The Curtiss P-40 is my quintessential plane. I have loved it since I was a child. Used to draw pictures of it. It is on my bucket list to fly in one. Great plane.
I've said it many times and I'll say it again: The P-40 series of fighters was an egregiously underrated aircraft by many who had no idea what they were talking about.
You can't do too much about the drag exhibited by the airframe. But I'd like to see what a P-40 could do with a G series Allison, a two speed, two stage supercharger, and a good Hamilton Standard High Activity paddle prop. You'll never make a P-40 into a 450 MPH fighter with a 27,000' critical altitude. But you could probably really improve it with 2,000 HP and a better prop.
@@AlanRoehrich9651During the war the RAF did fit a RR Merlin engine for testing in the same manner as they did with the P-51B. Whilst the characteristics of the P-51B were greatly improved, not a lot of performance improvement was gained in the P-40, so they continued with the Alison engine.
I think I've seen this aircraft in flight, in Hamilton, ON, at the Canadian Warplane Heritage Museum, home of the Lancaster someone mentioned they saw here. I had a chance to talk briefly with some of the Vintage Wings of Canada crew. They're great guys, they know those airplanes and they love flying them. They go out of their way to engage with the public, too, and don't seem to tire of answering questions from anyone. It properly honors the men who flew these planes in wartime; thanks.
The Australian War Memorial would probably have detailed records of what action the aircraft was involved in during it's time as RAAF A29-414. I am also in great envy of this pilot who gets to fly it. His comments about it's manoeuvrability and roll rate are spot on with what I have read about the P-40. I personally knew an Australian pilot who trained in Canada and flew P-40s during the war in New Guinea. His memoirs were a great read.
Awesome vid, thanks for posting. With the RAAF it was A29-414 Come In Suckers. Crashed while landing at a boggy airfield, one of the wheels colleapsed and it nosed over and caught fire. The fire was put out and it was bulldozed clear of the strip to make way for other SQN ACFT coming in, all low on fuel. It remained in situ until it was recovered in 2001. Therefore this restoration is a credit to those who carried it out.
It is a P-40N dressed up to look like a P-40E used by the Desert Air Force in 1942. The aircraft is dedicated to the memory of Dennis Copping, the (still missing) pilot of the aircraft that was found in the Egyptian desert by a Polish oil exploration team in 2012.
Absolutely. The P-40 was an early war plane, and people overlook it because it's outclassed by the P-47 and P-51. They forget it outclassed the Hurricane in the opinions of many who were familiar with both types. It doesn't help the P-40 that it did much of its fighting with the RAF and RAAF, and that USAAF P-40s had the F4F Wildcat alongside. It did a crucial service in those early years where the Allies were struggling, and I think it ranks with the P-39 as an unrecognized but good aircraft.
I´ve always been a staunch P-40-lover ever since I saw this flying marvel for the first time, and I know that during the war, the US army nicknamed it "the old exterminator". What I never knew so well, however, was the general impression of all those fighting pilots who at some moment had the chance of piloting a P-40 during the war. Did they like it dispite its "humble" performances since the mid-war or did they dislike it as many fighting pilots disliked the P-39 Airacobra?
One last thing, before I saw this I didn't know that the supercharger/turbocharger was critical for high-altitude performance! I've heard of planes that performed well at high or low altitude but I think I always figured it was the wing shape and 'something to do with the engine'. I'd never heard it put in clear terms before, but now it makes perfect sense that you'd need a good supercharger to increase the intake air pressure for high altitudes.
There is a superb video with a cockpit tour w/ the pilot flying her too, but it gets taken off of UA-cam for some reason a lot. This is a good video too though. Nice camera work. Great airplane.
Read the book ‘44 Days’ by Michael Veitch. It is a great read about the fighting this aircraft would have done. An amazing story for any WWII history enthusiast, particularly if you’re interested in the P40
@AlanMartinNala I think every pilot that got to fly a P 40 (not me of course) enjoyed it. Although not the shining star it once was, is served all through the war well enough.
