Say what you will about this plane, it kicked ass and looked cool as hell while doing so. Here's to all the brave souls who flew in them.
@Glicksman1
2 жыл бұрын
Amen.
@wilburfinnigan2142
2 жыл бұрын
And it was available in large quantities from before the war started. third most produced US fighter at 14,000 planes behind the P51 at 15,000 and the P47 at 16,000. speaks volumes to its availability, and toughness, maybe not the best but damn good enough to get the job done when flown correctly !!!
@danmccollister4840
6 ай бұрын
My grandfather, George Paxton, flew with the Flying Tigers, he took some hits that put him into a dive but managed to land it in China.
@bobsakamanos4469
2 ай бұрын
@@wilburfinnigan2142 With the Allison engine, it was mainly an export fighter.... speaks volumes to its need by foreign countries desperate for any kind of fighter. US used the Allison P-40 as a trainer mainly.
@wilburfinnigan2142
2 ай бұрын
@@bobsakamanos4469 BULL$HIT they used it as a trainer !!!! When first introduced it was the only decent fighter the USAAC had, 14,000 of them were built and it is in the top 5 of allied fighters for kills, and was the 3rd most produced US fighter of WWII> Hell in 1940 when the Brits came a begging for planes the RAF consideredit the BEST AVAILABLE fighter. FYI It out performed the Brits Hurrycane. and at its introduction there were NO planes or engines with a 2stage supercharger, they were in the works, closest was the turbocharges P38.......Facts of history !!
@bizjetfixr8352
2 жыл бұрын
A fundamental rule that we seem to be forgetting, is that a maginally inferior airplane is better than no airplane at all. The P-40 was inadequate for Northwest Europe, but perfectly adequate for every other theater. Then became a nice advanced trainer for newbie fighter pilots
@Glicksman1
2 жыл бұрын
The RAF and Anzac P-40s in North Africa and the Mediterranean kicked the Luftwaffe's' ass, outperforming the Bf-109E and F at lower altitudes. The Kittyhawk (P-40D and later variants) was the fighter used by the RAAF in greater numbers than the Spitfire.
@coleparker
2 жыл бұрын
@@Glicksman1 But as I understand it, the earlier models were outclassed by the Italian Macchi 202c Folgores
@Glicksman1
2 жыл бұрын
@@coleparker Considering P-40B through E (Kittyhawk I) vs. the 202c, both were very maneuverable fighters and both are gorgeous IMO. In a head to head, the P-40E has better armament and that counts for a lot. A 1/2 second hit on a 202 and it's goodbye. All P-40s were more rugged and more heavily built than the 202. Even a 1 second hit from a 202 would not likely down a 40 unless the shot was extraordinarily lucky (hit the pilot or a critical part of the engine). The 202 was faster than the P-40E and that matters a lot. Apparently, it could turn better as well. This must have surprised the RAF pilots as the 40 turned very well, indeed, better than the Bf-109E and F from most accounts.. The 202 was highly respected in North Africa. Squadron Leader Dennis Harry Clark, D.F.C. and A.F.C., in his book, "What Were They Like to Fly" (1964), stated: "Sleek, supremely fast... the 202 was capable of out-turning our P-40s with ease; but the majority would pull away effortlessly into a climbing roll off or a roll off the top when things became at all hectic... Their aircraft was superior to ours on all counts." It must have been an impressive bird, for sure. However, as usual, it really comes down to the skill of the pilot and a little bit of luck.
@coleparker
2 жыл бұрын
@@Glicksman1 Totally agree! Great Discussion!😀 It rare for me nowadays, to have one on these types of subjects. Thanks.
@Glicksman1
2 жыл бұрын
@@coleparker YW and thank you.
@p99guy
2 жыл бұрын
It was allways a looker! It stayed in continuous production the entire duration of WW2, as did the Hawker Hurricane. The P-40B was the best looking in shark paint in my opinion.
@bobsakamanos4469
4 ай бұрын
No, production for both ended in 1944 and they were not really front line fighters against the LW without top cover, especially the old Hurricane. Corporate influence has a lot to do with what contracts are in place and GM was producing Allisons for the mediocre P-40.
@wilburfinnigan2142
2 ай бұрын
@@bobsakamanos4469 mediocre ???? The brits considered it the "Best Available" fighter in 1940 when they came a begging the USA for more of them and North American sold them the Mustang, The P40 was the 3rd most produced American fighter behind the P47 and P51 and ranked 3rd or 4th in the total destroyed enemy aircraft just behind the $hitfire and Mustang !!!! Not the best but good enough to get the job done and AVAILABLE in large numbers throughout the war !!!
@GTX1123
2 жыл бұрын
Back in 1969 I got to climb up on a P40 that had been damaged 28 yrs earlier when Pearl Harbor was attacked. One of the landing gear was bent and it had bullet holes across one of the wings and the fuselage. It had been dragged out of a warehouse and set up as a movie prop for the movie "Tora Tora Tora" filmed on location at Pearl. My Dad was stationed at Pearl so he took us over to see the movie set on a Sunday when the movie crew had the day off.
@RawPower7
2 жыл бұрын
I have loved the P-40 since i built a plastic model of it as a kid, 45 now and still love the look of this beautiful plane.
@OldMusicFan83
11 ай бұрын
My last model kit was a balsa wood P40 at 17. Went into the Army not long after
@marinegunny826
2 жыл бұрын
While a Corsair fan myself, I always liked the look of the P-40. Especially the early model kitty hawk the flying tigers flew
@bobsakamanos4469
2 ай бұрын
Early model Tomahawks with teeth were flown by 112 Sqn, summer of 1941. Lt Bond of the AVG saw a magazine with the 112 sqn teeth in about Nov and then the AVG started painting teeth on all their P-40B's. A little known fact is that the 112 Sqn motif was origninally tiger teeth with canines, but eventually became the "Shark Sqn"
@marinegunny826
2 ай бұрын
@@bobsakamanos4469 I always wondered how they would have performed with Merlin engines. Any thoughts on that? Great comment, BTW
@j.b.macadam6516
2 жыл бұрын
The P-40 has always been my favorite WW2 aircraft. One of the few that served from beginning to end. When I used to play Microsoft Combat Flight Simulator, the P-40 served me well, and I tallied quite a few kills with it. A truly Great aircraft!
@patsmith8523
2 ай бұрын
I mentioned this on another video: It is important for people to understand that this fighter, like the Wildcat, was holding the line while newer fighters were being developed. Another point is that the brutal lessons learned facing the Zero, were learned in these old aircraft and passed down to the younger pilots. These are two contributions that are often overlooked.
@nickgooderham2389
2 жыл бұрын
Canada also equipped 8 home defence squadrons with P-40's, serving with both eastern and western air commands of the RCAF in Canada. 111 Squadron from EAC was transferred to the Aleutian Islands campaign. On September 25th, 1942, S/L Ken Boomer shot down a Japanese fighter over Kiska.
@JamesChechele
4 күн бұрын
This aircraft was what we needed when the chips where down. Brave young men climbed into the cockpit and gave their best. A true tribute to the Greatest Generation. God Bless Them 🙏
@mtacoustic1
2 жыл бұрын
I was fortunate to get a ride in two-seat versions of a P-40 and P-51. The P-51 was faster and more refined; but the P-40 was more nimble. It's sort of like comparing a Cadillac to a '32 Ford hot rod!
@bobsakamanos4469
2 ай бұрын
Then imagine how much more nimble a LF Spitfire V was with the Merlin 55M and clipped wings.
@robflange
2 жыл бұрын
You forgot the RNZAF (Royal New Zealand AirForce ) we operated 297 P40's of various marks and fitments Serving RNZAF squadrons 14 ,15,16,17 ,18 and 19 sqns Think it might very been our most numerous fighter in WW2
@flyingwombat59
2 жыл бұрын
He did mentioned the RNZAF. He didn’t go into detail.
