39s. Most were shipped to Russia. The Russians liked P-39s for ground attack against German tanks. Consolidated developed the PBY in Buffalo but moved production to San Diego to be near it's customer the Navy
My favorite model kit as a lad...just looked tough.
This thing is great in War Thunder aswell, one of my favorite and first monoplanes early game.
I once read about a P-40 pilot who's desert squadron was ordered to attack a German supply stronghold. They dove in from high altitude (they'd argued against it but -- orders) and the German defense quickly sighted them in. Some of the plilots completed their bombing and strafing, some were shot down. On his second run his P-40 was hit and the engine began it's sputtering death throes. He decided to land and be at the hands of the enemy; probably shot. On final approach he found his gear would not extend. Then suddenly the Allison leaped back to life, seemingly to full power! He turned and hot-footed it out of there at treetop level, heading in the general direction of US held territory.
Many miles distant, the Allison gave out a screaming howl and seized up. The pilot managed to bring his P-40 to a skidding crash landing. As the plane slowed, he was beginning to congratulate himself on a safe crash. But the plane could not completely stop before reaching a shallow ravine. It went over the edge, the prop dug in and and the plane flipped over on it's back. The pilot regained consciousness in the dark of night to see flashlight beams all around and English being spoken. Back at base later, he learned he'd been badly injured. Eventually he was well enough to be sent home to the USA. But to his eventual dying day (early-1970's), he credited the remainder of his life being saved -- to his P-40.
HJ Marseilles, considered the best pilot to ever serve in the Luftwaffe built his reputation shooting down way more P-40's than any other plane. Had he not died bailing out of a Bf 109G in the fall of 1942 he most likely would have had a higher kill count than Eric Hartman.
Rommel's supply lines were compromised by the RAF in Malta and the RN after 2 years fighting there. The LW in N.Africa were undersupplied and out numbered by the time of Marseilles death, but he was indeed a gifted pilot and an excellent deflection shot.
Imagine United States without P-40. In early Pacific campaigns P-36 and Seversky P-35 fighting against Japanese A6M.
It was P-36 fitted with Allison engines. An pretty ancient design. But it was there in numbers when needed, during first 18 months of war for United States.
Cracking site😎 ruined by ads every 5 minutes😔
Greg at the Greg’s Aircraft and Automobiles RUclips channel has a great video comparing the Allison and Merlin engined P-40s. In a nutshell, he concludes that the Allison engine was rated ata manifold pressure well below its capabilities, and when flown at higher manifold pressures there was no practical difference in performance between the Allison and the Merlin.
Take Greg's videos with a grain of salt.
@@bobsakamanos4469 why? Greg isn’t flawless, but neither is any other source.
@@stevehofer3482 he has a good presentation and delivery, but his "facts" are selective and omit important realities and details. People tend to buy into his nice delivery as being the same as full truths. He also refuses to amend his mistakes. It's all about the "likes" and $$.
@@bobsakamanos4469 I disagree, but I respect your opinion.
@@stevehofer3482 fair enough Steve, but I think he relies on readers not having researched the material. You know, model builders or airshow shutterbugs, etc. I just wish he'd respond or amend his work when faced with researched counterpoints. Cheers.
Outstanding channel. Best regards from Brazil
The thing to remember about the P-40 was that it was really a P-36 (which first flew in 1935) with a new engine.
Here - by using a largely existing airframe they were able to create a serviceable fighter in a shorter time than designing a new one from scratch.
And - this stop gap fighter - lasted throughout the war.
Very much an achievement.
It may have not been as good as later fighters but when it was so desperately needed - it was there.
The thing about the Pacific - was that the P-40 and F4F - were the planes that stopped the Japanese and turned them back. By the time later, better, fighters became available -the Japanese had already been defeated and were retreating. P-40's and F4F's did that.
They took on the cream of Japanese pilots - and killed them. They suffered for it - but they did it - and while the Allies could replace their losses - the Japanese could not.
One thing about the P-40's and the Russians - was that the Russians liked to have their armament in the fuselage. Look at their own aircraft designs.
With the P-40 - like the Spitfires and Hurricanes - the guns were in the wings - where the Russians didn't like them.
With the P-39 - the _main_ armament was in the fuselage where the Russians liked it. They just took the guns out of the wings - and they had exactly the kind of aircraft they liked.
.
Ive always wondered about the canopy. Looks like a 2 seater. Even P51 had this at first. Armor? Aero? What was the theory?
Increased visibility for the pilot. Compare with the cramped & constrained bf.109 and you understand.
Long but very informative and well done. Worth the time.
It’s strange, the radial engined original P-36 was sort of attractive but the shorter nose Allison P-40s were definitely not pretty planes. Looks contribute to moral and perception.