The P-40 as solid and good a fighter it was then, was it a complex plane to fly in combat situation ? It seem that it give the pilot a huge workload. Oil pressure, temperature manifold pressure, trim and all what was demanded to fly the plane must give little time to check your six. I imagine the situation. Adjust trim, check six, Manifold pressure, check six, and so on. And while you check six for a hundred time the engine temperature rises and you return to base.
+Brian steff magnussen just a friendly fyi, watch the video again. @ the 2:00 min and 5:00 min mark, dave gives two good indications of what is going on . in a combat scenerio, the pilot was busy to say the least ( ie: rudder trim ) these a/c were flown hard and chucked around pretty good. kittyhawks could take a pounding for sure, when called upon, they could ruffle feathers and clip wings.
Better than the Hurricane, competed against early series Bf109's but when the 109F arrived it was obsolete as a fighter. Did quite well on all fronts, including in Soviet service where it was one of the most successful Western built aircraft to operate on the Eastern front. The supposed superiority of early war Japanese fighters over it was mainly due to pilot experience and tactics. Not one of the great fighters of WWII but a solid workhorse. In many ways it was typically American, not cutting edge in technology or performance, but reliable, tough and solid. As with many early war American aircraft it's big flaw was lack of performance at altitude (also see P-39, P-38 etc).
Each takeoff could be your last and nearly every day someone you had breakfast with would not be there the next morning. Theres nothing chivalrous about war. I personally am glad to be living at a time of peace and I wish the same for my children and their children.
@geo1gin2 did you actually drive those military planes, my question is how i mean aren't they expensive thats what i heard, also how old do you have to be to drive a plane
There is one question I'd like to ask: what is the name og the interior colour? Is it RAF interior green or an american Berry Bros. color scheme? I'm building a P-40 model in RAF camouflage and I'd like to know what color did they use for RAF machines.
This Is One Of My Favorite Planes So Correct Me If I'm Wrong But I Thought It Was The "L" Model, Nicknamed Gypsy Rose Lee That Had Four Machine Guns Instead Of Six. Apparently, Some P-40N Models Had Four But Most Had Six - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtiss_P-40_Warhawk_variants#P-40N
I think its a bad idea for an aircraft like the P-40 Warhawk to not include an attitude indicator because the pilot would have no orientation to the horizon if he or she becomes disoriented due to poor visibility.
Yesterday I visited the Tyabb Air show in Victoria Australia. There were two P40's flying, one powered by a Merlin. Check YT over the coming weeks and you will see some posts. As a foot note Australia was desperate for fighter planes at the commencement of WW2 and the P40's filled that void until more modern types came online. They were a rugged aircraft and used effectively by the RAAF.
Good thing about the Aussie RAAF is they had the best of both worlds. Had the American P38, P40 , P39 and P43's ect and then they had the Brit Spitfires, Hurricanes, they had the De havilland Mosquito and the big ol bad ass heavy fighter/bomber Beaufigher and so on. The RAAF might not get the recognition is desrves during WW2 but they did a LOT of damage to the Japanese during the pacific war not to mention the Aussies that fought in Europe.
ultrakool Yeah, 30 guys during the height of ww2 when it was our own country under threat of invasion. We could only get 30 guys.... Come on, man. I know you dont really mean to be but youre coming off as a bit willfully ignorant here.
The Curtiss P-40 was doomed to mediocrity by a US Army decision to not allow turbosuperchargers in Allison V1710's in P-40's. In the hands of the right pilot however, the P-40 was lethal.
I would think that the Merlin Powered P-40s such as the P-40Ls, or even the Fs,(I think,) were the ones that were the fastest. But I also don’t have WW2 warplanes at my disposal so what do I know.
@@767bob The P-40 K was the heaviest version of the fighter and not much of an improvement over the P-40E power-wise. I don't think you are correct. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtiss_P-40_Warhawk_variants
The Merlin engines used in those versions weren't super-powerful (~1300 hp), being roughly similar in output to those used in the Hurricane Mark II, but definitely provided better performance for the aircraft above 15,000 feet compared to contemporary Allison engines of similar horsepower. Most of the Merlin-engine variants were used by the USAAF in the Mediterranean as well as a few in the Solomon Islands area, I believe.