@WESLAIRA
2 жыл бұрын
New Zealand doesn’t do anything worth a lot of detail lol
@edwardzamorski3711
Жыл бұрын
Why everyone forget new Zealand and the Aussies
@chrisbraswell8864
Жыл бұрын
That would be the P-47 at over 15,000.
@Nobody-oc4qb
6 ай бұрын
Not the most numerous, the 2nd. As the RNZAF had 424 F4U Corsairs. But only the P40’s were involved in any significant air to air combat, with 99 confirmed kills and 13 probables in the Solomons for the loss of 20. One of which was my late uncle in P40M, NZ3076. As for RNZAF P40 numbers, 300 were purchased / leased, but a couple were lost along the way due to the first batch being used USAAC P40E’s in Tonga that didn’t all make it to NZ. So 297 were taken “on charge” as they called it. The E’s were only used for OCU purposes. Only new K,M and N models went to the forward areas.
@stevewadman4166
2 жыл бұрын
I've always been most partial to the p-40 I'm not sure why but I'm glad to know it's bad reputation has been proven to be over exaggerated
@boosuedon
2 жыл бұрын
The P40 had great lines, especially when the nose is adorned with that shark mouth! The plane was just a little underpowered which is not the planes fault, but that of the designer! Power is "life" when it comes to a dog fight. When I was a kid I had a remote control P40 with the AVG insignias. I loved that damn thing! It was just COOL!
@boosuedon
Жыл бұрын
@Raspian Kiado About the only spec that the Supermarine Spitfire shares with the P-40 Warhawk is service ceiling of 30,000 feet. There are no other characteristics aside from being a single seat monoplane with retractable landing gear and made of metal. Body shape much different, wind design completely different, Spitfire weighs in at 5,100lb, Warhawk weighs in at 6,070lb, Spitfire rate of climb was 4,705 FPM, Warhawk rate of climb was 2,100 FPM, just to name a few. Spitfire entered service 1936, P-40 entered service 1939. P-40 was not nearly as maneuverable as the Spitfire either. Hardly cousins I would say. I personally like the lines of the P-40 over the Spitfire, especially when they put that shark mouth on the nose which I believe that the British did that first! The AVG fighting in China saw a picture of that plane in a magazine and adopted it for themselves creating the AVG Flying Tigers. Just a very cool looking airplane!
@edwardpate6128
Жыл бұрын
@@boosuedon I'd beg to differ on that comment about maneuverability. The P-40 was considered among the most maneuverable of WW2 fighters, it had a roll rate only exceeded by the FW190. It could out turn both the Spitfire and Me-109. As long as combat was below 15K feet as it was in most theaters outside of Western Europe the P-40 was an effective weapon. It also was a great fighter bomber with a significant bomb load. It had greater range than the Spitfire, Hurricane and Me-109, so I believe the statements of it being so greatly outclassed have been overstated.
@bobsakamanos4469
Жыл бұрын
@@edwardpate6128 Refer to NACA Report 868 for roll rates, the clipped wing Spit rolled better than P-40. The turn radius and rate of the Spitfire was better than the P-40 even in the lower comfort zone of the P-40. At increasing altitudes, the P-40 didn't have the HP to competitively turn. The F model being better than the Allison P-40s of course. The captured Me109G Black 6 was flown in ACM trials against Spitfires not P-40s, simply because the Spits were closer in performance and were used as top cover for the Kittyhawks. The P-40 was a tier 2 fighter as stated by Claire Chennault.
@bobsakamanos4469
Жыл бұрын
Proven to be over exaggerated??? The P-40 was a tier 2 fighter as stated by Claire Chennault. It became a fine fighter-bomber by 1942, though with final versions carrying 2,000 lbs of bombs in Italy.
@esteger1
2 жыл бұрын
The P-40 would ultimately be superceded by later designs, but it was still pretty bada--.
@That70sGuitarist
2 жыл бұрын
I never realised just how heavy the P-40 was! Then again, once you add a essential improvements like self-sealing fuel tanks, increased cockpit armour and three .50 Brownings in each wing, a bird is bound to get a wee bit heavier.😉 The British Mk IV Kittyhawk, once it had been lightened as much as they could get away with and been equipped with a Merlin engine, greatly improved the P-40's overall performance, but by that stage of the war, it had mostly been relegated to ground attack missions. Great video, very informative;.
@wilburfinnigan2142
2 жыл бұрын
Sorry but you are wrong !!! The merlin engines used in the P40 F & L was the Packard Merlin V1650-1 which was also a single stage supercharged engine, with a second SPEED !!! This was NOT the same version the Mustang received, The Merlin in the P40 only gave a slight improvement in service ceiling, as all test by USAAF and RAF showed the Allison engine version was faster at 20,000 ft, rolled faster and had a higher rate of climb, and precisely why only 1311 were ever built from the original contract the USAAF had with packard for the 3,000 V1650-1 merlin !!! Just the fact IF you bother to look up the performance specs. the P40 was a great asset in the Mediterrian theater, better than the Hurrycane !!!
@bobsakamanos4469
4 ай бұрын
@@wilburfinnigan2142 sorry, but the Allison P-40 was not competetive with the P-40F & L at 20,000'. The lightened N models were also found to be lacking in firepower, so in theatre the 2 other .50 MG's were re-installed along with other equipment. The -81 Allisons were better than previous ones, but still not effective or reliable at 20,000 feet or more. The USAAF gave the N a poor review as a fighter : "The P-40N-1 has reached its limit in performance unless major changes in control surface design, wing form, structure and horsepower are made." AAF Proving Ground Command, Elgin Field, June 1943.
@pimpompoom93726
3 ай бұрын
@@bobsakamanos4469 It was used primarily as a fighter bomber which it excelled at. Bomber escort fighters need range and the ability to fight at 30,000 feet, fighters used in other applications don't necessarily. There was a role for the Allison engine, which was simpler, more robust, less costly and designed for mass production.
@bobsakamanos4469
3 ай бұрын
@@pimpompoom93726 You're thinking of the ETO. In North Africa the Allison P-40s were the main fighters for a couple of years until the Spitfires and P-40F's showed up to provide better top cover. The Allison P-40s also flew escort for light/medium bombers there which typically flew at 12,000' and they also flew escort for Kittybombers.
@kenneth9874
23 күн бұрын
The difference in performance was negligible
@christophergeorge8800
2 жыл бұрын
I liked how Chenault's group had painted the shark teeth and eyes on the noses. Someone said the Japanese were scared silly about sharks and this gave the AVG pilots a phyc edge over them.
@paulbantick8266
7 ай бұрын
That Shark's Mouth was first painted on P40s by: "The archetypal shark mouth, as we know it today, first appeared on the noses of the Tomahawks of Royal Air Force No. 112 Squadron, fighting in North Africa. “The Shark Squadron” had received its Curtiss fighters in July 1941. Squadron nose art underwent many iterations before the British airmen settled on the definitive design. The ultimate shark appeared while 112 Squadron was serving in Egypt. That year, in another part of the world-a Baptist missionary’s house in Toungoo, Burma, to be exact-AVG pilot Charles Bond had grown bored with the after-dinner conversation. He picked up the November 2, 1941 copy of The Illustrated Weekly of India and saw, on its cover, a photo of a pair of 112 Squadron’s Tomahawks. In the photo, South African Flight Lieutenant Neville “Bowks” Bowker stood on the wing of a British Tomahawk Mk. 1 named “Menace.” But what struck Bond most was the fighter’s eyes and fearsome teeth."
@bobsakamanos4469
2 ай бұрын
That's funny, since the germans were not bothered at all by the underpowered P-40 with teeth (112 Sqn).
