As
a scale modeler of WWII aircraft, I'm a fan of the Curtiss P-40
series of American fighters, with the P-40E my favorite. I like
others, of course - the P-47, or F6F Hellcat, for example.
And in the
past, I followed the herd and perceived the P-40 as basically out of
the running. I saw the name, "P-40" and automatically
dismissed it, smugly parroting all the claims I heard about its
uselessness.
But today, I no longer march with all the
naysayers. Instead, I looked for reasons why it was as successful as
it was. And surprise! - it was
sucessful when it was most needed.
Yeah, I came around, at last - I'm a P-40 fan.
✪
The Curtiss P-40
When
World War II came to the United States in 1941, the Curtiss P-40E,
"Warhawk" was
the best fighter available in large numbers. That is important,
and we'll explain why as we go along.
The
P-40, itself, is probably known to all reading this, but here's a
quick overview in case youre just coming in...
The P-40 series
was a single-engined, single-seat, all-metal fighter-bomber that
first flew in 1938. However, the P-40 sprang from an already existing
model, the radial-engined Curtiss P-36 Hawk. Curtiss replaced
the Hawks radial with a V-12, liquid cooled, inline, and after a few
other changes, this switch resulted in a capable fighter aircraft that could
be produced quickly, as the manufacturing lines were already in
place.
This sped up production and allowed the P-40 to be ready for
war quickly. In fact, it was already in combat before the US was
involved, serving with the British Commonwealth and Soviet forces.
In all, over 28 Allied
powers during
World War II would use the P-40, and it remained in frontline service
until the end of the war.
The P-40 was the third most-produced
American fighter of World War II. The P-51
Mustang and P-47 Thunderbolt were #1 and #2, but they were still in
development when the U.S. entered the war. This means the P-40 was
the only single seat fighter available to the U.S. at the time. When
production stopped in November
1944, 13,738 of all P-40 types had been built.
The U.S.
Army Air Corps called
the plane, The P-40, "Warhawk," officially
adopting that name after June 1941. The British
Commonwealth and Soviet air
forces used the name, "Tomahawk" for
the early P-40B, and P-40C models, and, "Kittyhawk" for
all susequent variants.
And it was in June,
1941, in the deserts of the Middle East and North Africa that the P-40E Warhawk first saw
combat with British Commonwealth squadrons. This theatre was where the synonymous "shark mouth"
logo first became associated the Warhawk. No.
112 Squadron Royal
Air Force first added
it to their Tomahawks - copying it from similar
markings on
Luftwaffe Messerschmitt
Bf 110 twin-engine
fighter bombers.
Serving
in some capacity across every major theater of the war, it is my
humble opinion that the P-40E was the most critical variant of the
series. Not because it was the best ever, but because it was
mass-produced and made available to the Allies in the early years as the war expanded. It was most needed then, and
America made the "E" version available to help bear much of
the brunt of air combat in the "outlying" conflict
theatres.
From
The Beginning
The
earlier marks of the P-40, the B and C versions, aka, "Tomahawk",
had been in service since before the war began. But there were never
a lot of them and by 1941, these first P-40 variants were
overtaken in performance. Fortunately, when the U.S. entered the
conflict in 1941, the “E” model had already been in production,
and it joined the ranks in serious numbers.
This means that the P-40E faced much of the desperate
fighting during 1942 against Japan in the Far East, South Pacific and
Australia/New Guinea. It also formed the backbone of the Allied
Commonwealth Desert Air Forces in the Middle East against the Germans
and Italians.
And lest we forget, the Russians
used them to great effect against the Nazi's in the skies over the
Motherland.
Why
The "Echo" Model Mattered
Upgraded from the earlier B/C Tomahawk models with a more powerful
engine and six .50-caliber machine guns, the "E" model
could unleash a devastating weight of fire. The P-40E was the first
variant to feature this standardized armament in the wings, a
significant upgrade from earlier models.So it was a potent gun
platform (see the firepower analysis below)*.
The P-40E was also exceptionally rugged - it was
structurally durable, offered very good pilot protection, and was
capable of absorbing significant combat damage. Added to that was
its overall good speed and its superior high-speed diving
capabilities. It could out-dive almost any opponent and also
possessed a decent top speed, particularly at low to medium
altitudes. All this while being proven, readily available, and
easily maintained. It brought many a pilots home, to fight another
day.
* FUN
FACT #1
The air marshalls of the United States
wanted an aerial cannon for their aircraft, like other nations were
using at the outbreak of WW2. But they never got a suitable gun into production once
the war started. So they went with what they already had - the .50
cal Browning machine gun.
The P-40E, for
example, had 3 of them in each wing, for a total of six.
IT soulds like a lot, and it WAS, Let's picture what this meant:
- Each .50 cal BMG fired about 800
rpm, or 13-14 rounds per second.
- With 6 guns, that's 78-84 .50
cal bullets per second, heading downrange.
- The bullets,
themselves, weighed about 1.65 ounces each. This yielded 8.25 POUNDS
of lead per second from a 6 gun burst.
- The bullets reached their
target moving at about 3,000-3200 fpm.