@geo1gin2 What a different age that was. Now look at the typical 19 yr. old. I'm not saying good nor bad. Just different. I was born in '58, but wished to have been born around '22.
The plane is in the livery of 260 Squadron RAF. They didn't employ the shark mouth markings. 112 Squadron RAF was the only Desert Air Force squadron that did and I doubt they wanted other P-40 squadrons in the RAF/RAAF/SAAF copying them. 112 Squadron were the first in the world to paint the shark mouth on the P-40 (they were flying P-40B/C Tomahawks at the time), some months before the AVG (Flying Tigers) in China/Burma adopted it.
wasn't this the last American fighter before they started putting those reticle gunsights in? imagine having to memorize all your bank angle, slip or skid rates just to land deflection shots home with that stupid pinwheel tacked to your hood
I think there is quite a bit of exaggeration from the pilot about the plane. If you read other personal accounts of the P40 buy guys who flew it in WW2, they said it was a dog.
How she goin' S Stan? All of the a/c constructed during ww11 had their good points and their short comings. I'm not aware of any type being totally immune. While the p-40 did not have awe- inspiring performance at altitude she stood her ground,and held the line, and actually started to push the foe back. Many "youngsters" piloted kittyhawks. There were those who praised her, and those who felt otherwise. Many pilots have said and would agree with, that if the p-40 did one thing it was known for, it brought them back (far more often that not). To be sure, early on many kittyhawk sqd's took heavy losses. Once pilots received better training, and utilized improved tactics ( there was a learning curve, and we figured it out ) the kitty could hold her own. Ultimately, that's what it came down to.
Giovanni Stella Yeah, becuz I believe everything the TV tells me, too. :/ P-40 did very well despite being a mid-1930s design, especially in the Pacific, particularly in Burma and China. Might wanna read up on how this "bad" airplane and their pilots did against the Japanese in those areas.
Giovanni Stella Well, only to a point. That certainly doesn't mean the P-40 was a bad plane. The P-40 was still faster (especially the P-40K), particularly in a dive, and it actually possessed better maneuverability than the A6M2 at high speeds, especially in roll. The Allison V-Series were excellent, powerful engines, almost totally reliable, and were easy to maintain. Their main problem was that most versions were not aggressively supercharged for high altitude performance, though the ones installed in P-38s were turbo-supercharged for that purpose. The P-40 had better armament, could carry a higher bomb load, and was far more strongly built and better protected than the Zero. The A6M2 had it's long range and extreme maneuverability only because it was very lightly built in the extreme, did not have protected fuel tanks, and had absolutely no armor protection anywhere. In low-speed tight horizontal maneuvering it was king. At high speeds however, it was a dog, and this was an area where most Allied aircraft excelled. Also, of course, battle damage of any significant degree was almost always fatal for the A6M2. Again, pick up a book and read about the exploits of P-40 pilots over Burma and China.
The Curtiss P-40 is my quintessential plane. I have loved it since I was a child. Used to draw pictures of it. It is on my bucket list to fly in one. Great plane.
I've said it many times and I'll say it again: The P-40 series of fighters was an egregiously underrated aircraft by many who had no idea what they were talking about.
When the p-40 was developed there weren't any bombers that could fly at 30,000 ft.
It was good for what it was, it was a great desert fighter.
You can't do too much about the drag exhibited by the airframe. But I'd like to see what a P-40 could do with a G series Allison, a two speed, two stage supercharger, and a good Hamilton Standard High Activity paddle prop.
You'll never make a P-40 into a 450 MPH fighter with a 27,000' critical altitude. But you could probably really improve it with 2,000 HP and a better prop.
@@AlanRoehrich9651During the war the RAF did fit a RR Merlin engine for testing in the same manner as they did with the P-51B. Whilst the characteristics of the P-51B were greatly improved, not a lot of performance improvement was gained in the P-40, so they continued with the Alison engine.
That is a very nice looking restoration! And thanks for the tour, gentlemen.
I think I've seen this aircraft in flight, in Hamilton, ON, at the Canadian Warplane Heritage Museum, home of the Lancaster someone mentioned they saw here.