@shenmisheshou7002
2 жыл бұрын
It must be remembered that the P-40 was already at war with Japan while many other types were still on the drawing board. While it will not appear on anyone's list as a "Greatest" airplane, The P-40 pulled its weight. It actually has a pretty decent kill ratio (25:1 against Japanese aircraft). It contributed to our win in every theater it saw service in and was a much better dogfighter than it was given credit for and considering it was a pre-war design and is served pretty much throughout the war.
@wilburfinnigan2142
2 жыл бұрын
TRUE !!! Most of the hype against the P40 was post war when they were able to compare it to LATER, get that LATER more modern fighters, but compared to contemporary fighters of the day it held its own when flown correctly and used its strengths to fight the enemy !!! It was a tough rugged plane and AVAILABLE when the war started !! !
@bobsakamanos4469
4 ай бұрын
It was a good fighter bomber and was up against the LW long before Pearl Harbor. As a fighter, with the right tactics, more numerous and top cover, it could cope with Japanese fighters low down. In places like Milne Bay and North Africa Op Torch/El Alamein, it didn't have to worry about being outnumbered. So, overall it was mediocre.
@shenmisheshou7002
4 ай бұрын
@@wilburfinnigan2142 It was the engine more than the plane itself and in particular, the single stage supercharger. When it entered the war in Africa, it was considered to be about the same or slighly better than the Bf-109 at low altitude, but could not match it at high altitude. The P-40 made a large contribution to our fights with both the Japanese and the Germans. Even the Chinese used to learn about the Flying Tigers in school!
@pimpompoom93726
3 ай бұрын
@@bobsakamanos4469 It was better than 'mediocre', it was actually quite a good fighter. It just didn't have the high altitude performance needed for escort fighters in the European theater of combat. In the Pacific it was still contributing in 1945, quite a credit for an aircraft originally conceived in 1937. The Mustang and Spitfire Mark IX were thoroughbreds, but the P-40 and Hurricane were good working horses. You need both.
@bobsakamanos4469
3 ай бұрын
@@pimpompoom93726 it was only mediocre and the damning report by AF evaluations in 1943 led to Curtiss stopping production in 1944. By late war it was a fine bomber - in Italy carrying as much as 2,000 lbs - but as a fighter it was done by 1943. The Hurricane was even more obsolete, which is why P-40s replaced them. As per my other comment: "The P-40N-1 has reached its limit in performance unless major changes in control surface design, wing form, structure and horsepower are made." AAF Proving Ground Command, Elgin Field, June 1943.
@alexlanning712
2 жыл бұрын
The RAAF swore by them both in North Africa and the Pacific where their "dive&zoom" tactics were very good for breaking up Japanese formations
@mjpraetorian4386
Жыл бұрын
Same tactics as the P-47
@wilburfinnigan2142
5 ай бұрын
alexlanning Lets not forget when the Brits came begging North American to build the P40 for them the Brits considered the P40 the BEST AVAILABLE fighter for them, until Kindelberger and Atwood offered a better fighter in their new, on paper Mustang !!!
@bobsakamanos4469
4 ай бұрын
No, not in Africa. The LW had the advantage of height and would climb back to safety. Once the US entered the fray, P-40s outnumbered and out supplied the LW.
@bobsakamanos4469
4 ай бұрын
@@wilburfinnigan2142 Brits first asked Kindelberger to build Spits in 1938. He said no due to the excessive man-hours required to build them. No profit margin.
@alexlanning712
4 ай бұрын
@@bobsakamanos4469 I do know the P40 had a good performance in the thinner atmosphere, with its big air intake
@Glicksman1
2 жыл бұрын
For me, the P-40 is the most iconic and most "fighter-ish" looking WWII airplane. I find it both beautiful and deadly looking, much like a Fw-190. The "shark's mouth" paint added much to it's allure and mystique, however it was not, as commonly but erroneously thought the original idea of "The Flying Tigers" (the Chinese AVG operating in the CBI in 1941-42). The first to paint their aircraft with the "shark's mouth" was Zerstörergeschwader 76 group of the Luftwaffe in 1939, flying Bf 110Cs twin-engine heavy fighters, but they did not paint eyes above the mouth. That was later added by the RAF, but the "shark's mouth" was Luftwaffe 76 Group's original idea. The first to paint the "shark's mouth", now with eyes, on a P-40 was the invention of No. 112 Squadron of the Royal Air Force. Fighting in Egypt, Sudan, Greece and Crete, one of the first squadrons to fly the P-40 in combat. They painted the shark mouth on them because they thought the large nose radiator intake looked perfect for it, which it certainly does. Accordingly, 112 Squadron was nicknamed the “Shark Squadron.” It was from widely published photographs of their aircraft that the AVG got the idea for similarly painting their P-40s. In Chinese culture, the tiger is known as the king of the beasts and symbolizes bravery and strength. Its image is a talisman for warriors, signifying a leader, and presenting a dire warning to foes. This made it perfect for the AVG's P-40s. While Japanese Army and Navy fighters, particularly the Zero-Sen, were much better slow, hard-turning dogfighting aircraft, once the AVGs' pilots understood the advantages of the P-40 in faster, dive and zoom combat, they racked up an astounding 40:1 kill ratio! Of course, many of these kills were of Japanese transport and bomber aircraft, but most of their kills were fighters. The P-40 is the symbol of WWII American fighter aircraft.
@coleparker
2 жыл бұрын
The AVG planes were and the earlier B version Tomahawk, that did not electric gun sites. Also the tactics used by them were developed by Chennault who had been in Command of Chinese Air Force in the thirties. Chennault had written up a report on his tactics and their application against the IJN and Imperial Japanese Army Air force pilots and sent it to the Pentagon people prior to the bombing of Pearl Harbor. But they ignored it. It is also interesting to note that the AVG pilots did not begin their operations until after Pearl Harbor.
@Glicksman1
2 жыл бұрын
@@coleparker Yes, That is all true. It's interesting that many people believe that the AVG fought the Japanese before December 7, 1941. Some may have gotten this erroneous idea from the film "Flying Tigers" (1942), with John Wayne in his first war movie, and a young Jimmy Dodd, later the adult host of the Mickey Mouse Club. This film is a mostly fictional and fanciful account of the AVG's early operations in the China/Burma theatre. General Chennault is not mentioned at all in the film, and it is clearly erroneously shown that the AVG were fighting before Peal Harbor as they hear about the Japanese surprise attack after having be already been in action against them for some time. While the AVG never had more than 62 flight-ready fighters at an one time, the Japanese broadcast that they had hundreds. I suppose that was to alleviate the embarrassment of how effective the AVG was and how badly they were being beaten by the truly tiny AVG. From Wikipedia: "AVG fighter aircraft came from a Curtiss assembly line which had just started producing Tomahawk IIB models for the Royal Air Force in North Africa. The Tomahawk IIB was similar to the U.S. Army's P-40C, but there is some evidence that Curtiss actually used leftover components when building the fighters intended for China, making them closer to the older P-40B/Tomahawk IIA specification - for instance the AVG aircraft had fuel tanks with external self-sealing coatings, rather than the more effective internal membranes as fitted to the P-40C/Tomahawk IIB, and the aircraft built for China lacked the later Tomahawk's fittings to carry a drop tank and the addition of an armour plate in front of the pilot. The fighters were purchased without "government-furnished equipment" such as reflector gunsights, radios and wing guns; the lack of these items caused continual difficulties for the AVG in Burma and China." General Chennault established an excellent early warning system that gave a distinct advantage to the AVG, allowing them to take off well before the Japanese aircraft were in the area. With their altitude advantage they used a dive-and-zoom attack method on the more maneuverable, but much slower Japanese fighters. The occasionally encountered the formidable Zero-Sen (the Zero-Sen was a IJN aircraft and did not operate inland except on very rare occasions). The vaunted Zero-Sen, while the best turning-fight airplane of the war, could not dive as fast and was slower than the P-40 by 40 mph. Also, the Zero-Sen could not turn well at airspeeds higher than 280 mph due to aileron stiffening, while the P-40 turned very nicely at airspeeds well over 300 mph. By diving and keeping their airspeed up, it was impossible for the Japanese fighters to catch or turn with it. That is how the AVG earned it's amazing 40:1 kill ratio. Chennault duly reported all of this, including the existence of the incredibly capable and deadly Zero-Sen, to the USAAC in 1941, but it was all disbelieved and ignored. This stupidly cost the lives of many American pilots early in the war who vainly tried to dogfight with the wickedly more maneuverable Japanese aircraft. Real history is nothing like what we see in films from Hollywood.
