New P-40 FM

[wholehawg]

I have been mucking about with 4.12 for while now and I was wondering if there were any P-40 drivers out there and what their impressions were of the new FM?

It's always been one of my favorite aircraft of WW2 and in this sim. It seems like the roll rate has been bumped up and the wing loading increased so it flys more like a 190 now.

[Woke Up Dead]

In 4.11 I was able to use the P-40E to out-turn 109-F4 pilots online in a slow speed fight at low altitude, most of the time. I wasn't able to do this yesterday, though it was only one fight. The F4 and G2 were very tough opponents for the P-40 even before this patch, I hope it can still turn with an F2 or E.

The change I noticed the most is the fuel consumption, it seems like you need to take 50% fuel now to fly as far as you were able to with 30% before. Maybe it's the extra fuel weight that made me notice the low-speed turn rate decrease?

My early overall impression is that life will now be even tougher for P40 pilots facing German opponents, but things should still be OK or even better against the Japanese.

[ElAurens]

I always took 50% fuel before so I see no difference there.

Older P40 FMs never seemed to me to have the correct roll rate. The P40 had an extremely good roll rate, probably the best US fighter in this regard. Early versions were around 135 deg/sec while later, heavier versions dropped to around 90 deg/sec, still very respectable.

I've always though as well that the turning ability of the P40 has never been properly given it's due in sims. I suspect this is an artifact of the popular myth that it was a poor turner based on it's performance against the A6M early in the war. Of course NO allied aircraft could turn with the Zero, but only the P40 got saddled with the FMs of a flying brick, at least in the turn.

The reality is that the early Hawk 81s could out turn the Spitfire below 15.000 ft.

Try that in the sim and see what you get.

[IceFire]

Not sure about the Spitfire but I can still out turn 109s except for maybe the G-2 (but I wonder if that is still a bit overdone). The handling is definitely more difficult and the stability difference between the E and M is more pronounced but I think this is "more right" in terms of the realism of the P-40.

It's still a wonderful fighter with a troubled reputation but in the right hands its easily competitive at low and medium altitudes.

I'm looking forward to having a new 3D model and some new variants... especially if we get a P-40N. A few hundred pounds lighter and with more engine power. That could be fun :D

[KG26_Alpha]

When introduced in the North Africa campaign 1941, the Bf109's flew above them and dove into the P40 formations below,
the Warhawk was a medium to low altitude aircraft which was exploited by the Luftwaffe.

Roll and turn all you like its what they did to avoid the BnZ tactics from the Bf109's

:)

[ElAurens]

Tell it to the 325th.

:cool:

[horseback]

Tell it to the 325th.Exactly. RAF & Commonwealth units in North Africa converted to the Lend-Lease P-40s directly from the Hurricane in the early cases, and the LW jumped on them hard right away, before they figured out what its advantages were and what they could or should do with it.

USAAF units flying P-40s from Torch and later were often unpleasantly effective from the Luftwaffe's point of view. These pilots were quite experienced with the capabilities of the Warhawk and more aggressive in the bargain. If the attacking 109 driver didn't notice the star on one wing vice the roundels on both, it could turn out to be a bad day for him.

The new in-game FM seems to require more trim adjustment, including a new demand for aileron trim. It does still have a pretty good roll, although it lacks the 'head of a pin' balance of the FW 190A series. The 'M' model is also a good deal more 'peppy' in the sense that it is faster and better accelerating than before.

Still has that glass jaw Allison though.

cheers

horseback

[KG26_Alpha]

When introduced in the North Africa campaign 1941, the Bf109's flew above them and dove into the P40 formations below,
the Warhawk was a medium to low altitude aircraft which was exploited by the Luftwaffe.

Roll and turn all you like its what they did to avoid the BnZ tactics from the Bf109's

:)


Tell it to the 325th.

:cool:

"It entered combat in April 1943 and began escorting medium bombers, flying strafing missions, and conducting sea sweeps from bases in Algeria and Tunisia.
The group participated in the defeat of Axis forces in Tunisia, the reduction of Pantelleria, and the conquest of Sicily.
The 325th received a Distinguished Unit Citation (DUC) for action over Sardinia on 30 July 1943 when the group,
using diversionary tactics, forced a superior number of enemy planes into the air and destroyed more than half of them.
The group did not fly combat missions from the end of September to mid-December 1943 as the 325th converted to Republic P-47 Thunderbolt aircraft and moved to Italy."