- This meant that each
bullet delivered 12,000
to 14,000 foot-pounds of force on target! (For
comparison, the standard .30-06, 165 gr. bullet of the period had
only 1,500-1800 ft-lbs of energy)
The
high energy of the .50 BMG was designed for anti-material roles, and
could pierce 1-2.5 inches (12.5mm to 30mm) of steel armor at close
ranges. But against aluminum aircraft, well, it had a
literal shredding effect. That's why gun camera footage from the time
shows aircraft and ground targets appearing to just melt, or
disintegrate, under this withering fire.
Critics
Galore
The
biggest gripe that arm-chair aviation critics harp on today with the
P-40 is it's lack of a two-stage supercharger. This limited it to
low and medium altitude performance. Which
was a drawback, certainly, if one imagines that there is no other
combat possible but near stratospheric encounters. Its primary opponents, for example, both the Bf-109
of Germany and The A6M "Zero" series of Japan, were
designed with superchargers for single seat interceptor performance and high
altitudes... They had seen the wrting on the wall early and were
ahead of America in this.
At the time, the U.S. only had the P-38
Lightning that could fight in the rarified air above 20,000 ft.
It WAS designed as an interceptor, but it was a two-engined aircaft
and was not intended as a dogfighting single seater.
But
the ultra high-altitude combat everyone loves to talk about wasn't
the only game in town. In 1942, a lot of the
aerial combat that occured was at low to middle altitudes. And the
P-40E was agile enough to be competitive at these levels.
So tactics eventually developed to keep the altitudes down and take
advantage of the P-40E's strong points. This is what the
talking-heads like to overlook.
Good
Performance
While
the P-40 was designed as a jack-of-all-trades, rather than a high-altitude, "turn-and-burn," fighter, it was still very maneuverable
at the medium-to-high speeds of 1942. For
instance, the Warhawk "E" model actually had an excellent
high-speed roll rate compared to it's adversaries.
The fast roll rate was particularly effective for
evasive maneuvers and transitioning into dives. In 1942, only the
lighter Japanese fighters - the A6M Zero and Ki-43 Oscar - could
dangerously out-turn it. But at higher speeds, these aircraft did not
roll as well. The Zero was especially notorious for ailerons that got
heavy and less effective at high speed. They were also fragile - a
few hits from the P-40's guns could bust them up. They lacked
adequate pilot protection, too, were rather under-gunned as we'll
see, and in 1942, they lacked the all-important self-sealing fuel
tanks.
So the P-40 pilot used these
weaknesses to his advantage. Keeping his speed advantage and heavy
firepower in play, the Warhawk pilot rolled out and broke-off if the
encounter slowed to favor a turning-type dogfight. In this way, he
lived to fight another day.
Performance
Against Specific Adversaries
Many people have been convinced that the German and
Japanese adversaries of 1942 were invincible, "miracle
machines." This viewpoint is reinforced by the fact that the
P-40 was not designed to the same parameters as those two. Yes, the
enemy aircraft were good - but they were not invincible.
Bf
109s (E-3, early F) vs.
The P-40E
Most
people are surprised to learn that the P-40 could
effectively turn-fight with its German opponents at its favored
altitudes. It did the Germans little good to be 22,000 feet in the
air when Allied forces were attacking their people lower down... so
they were forced to meet the P-40 at altitudes which favored
it.
The
P-40E Warhawk and Bf 109E were actually not that far apart in
performance, during the early-to-mid war (1941–1942) period. The Bf
109E held an advantage in acceleration and climb rate, due to a
better power to weight ratio. Messerschmitt's Bf 109E (Emil) also had
a negligible edge in top speed (approx. 360 mph vs. 340-350 mph for the
P-40E), and better energy retention in vertical maneuvers. But these on-paper advantages came at a cost. The Bf-109 didn't
absorb the punishment of six .50 cal's very well, it was slower
diving, and it was sometimes prone to engine issues. Worse, above
275 mph it's
controls also got heavy like the Zero, and the roll
rate was poor.
This made the P-40E competitive, as its roll rate
was superior - a key advantage used to escape or out-turn the Bf 109
in dogfights. The Warhawk also excelled
in dive speed, and structural durability. It could turn with the
Bf-109 and was capable and rugged at its favored altitudes. As long
as the German pilot stayed at high altitude, he appeared to be ahead.
But if he engaged the P-40 where it was, he had at least a 50-50
chance of falling victim to the guns of the American plane.
Conclusion
One
must always keep in mind the design parameters behind the Curtiss
P-40E Warhawk:
-
Low-to-medium altitude combat
- Versatility
- Well armed
and armored
-
Durability
- Quickly
producible...manufactured
in large numbers using existing production lines.
These were
rather different
criteria compared to the Bf-109 in 1942. So while some consider the P-40
"technically inferior" in certain performance qualities,
the numbers show it wasn't a lamb to the slaughter, as many
imagine in hindsight. Rather, the P-40E’s good qualities and its
ruggedness allowed it to compete effectively against the 109E,
particularly in the Mediterranean theater.
A6M
Zero vs.
