P-40 vs. Hurricane

[Gnomey]

Originally Posted by Royzee617

Tough one. I like both planes and no doubt it will all be subjective. Both had mixed careers as fighters (pursuit) and ground attack.

The Hurri was already obsolescent by WW2. Under the skin it used much of the design of 30s biplanes. But that made it easier to build and repair when that was important. In contrast the P40 was the first of the next generation with a lot more metal. As a fighter it outgunned the Hurri (until the 20 mm cannon but they were for ground attack not AtA). But I think the Hurri was more manoeuvrable at most altitudes.

They were contemporary and the RAF used both... I don't think the Hurri ever made it to USAAF service etc. (Unlike the Spitfire) - and kept using them until they were replaced by the Typhoon and P51, respectively (I think). So they were not in service for all that long c.f. the Spitfire or 109 which the Hurri fought with in BoB.

On reflection I would have to say that the Hurri edges out the P40 due to its versatility. It was used in some very challenging roles but few planes could have withstood being rocket-fired off a pitching merchantman's deck in the Arctic to pursue Condors. Plus I think the Hurri was one of the first allied planes to use rocket projectiles and the P40 did not.

Good points Roy. I agree with all of them.

[FLYBOYJ]

Agree, good points for the Hurricane - my sources showing both aircraft with the ability to carry a 500 pound bomb load as well.

Found out as well the Tomahawk IIB carried 380 rpg for it's four wing mounted .50s. The P-40E carried 281 rpg for it's 6 .50s.....

[the lancaster kicks ass]

Originally Posted by FLYBOYJ

WRONG! P-36, P-39 and Zero had wing guns!!!

if you re-read what i said i said they didn't have ALL their armorment in their wings, so i wasn't wrong........

[FLYBOYJ]

Originally Posted by the lancaster kicks ass

if you re-read what i said i said they didn't have ALL their armorment in their wings, so i wasn't wrong........

But they had armament in the wing With wing fuel tanks - isn't that what we were discussing?!?!

[the lancaster kicks ass]

yes but you ceemed under the impression i wasn't aware those fighters had wing guns, which i was.........

[FLYBOYJ]

Originally Posted by the lancaster kicks ass

yes but you ceemed under the impression i wasn't aware those fighters had wing guns, which i was.........

OK - my mistake...

[MacArther]

The point was that the P40 N could carry more ammo and more fuel. Thus it was the better fighter because it could carry more rounds of a harder hitting gun.

[the lancaster kicks ass]

all them rounds are useless though if the plane is a poor gunnery platform, i know the P-40 was a good platform i'm just saying ammo isn't everything, you take out a plane with a couple of bullets if you put them in the right place, there's more to a good fighter than ammo.........

[FLYBOYJ]

Originally Posted by the lancaster kicks ass

all them rounds are useless though if the plane is a poor gunnery platform, i know the P-40 was a good platform i'm just saying ammo isn't everything, you take out a plane with a couple of bullets if you put them in the right place, there's more to a good fighter than ammo.........

I read somewhere that Jimmie Thach was confronted about F4F pilots dismayed about some modles only having 4 guns as opposed to 6. His response was "What good is having 6 guns when you can't hit anything with 4?"

[the lancaster kicks ass]

exactily........

[CurzonDax]

I read somewhere that Jimmie Thach was confronted about F4F pilots dismayed about some modles only having 4 guns as opposed to 6. His response was "What good is having 6 guns when you can't hit anything with 4?" [/quote]

LOL, never heard that one. Still, even though I am firmly in the P-40 camp, wasn't one of the drawbacks of the P-40 is that it could only use Prestone coolant. It seems to me in reading several Flying Tigers accounts and books, that the AVG guys would go nuts trying to find Prestone. (I am at work and don't have the time or resources to verify all of this)

As far as carrying bombs, and I my have missed this somewhere back there, it was until the introduction of the KIttyhawk variant of the P-40 that it could carry bombs, the P-40 Warhawks, unless they were really modified could not.

:{)

[FLYBOYJ]

Originally Posted by CurzonDax

I read somewhere that Jimmie Thach was confronted about F4F pilots dismayed about some modles only having 4 guns as opposed to 6. His response was "What good is having 6 guns when you can't hit anything with 4?"

LOL, never heard that one. Still, even though I am firmly in the P-40 camp, wasn't one of the drawbacks of the P-40 is that it could only use Prestone coolant. It seems to me in reading several Flying Tigers accounts and books, that the AVG guys would go nuts trying to find Prestone. (I am at work and don't have the time or resources to verify all of this)

As far as carrying bombs, and I my have missed this somewhere back there, it was until the introduction of the KIttyhawk variant of the P-40 that it could carry bombs, the P-40 Warhawks, unless they were really modified could not.

:{)[/quote]

Actually it was the "C" model (Tomahawk MK IIB) that started carrying bombs....

[FLYBOYJ]

GOT THIS FROM A "DEAD" SITE LINK, GREAT INFORMATION CONCERNING THE P-40B VS. THE ME-109 - SOMEONE DID THEIR HOMEWORK!


Top Speed
The values have been measured offline with air start at the respective altitude, 100% fuel, after 4 min acceleration at 100% power and another 2 min acceleration at War Emergency Power.

The Me 109E-4 is slightly faster below 7500 ft, somewhat slower than the P-40B from 7500 - 16000 ft, and faster above that, with its superiority increasing with altitude.
Climb Rate
A graphical comparison of the climb rates. The values have been measure offline, take-off with 100% fuel, climb at 100% power (no War Emergency Power) using the climb autopilot. The climb rates were averaged over the time clocked for 5000 ft intervals (with the 1st interval above ground level from 1000 - 5000 ft.)