I had a chance to talk briefly with some of the Vintage Wings of Canada crew. They're great guys, they know those airplanes and they love flying them. They go out of their way to engage with the public, too, and don't seem to tire of answering questions from anyone. It properly honors the men who flew these planes in wartime; thanks.
The Australian War Memorial would probably have detailed records of what action the aircraft was involved in during it's time as RAAF A29-414. I am also in great envy of this pilot who gets to fly it. His comments about it's manoeuvrability and roll rate are spot on with what I have read about the P-40. I personally knew an Australian pilot who trained in Canada and flew P-40s during the war in New Guinea. His memoirs were a great read.
Thanks. It's good seeing someone so excited about their machine.
The sheer amount of switches on the instrument panel in the warhawk compared to it's previous model, the tomahawk, blows my mind.
Awesome vid, thanks for posting. With the RAAF it was A29-414 Come In Suckers. Crashed while landing at a boggy airfield, one of the wheels colleapsed and it nosed over and caught fire. The fire was put out and it was bulldozed clear of the strip to make way for other SQN ACFT coming in, all low on fuel. It remained in situ until it was recovered in 2001.
Therefore this restoration is a credit to those who carried it out.
Great HiDef quality video, great editing, and what a super plane.
This plane has been re-done nicely. It looks New!
Long live The P40,,, awesome aircraft,, I'm in love
It is a P-40N dressed up to look like a P-40E used by the Desert Air Force in 1942. The aircraft is dedicated to the memory of Dennis Copping, the (still missing) pilot of the aircraft that was found in the Egyptian desert by a Polish oil exploration team in 2012.
Absolutely. The P-40 was an early war plane, and people overlook it because it's outclassed by the P-47 and P-51. They forget it outclassed the Hurricane in the opinions of many who were familiar with both types. It doesn't help the P-40 that it did much of its fighting with the RAF and RAAF, and that USAAF P-40s had the F4F Wildcat alongside. It did a crucial service in those early years where the Allies were struggling, and I think it ranks with the P-39 as an unrecognized but good aircraft.
Beautiful aircraft.
I´ve always been a staunch P-40-lover ever since I saw this flying marvel for the first time, and I know that during the war, the US army nicknamed it "the old exterminator". What I never knew so well, however, was the general impression of all those fighting pilots who at some moment had the chance of piloting a P-40 during the war. Did they like it dispite its "humble" performances since the mid-war or did they dislike it as many fighting pilots disliked the P-39 Airacobra?
One last thing, before I saw this I didn't know that the supercharger/turbocharger was critical for high-altitude performance!
I've heard of planes that performed well at high or low altitude but I think I always figured it was the wing shape and 'something to do with the engine'. I'd never heard it put in clear terms before, but now it makes perfect sense that you'd need a good supercharger to increase the intake air pressure for high altitudes.
Hey! That's My plane leave it alone. I love P-40s. He is sooooo lucky.
There is a superb video with a cockpit tour w/ the pilot flying her too, but it gets taken off of UA-cam for some reason a lot. This is a good video too though. Nice camera work. Great airplane.
Read the book ‘44 Days’ by Michael Veitch. It is a great read about the fighting this aircraft would have done. An amazing story for any WWII history enthusiast, particularly if you’re interested in the P40
Beautiful air craft the p40 always liked it .
@AlanMartinNala I think every pilot that got to fly a P 40 (not me of course) enjoyed it. Although not the shining star it once was, is served all through the war well enough.
Excellent video!
Awesome Airplane, I just wish I could be there...
The P-40 as solid and good a fighter it was then, was it a complex plane to fly in combat situation ? It seem that it give the pilot a huge workload. Oil pressure, temperature manifold pressure, trim and all what was demanded to fly the plane must give little time to check your six. I imagine the situation. Adjust trim, check six, Manifold pressure, check six, and so on. And while you check six for a hundred time the engine temperature rises and you return to base.
+Brian steff magnussen just a friendly fyi, watch the video again. @ the 2:00 min and 5:00 min mark, dave gives two good indications of what is
going on . in a combat scenerio, the pilot was busy to say the least ( ie:
rudder trim ) these a/c were flown hard and chucked around pretty good.
kittyhawks could take a pounding for sure, when called upon, they could
ruffle feathers and clip wings.