The P-40E
In
the Pacific theater, things were different. The P-40 was facing the
early marks of two Japanese aircraft: the Mitsubushi A6M fighter
...the infamous "Zero"... and the Ki-43 Hayabusa, aka,
"Oscar." The latter was known as the, "Army Zero," so
we'll focus on the Zero as the two were essentially the same.
Now,
here's the elephant in the room:
With either of these, and
especially the early Zero, the Warhawk could not effectively
dogfight at lower speeds. The Warhawk was out-turned by
the Japanese fighters.
Why? Because we have to remember that – like
the Bf-109 - the A6M Zero of 1942, and the P-40E Warhawk had
contrasting roles. Put simply, each was designed to very
different criteria.
The Zero was almost feathery, compared to
the P-40, and was designed for...
- Long, ocean-covering range... it was a Naval fighter
- Almost kite-like maneuverability
-
Fast climb to altitude
- Low-speed agility
But to achieve
these aims, the Zero's designers sacrificed pilot survivability,
structural aircraft ruggedness, and aircraft self-survival. The noble
warrior mentality of Japanese tradition seems to have been part of
their thinking.
P-40 pilots soon learned they were outclassed in
slow speed, twisting dogfights with Japanese fighters. The
Japanese pilot wanted them to fall for it, of course, and they did in
the beginning because, well... that's how fighter pilots are supposed
to fight, right? But the Allies had to quickly accept that was a bad
idea, and instead, they leaned on their superior diving ability,
their competitive speed and the ability to roll out and come around
fast to their advantage.
At the risk of being redundant, we must
again review the differences in design philosophy
between the Zero and the P-40E Warhawk in 1942. The P-40E brought to
the fight...
- A notable edge in speed
- Heavier, more rugged
construction
- Superior roll rate at speed
- Faster dive
speeds
- Good pilot protection
- Sefl-sealing fuel tanks
-
Potent firepower
Basically, it favored high-speed combat, making
it better for "boom-and-zoom" tactics.
Key
Differences:
Aero/Performance
The
A6M2 boasted unmatched turn performance - at slow speeds. At high
speeds, however, its ailerons became increasingly heavier and
ineffective. The P-40E was notably faster at its favored altitudes
and possessed a much better roll rate at high speeds. Much like
the Bf-109 pilot, the Zero pilot had some advantage - as long as he
stayed high in the sky, or got his opponent to engage in a slow,
slugging dogfight. But once he came down to where the fight was, he
lost much of his advantage.
Combat
Tactics
The
Zero was a bantamweigh, structurally built as a toe-dancing
dogfighter, while the P-40E was heavier and best used in diving
attacks. The Zero pilot wanted
to get the Warhawk pilot into a slow dogfight – and the P-40 pilot
had to break out of that envelope and change the rules.
Durability
The
P-40E was extremely durable compared to the Zero, with armor
protection and self-sealing fuel tanks, whereas the Zero of 1942 was
rather fragile, and prone to catching fire.
Armament
The
Zero featured 20mm cannons, which was the norm everywhere but in the USAAC. But, they had a slow
rate of fire (half that of the Browning .50 cal.). They also fired a
lower velocity shell, there were only two of them on board. They also had a limited ammunition capacity. A couple seconds of shooting, and
they were outta ammo.
On the other hand, the P-40E carried six,
.50-caliber machine guns, which had a much higher rate of fire,
higher velocity bullets, more ammo, and a consistently heavier weight
of fire. See the above analysis of the P-40 machine gun
armament.
The
Zero achieved higher kill ratios early in the war due to
its agility, but the P-40E pilots soon adopted different tactics.
After that, the Warhawk served as a vital, sturdy, and effective
deterrent in the Pacific, particularly when employing hit-and-run
tactics to mitigate the Zero's turning capabilities.
When
Useful Beats Perfection
When
all the GOOD attributes possessed by the P-40E are combined, we find
it was a tough, reliable workhorse. It was effective in the Pacific
and North African theaters, particularly when using boom-and-zoom
tactics to counter more maneuverable, but fragile, opponents like the
Japanese Zero.
While often overshadowed by "glamorous"
rivals like the Spitfire, or pushed to the back by P-51 devotees, the
fact remains that the P-40 held its own against the odds. Eventually, newer types came available in sufficient numbers and P-40 production
ended. But it was the P-40E, the strong, potent warhorse, that held the line
during the desperate battles of 1942.
Kill
Ratio
At
this point, we should mention kill ratios. This is a measure of how
many enemy aircraft are brought down or put out of action, for every
Allied plane engaged. In the case of the P-40E, this kill ratio was
not a high number. The 10:1 ratios you see for planes like the
P-51 or F6F Hellcat are often held against the P-40.
But we must
recognize that those high kill ratios came later in the war, as a
result of superior numbers, ever-better aircraft, endless resources,
and the loss of experienced pilots in the enemy ranks as the war
ground on.
The Allies overwhelmed them with resources they could
not match, and we did it on every front.
The enemy was
constantly facing more and better aircraft wherever they turned, and
their production could never come close to keeping up. We had more
experienced pilots, too, always transitioning through constantly
improving combat planes. By 1944 and beyond, anything with enemy
markings was shot out of the sky by as many Allied aircraft as
possible. It was a matter of attrition, frankly.