@coleparker
2 жыл бұрын
@@Glicksman1 There was another great account of the AVG group in the Book God is My Co-Pilot. Later it became a movie in 1945 starring Dennis Morgan and Alan Hale. I actually got to hear Scott give a talk at the Patton Museum in Chirraco summit in California during one of the anniversaries. He recounted a lot of different experiences he had. Also another, good book is entitled, the Ragged Rugged Warriors. It talks about the thirties air wars in both Spain and China.
@Glicksman1
2 жыл бұрын
@@coleparker I've read the book and seen the film. The book "God is My Co-Pilot" is alright, if a bit incredible in places and a lot self-glamourizing. It's a mediocre film, although marginally better than the semi-fictional Hollywood debacle, "Flying Tigers". At least a character named Chennault (Raymond Massey) is in it. I sense that Scott saw WWII as a very convenient opportunity to make money and become a "Hero". Before going to China, Scott had made sure that he logged many thousands of hours in the States, more than some pilots did in the entire war, and many of these as a flight instructor in order to boost his flight time. He was 34 wen he got to China, considered too old for combat, however, he fudged his way to China falsely claiming to be a B-17 pilot. Once he got there he was assigned as a pilot of C-47's flying over "The Hump". Well, that was not the way to become a famous "Hero", or make any money, was it. Scott was never in the AVG, but General Chennault, who was impressed with Scott's many flight hours (ahem) appointed him to be the Commander of the 23rd Fighter Group, which was the AVG before it was converted to a USAAF unit on July 4, 1942. While there, Scott made himself unpopular with many of its pilots for being an obvious self-promoter and displaying a raging personal ambition. Not a team player, for sure. He convinced General Chennault to let him fly and he mostly flew bomber escort missions. Well, that wasn't the path to glory, either, so, strictly against USAAF policy, he assigned himself solo missions. Most of his kills were unarmed transports or lumbering heavy bombers such as the KI-21 (Type 97 "Salley" or "Gwen"), although he did down a few inferior Japanese Army aircraft such as the fixed gear, obsolete Ki-27 "Nate"/"Abdul", the slightly better Ki-43 "Oscar", and the twin-engine, two-seat heavy fighter, Ki-45 Nick. He claimed a Zero-Sen, but Zero-Sens were IJN aircraft and were not operating in his area. He also assigned himself many solo ground attack missions during which he reported that between sorites he would land, have his spinner repainted a different colour, and go back to attack again. He said that he did this to make the Japanese think that they were bein attacked by more than one P-40. This is very nice storytelling, but there is no record of it actually happening. The drying time of the oil-based paint in use at that time is fairly long, and he would have had to wait many hours between sorties for it to dry, or it would have sloughed off when he started the P-40's engine. Actually changing the spinner to a different coloured one would have taken less time and would have been as effective. While the AVG was distinctly a cut-and -slash, soldier-of fortune outfit, they were not flying for Uncle Sam when they collected their bounties from Chiang Kai-shek, and went on to serve with distinction in the USAAF, USN and USMC. Scott sought and made a profit while flying in the USAAF during the war. Boyington, at least waited until 1958 to publish his autobiography, "Baa Baa Black Sheep", and he was a real, by god, fighter pilot.
@coleparker
2 жыл бұрын
@@Glicksman1 As a kid in the 60s I had seen the movie a number of times. Typical WWII film that was being churned out in those years. I did read Boyington's autobiography. Good book, but questionable TV Show. I know that the AVG was a Soldier of fortune outfit, that were secretly given permission to join the squadron. But since they did not begin their actual operations until after Pearl Harbor their operational life span was not that long, with many never collecting their promise bonuses, and many being dragooned back into their former services with threats of draft, and reduced ranks.
@blueduck9409
2 жыл бұрын
The P40 was a good plat form. I think its one of the best looking of the era.
@BobSmith-dk8nw
2 жыл бұрын
One of the P-40 pilots that transitioned to the P-38's said that the reason for that - was range - not capability. .
@jamesricker3997
2 жыл бұрын
The biggest difference between the P-38 and the P-40 was high altitude performance
@BobSmith-dk8nw
2 жыл бұрын
@@jamesricker3997 Yes - but - the _REASON_ for this guys transition was range. Performance was irrelevant if the plane couldn't fly to the target. There was a lot of combat that took place at lower altitudes - for example - if the allies raided the Japanese across the Owen-Stanley mountains. They would be coming down to attack the Japanese facilities. The range there - was not that great. Both sides were on the same island. But - going to Rabaul was another question - as were some of the other targets on other islands. .
@bobsakamanos4469
2 ай бұрын
@@jamesricker3997 no, the P-38 had a poor roll rate (until boosted ailerons were included in 1944), but it climbed much better than the P-40. The biggest similarity was that the Allison engines couldn't take over-boosting.
@kenneth9874
23 күн бұрын
@@bobsakamanos4469hmmm, the Alison had no problem with boost.
@bobsakamanos4469
23 күн бұрын
@@kenneth9874it certainly did. Detonation plagued it so Allison tried to fix that with new intake manifolds to prevent the uneven fuel/air charge. No dice, even the P-82s had constant problems in korea.
@Charon58
2 жыл бұрын
The lack of a dual stage, two speed supercharger and the poor aerodynamic placement of the radiator were the P-40’s main problems. Below 10’000 feet it was very good and with some aerodynamic fixes and better superchargers it could have been very competitive. A four bladed prop to take advantage of the ever increasing power of the Allison engines would have kept it that way. The main problem was an almost unlimited budget for aircraft that meant that evolving the plane (like the Germans did with the 109 and 190 and the Britts with the Spitfire) was just less expedient than focusing on newer designs like the P-47 and P-51.
@danielmeador1991
2 жыл бұрын
Later variants actually had a 2 stage 2 speed supercharger
@Glicksman1
2 жыл бұрын
@@danielmeador1991 North American Aviation was asked y the British Purchasing Commission to build P-40s on license for them, but NAA President "Dutch" Kindelberger said that they could design and build a better fighter than that in a short time. The BPC, skeptical of is, agreed and d in 102 days from the date of the purchase order, NAA designed and built the prototype P-51. Later model P-51s could do for eight hours what a Spitfire could do for two.
@danielmeador1991
2 жыл бұрын
@@Glicksman1 ok whatever I’m not talking about the p51 or spitfire I’m talking about the P40 ok and according to my research later models specifically the N model starting with the -15cu had a 2 stage 2 speed supercharger
@Glicksman1
2 жыл бұрын
@@danielmeador1991 Well, excuse the F out of me. Do you mind if I discuss what I want to? I thought that you and all might like to read some information that you and they might not already know. Sorry if I offended you, Officer.
@danielmeador1991
2 жыл бұрын
@@Glicksman1 jeez I didn’t know that was what you were doing I guess someone hit me with a stupid stick General
@jackdaniel7465
7 ай бұрын
We who know have definitely not Forgotten you New Zealanders and Australians who gave and sacrificed together with the United States secured victory in the Pacific theater together and with that i say.....THANK YOU FOR YOUR HUGE CONTRIBUTION TOWARDS VICTORY, much love to your country and its great people!!!❤️❤️❤️🇺🇸🙏
@TD402dd
11 ай бұрын
The truth is the P-40 was an excellent handling plane that was never permitted to have a dual supercharger to fly to 40,000 feet like the other great fighters. They were fantastic in Africa where they handled their own against the ME-109, but only with Australian pilots. The American pilots at the time never received enough training to fly against professional pilots. It was the best stop gap fighter until the P-51 and P-47 were built, and thank goodness we had them.
