Best World War II Aircraft?

[FLYBOYJ]

2) RE: "God is My Co-Pilot" - 'Boom Zoom ' WERE the tactics IIRC that the AVG used against Zeros. One pass and high-tail to base unless unescorted Bettys. That is what I remember from the book. Don't know what other tactics the AVG used that P-40K referenced.

Actually it was aganist Oscars and Nates. There were few if any Zeros in th CBI when the Flying Tigers were at their peak.

 

[vikingBerserker]

I've read some units obtained an overall 3-1 ratio flying the P-40, but would be interested in seeing the evidence about it versing the 109.

 

[renrich]

The AVG fought as a unit only about six months and mostly against second line Japanese fighters and bombers. I doubt if they ever engaged IJN aircraft which would include A6Ms.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

I've read some units obtained an overall 3-1 ratio flying the P-40, but would be interested in seeing the evidence about it versing the 109.

And this is based on "claims" (JoeB will chime in here soon). I'm sure the actual score is more like 2 to 1 or 1 to 1.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

The AVG fought as a unit only about six months and mostly against second line Japanese fighters and bombers. I doubt if they ever engaged IJN aircraft which would include A6Ms.

The JAAF were flying Nates and later Oscars. the P-40 outgunned both of them but the Oscar was no slouch being more maneuverable than the Zero.

 

[P-40K-5]

And this is based on "claims" (JoeB will chime in here soon). I'm sure the actual score is more like 2 to 1 or 1 to 1.

air to air kills were 3:1 overall. in favor of the P-40.

below is an interesting read.

 

[tail end charlie]

below is an interesting read.

Was it written by Biggles cousin?

 

[P-40K-5]

Was it written by Biggles cousin?

nice. Insult the great men and women who served and gave thier lives
in WWII. and who built these aircrafts so that people like you can make
such statements. are proud of yourself now?

 

[Colin1]

below is an interesting read.

Restricted?
Declassified now obviously but a piece of Curtiss-Wright documentation then; that'll be some of what the Truman Committee were referring to when they accused Curtiss-Wright of an over-zealous sales pitch

You can count on <company x> to tell you <company x's product> is, really, as good as it ever was, even when it isn't any more.

I don't know how old you are, I can't place you but it's a sales pitch, it reminds me of something Buick might put out to clear the old models off the showroom floor before the new range comes in.

 

[tail end charlie]

nice. Insult the great men and women who served and gave thier lives
in WWII. and who built these aircrafts so that people like you can make
such statements. are proud of yourself now?

That is a cheap shot, I am not insulting anybody who took part in the conflict which includes a large part of the older males in my family my wifes family and the generation before in WWI. My wifes father died when she was two from chronic bronchitis due to living in a submarine breathing sulphuric acid fumes for 3 years despite having a reserved occupation. My father was on destroyers, one uncle was in bomber command/ROC two were in the army and another was RAF ground crew.

I dont know where you got the document from but it seems like late war publicity, check the dates mentioned with the actual dates. Look at the actual service record of the P-40 with the RAF. It was replaced as soon as was practical. For a pre war design it did very well it was a good plane but there were better, it was better than the Hurricane but in 1942/3 that wasnt saying very much at all. The document you posted reads like Curtiss hype for a plane that was passed its time, what is its title?

 

[FLYBOYJ]

air to air kills were 3:1 overall. in favor of the P-40.

below is an interesting read.

Do you realize you are reading war time propaganda????? Its straight from the flight manual. Please be advised that you're not dealing with a bunch of novices who just learned about warbirds last year. I don't think you know the difference between "claims" and actual kills confirmed by both sides.

I suggest you read "Bloody Shambles." That should give you somewhat of an insight as to the real story.

 

[tail end charlie]

Do you realize you are reading war time propaganda????? .

I dunno about the Pacific but any plane that could score a 3:1 ratio against the Luftwaffe between 1941-45 would be a legend, in fact the war would be over by 44 probably

 

[FLYBOYJ]

I dunno about the Pacific but any plane that could score a 3:1 ratio against the Luftwaffe between 1941-45 would be a legend, in fact the war would be over by 44 probably

If not 1943....