FUN
FACT #2: In the Pacific theatre, the later P-40N was often painted with white tails, big white
stripes, colorful spinners and more, so that all the trigger happy Allied
pilots would not mistake them for Japanese aircraft. Friendly fire
was a big problem!
The P-40E, on the other hand, was on its own against the best
aircraft and pilots the enemy could bring into the game. 1942 was not
a good year for the Allied air forces, especially against Japan. Not
only were tactics still being ironed out for much of that year, but
the Japanese still had a lot of good aircraft - and
pilots - in the air.
While the Japanese planes were better at
aerobatic dogfighting, the robust P-40 managed to slug it out for
a positive, albeit closely contested, positive kill ratio
against Japanese forces in the South Pacific and CBI theatres. This
ratio averaged out in the range of 1.5-to-1 by
late 1942.
P-40E
"Kill" Numbers vs. Japan
The
P-40E Warhawk was widely used early in the Pacific theater, and
achieved a respectable - and often favorable - kill ratio against
Japanese aircraft by utilizing boom-and-zoom tactics.
The Zero pilot had to
heavily damage the rugged P-40 in order to shoot it down, while the 6
x .50 cal machine guns of the P-40 were lethal with even a few hits
on the Japanese planes. Many records indicate that in
1942, the P-40E Warhawk/Kittyhawk could hold the fort, and it
maintained a surprisingly competitive, slightly positive, kill ratio
of
1.5-1 record against the Japanese pilots.
Specialized units like
the American Volunteer Group (AVG), "Flying
Tigers,"
and
the 49th Fighter Group (using P-40Es) maintained high success rates
through superior tactics and diving speed. The AVG boasted a high kill ratio of roughly 296
enemy aircraft for 12 pilots killed in action. These tallies are often disputed and some of those numbers
surely include "other" aircraft, like bombers, transports
etc. But even if the total number of Japanese fighters was a quarter
of that, it solidly demonstrates the effectiveness of the P-40E in
skilled hands.
-
49th Fighter Group: Between
April and August 1942, this group shot down over 60 Japanese planes
to gain air superiority over Darwin, Australia.
-
Ace Records: Over 200 Allied
fighter pilots – from the UK, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, South
Africa, the U.S. and the Soviet Union – became aces flying
the P-40. These included at least 20 double
aces, mostly over North Africa, China-Burma-India, the South West
Pacific and Eastern Europe!
Over time, next-generation Japanese
and Allied aircraft eclipsed the P-40 as they came on-line, but it
was the P-40E that held down the fort in the early years.
P-40E
"Kill"Numbers vs. Germany
The
P-40's overall, cumulative, multi-theater kill ratio against Germany
is often cited as high, even as it was challenged in direct dogfights
against the Messerschmitt 109. But lets remind you that the P-40 was
NOT a European fighter...the term, "multi-theatre" is
important.
Because it lacked a two-stage supercharger, the
Warhawks effectiveness above 15,000 feet was reduced. For this reason
it was not used in Western Europe as an interceptor or high-altitude
bomber escort. Most of the P-40's criticisms arise here, as the
Spitfire or the P-51 Mustang inevitably become (unfairly) the comparison
standard. In the mind of P-40 detractors, if it wasn't those aircraft, then they find ways to deem it,
"useless." This has become the default crutch of the
Warhawk critics.
But if one puts that narrow view aside, and
examines the Warhawk's results against the air forces of Germany
outside of Western Europe, we find a different story.
Mediterranean/North
Africa
In the hand of the Allies, the P-40 saw widespread use in North Africa, the Mediterranean and Italy until late 1944, often proving to be a formidable opponent. There is
data from units in the Mediterranean that show impressive records
achieved by leveraging the aircraft's strengths in low-to-medium
altitude combat.
While seen as slightly inferior to the Bf
109, the P-40E was effective when using "hit-and-run"
tactics, with units often exceeding 2:1 ratios.
Soviet
Service
On the Eastern Front, Soviet pilots found the P-40E without vices, and comparable to the
Bf-109E, though it was not as good against later German models, the F
and G series 109's and the next-generation Focke-Wulf 190.
Of
the 1,500 P-40E-1's (export version) originally intended for the
RAF, nearly 600 were diverted to the Soviet Union to bolster
their defenses in the early phase of the German
invasion. Eventually, the
Russians developed their own range of high-altitude, air superiority
fighters to confront the Bf-109 and Fw-190's. But the P-40 soldiered
on in the VVS, where its qualities as a low-altitude
fighter, ground-attack, or escort fighter were put to good usemissions.
Notable Combat Records Against The Bf-109
The 325th Fighter Group ("The Checkertail Clan") These guys claimed a total of 135 Axis aircraft in Italy, for the loss of only 17 P-40s in combat. That's an almost shocking 8:1 victory ratio, and 96 of those kills were Bf-109s.
324th Fighter Group: This unit maintained a ratio better than 2:1 while fighting German and Italian forces in the MTO.
Desert
Air Forces (RAF/RAAF/SAAF): During the North African campaigns,
P-40 pilots (flying Kittyhawk 1A's) were credited with approximately
53.5 claims in specific high-intensity periods (like October 1942),
significantly outscoring opposing German records for the same
period.