@kenneth9874
23 күн бұрын
Lol
@lordemed1
2 жыл бұрын
P-40 coolest looking. Spitfire most beautiful plane ever.
@adirondacker007
2 ай бұрын
The P-40B at The American Heritage Museum, by an amazing coincidence during its restoration, is powered by one of the Allison engines originally installed in one of the P-40's sold to China for use by the American Volunteer Group. John Petach scored two victories behind that engine.
@adamdelarozza1985
2 жыл бұрын
The Nose Art is Amazing!💯
@Cubic5
2 жыл бұрын
In the late 80's I met a man who flew P-40's in North Africa for the South African Air Force.
@thedeathwobblechannel6539
2 жыл бұрын
So as time goes by I've come to learn that the p-40 was quite maneuverable and if it had had the upgrades of the other aircraft like paddle blade props and they had really properly gotten after the supercharging situation on the aircraft things could have been a lot different but it was what it was very durable very strong and a little more maneuverable then you might think
@esbam2002
22 күн бұрын
The plane has nostalgia factor to it. Always liked the early war better than later.
@aaronsanborn4291
2 жыл бұрын
The P-40 was a tough rugged bird that was honestly underpowered and a few minor changes could have made it even better than it already was
@jamesricker3997
2 жыл бұрын
They did that with the P-40Q It was never accepted for service because it's performance although excellent, was inferior to the P-51
@wilburfinnigan2142
2 жыл бұрын
It was NOT underpowered, down low it was fast, it lacked a LATER 2 stage supercharger system that some of the other planes had. Remember the Merlin did NOT get the 2 stage 2 speed supercharger until very late 1942 early 1943 and of the 20,000 shitfires built only 7,000 had the LATER Merlin 60 series HIGH ALTITUDE supercharger !!! Dem facts of history !!! timeline !!!
@bobsakamanos4469
5 ай бұрын
Allison never made a reliable high altitude engine. The addition of a second stage supercharger also required an intercooler, aftercooler, backfire screens and a new accessory case with larger diameter induction inlet. All that extra weight up front was a showstopper. It also needed other mods like a new intake manifold to correct for unequal FAM distribution and detonation problems. The lightened P-40N with only 4 guns was as good as it got in 1943-44, but that was already taking a back seat to other fighters.
@Glicksman1
10 ай бұрын
The P-40 was a fighter that could only fight effectively at low altitude (below 15,000'). In North Africa and in the Pacific, where aerial combat was generally down low it shined. In Europe, where aerial combat usually took place above 20,000', the P-40 was useless. Accordingly, the P-40 did well against the Luftwaffe in NA and against the Japanese air services in the PT. With that shark's mouth, it is indeed the coolest fighter of all time.
@bobsakamanos4469
4 ай бұрын
In N.A., the bombers flew at about 12,000' forcing the LW to come down from their perch where they were usually untouched by P-40s. By the time the US entered the fray, P-40s vastly outnumbered the LW, which had its supply lines cut by the RAF out of Malta.
@kenneth9874
23 күн бұрын
The greatest success of the P40's was on the Eastern front
@wjewell63
Жыл бұрын
Love the Corsair but these wildcats are mesmerizing to me for some reason...great channel...👍
@walter1742
2 ай бұрын
Yes my favorite design I always wanted to give it a red tailed hawk paint job because with that big spinner and wings it looked like a hawk my second favorite is the P38 ! 👍👍👍
@codyhilton1750
2 жыл бұрын
The P-40 with the shark nose art was the sharpest fighter in history.
@Vonriga
2 жыл бұрын
I love the Kittyhawks! Thank you for this video.
@theworldwariioldtimeradioc8676
2 жыл бұрын
The P-36 did see combat during the attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941. Many P-36’s were sent to France. Vichy kept them in North Africa after the armistice with Germany. Some actually fought against the United States during Operation Torch.
@lindycorgey2743
2 жыл бұрын
The Vichy P36s fought the U.S. Navy F4Fs.
@brucepeek3923
Жыл бұрын
P 40 's had the fastest roll rate of any u.s. fighter- all dog fighting tactics begin with a roll- at speeds above 260 mph it could indeed outmaneuver the Japanese zero. best Bruce Peek
@balham456
2 жыл бұрын
I saw one being flown at Duxford September 2017: beautiful.
@waynelovejr.1005
2 жыл бұрын
I wonder what a P40 redesigned to accept the turbocharged Rolls Royce engine could have done? It would have been interesting to find out.
@wilburfinnigan2142
5 ай бұрын
waynelovejr Hey dummy the Merlin NEVER had a TURBOcharged supercharger system, which is exhaust driven why you see 12 exhaust ports on all $hitfires made. LATER, get that LATER 60 series and on, 1943 has a two STAGE 2 SPEED mechanically driven SUPERCHARGER Look up the difference inn the two systems, the ONLY fighters in WWII that had TURBOchargers, used as a second stage was the Allison P38 and the PW R2800 used in the P47 !!! Also the B17 and the B24 used the Turbocharger as a second stage supercharger, why they could fly 10,000 ft higher than a Merlin equipted Lancaster whose merlins were only single stage !!!
@txnetcop
2 жыл бұрын
The N was the best! But the P-40D held its own for a long time! It simply would not turn with a Zero, but you could dive on it. TX Hill liked the plane.
@briancooper2112
2 жыл бұрын
P-40 Had armour plating. Putting 6 .50 caliber MG and getting rid of .30 in nose and wings. The best planes for diving were F4U and P-47.
@txnetcop
2 жыл бұрын
@@briancooper2112 True
@txnetcop
2 жыл бұрын
@@briancooper2112 Best P-40 was the N model look it up!
@briancooper2112
2 жыл бұрын
I would like to fly a P-38,F4U,P-51,P-47
@txnetcop
2 жыл бұрын
@@briancooper2112 Me too!
@flyingweed9671
2 жыл бұрын
I would love to buy a P40 for $24,000 today.
@Glicksman1
2 жыл бұрын
That's $477,946 today and you probably can get one for around that price, if you can find one. What fortune it must cost to run and maintain one I don't know. However a one hour ride in a two-seat P-40 today costs $2,850, which gives us some idea of the cost to run it.
@blueduck9409
2 жыл бұрын
Wouldnt we all. Id sell my car or trade it in on a P40.
@timf2279
2 жыл бұрын
After the war I'm sure they were discounted at a surplus price for scrap value. Wouldn't it have been great just to have warehouses full of old warbirds bought after the war.
@artnull13
2 жыл бұрын
@@Glicksman1 better stick to my models then…
@Glicksman1
2 жыл бұрын
@@blueduck9409 You'd need to have one hell of an expensive car, then.
@markr.1984
Ай бұрын
The P-40F with the Merlin engine did better up high but still not enough power or aerodynamics to compare with a P-51 or P-47, or even the P-38. So the high altitude problems were not just due to the Allison one-stage engine and the P-40F with the Merlins proved that. Still a great plane though. They really didn't make many Merlin powered P-40s though.
@Ocrilat
10 ай бұрын
One of the biggest strengths of the P-40 was that when the shit hit the fan, it was ready, in numbers, and the superior planes of the future simply were not.
@OldMusicFan83
11 ай бұрын
Under rated. AVG in China got a lot out of them!
@nickdanger3802
2 жыл бұрын
Churchill "Our most vital need is therefore the delivery at the earliest possible date of the largest possible number of Curtiss P-40 fighters." page 86 The Burning Blue Addison and Crang
@bobsakamanos4469
3 ай бұрын
Yup, they were desperate.