It’s also a matter of tactics on the part of the P-40 pilots. Especially in the Pacific when battling A6Ms.
I wonder why the 332nd fighter group is not mentioned here. She has also flown the P-40. First in Africa and then in Italy before being converted primarily to the P-51 Mustang. From their base in Ramitelli, the pilots accompanied the bombers to Germany. It was the Tuskegee Airmen, the only unit composed entirely of black pilots. They did a really excellent job. They shot down 112 aircraft, destroyed 150 on the ground and damaged 148. They were also credited with shooting down 3 Messerschmidt 262s.
Lieutenant Colonel Lee Archer was the Tuskegee Airmen's only ace with 5 kills. 🙂
The British pilots in North Africa were disappointed at first being issued P-40's yet soon changed their minds since those were less affected by MG and rifle bullets when doing strafing runs and held together when a belly landing was required. Their mechanics loved the P-40 since it was easy to work on and repair due to any new replacement part fitting perfectly and that the Allison had 50% fewer parts than the Merlin. Later on, the P-40's in Europe were fitted with the Packard Merlin.
P-40Fs (Merlin engine) were the predominant mount for the USAAF in 1942 in Africa. They could fly top cover for the Allison P-40s along with their Spitfires.
The P-40 was the unsung hero of the war that you could argue would have been lost without it!
This was very well done. You gave it a fair shake
An excellent informative well researched video. An underated work horse aircraft not flown to its strengths initially , nor developed to its true potential due to the pressing need for planes in the air when nothing else comparable was available in the necessary numbers. The contribution it made is now being recognised, and without it the Allied cause would have been in a far worse state than it found itself at that point in time.
The Spitfire, Mustang and Corsair get all of the hype but the Hurricane, Warhawk/Kittyhawk/Tomahawk and the Wildcat are the planes that really won the war and did the heavy lifting when the Allies were most desperate.
Sadly, the attrition of pilots was certainly higher in the obsolete Hurricane. The P-40 was a nice stopgap (replacing Hurricanes) if deployed in large quantity to outnumber the enemy.
The P-40 was good enough up to 15,000 when flown right all it needed was more speed and supercharger to allow more altitude. Later models were definitely improvements, but speed never reach competitive ranges to make it a contender against the newer models of the enemy. Like any fighter, when flown right it works ok.
Nicely done. VERY nicely done.
Australia built the CAC Boomerang, which was half a Wirraway, which was an armed Texan and I am guessing it ended up being no better than the P-40.
The P40 claims a 15 to 1 kill ratio
Strange when the Zero out performed the Spitfire in the early war years.
The Brewster Buffalo had a kill ratio of 42 to 1.A record for a piston engine aircraft. Just some context.
Australian pilots came to love the Kittyhawk. Ex Spitfire pilots who had served in Britain came to appreciate their robustness and reliability in the Pacific theatre. This video has some of their impressions and assessments of the P-40E at Milne Bay
ruclips.net/video/Y5UP97oIZF0/видео.htmlsi=m2xOmmCKFdwZcI47
I wonder how the p40 would have performed if it was wedded with the Merlin
It was wedded with the Merlin (P-40F and P-40L) before going back to Allison engines.
P-40F production started with the Merlin XX, but GM influence had the Allisons replace them. Packard was then committed to building the Merlin 60 series for the Mustang.
As a little kid in the early 1970s the P40 was my favorite fighter of course because it had that shark nose art that appealed to me as a kid cause I thought it looked cool. Then as I got older I fell in love with the Mustang for a very long time, learning everything I could about it. In the 1970s and 80s there were still alot of information and books about these aircraft like they were still in service, I was born 20 years after the war ended but remember all the stories my grandmother and my mother and uncle's would tell me stories and what it was like during WW2 and I loved listening! After the Mustang I discovered the P47, or I should say, we were not told the truth about the P47 for political reasons. I was always told and read that until the later Mustangs were available, we could not escort the bombers deep enough into Germany until the Mustang came and saved the day! They could make it all the way to Berlin! What the top brass fails to mention is that the P47 had that capability from the beginning! The top army airforce brass, also known as the bomber mafia forbid drop tanks from being installed on the P47s, they made it a rule, even though the 47s were built for them to be installed. They wanted to prove the bombers could do it on their own with no escort fighters! They were not fans of the fighter escort and had made up their minds before the war that bombers could do it themselves. And it took them a while to see what everyone else had seen a while ago, but they cost the lives of over 250,000 bomber crews and the aircraft themselves. Around the same time the new Mustangs were coming out, so they spun the story and said now we can escort the bombers deeper into Germany with this new plane that has the range in order to fool everyone that it was there incompetence that killed all those men and made it look like the P47 couldn't make it to Germany. Some enterprising young men could not understand why they were forbidden to install the drop tanks so they asked the British if they would make some. And our friends, the Brits immediately made some out of that paper mixture they were known for. To save metal, the British came up with these paper mashay drop tanks that could be pressurized. The Americans tested them out, and they worked perfectly!!! They were able to fly a good distance past Berlin and could reach the majority of Germany and come home. That means the P47 could have escorted the bombers anywhere they needed to go from the very beginning that the 47 was introduced. The majority of those bomber crews didn't have to die! Even without the drop tanks though they managed to clear the skies of the best German pilots flying the best quality aircraft. By the time Mustangs got over there, all the aces and best German pilots and planes had been taken out by P47s!! That's why it's my favorite now! If you want to become an ace and make it home to tell about it, this is the plane for you! I didn't realize this was the fastest piston plane in the war and that more aces survived to go home flying 47s than any other plane because it was the hardest to shoot down.