The P-40's success rate against the Luftwaffe was highly
dependent on unit training and tactical application, with kill ratios
ranging from parity to quite high among specialized American units.
The P-40E's six, .50 caliber machine guns provided substantial
firepower, and its rugged construction allowed pilots to survive
damage that would have downed more fragile aircraft, contributing to
its favorable loss ratios.
In
summary, the
P-40 performed surprisingly well as an air combat fighter against
German forces, sometimes enduring tough losses, yes....but also
inflicting a very heavy toll on enemy aircraft. All
while considered, "useless" by many.
Conclusion
Although The Warhawk gained a postwar reputation as at best a mediocre, at best, more recent
research and scrutiny of Allied squadron records indicate this
reputation is wholly undeserved.
The P-40 also offered
other advantages that most people don't take into account - plusses usually neglected when
compared to the more popular fighters of the day. These include such
VERY strong attributes as relatively low cost in a proven design from an established manufacturer. We can likewise count good pilot protecton,
ease of maintenance, and exceedingly rugged durability as well. ANd we cannot dance around its versatility. It was an excellent ground attack and air support fighter.
These
features kept it in production – and in the fight - long after its
service as an interceptor/fighter had passed.
ALong these lines, it is interesting to learn that some P-40
pilots in Europe nicknamed the P-40N variant the, "B-40" - for its performance as a bomb hauling fighter. This
variant could carry around 1,000 lbs. of bombs and common loadouts included a 500 lb bomb
on the belly rack and two 250 lb, or 500 lb bombs under the
wings.
And
while these bombing runs might enjoy near-surgical precision, it was
also an extremely hazardous operation. The Germans had excellent
anti-aircraft weapons and their crews were very experienced.
That's when the ruggedness of the P-40 came into play. Many a Warhawk
pilot came back to base with severe damage after such missions –
but they came back.
Although there were efforts made later to develop
the P-40 into a high altitude interceptor - it never really happened.
The P-40N was put on a diet and could eventually reach a top speed of
380 mph. But it never was a high-altitude interceptor. And to be
blunt, it didn't need to be. Other planes came along by mid-war to fill
that role. Rather, the P-40 line remained throughout the conflict,
just as it come into the war: well capable of most things, if not
perfect at all things.
And that is a testimony that will stand for
the ages.
✪
As a scale modeler of WWII aircraft, I'm a fan of the Curtiss P-40 series of American fighters, with the P-40E ny favorite. I like others, of course - the P-47, or F6F Hellcat, for example.
And I know that many will see the name, "P-40" and dismiss it out of hand, making silly claims about its uselessness. So I have gone a different way.
Instead of following the crowd, trying to declare the P-40 as "no good," I looked for reasons why it was as successful as it was - because it was sucessful when it was most needed. Yeah, I'm a P-40E fan.
The Curtiss P-40E The Curtiss P-40 Warhawk was the United States' best fighter available in large numbers when World War II began. That says a lot and Ill explain why as we go along.
The p-40 wasa single-engined, single-seat, all-metal fighter-bomber that first flew in 1938. However, the P-40 sprang from an already existing model, the Curtiss P-36 Hawk. It replaced the Hawks radial engine with a V-12, liquid cooled, inline. This reduced development time and sped up production. The Warhawk was used by 28 Allied powers during World War II, and remained in frontline service until the end of the war.
The P-40 was also the third most-produced American fighter of World War II. The P-51 Mustang and P-47 Thunderbolt were #1 and #2, but they were still in development when the US entered the war. This meant the P-40 was the only single seat fighter available to the U.S. When production stopped in November 1944, 13,738 of all types had been built.
The U.S. Army Air Corps called the plane, The P-40, "Warhawk," officially adopting that name after June 1941. The British Commonwealth and Soviet air forces used the name, "Tomahawk" for the early P-40B, and P-40C models, and, "Kittyhawk" for all susequent variants.
And it was in June, 1941, in the deserts of the Middle East and North Africa with British Commonwealth squadrons that the Warhawk first saw combat. This was where the infamous "shark mouth" logo, synonymous with the Warhawk, was first used. No. 112 Squadron Royal Air Force, added it to their Tomahawks in North Africa, copying it from similar markings on Luftwaffe Messerschmitt Bf 110 twin-engine fighter bombers!
Serving in some capacity across every major theater of the war, it is my humble opinion that the P-40E was the most critical variant of the series. Not because it was the best or the most successful. Rather, because it was mass-produced and made available to the Allies in the crucial first year of the war, when it was most needed. The other aircraft of the Allies (primarily British) were already committed, so America produced the P-40E and made it avaulable to help bear much of the brunt of air combat in the "outlying" conflict theatres.
From The Beginning
The earlier marks of the P-40, the B and C versions, aka, "Tomahawk", had been in service since before the war began. But there were never a lot of them and by late 1941, these first P-40 variants were overtaken in performance. Fortunately, when the U.S. entered the conflict in 1941, the “E” model had already been in production, and it joined the ranks in serious numbers.