@blackbirdpie217
8 ай бұрын
I think everyone loves the P-40, for its incredible service record it was never underrated. It served well in China and throughout the pacific. It was however outdated by 1943. Planes like the P-47, F4u Corsair and P-51 were far superior. But I still regard it as one of if not my first favorite,. for looks, history and nostalgia, and its use as a real, proven weapon.
@bobsakamanos4469
3 ай бұрын
It's always amazing how americans ignore the battles of North Africa and the MTO in 1942-1944.
@davidbenner2289
2 жыл бұрын
Some of the AVG Flying Tigers remained in or returned to East Asia after the War. Catha-Pacific or CAT Airlines had smaller side lines, sharing contract pilots with the Federal Government. Southern Air Transport was lesser known. I grew up surrounded and mentored by some of the pilots, even going up with them. For whatever reason, they loved dad to death. Probably because he kept the keys to the liquor cabinet. That, and he was there medical services officer. Many know these men when they worked for Air America and their extensive involvement in the Laotian Civil War.
@mattluszczak8095
7 ай бұрын
Yeah p40 looks awesome
@lewiskemp5893
2 жыл бұрын
Definitely the Coolest looking plane
@jerrymcgeorge4117
Жыл бұрын
Why does the channel have to run the Abrams Tank clip ten times a hour? It’s driving everyone nuts!
@ThatsMrPencilneck2U
2 жыл бұрын
Some of the gun camera film in this video show friendly fighters appearing to fly right through the hail of bullets. My father armed P-47's and P-51's and developed the film from the gun cameras. He saw a lot of pictures, he never understood how those friendly planes returned without a scratch. Addendum: My father always said the P-40 was the plane everyone was excited about, when every modern enthusiast can tell you that the planes my father armed were far superior.
@peterruiz6117
2 жыл бұрын
The P40 seemed to be in many comic books in the late seventies, so my brother and I knew of it...The Stuka, Zero, Spitfire, and Mustang were also ingrained in the comical war imagination. "Wierd War", and "Sgt. Rock were stuff of a child's dreams... And laughfs, as Rock could be outragious..... The P40 COULD turn with rhe Zero ?? I have to look into this more. The P38 'Lightning' is also stamped the same way, yet the highest sciring Americans used it to become "ace of aces" (sorry Chuck, you tried to steal glory in "the Right Stuff", but nooo). It could cork screw using throttle vectoring....Yes, not a new, 5th gen thing only. nuff said...I wasn't there, but I can still imagine. Just don't believe it, when you fly an Me262, in video, and dog fight everything. I got my info straight from interviews of Adolf Galland, Robert Tuck, Saburo Sakai.
@bobsakamanos4469
3 ай бұрын
It's unfortunate that Curtiss didn't have a better design team. They were on the right track with the ventral radiator (Meredith scheme) of the XP-40, but didn't seem to have accessed the ducting research available from the 1938 Gothert german study (which NAA used for the P-51) or boundary layer research. Similarily, they missed the mark on the P-40 replacement, the XP-46.
@edwardpate6128
2 ай бұрын
All American military aircraft manufacturers had access to the same NACA data.
@bobsakamanos4469
2 ай бұрын
@@edwardpate6128 and they had NACA's wind tunnel help, yet somehow settled for a less effective solution, but quicker profits. Admittedly, Curtiss knew the P-40 was an under performer and were working on the lightweight XP-46, also an aerodynamic failure. Then again, NAA had help from Britain (Shenstone) in 1941 on their radiator ducting that produced the faster P-51A. NAA also relied on GALCIT facilities for rapid and continuous aerodynamic improvements.
@raspiankiado
Жыл бұрын
I think, if the engine was swapped for the A-36/P-51 Engine, moved further back, halfway onto the wings, and the cockpit remained in somwhat the same position. The P-40 could have proven to be an amazing fighter like it's predecessor. The smaller engine would be lighter, with similar amounts of power. The nose would have a less significant "footprint", improving aerodynamics. The later P-51 engine, known for it's fuel efficiency, would reduce weight further, by reducing the amount of fuel which needed to be carried. The center of mass, sitting further back, would allow it to turn even quicker. The P-40 could have been a 50 year old platform, with a more modern engine, that put more modern ground up fighters, like the Spitfire, to shame.
@bobsakamanos4469
3 ай бұрын
The P-40 was already a heavy airframe with just the Allison. The two stage Merlins were at least 300 lb heavier than previous Merlins and also required more radiators up front (for intercooler & aftercooler) ; i.e. more weight / more drag. So no, it wasn't really feasible, not to mention that GM already interfered and stopped the use of P-Merlins for the P-40F.
@Ghostsof1861
7 ай бұрын
Everyone raves over the P51, but I think the P40 Warhawk and F4U Corsair were the best looking fighter planes of the war (best looking, not best in performance)...
@ramimariewilson4672
11 ай бұрын
My favorite P-40 story is that of Hans Joachim Marseille in his BF 109F-4/Trop, dropping all 3 British flown P40s that were in a defensive circle. All 3 falling to Earth at the same time;) Given, he accomplished the same feat vs Hurricanes and Spitfires.
@bobsakamanos4469
4 ай бұрын
You're thinking of the outdated Hurricanes in a circle.
@ramimariewilson4672
4 ай бұрын
@@bobsakamanos4469 Look it up. He did it to Hurricanes as well. I've read; The Star of Africa, his Biography. Lots of days with Multiple P-40's downed over North Africa.
@bobsakamanos4469
3 ай бұрын
@@ramimariewilson4672 that's what I said. The Hurricanes flew in defensive circles while Marseille flew yoyo inside them with flaps deployed to eradicate the outdated Hurricanes.
@ramimariewilson4672
3 ай бұрын
@@bobsakamanos4469 No you said it like I was wrong about which aircraft he treated like fish in a bucket. The answer is P-40s, Hurricanes and Spitfire's. I mentioned it as my favorite P-40 anecdote because that's the subject of the video I was commenting on.
@ramimariewilson4672
3 ай бұрын
@@bobsakamanos4469 Look up his victories by aircraft type and you will see he shot down 3 or more P-40's in one day multiple times. Same with Hurricanes, but not as many. Not to mention doing so with minimal rounds of ammo spent.
@danweyant4909
7 ай бұрын
$ 24,500.00 in 1938 worth about a half a million dollars today
@whylie74
2 жыл бұрын
Its cool for one reason and one reason only, it's the chosen mount of the legend that is Capt. Wild Bill Kelso.
@pac1fic055
2 жыл бұрын
As a kid I loved this plane and the Airacobra.
@robertelmo7736
2 жыл бұрын
Me too lol...got some models somewhere from the early 80's...
@pac1fic055
2 жыл бұрын
@@robertelmo7736 the Monogram and Revell models were fantastic.
@kiplingslastcat
2 жыл бұрын
Yes, it was outdated... yes, it was underrated... yes, it's the coolest looking!
@michaelely2161
7 ай бұрын
Is it me - or do the p-40 b/c variants look way better than other variants?
@TheRedStateBlue
Жыл бұрын
the P-40 is the coolest looking plane that's ever been flown, imo. too bad they all got turned into paper clips.
@jeffsmith2022
2 жыл бұрын
The P- 40 had the best nose art ever...
@steveshoemaker6347
2 жыл бұрын
Thanks very much....Shoe🇺🇸
@ElwoodPDowd-nz2si
2 жыл бұрын
P36 is a great looking plane.
@mainsqueezereptiles6264
23 күн бұрын
Goat !
@tkskagen
2 жыл бұрын
At 03:48 into this video, what did the additional "nodes" above the engine hold for Wepons? (Was this the "first version" (P-40-A) with the 50mm and two 7.62 Machine Guns?) I've never seen this version before in pictures or model kit form. They always had the Wing mounted guns...