Better than the Hurricane, competed against early series Bf109's but when the 109F arrived it was obsolete as a fighter. Did quite well on all fronts, including in Soviet service where it was one of the most successful Western built aircraft to operate on the Eastern front. The supposed superiority of early war Japanese fighters over it was mainly due to pilot experience and tactics. Not one of the great fighters of WWII but a solid workhorse. In many ways it was typically American, not cutting edge in technology or performance, but reliable, tough and solid. As with many early war American aircraft it's big flaw was lack of performance at altitude (also see P-39, P-38 etc).
An excellent video, thanks!
FANTASTIC!
I've always wondered how the p40 compares with the hawker hurricane off the same ERA ,.how did it compare
Each takeoff could be your last and nearly every day someone you had breakfast with would not be there the next morning. Theres nothing chivalrous about war. I personally am glad to be living at a time of peace and I wish the same for my children and their children.
Beautiful machine.
@geo1gin2 did you actually drive those military planes, my question is how i mean aren't they expensive thats what i heard, also how old do you have to be to drive a plane
Been the for the first time, not the last at all!!!
There is one question I'd like to ask: what is the name og the interior colour? Is it RAF interior green or an american Berry Bros. color scheme? I'm building a P-40 model in RAF camouflage and I'd like to know what color did they use for RAF machines.
WOW! AvWeb reviewed an airplane that didn't have a jet engine or a parachute?!
Dave's brother is an astronaut. How cool is that ?
is there any way of hiring a p40 and flying it??
This Is One Of My Favorite Planes So Correct Me If I'm Wrong But I Thought It Was The "L" Model, Nicknamed Gypsy Rose Lee That Had Four Machine Guns Instead Of Six. Apparently, Some P-40N Models Had Four But Most Had Six - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtiss_P-40_Warhawk_variants#P-40N
Wow, that exhaust looks so restrictive! Anyone know the reason they're pinched down like that?
@belzebuthhhh that is true but apparently speed didn't help Germany in the end of the war
Timing is everything, no?
What was the RAAF serial of this aircraft? It 's history would be simple to trace. Every aircraft is well documented.
I think its a bad idea for an aircraft like the P-40 Warhawk to not include an attitude indicator because the pilot would have no orientation to the horizon if he or she becomes disoriented due to poor visibility.
i see a lancaster in the background :)
I honestly had no idea Australia had these kind of planes in WW2 ha learn something new everyday :)
Yesterday I visited the Tyabb Air show in Victoria Australia. There were two P40's flying, one powered by a Merlin. Check YT over the coming weeks and you will see some posts. As a foot note Australia was desperate for fighter planes at the commencement of WW2 and the P40's filled that void until more modern types came online. They were a rugged aircraft and used effectively by the RAAF.
if you're from the u.s., you paid for it...or your grandparents did, with their tax dollars (lend-lease).
Good thing about the Aussie RAAF is they had the best of both worlds. Had the American P38, P40 , P39 and P43's ect and then they had the Brit Spitfires, Hurricanes, they had the De havilland Mosquito and the big ol bad ass heavy fighter/bomber Beaufigher and so on. The RAAF might not get the recognition is desrves during WW2 but they did a LOT of damage to the Japanese during the pacific war not to mention the Aussies that fought in Europe.
Antifaith29 yeah but, their air force had like 30 guys in it, didn't they? ;^)
ultrakool
Yeah, 30 guys during the height of ww2 when it was our own country under threat of invasion. We could only get 30 guys....
Come on, man. I know you dont really mean to be but youre coming off as a bit willfully ignorant here.
The Curtiss P-40 was doomed to mediocrity by a US Army decision to not allow turbosuperchargers in Allison V1710's in P-40's. In the hands of the right pilot however, the P-40 was lethal.
I would think that the Merlin Powered P-40s such as the P-40Ls, or even the Fs,(I think,) were the ones that were the fastest. But I also don’t have WW2 warplanes at my disposal so what do I know.