This ??

[JtD]

El, as you know I spent a lot of effort in research for the updated P-40 FM - regarding the turn rate, there's no way that physics allow any of the modelled P-40's to sustain a turn as well as say a contemporary Hurricane or a Spitfire did. It's just a ton too heavy for it, or it lacks 500 hp. What it has is plenty of fuel and good control characteristics, so with low fuel, with not ace quality pilots in both aircraft, it will be able to close the gap. It's also possible that in practice US pilots violated the boost limitations, closing the gap even further. Probably wrecked one or two engines as well, but the dead can't tell their stories, only the survivors will. As the early P-40's lacked ABC, the Allisons could produce 60"+ at sea level, instead of the 40some they were cleared for - and it is a documented fact that some units did. This would basically give them the extra hp they need, at a high risk of engine damage.

However, in game all aircraft come with ABC and the aircraft are not modelled to represent field mod abuse, but best documented performance on official specs. Guess it is like IceFire said - we'll have to wait for the N. It will have the M's power (which is pretty good already), at far less weight, and should be real fun to fight with.

[horseback]

The 325th got a lot more "ink" than the P-40 groups that preceded it into North Africa, partly because the leadership was as colorful as the group's markings, and partly because the 325th continued to score in the air-to-air arena while the other groups were concentrated on air to group tasks. However, it is clear that the USAAF operated Warhawks were flown more aggressively than Commonwealth Kittyhawks and that they were a surprise to the JGs in N. Africa which saw P-40 series aircraft in terms of bull's eyes.

JtD, math aside, the P-40 like the P-36/Hawk 75 before it had well balanced controls, a very good roll rate at most speeds and a superior dive acceleration that resulted in an excellent zoom climb; an experienced P-40 driver could humiliate the average Spitfire or Hurricane (not to mention Mustang) pilot fairly easily if he knew what he was doing.

cheers

horseback

[ElAurens]

Alpha, that is the one major engagement that was quite successful for the 325th, to be sure, but their overall record with the P40 vs. the 109 was indeed better than their Commwealth counterparts. They simply had more seat time in the aircraft. The 325th. were also the first unit to use 1000lb. bombs on the P 40.

JtD, as you probably know from the often circulated Allison document, there were many units, both in the Pacific and North Africa running up to 72 inches of manifold in their modified P40s. They didn't all blow up doing this either. Of course those were desperate times early in the war when the Allies were searching for any advantage to survive.

The Allison V 1710 is a more robust engine than the Merlin, this is a fact. To this day you will find Merlins in unlimited class air racing using Allison connecting rods because they are stronger than the Rolls Royce units.

Looking forward to the N model.

[JtD]

...an experienced P-40 driver could humiliate the average Spitfire or Hurricane (not to mention Mustang) pilot fairly easily if he knew what he was doing.Same is true vice versa, because usually the experienced guy knowing what he's doing beats the average guy. At least, the P-40 is good enough to allow for that.

... there were many units, both in the Pacific and North Africa running up to 72 inches of manifold in their modified P40s. They didn't all blow up doing this either.No, of course, the increased boost did help them to significantly improve their chance of survival overall. I just meant to say it wasn't risk-free.

[The_WOZ]

It would be interesting to add some P-40 variant with higher manifold pressure, if there is enough data to support it. After all there's already the 25Lbs spits, the 1.65 ATA 190s and the Bf-109K4-C3 in the sim.

[ElAurens]

I wish we could find performance figures for the AVG's Hawk 81s.

Those of us who are true believers know that their engines were assembled off the regular production schedule, and made more power than
standard V1710s of their day.

The AVG suffered higher than normal prop reduction gear box failures because of this. It also acounts for thier ability to dominate the air space they flew in. (Beyond their superior tactical doctrine). The trouble is there are no documents with numbers on them.

Hence no way to translate that into a sim, or convince those who doubt this.

Over boosted later models used by Commonwealth forces are easy to do as the documentation exists.