@ncktbs
2 жыл бұрын
3:55 was a prop plane made only for the movie most that you see with nose guns are b models
@shaggygabe728
2 жыл бұрын
I think we can all agree that the LWS-6 Zubr is the coolest and best aircraft of ww2 😳😰😎
@Glicksman1
2 жыл бұрын
:D
@Jayjay-qe6um
6 ай бұрын
Future US President Ronald Reagan appears in the Recognition of the Japanese Zero Fighter (training film, 1942) as a young pilot learning to recognize the difference between a P-40 and Japanese Zero. In this film Reagan mistakes a friend's P-40 for a Japanese Zero and tries to shoot it down. Reagan gets a chance to shoot down a real Zero.
@lockheedskunkworks5687
2 жыл бұрын
Why show Boeing P-26 at the beginning?
@OldMusicFan83
11 ай бұрын
Context?
@drstewartshermanful
2 жыл бұрын
I wonder how this plan would have performed if they put a Rolls-Royce Merlin engine in it just like they did the p-51?
@Defiant1940
2 жыл бұрын
P-40F and P-40L both featured Packard V-1650 Merlin engine in place of the normal Allison, and thus did not have the carburettor scoop on top of the nose. Performance for these models at higher altitudes was better than their Allison-engined cousins. The L in some cases also featured a fillet in front of the vertical stabilizer, or a stretched fuselage to compensate for the higher torque. The P-40L was sometimes nicknamed "Gypsy Rose Lee", after a famous stripper of the era, due to its stripped-down condition. Supplied to the Commonwealth air forces under the designation Kittyhawk Mk II, a total of 330 Mk IIs were supplied to the RAF under Lend-Lease. The first 230 aircraft are sometimes known as the Kittyhawk Mk IIA. The P-40F/L was extensively used by U.S. fighter groups operating in the Mediterranean Theatre. Surprisingly the Merlin engines were not as popular with the USAAF as they were with the RAF. Mechanics thought the Merlin was over-complicated, with more parts than the Allison, and because it revved higher it was less fuel efficient. There was also the problem of logistics, with two supply chains needed for the two different engines, with mechanics favouring the more familiar US engine, to the point that quite a few Merlins were removed and replaced with Allisons.
@78jog89
10 ай бұрын
Sorry to say, but the pictorial use of radial engines is out of context to the inline Allison engine.
@markredding6786
11 күн бұрын
They keep showing radial engines while discussing the P40 Really????
@teddcoleman8736
2 жыл бұрын
My Brother had a flying model when I was a kid always thought that it was cool plane
@FrankBorkowski
Ай бұрын
Doesn't it always come down to the pilot? A good pilot can make any plane dance. A bad pilot can't win anything.
@aaabbbccc543
2 жыл бұрын
it needed a better supercharger.
@94thaerosquadron3
2 жыл бұрын
Hold it hold it! As a child of a employee at Curtiss Right! Then later a Murray co. contract employee. Was my first flight instructor. I flew all the planes my dad had. Till 1982. I could not afford a real aircraft. I went rc planes . I have time cards in a aluminum folder my dad made. B17 unused vin# plates. Qualify’ me to build rc p 40’s I’m on my 14 or 16 one . More than 12 scratch built. I can fly with the best test pilots in rc . Rc combat winner in 1/2 A !with a scratch p 40 . Oops that makes 17? A one pound plane 15 oz. if your good. At 88miles per hour. Like a SKYHAWK at the speed of sound.
@OldMusicFan83
11 ай бұрын
Let us all remove our caps, bow our heads and remember the heroic defense of LA by Captain Wild Bill Kelso in his P-40, during the dark days after Pearl Harbor…
@rudydedogg6505
11 ай бұрын
The P-40 has always been considered to be an "adequate" airplane that did nothing really well and was a handful during take-offs and landings. The same can be said about other aircraft from other nations but but on occasion there will be a pilot who has skills above and beyond mortal men who can make even an adequate plane excel. In the case of the P-40, that man was Australian Clive Caldwell. Like Germany's Heinz Joachim Marseille, Caldwell absolutely mastered his fighter to do things other pilots believed to be impossible. In his hands the Warhawk was a plane to be feared but for the majority of its pilots, it was a fairly easy victim. Like so many fighters of WWII, the plane's ability is important but it is who is flying that plane will determine its true ability.
@MainJet158
11 ай бұрын
How good they could have been with Merlin engines.
@bobsakamanos4469
3 ай бұрын
The P-40F & L had 2-speed Merlins. Performance was better and more reliable at higher altitudes, where they could provide top cover for Allison engined P-40s.
@lindycorgey2743
2 жыл бұрын
I think if the G-suit was around at the beginning of the War. It would have been better. Early in the War. A P40 Pilot absolutely stunned the Japanese Zero Pilots flying against him. It was his tolerance for sustaining Gs.
@roybennett9284
2 жыл бұрын
And used by the RAAF in new Guinea...
@boosuedon
2 жыл бұрын
Power and speed has always been the mantra for a successful fighter, even today. The Japanese realized this and to achieve it they reduced the weight of the airplane. For some reason the US designers didn't catch up to this until the BRITISH exchanged an Allison engine in a P51 with a Rolls Royce engine which made the airplane a totally different aircraft! It was the British as well that had to teach the US how to fly and land a Vought Corsair on a aircraft carrier! That is a bit embarrassing as well!
@DeltaAssaultGaming
2 жыл бұрын
HMS Prince of Wales just had to put in for repairs withiut getting to accomplish any training at all. That’s really embarrassing as well!
@bizjetfixr8352
2 жыл бұрын
I'm betting that the Brits got away with operating the Corsair off carriers, because the FAA pilots had more flying time than the average 300 hour total time fighter pilot joining the fleet VF squadrons, circa 1943/early 1944. The Corsair was always a pig landing on a carrier. Read Eric Browns evaluation of the Corsair in "Wings of the Navy". Contrast that with his evaluation of the F6F, which COULD be operated on a flight deck by the average 300hr TT newbie.
@nickdanger3802
2 жыл бұрын
"There is a controversy between those who say that the Admiralty did not get what it wanted for the Fleet Air Arm and those who say that the Admiralty was not very clever at explaining what exactly it 796 was that it wanted. I noticed quite recently that Air Marshal Dowding has gone on record as saying that the Admiralty got precisely the types which it specified and demanded. " "Whether it lies at the Admiralty or at the Ministry of Aircraft Production, or 797 whether it lies with the Minister of Defence or the War Cabinet, these are things which require a great deal of knowledge and information before one could decide; but the responsibility must lie somewhere for the fact that in the fourth year of war the Fleet Air Arm is still so ill-equipped as to be robbing this country of the opportunity of great and victorious strokes at sea while at the same time inflicting very unnecessary perils upon the pilots." Hansard FLEET AIR ARM. HL Deb 27 January 1943
@nickdanger3802
2 жыл бұрын
HMS Indomitable She sailed to the West Indies in the US Neutrality Zone in November 1941 for her maiden voyage. While there, Indomitable ran aground on a coral reef near Jamaica then to the US for repair though she returned to service soon afterwards.
@boosuedon
2 жыл бұрын
@@bizjetfixr8352 Not so much a "Pig" as was the fact that because of the long nose, pilots could not see what they were landing on! The Brits just changed the angle of approach glide path from one that was straight head on to one that was a semi circular approach that allowed the pilot to see the flight deck from the left front corner of the cockpit.
@GTX1123
2 жыл бұрын
It was all about tactics with the P40. Only attack with an altitude / speed advantage. American fighters in general were phenomenal in a head on pass with Japanese fighters due to their much heavier armament - one well placed hit on just about ANY Japanese aircraft and they would instantly vaporize. The P40 also had a better roll rate than the Zero which could either give the pilot the advantage in an attack position or save his rear end if he had a Zero on his 6.
@JSFGuy
2 жыл бұрын
Let's go? 3 minutes ago?