The P-40K were the fastest, not by much about 4 mph faster than the P-40F....
@@767bob The P-40 K was the heaviest version of the fighter and not much of an improvement over the P-40E power-wise. I don't think you are correct.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtiss_P-40_Warhawk_variants
The Merlin engines used in those versions weren't super-powerful (~1300 hp), being roughly similar in output to those used in the Hurricane Mark II, but definitely provided better performance for the aircraft above 15,000 feet compared to contemporary Allison engines of similar horsepower. Most of the Merlin-engine variants were used by the USAAF in the Mediterranean as well as a few in the Solomon Islands area, I believe.
👍👍👍👍👍👍👍😉👍👍👍👍👍👍👍
geo1gin2 Salute you
wish i was born in this time :)
i am today military pilot but here is no honor at all
this days was knights days
S!
Didn’t the tuskegee airmen use this plane?
@geo1gin2 What a different age that was. Now look at the typical 19 yr. old. I'm not saying good nor bad. Just different. I was born in '58, but wished to have been born around '22.
and where is the front teeth of a shark?
this is the same camouflage British air forces
112 squadron seems
The plane is in the livery of 260 Squadron RAF. They didn't employ the shark mouth markings. 112 Squadron RAF was the only Desert Air Force squadron that did and I doubt they wanted other P-40 squadrons in the RAF/RAAF/SAAF copying them. 112 Squadron were the first in the world to paint the shark mouth on the P-40 (they were flying P-40B/C Tomahawks at the time), some months before the AVG (Flying Tigers) in China/Burma adopted it.
悩み
wasn't this the last American fighter before they started putting those reticle gunsights in? imagine having to memorize all your bank angle, slip or skid rates just to land deflection shots home with that stupid pinwheel tacked to your hood
I think there is quite a bit of exaggeration from the pilot about the plane. If you read other personal accounts of the P40 buy guys who flew it in WW2, they said it was a dog.
How she goin' S Stan? All of the a/c constructed during ww11 had their good
points and their short comings. I'm not aware of any type being totally immune. While the p-40 did not have awe- inspiring performance at altitude
she stood her ground,and held the line, and actually started to push the foe
back. Many "youngsters" piloted kittyhawks. There were those who praised
her, and those who felt otherwise. Many pilots have said and would agree
with, that if the p-40 did one thing it was known for, it brought them back
(far more often that not). To be sure, early on many kittyhawk sqd's took
heavy losses. Once pilots received better training, and utilized improved
tactics ( there was a learning curve, and we figured it out ) the kitty could
hold her own. Ultimately, that's what it came down to.
I totally missed all the world wars since the third up to the eleventh lol
le meeserrssshmit etait mainte fois plus rapide
P40 was a bad plane.
Giovanni Stella
Yeah, becuz I believe everything the TV tells me, too. :/
P-40 did very well despite being a mid-1930s design, especially in the Pacific, particularly in Burma and China. Might wanna read up on how this "bad" airplane and their pilots did against the Japanese in those areas.
The a6m2 were better because they are so manouvrable and his engine was better than the engine of p40 .
Giovanni Stella
Well, only to a point. That certainly doesn't mean the P-40 was a bad plane. The P-40 was still faster (especially the P-40K), particularly in a dive, and it actually possessed better maneuverability than the A6M2 at high speeds, especially in roll. The Allison V-Series were excellent, powerful engines, almost totally reliable, and were easy to maintain. Their main problem was that most versions were not aggressively supercharged for high altitude performance, though the ones installed in P-38s were turbo-supercharged for that purpose. The P-40 had better armament, could carry a higher bomb load, and was far more strongly built and better protected than the Zero.
The A6M2 had it's long range and extreme maneuverability only because it was very lightly built in the extreme, did not have protected fuel tanks, and had absolutely no armor protection anywhere. In low-speed tight horizontal maneuvering it was king. At high speeds however, it was a dog, and this was an area where most Allied aircraft excelled. Also, of course, battle damage of any significant degree was almost always fatal for the A6M2.
Again, pick up a book and read about the exploits of P-40 pilots over Burma and China.