P-40 - just for the record, I still remain by my statement that the P-40 was one of the most under rated fighters of WW2. With that said, I also recognize its limitations and ACTUAL wartime combat record with verification against axis records. Posting propaganda from the -1 shows either your very naive or lack of knowledge of this subject matter. I hope you're not serious about writing a book unless you already have a fat advance from a publisher (Osprey maybe?) because based on some of your comments here and lack of verifiable sources to back up your claims, you seem to be relying on Wikipedia or the preamble found in model kits for your sources of information.

 

[tail end charlie]

If not 1943....

P-40 - just for the record, I still remain by my statement that the P-40 was one of the most under rated fighters of WW2. With that said, I also recognize its limitations and ACTUAL wartime combat record with verification against axis records.

It seems to me that the P40 was Americas Hurricane. It performed in all sorts of theatres but was outshone by more glamourous aircraft.

Without the spitfire the BoB could have been won ...eventually ......but without the hurricane the BoB would have been lost. The P 40 like the Hurricane bought time for better planes to take the fight to the adversary. In the Pacific many of the key battles were between carriers or involved carriers so the heroes of the battle were carrier based planes and their pilots.

 

[parsifal]

In fighter versus fighter engagements, on a consistent basis, the japanese were shooting down more allied fighters than they were losing themselves. The loss ratios varied greatly, but it was not inconsistent for the allies to lose 5 or 6 fighters for every one Japanese fighter. Total aircraft losses improvfed things a bit, but it was still weighted in favour of the japanese until well into 1943. The turning point in the air war was 1943, not 1942.

It was not just numbers that worked against the japanese in my opinion. As 1944 wore on they were also losing qualitatively.

 

[Njaco]

Thanks Joe. I was at work and couln't correct afte I remembered and posted.

and I was also wrong on the Palm Sunday Massacre - I was actualy refrencing the Holy Thursday Massacre a wek later. Here is Palm Sunday....

The effort to re-supply the bridgehead in Tunisia by the Germans is slowly turning into a diaster. Nearly 100 Ju 52s were loaded with German soldiers to be airlifted to Tunisia in an effort to reinforce Rommel. The transport formation was to be escorted by 16 Italian Macchi C-202s and Bf 109s fighters from JG 53 along with 3 Bf 110s. Near Cape Bon, the formation was attacked by 46 P-40s from the US 9th AF's 57th FG, 12 P-40s from the 324th FS and 12 Spitfires from RAF No. 92 Sqdrn. who were providing top cover for the P-40s. The Allied pilots were guided to the Germans by messages recieved from the German enigma codes. The Junkers transports were caught flying about 100 feet above the Mediterranean in 3 'V' formations. Leaving the Spitfires and a squadron of Warhawks to take on the Messerschmitts and Italians, Capt. James Curl led 3 squadrons of fighters into the German transports. After 10 minutes of battle, over half of the Ju 52s were shot down into the sea or crashed on the beaches of Cape Bon. 51 German transports were shot down along with more than 16 fighters. The Allies lost 6 P-40s and one Spitfire during combat.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

In the Pacific many of the key battles were between carriers or involved carriers so the heroes of the battle were carrier based planes and their pilots.

Not always true. There were numerous operations where the USAAF in coordination with the US Army and Navy was the main player. Look in to 5th AF operations in the Solomons. Additionally, the P-40 could not have done it alone in that theater because it lacked the range and that's where the P-38 came in.

 

[renrich]

Correct FB, and the Nate(KI-27) was a fixed gear monoplane with a Vmax of about 286 mph and two 7.7 MGs. Hardly a first class opponent and on paper not even in the same league with the P40. As you have said, the books by Shores, including "Bloody Shambles" will give one a new perspective about the war in Southeast Asia and the "claims" by allied fighter pilots.

 

[Shortround6]

Do you realize you are reading war time propaganda????? Its straight from the flight manual. Please be advised that you're not dealing with a bunch of novices who just learned about warbirds last year. I don't think you know the difference between "claims" and actual kills confirmed by both sides.

To me the most telling sentence in that posting was;

"True, no more P-40's are being sent to the war theaters."

start of second paragraph, second column, first page.
I believe the date on that manual was 1943?

In the flight manual for transitioning pilots they are saying that it is no more than an advanced trainer if you take away the hoopla. 8)

 

[tail end charlie]

In the flight manual for transitioning pilots they are saying that it is no more than an advanced trainer if you take away the hoopla. 8)

I am surprised that such a document was actually handed to pilots, it reads like a pathe news soundtrack. I would have thought it should be full of instructions and procedures limits and parameters not a kind of sales pitch.