This means that the P-40E faced much of the desperate fighting during 1942 against Japan in the Far East, South Pacific and Australia/New Guinea. It also formed the backbone of the Allied Commonwealth Desert Air Forces in the Middle East against the Germans and Italians.
And lest we forget, the Russians used them to great effect against the Nazi's in the skies over the Motherland.
Why It Mattered
Upgraded from the earlier B/C models with a more powerful engine and six .50-caliber machine guns, the "E" model could unleash a devastating weight of fire.* So it was a potent gun platform. That is important.
The P-40E was also exceptionally rugged - it was structurally durable, it offered very good pilot protection, and was capable of absorbing significant combat damage. Added to that was its superior high-speed diving capabilities. It could out-dive almost any opponent and also possessed a decent top speed, particularly at low to medium altitudes. All this while being proven, readily available, and easily maintained. It brought many a pilots home, to fight another day.
Critics Galore The biggest gripe that arm-chair aviation critics harp on today was the P-40's lack edium altitude performance. Which was a drawback, certainly. For example, both the Bf-109 of Germany and The A6M "Zero" series of Japan were designed for interceptor performance at high altitudes. Only had the P-38 Lightning was able to fight in the rarified air above 20,000 ft. But it was a two-engined aircaft and was not intended as a dogfighting single seaterailable to America at the time that was able to fight in the rarified air above 20,000 ft.
But the ultra high-altitude combat everyone loves to talk about was primarily a feature of the mid to late European air war, once the Allied bomber campaigns got underway.
On the other hand, in 1942, a lot of the aerial combat that occured was at low to middle altitudes. And the P-40E was agile enough to be competitive at these levels. So tactics eventually developed to keep the altitudes down and take advantage of the P-40E's strong points. This is what the talking-heads overlook.
Good Performance
While designed as more of a jack-of-all-trades, rather than a "turn-and-burn" fighter, The P-40 was still very maneuverable at the medium-to-high speeds of 1942. For instance, the Warhawk "E" model actually had an excellent high-speed roll rate compared to it's adversaries.
The fast roll rate was particularly effective for evasive maneuvers and transitioning into dives. In 1942, only the lighter Japanese fighters - the A6M Zero and Ki-42 Oscar - could dangerously out-turn it. But at higher speeds, these aircraft did not roll as well. The Zero was especially notorious for having heavy aelierons at high speed. They were also fragile - a few hits from the P-40's guns could put them down. They lacked adequate pilot protection, too, were rather under-gunned by comparison, and in 1942, they lacked the all-important self-sealing fuel tanks.
So the P-40 pilot used these weaknesses to his advantage. Keeping his speed advantage and heavy firepower in play, the Warhawk pilot rolled out and broke-off if the encounter slowed to favor a turning-type dogfight. In this way, he lived to fight another day.
Performance Against Specific Adversaries
Many people have adopted the outlook that the German and Japanese adversaries of 1942 were invincible miracle machines. This viewpoint is enhanced by the fact that the P-40 was not designed to the same parameters as those two.
Yes, they were good - but they were not invincible, Lets have a look at them.
Bf 109s (E-3, F-4): The P-40E could effectively turn-fight with these opponents at its favored altitudes. It did the Germans little good to be 20,000 feet in the air when their opponents were lower down...so they were forced to meet the P-40 at altitudes which favored it.
The P-40E Warhawk and Bf 109E were actually closely matched in the early-to-mid war (1941–1942), with the Bf 109E holding slight advantages in speed and climb, while the P-40E excelled in dive speed, roll rate, and structural durability. The P-40E was a capable, rugged low-altitude fighter, often achieving a positive kill-to-loss ratio against the Bf 109E in combat. It wasn't the slaughter everyone evnisions.
P-40E Warhawk (Kittyhawk IA) strengths were excellent dive speed, good roll rate, strong structure, and effective .50 caliber firepower. Its power-to-weight ratio was less than the Bf-109, so the German fighter had an advantage in climb rate and acceleration, although top speed for both was quite close. At high-altitudes, the P-40E was simply out of the running and could not match the 109.
It was, after all, a low-to-medium-altitude fighter/bomber/ground attack aircraft... not a dedicated interceptor.
Messerschmitt's Bf 109E (Emil) had a slight edge in speed (approx. 360 mph vs. 340-350 mph for the P-40E), could climb faster and had better energy retention in vertical maneuvers. At the same time, it was less able to absorb punishment, was slower diving, and sometimes prone to engine issues. Its intended role was as a dedicated interceptor and air-superiority fighter. So we end up in a sort of apples-to-oranges comparison - something most people overlook.
Combat Results: Despite being considered "technically inferior" in certain performance qualities, the P-40E’s ruggedness allowed it to compete effectively against the 109E, particularly in the Mediterranean theater.
One must keep in mind the design philosophy behind the Curtiss P-40E Warhawk: a rugged, heavily armed, and quickly producible fighter that could be manufactured in large numbers using existing production lines. High altitude interception was NOT part of its design thinking. Rather, it was intended fo rthese attributes:
- Low-to-medium altitude combat
- Versatility
- Heavily armed and armored
- Durability
The Bf 109E, by contrast, was intended to be a fast, high-altitude interceptor.
