![]() |
| |||||||
| Aviation Discussion on the aircraft of WWII. |
![]() |
| | LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
| | #1 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,193
| A fun WWII what if... What if the P-40 Warhawk had been equipped from day one with a 2-stage supercharger? I believe its overall performance would have made it an even match for the prevailing universal fighters (109, Spitfire, Hurricane, Zero, Yak 1) of the early war if it were as competitive at high altitudes as it was at low. Perhaps history would be mentioning this tough forgiving misunderstood airframe with the respect the overall design deserved. |
| | |
| | #2 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 2,412
| Well, there was no 2-stage engine available at the time, at least not an inline one. There is a similar possibility though along the same lines. Go back to the radial engine like the P-36, use a streamlined, tight-fitting, fan cooled, cowling with a large spinner (like the late version used on the XP-42, or with the BMW 801 initially on the Fw 190, and many others) and then use the 2-stage supercharged, intercooled Pratt & Whitney R-1830 Twin wasp similar to that used on the F4F-3 (available in 1940, this may be the first widely produced 2-stage millitary aircraft engine) That would have been avialable "from the begining" more or less and would have provided combat power over 20,000 ft. (at which altitude I'd expect a top speed somewhere around 370-380 mph, maybe a bit more) It would probably be a bit lighter than the contemporary P-40 (everthing but the engine being equal) and visibility over the shorter nose would be better. |
| | |
| | #3 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Ohio
Posts: 273
| Since we are dreaming, my dream is the Army Air Corps, Allison, Curtiss, all pushed for making the 2 stage supercharger for the Allison V-1710. Then yes, the P-40 would be in the same realm as the "premier" early war fighters in the calibre of the Spitfire and Messerschmitt! The technology was obviously available, the Air Corps didn't support it though. I think the P-40 would have been just like the Spit and Bf 109, great performers with limited range. Actually, in my twisted mind, the P-40 is just as great as those two already, you just have lure them guys down to your best fighting altitude and give them a whoop'in ! |
| | |
| | #4 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 2,412
| In that line of thought, had Allison's 2-stage supercharger development paralleled that of Pratt & Whitney's they'd have had one in production by 1940. Such an engine would out perform the European contemporaries. (the 2-stage Merlin not available until much later, similar with the DB 605 -particularly the high-alt version) Such an engine would of course benefit the P-38 (reduced weight and maintenance/reliability problems), P-39 (altitude performance), and P-51 as well. Last edited by kool kitty89; 12-25-2008 at 05:33 AM. |
| | |
| | #5 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Dallas, Tx
Posts: 4,732
| How did the P-40 compare to the Spit, Hurricane, and 109 as far as manuverability?
__________________ |
| | |
| | #6 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,765
| Hi Thorlifter, >How did the P-40 compare to the Spit, Hurricane, and 109 as far as manuverability? Poorly. Regards, Henning (HoHun) |
| | |
| | #7 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,765
| Hi Koolkitty, >There is a similar possibility though along the same lines. Go back to the radial engine like the P-36, use a streamlined, tight-fitting, fan cooled, cowling with a large spinner (like the late version used on the XP-42, or with the BMW 801 initially on the Fw 190, and many others) and then use the 2-stage supercharged, intercooled Pratt & Whitney R-1830 Twin wasp similar to that used on the F4F-3 (available in 1940, this may be the first widely produced 2-stage millitary aircraft engine) Here is a comparison including the "Super Hawk" with R-1830-86 I prepared a while back ... Regards, Henning (HoHun) |
| | |
| | #8 |
| Junior Member Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 26
| The Warhawk may be considered a mediocre fighter by the masses but undeniably it has its share of glory serving with the Flying Tigers in China. |
| | |
| | #9 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,193
| It was not the best in that regard but it was a faster diver and tougher I think, I believe that had its altitude performance been on par with the 109, SF and Hurricane it would have still been the heavyweight brawler of the 4. |
| | |
| | #10 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,765
| Hi Clay, >It was not the best in that regard but it was a faster diver and tougher I think, I believe that had its altitude performance been on par with the 109, SF and Hurricane it would have still been the heavyweight brawler of the 4. Good point about the dive - it was not trouble-free in a dive, but it had good aileron control at high speeds, superior to the Spitfire or the Me 109. Here is a comparison I prepared a while back ... Regards, Henning (HoHun) |
| | |
| | #11 | |
| Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,193
| Quote:
| |
| | |
| | #12 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,765
| Hi Clay, >I'm not smart enough to put that into real world terms Have a look at the P-40F graph ... it did not have a two-stage engine, but at least a two-speed engine, quite similar to that of the Hurricane II. In the speed diagram, you can see that the P-40F is a lot faster than the Hurricane II ... but in the climb rate diagram, the Hurricane shows up with a much superior climb rate. Conclusion: The Hurricane had too much drag to go fast, and the P-40F was overweight so that it couldn't climb worth a damn. Regards, Henning (HoHun) |
| | |
| | #13 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,193
| They had a few P-40s re-engined with the Merlin, did they perform any better? |
| | |
| | #14 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,765
| Hi Clay, >They had a few P-40s re-engined with the Merlin, did they perform any better? That's the P-40F in the above diagram. It was a bit better at high altitudes, but not really good. Regards, Henning (HoHun) |
| | |
| | #15 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Montrose, Colorado
Posts: 3,525
| The P40 was very heavy for the power available. It's power loading at most useful altitudes was quite high. It's best defensive maneuver was the split s as it rolled well. |
| | |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
| |