Climb speed for the P-40B 130 mph
Climb speed for the Me 109E-4 130 mph
The climb rate of the Me 109E-4 is very much superior to that of the P-40B. It starts with a +50% advantage at sea level and increases to a +100% advantage at 17500 ft.
The climb rate is subject to some variation according to power setting and total weight (mainly determined by the fuel load):
Average Climb Rate 1000 - 10000 ft
Type Climb rate [fpm]
Normal Power WEP (100% fuel) WEP (10% fuel)
P-40B 2300 2700 3200
Me 109E-4 3500 3900 4500
Obviously, even a lightly loaded P-40B on WEP will not outclimb a fully loaded Me 109E-4 on 100% normal power.

Manoeuvrability
Roll Rate
The P-40B is superior to the Me 109E-4 in rolling at all speeds, though at high speeds the superiority is greatest. While the Messerschmitt's ailerons seem almost frozen at 400 mph, the P-40B rolls very quickly at that speed, and to both sides with equal ease.

Time for a 360° Roll

SEE BELOW

The roll rates were measured with 100% fuel at about 1000 - 5000 ft altitude at the respective indicated air speeds.
Turning
The P-40B turns better than the Me 109E-4 at all speeds. While the difference is not very large, it's quite noticable.
Here the specific excess power values for a 3-G turn at 200 mph that is flown from 5000 ft - 1000 ft as a shallow spiral dive (using WEP).
Typ 3-G Turn at 200 mph
Time Specific Excess Power
P-40B 158 s -25.3 ft/s
Me 109E-4 150 s -26.7 ft/s


Firepower
The Firepower of the P-40B is not very impressive, but adequate. The Me 109E-4 on the other hand enjoys good firepower, but the ammunition supply is much more limited.

SEE BELOW

Tactics
At altitudes above 18000 ft, the Me 109E-4 clearly outperforms the P-40B. Between 18000 ft and 8000 ft the P-40B enjoys a greater top speed, while the Me 109E-4 holds a vast advantage in climb. Below 8000 ft, the Me 109E-4 is slightly faster than the P-40B. When it comes to turning, the P-40B however is superior at all but the highest altitudes.
Tactics for the P-40B
The P-40B should avoid combat against he Me 109E-4 at altitudes above 18000 ft. Should it be attacked by a Messerschmitt at high altitude, flat turns are a good defense as they force the Me 109 to bleed speed. If that fails, a dive to a lower altitude will probably shake the Messerschmitt - a dive to 15000 ft will bring the P-40B into its region of superior top speed. If it's necessary to dive even lower, the best way would be to dive to the deck as the speeds are almost equal there. A sharp roll to the left at high speed and a pullout at 90° to the initial flight path will give the P-40B a good headstart as it's impossible for the Me 109E to roll anywhere as quickly in a dive.
Offensively, it's important to exploit the superior speed at medium altitude to catch the Me 109E-4. An altitude advantage at the beginning of the fight defeats the Messerschmitt's greatest advantage: Its superior climbing ability. Its manoeuvrablity enables the P-40B to keep its energy advantage throughout the attack, which may be better than sacrificing the energy to saddle up on the Me 109's tail in case there are more enemies in the area. It also helps to defeat any attempt to dive away.
When firing the guns, it's a good idea to stay aware of the differences between the two sets of guns: The two 12.7 mm machine guns in the nose are very accurate no matter what the range is, and they have the same or better firepower as the four 7.62 mm wing guns. The 12.7 mm guns accordingly should be used at all ranges, in contrast to the wing guns that should be set to a short convergence distance (like 150 yards) and fired - in addition to the centreline guns! - at short range only.
Tactics for the Me 109E-4
The best tactics for the Me 109E-4 obviously would be to fight the P-40B over 18000 ft. Unfortunately, it's unlikely that the enemy is cooperative enough to comply with this suggestion! For the best chances of success, the Me 109E-4 needs to make sure that it enters any fight with an altitude advantage, and it's imperative to avoid being surprised by a P-40B.
If the approach of a P-40 (or any unidentified enemy) is spotted at long range, climbing probably is the best option as long as there's a chance of getting above the attacker. Even if the P-40B gives chase, it's possible to outrun it at altitudes where the P-40 is supposed to be faster in level flight if the Messerschmitt pilots climbs away. A very shallow angle might be best to deny the P-40B the option to come in level and close by zooming up. As long as the P-40B is forced to climb at all, it loses part of its engine power to lift the heavy weight of its airframe, and as a result it loses its speed advantage, too.
A P-40 at about the same altitude and speed can be shaken by a dive that leads into a smooth level run at 5000 ft where the Me 109E-4's speed advantage is at its maximum. Below 1000 ft, a shallow climb might be in order to get a noticable speed advantage, as long as it doesn't mean the P-40B can zoom up into an attack right then. Turning is not a good defensive move for the Me 109E-4, but it might be unavoidable if the P-40B is about to get into a shooting position.
To successfully attack a P-40B, the Me 109E-4 needs to hold an energy advantage. Following the P-40B into a turn is not a good idea - the P-40B turns better, and the Messerschmitt needs to keep its energy advantage to get away after an unsuccessful gunnery pass. If the P-40B dives away, it should only be followed if it doesn't have too much of a headstart - else, a lengthy tail chase would result, and if the P-40B turns back into the attacker, maybe even a turning fight at deck level which the Me 109E-4 probably would lose.
In general, the best tactics involve climbing back up over the P-40B after each attack so that it's possible to fly repeated attacks against the P-40. The firepower of the Me 109E-4 will ensure the P-40 pilot's demise if he makes just a single mistake.

[Royzee617]

cannon firing Hurri pic

[FLYBOYJ]

Very Cool! I was trying to get the cutaway for both aircraft on here as a comparison...