Overall, the P-40E proved to be a good fighter in the Mediterranean and North African theatres.
A6M Zero: In the Pacific theater, the P-40 was out-turned by this lighter Japanese fighter, particularly at lower speeds. So the P-40 pilot avoided twisting, turning dogfights with Japanese fighters, and instead, used diving, speed and the ability to break off to his advantage.
The Mitsubishi A6M2 Zero and Curtiss P-40E Warhawk had contrasting, specialized roles. The Zero was designed for maneuverability, climb rate to altitude, and low-speed agility. In contrast, the P-40E was faster, heavier, rugged, and superior in diving and high-speed combat, making it better for "boom-and-zoom" tactics.
- Aero/Performance: The A6M2 boasted unmatched turn performance - at slow speeds.
The P-40E was notably faster at lower altitudes and possessed a much better roll rate at high speeds. - Combat Tactics: The Zero was light and structurally a dogfighter, while the P-40E was heavier and best used in diving attacks.
- Durability: The P-40E was highly durable with armor and self-sealing fuel tanks, whereas the Zero was fragile, and prone to catching fire.
- Armament: The Zero featured 20mm cannons, which were potent but had a slow rate of fire, lower velocity and limited ammunition. By contrast, the P-40E carried six .50-caliber machine guns, which had a higher rate of fire, higher velocity, and a consistently heavier weigth of fire
Conclusion:
The Zero sometimes achieved higher kill ratios early in the war due to its agility, the P-40E pilots soon adopted different tactics. After that the Warhawk served as a vital, sturdy, and effective deterrent in the Pacific, particularly when employing hit-and-run tactics to mitigate the Zero's superior turning capabilities
When Useful Beats Perfection
When all the GOOD attributes possessed by the P-40E were combined, we find it was a tough, reliable workhorse. It was effective in the Pacific and North African theaters, particularly when using boom-and-zoom tactics to counter more maneuverable, but fragile, opponents like the Japanese Zero.
While often overshadowed by "glamorous" rivals like the Spitfire or Bf 109, or pushed to the back by P-51 devotees, the fact remains that the P-40 was the third most-produced American fighter, with 13,738 of all types built.
And it was the P-40E, the strong, potent warhorse, that held the line during the desperate battles of 1942.
* FUN FACT
The air marshalls of the United States wanted an aerial cannon for their aircraft, like other nations were using in WW2. But they never got a suitable gun into production once the war started. So they went with what they already had - the .50 cal Browning machine gun.
The P-40E, for example, had 3 of them in each wing, for a total of six.
Now, let us picture what this meant:
- Each .50 cal BMG fired about 800 rpm, or 13-14 rounds per second.
- With 6 guns, that's 78-84 .50 cal bullets per second, heading downrange.
-The bullets, themselves, weighed about 1.65 ounces each. This yielded 8.25 POUNDS of lead per second from a 6 gun burst.
- The bullets reached their target moving at about 3,000-3200 fpm.
- This meant that each bullet delivered 12,000 to 14,000 foot-pounds force on target! For comparison, the standard .30-06, 165 gr. bullet of the period had only 1,500-1800 ft-lbs of energy)
The high energy of the .50 BMG was designed for anti-material roles, and could pierce 12.5mm to 30mm of steel armor at close ranges.a literal shredding effect. That's why gun camera footage from the time shows aircraft and ground targets appearing to just melt, or disintegrate, under this withering fire.
Kill Ratio
At this point, we should mention kill ratios. This is a measure of how many enemy aircraft were shot down for every American plane engaged. In the case of the P-40E, it was not a high number. The 10:1 ratios you see for some planes like the P-51 or F6F Hellcat are usually held against the P-40.
But we must recognize that those high kill ratios came later in the war, as a result of superior numbers, ever-better aircraft, endless resources, and the loss of experienced pilots in the enemy ranks as the war ground on.
The Allies overwhelmed them with resources they could not match, and we did it on every front. So they were constantly facing more and better aircraft wherever they turned and their production could never come close to keeping up. We had more experienced pilots, too, all transitioning through an endless line of always improving combat planes. By 1944, anything with enemy markings was shot out of the sky by as many Allied aircraft as possible. It was a matter of attrition, frankly.
The P-40E, on the other hand, was going it alone against the best aircraft and pilots the enemy could bring into the game. 1942 was not a good year for the Allied air forces, especially against Japan. The Curtiss P-40, nevertheless, achieved a respectable, positive kill ratio against Japanese forces in the South Pacific and CBI theatres. This ratio was in the range of 1.5-to-1 by late 1942. Thats better than parity, against the best that Japan had.
Not only were tactics still being ironed out for much of that year, but the Japanese and Germans had a lot of good aircraft - and pilots - in the air. While the Japanese planes were better at aerobatic dogfighting, and the somewhat faster, fuel-injected Bf 109 could climb better, the robust P-40 managed to slug it out for a positive, albeit closely contested, gain.
P-40E Performance vs. Japan: In the Pacific/CBI theaters, the P-40 was highly effective against Japanese aircraft like the Nakajima Ki-43 "Oscar" and Ki-43 "Oscar".