Perfection is the enemy of good enough. Eventually the P40 did what it needed to do.
LOL, that depends on how perfect the enemy is.
Oh, Rex is forever so droll!
The US Army Air Corps was glad to have the P-51, but had to have the P-40.
My father armed P-47's and P-51's in Europe, during WWII. He was trained on P-38's in the US. He had no idea that the aircraft he worked on were in any way superior to the P-40. If you were not a pilot, you just didn't know the weakness of the lack of a multi-stage supercharger.
The USAAF was so enamored with the advantages of the exhaust driven turbochargers that they discouraged the development of a multi-stage mechanically driven supercharger. Allison started to develop turbocompounding system, where exhaust gas would be used to help turn the crankshaft. This was abandoned, in favor of developing a conventional two-stage system, but that work was not completed in time for the improved engine to be incorporated in any WWII designs.
Allison used the Turbo-supercharging in the P-38, although it had many issues. Allison first proposed the 2 stage s/c by simply tacking on an auxilliary s/c in early 1941 for the Mustang. NAA rejected it immediately and started looking for an alternative engine for the Mustang. In March 1941 NAA acquired the Merlin XX documents from RR. In April RR started bench testing their 2 stage Merlin, which NAA adopted in 1942.
I have a deep love for the P-40. So much unjustified invective.
The P-40 could really be called the Workhawk because while not a glamorous top of the line fighter like the Mustang and Spitfire she did soo much for winning the war all around the world. Take a moment and consider how things would've gone if there no P-40s in various theaters and no or only inferior fighters would've been available. She was available at the most critical and desperate times the Allies faced. And continued to serve throughout the war.
Props to the guy who got two melee kills in a plane.
You said "props".
Lol
I read somewhere that Curtiss engineers accused North American of using the airframe design of the P-40 a little too closely when they designed the P-51/Mustang.
NAA learned what not to do from many airframes. The Mustang airframe has little to do with the P-40.
The P-40 was the Honda Civic to the Mustang/Spitfire's Super Car.
Just curious... during ww2, was anyone ever shot on the ground due to planes having dog fights in the sky?
Those bullets had to land somewhere right?
Imagine millions of pounds of lead and copper and other metals scattered all around Europe, Russia, Etc.
Imagine the millions of pounds of unexploded ordinances still buried.
Apparently- there has been a couple major explosions- one caused by a lightning strike from a buried ww1 line breach attempt.
Imagine how much lead and other metals, thermite, cordite, and other chemicals are still undiscovered.
They almost got all the way through the alphabet! After Z, they would have had to build the "Now I know my ABC's" and "Next time won't you sing with me" models.
You do a great job and he's aircraft historical videos. You should do one or two on the P-51. You do a great job on these videos thanks a lot. 👍😎
Outstanding piece! Congratulations!
You totally forgot Ben Affleck and Josh Hartnett used P40s in the defense of Pearl Harbor during the Japanese attack.
This fighter, in the hands of RAAF pilots, was critical in the first Japanese defeat of WW2 - the Battle of Milne Bay.
Given air superiority and top cover, the P-40 was effective in the hands of an experienced pilot (and there was a lack of those). It was rugged enough to be used in the muddy Milne Bay environment (with Marston Mats), but the pilots benefitted from the lack of Japanese fighters/ carriers, which were previously lost at the Battles of the Coral Sea and Midway.
Aussies have a fondness for the P-40s because the vast majority acquired by the RAAF were P-40N's. In the african desert, neither the earlier versions, nor the N were a match for the LW fighters.