@oceanhome2023
2 жыл бұрын
The Classic Shark nose painting was its MOST famous feature. Probably the FIRST use of this artwork ! This has been copied ever since !!!
@oceanhome2023
2 жыл бұрын
@CENK Was not the Chinese Volunteer group action before the P40 was used in Africa ?
@nickdanger3802
2 жыл бұрын
@@oceanhome2023 AVG first saw action after Pearl Harbor.
@emmgeevideo
2 жыл бұрын
"Jew 52"? -- I think you need to update your computerized narrator. I doubt the Germans called it anything like that.
@artnull13
2 жыл бұрын
Except for Jew in German is pronounced ‘yüh·din’ or ‘yüd’ Also clearly it’s an English pronunciation they’re using.
@emmgeevideo
2 жыл бұрын
@@artnull13 My main point is that the producers of this video series prefer a computer voice and should have caught this silliness when they did the editing and trained their computer voice to say "Jay You 52".
@artnull13
2 жыл бұрын
@@emmgeevideo the other point would be ‘Jew52’ is not wrong for English pronunciation given the German nickname for it is *Tante Ju* ("Aunt Ju")
@emmgeevideo
2 жыл бұрын
@@artnull13 You are a wealth of knowledge for sure. I'm betting on the fact that the computerized narration made a mistake that wasn't caught. If their computer was that smart and your last comment is correct, it would have pronounced it "Yu 52".
@TrungNguyen-du9cn
2 жыл бұрын
Who designed the arts on these fighters? Do all P-4Os have these “shark mouths”?
@ImpendingJoker
2 жыл бұрын
No, not all P-40s had shark mouths. This was added to the AVG's P-40s because of Japanese superstitions. It was claimed that they feared a monster coming from the sky with great teeth. I dunno how well it worked but, after that a lot of them had the shark mouth. Later in the war though a lot didn't have it at all, and the USAAF P-40s didn't have it at first. There are many pictures of P-40s online that show them without the teeth.
@Defiant1940
2 жыл бұрын
It was the RAF, in the Mediterranean theatre, who first painted their P-40's with shark-mouths, which they themselves had copied from Luftwaffe Bf-110's. The AVG saw pictures in the media of the time and thought they looked cool.
@randywoods67
22 күн бұрын
Nice video -- but I have to add that the pronunciation of the Junkers Ju 52 as the "Jew 52" is an awkwardly hilarious way to describe a German transport plane.
@lanes8237
Жыл бұрын
Is this an AI voice narrator?
@demetridar506
2 жыл бұрын
All US built WWII fighters of WWII were overweight, and this characteristic reduced their overall fighting ability. The P-40 was no exception. Based on this thinking, the P-40 was no worse than the other fighters. But just like the other US fighters, given the favorable conditions that it always operated, it managed to get through despite its shortcomings..
@stevenbass732
2 жыл бұрын
Don't forget that the "overweight" came from little things like self sealing fuel tanks and pilot protection aka armor plate and more and heavier guns and ammo. That's why the average American fighter could take hits and keep flying while other aircraft would fall out of the sky.
@demetridar506
2 жыл бұрын
@@stevenbass732 No, other nations had armor plating and self sealing tanks. Ex Spitfire. The overweight came from the crude design that allowed unskilled labor to build the planes. The USA had an abundance of raw material, but limited skilled labor. So, the amount of metal that was needed was not important, as much as the effort it took to build it. Also, the companies themselves wanted to maximize profit, so they designed the planes in a way to minimize cost per plane. These factors led to overweight and often oversized planes with very limited fighting ability. The plus side is that they could build huge numbers, so at the end they could achieve air superiority. But when compared one to one, they were always under performing. It is not only the P-40, all of them, when you compare them with contemporary models from other nations. The over-rated P-51 for example was no match for the Bf 109K-4 or the Japanese Ki-84, or contemporary Spitfires like the IX and XIV.
@stevenbass732
2 жыл бұрын
@@demetridar506 Whatever you say. That must be why American fighters enjoyed such a high kill ratio.
@demetridar506
2 жыл бұрын
@@stevenbass732 The high kill ratios is a function of a number of things. First, all air forces had an exaggerated impression of how many aircraft they really destroyed. This was not necessarily lack of honesty, it was more of a poor interpretation of events under the pressure of combat. Actual kills tend to be about three times less than the claimed. However, the losses are accurately recorded. So, all air forces had an exaggerated kill to loss ratio. But of course, the US propaganda only displayed the US official kill ratio, and the same myths are carried over to this date. The second factor is that in the USA in particular, there was an exaggerated reason to boost the official claims, due to the need to get Congress to fund a war that had no direct benefit to the average American. This is well described by a book by a French super ace, Pierre Glostermann (spelling maybe a bit off). Perhaps the time where the Americans overclaimed the most was the "Flying Tigers", where the pilots were getting paid by the Chinese Sek regime for every Japanese plane they destroyed, so the motivation for "seeing" things was upgraded. Many of these habits continued after the flying tigers were incorporated in the USA AF. The third is the very favorable operational conditions. For example, pilot training towards the end of the war deteriorated for the axis powers, while it improved for the USA and Great Britain. In the case of the early and mid Pacific war, the allies had Radar, and knew when and where the Japanese air raids are coming, so they were placing a number of P-40's and later P-38's at 5000 ft above enemy formation. Very often, axis planes were not well maintained due to limited resources. There are many operating conditions that favored the allies, giving the illusion of better aircraft. This illusion of course is fed by wartime and post war propaganda.
@timf2279
2 жыл бұрын
Perfect example is the F4F vs the A6M. Heavy and armored vs nimble and light.
@FeiHuWarhawk
9 ай бұрын
The German Transports are not called jew 52 ...they are called J then U Fifty Two...JU52
@flyingwombat59
2 жыл бұрын
First time I heard “JU’ pronounced as “jew”. I know this as J U.
@Glicksman1
2 жыл бұрын
I've heard it pronounced that way before and never took offense, but given who flew it I understand why J U might be the better way to go.
@Guardias
2 жыл бұрын
Gotta love that the Brits strapped four extra 30 cals on it and then criticized its performance.
@joed3786
2 ай бұрын
Underpowered even with the Merlin. Overweight. Suffered ProFormance issues above 15k Feet. Was not really agile in either Low or Mid-Level Flight. Looks do not win Gun Fights. ProFormance Does.
@marcuslandry
2 жыл бұрын
A Jew 88??? Jew 52s???
@williamlloyd3769
2 жыл бұрын
Junkers Ju 88 is a German World War II Luftwaffe twin-engined multirole combat aircraft.
@warrenchambers4819
2 жыл бұрын
Uh let me think here uh ok Jew 88 is getting ripped off bigly and jew 52 is almost breaking even? Haha sorry couldn't resist.
@marcuslandry
2 жыл бұрын
@@williamlloyd3769 Okay, but why is this the only channel I've ever heard it called a Jew 88 instead of J-u 88?
@ImpendingJoker
2 жыл бұрын
@@marcuslandry Because they used Text-to-speech robo voice and didn't correctly input the Ju into the script, so the robo voice reads it as "jew".
@artnull13
2 жыл бұрын
@@marcuslandry heard it pronounced both ways
@ramimariewilson4672
11 ай бұрын
Outdated and not the coolest looking WWII fighter IMEO.
@lurking0death
2 жыл бұрын
It was NOT a great fighter. It was obsolete in 1941. It had a cute paint job thanks to the "Flying Tigers" but that was the only good thing about it.
@nickdanger3802
2 жыл бұрын
Clive "Killer" Caldwell RAAF Highest scoring Allied ace in North Africa. All of his shoot downs in North Africa were in P40's.
@modeltraingeek6544
2 жыл бұрын
I’ve just built an Airfix kit of this super aircraft!!!!! 🫡
Пікірлер: 294