- 49th Fighter Group: Between April and August 1942, this group shot down over 60 Japanese planes to gain air superiority over Darwin, Australia.
- Ace Records: Over 40 US pilots achieved ace status (5+ kills) flying the P-40 in the China-Burma-India (CBI) theater.
- Top Ace: Australian pilot Clive Caldwell claimed 22 of his 28.5 kills in a P-40, showcasing its potential in experienced hands.
P-40E Performance vs. Germany
The
P-40's overall, cumulative, multi-theater kill ratio is often cited
as high, even as it was challenged in direct dogfights
against the Messerschmitt 109.
Mediterranean/North Africa: There is data from specialized units in the Mediterranean and Eastern Front
that show impressive records achieved by leveraging the aircraft's
strengths in low-to-medium altitude combat. While often considered slightly inferior to the Bf
109, the P-40E was effective when using "hit-and-r
un"
tactics, with units often exceeding 2:1 ratios.
Soviet Service: On the Eastern Front, Soviet pilots found the P-40E comparable to the Bf-109E, though it was not as good when dogfighting later German models, like the Me-109F and G series. Of the 1,500 P-40E-1's (export version) originally intended for the RAF, nearly 600 were diverted to the Soviet Union to bolster their defenses in the early phase of the German invasion.
The Russians came to use it more as a low-altitude fighter, or in ground-attack and escort missions, rather than as an air-superiority fighter against high-altitude German fighters.
Combat Characteristics: Pilots favored the P-40 for its robust structure, high diving speed, and stability, despite being slower than some opponents.
Effectiveness: The P-40 saw widespread use in North Africa and Italy until late 1944, often proving to be a formidable opponent despite not being the top-tier fighter of the era.
Notable Combat Records
325th Fighter Group ("Checkertail Clan"): In Italy, this unit achieved a staggering 8:1 kill ratio, claiming 135 Axis aircraft (including 96 German Bf-109s) for the loss of only 17 P-40s in combat.
324th Fighter Group: This unit maintained a ratio better than 2:1 while fighting German and Italian forces in the MTO.
Desert Air Forces (RAF/RAAF/SAAF): During the North African campaigns, P-40 pilots (flying Kittyhawks) were credited with approximately 53.5 claims in specific high-intensity periods (like October 1942), significantly outscoring opposing German records for the same period.
Strategic
Performance Factors
- Altitude Limitations: Because the P-40E lacked a two-stage supercharger, its effectiveness above 15,000 feet was reduced. For this reason it was not used in Western Europe for high-altitude bomber escort missions. This is where most to the P-40's criticisms arise, as the P-51 Mustang eventually (and unfairly) becomes the comparison standard.
- Durability and Firepower: The P-40E's six .50 caliber machine guns provided substantial firepower. Its rugged construction allowed pilots to survive damage that would have downed more fragile aircraft, contributing to its favorable loss ratios.
- Comparison to Other Theaters: While the early P-40C is famous for a roughly 15:1 or 25:1 kill ratio against Japan in China (AVG), its performance against Germany was more heavily challenged by superior aircraft like the Messerschmitt Bf 109 F and G variants and Focke-Wulf Fw 190.
- P-40E: 820 aircraft were built for the U.S. Army Air Forces (USAAF).
- P-40E-1: 1,500 aircraft were produced for the British Royal Air Force (RAF) under the Lend-Lease program, where they were known as the Kittyhawk IA.
- Total P-40 Series: Across all variants, approximately 13,738 P-40s were manufactured between 1939 and 1944.
- Variants: The P-40E was the first variant to feature a standardized armament of six .50 caliber machine guns in the wings, a significant upgrade from earlier models.
- Service: While the P-40E is famously associated with the Flying Tigers (AVG) in China, the group originally operated earlier P-40B/C "Tomahawk" models before later pilots transitioned to the E-series.
Although it gained a postwar reputation as a mediocre design, more recent research and scrutiny of Allied squadron records indicate this reputation is wholly undeserved.
In fact, the P-40 performed surprisingly well as an air superiority/air combat fighter, sometimes enduring severe losses, yes....but also inflicting a very heavy toll on enemy aircraft.
Need proof? Based on war-time victory tallies, over 200 Allied fighter pilots – from the UK, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, South Africa, the U.S. and the Soviet Union – became aces flying the P-40. These included at least 20 double aces, mostly over North Africa, China-Burma-India, the South West Pacific and Eastern Europe!
The P-40 offered other advantages, too, plusses that are usually neglected when compared to the more popular fighters of the day. These include such VERY strong attributes as relatively low cost, good pilot protecton, ease of maintenance, and exceedingly rugged durability. These features kept it in production as a solid fighter-bomber long after its time as an interceptor/fighter had passed. At one point, P-40 pilots in Europe nicknamed the P-40N variant the, "B-40," for its performace in this role.
Although there efforts made later to develop the P-40 into a high altitude interceptor - it never really happened. It wasn't neccessary, as other planes came along to fill that role. And - the P-40 didn't need to be. Rather, the P-40 line remained throughout the conflict, just as it came into the war: well capable of most things, if not perfect at all things.
And that is a testimony that will stand for the ages.
No comments:
Post a Comment