It was NOT the USAAF that had Packard build the merlin !!! It was the British purchasing commission that search out a supplier, having first talked to Chrysler, who refused, later building the Wright R3350 for the B29 then Ford Dearborn , Edsel, agreed then Henry refused, later building the PW R2800 and also B24's. The Brits went to Packard, who they had been in talks with for components for the Merlin but Packard would only agree to build the complete merlin, and no less than 1000. Rolls Royce agreed and placed an order for 6,000 engines FOR THE BRITISH !!!! and as a side to help things along Packard was also given an order for 3,000 merlins this being the V1650-1 single stage units, and the USAAF had no plane for the merlin so it was decided to put them in the 1311 P40F' and 600 P40L'sfor a total of 2911 planes using most of the 3,000 V1650/1 merlins, why there were NO MORE P40's built with the Merlin because PACKARD had developed the V1650-3 the 2 stage high altitude version and they ALL went to the P51 B/C & D/K Mustangs. and now you know the real story according to Packard !!! Besides the Merlin version P40F was no faster than the Allison version, did not climb as fast and rolled faster, all this verified by USAAF and RAF flight tests !!! Most Brits are to this day unaware that PACKARD built the Merlin for the Brits, but 37,137 were deliver to the Brits...1/2 of the Lancaster bombers the Mk BIII had the Packard merlins as well as 1500 Mossies 1200 Hyrricanes and 1040 spitfires MkXVI. just the facts less the hype and British BS !!!
Okay. Sold. I'll need to learn this in IL-2
An aircraft which could give a good solid workmanlike performance.
Can't help but wonder, why the P-40N did not receive the V 1710-73 with 1325 HP?
that engine was used on the P-40K. The -81 had a different compression ratio and other mods.
Great uncle was a mechanic in north africa and italy. He worked on p 40s dc3s and p51s. Regarding the 2 fighters he worked on... he said the mustang was a hotter plane but the Warhawks were more like a brick s house.
As for the dc3 or c47 he said it was boring to work on as nothing ever went wrong with them.
He passed on in 2005 and that was about all he said of the war other than italy was shittier than north africa as it was almost as hot and more humid
Excellent thanks for you're well done videos..
The P-40 wasn't that great at all of a fighter plane. Even it's strength, having a fast dive, wasn't even anything special against anything other than Japanese fighters. The P-40 was trash but the pilots who flew it deserve all the credit for making it competitive.
Thanks!
The P-40 and a couple of Mustangs made up the first WWII fighters that I saw at airshows in California in the mid-sixties. a seriously underrated fighter.
Thanks
Algo food. Also, for a second part, please link part 1 :)
29.11 - actually a P-40F
Outstanding Rex
Always wanted to fly a P-40.
WHERE did you find that photo of the P-40 test fire at7:32 that photo is awesome. I want to make it my wallpaper
The P-40 wasn't the best plane but if used to it's strengths was a legend, it could take incredible battle damage, had good firepower, good range, carry bomb's, good speed- couple of examples the Aussies used them against the Japanese defending Port mornsbe and gave them a bloody nose while also supporting the army, when the Japanese invaded chine they were unstoppable then they crossed paths with the flying tigers who gave them a right good kicking and a very, very bloody, nose !!!, So it wasn't the most advanced fighter around or the most revered but was a warrior who got the job done with an attitude to match and finally you gotta love an underdog who refuses to give up.
Lemme put it this way, there were approximately 40 aces in the Brewster Buffalo
If i remember correctly, werent the allison engines that was used originally, the same ones used in the PT boats the america used to such good effectz in the pacific theatre?
My great uncle flew P-40's in North Africa (260 Squadron RAF), but disappeared on a mission in 1942 and was never seen again. He was, however, awarded the DFM, (Distinguished Flying Medal) posthumously, for his previous actions in battles, some of which they were outnumbered in by four to one.
I heard they found his aircraft, was your grandfather Dennis copping?
Edit: sorry, saw your comment on the related video. Same squadron, I hope they find his too one day.
What was your great uncles name????
When did he disappear? Before El Alamein? Battle of Tobruk or Marsa Matruh?
I think it was general mismanagement at Curtiss that ruined the company. They had some good ideas but just didn't invest enough in research and development to keep abreast of new tech. The P-40 was a good plane but Curtiss relied too much on that contract. I think the SB2C damaged Curtiss more than the P40 ever did.
During the war years contracts were assured. So money was always coming in. At the end of the war money was no longer assured and competition returmed
Like Colt. They rely exclusive on producing the M16 for the military. Once that contract dried up - bankruptcy
@@khaccanhle1930 does Colt even exist beyond revolvers today?
@@pandoranbias1622 They're trying to rebuild. They had no R&D so purchased Diemaco Ltd, a first class design house, as Colt Canada so they have improved their ability to provide for militaries around the world. So they still produce a wide range; whether that will be successful remains to be seen.
@@boomslangCA Interesting. Hoping they continue for at least a few generations more, a name like Colt is as American as it gets.