[REQUEST] XP-40Q-3 - Printable Version

[REQUEST] XP-40Q-3 - Printable Version

+- All-Aircraft-Simulations (https://allaircraftsimulations.com)
+-- Forum: IL2 MODS Download & Discussion (https://allaircraftsimulations.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=267)
+--- Forum: IL-2 4.09m (https://allaircraftsimulations.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=348)
+---- Forum: IL2 MODS Discussion Section 4.09m (https://allaircraftsimulations.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=292)
+---- Thread: [REQUEST] XP-40Q-3 (/showthread.php?tid=61383)

Pages: 1 2 3

- Guest - 07.05.2009

Found out some more fun specs. It's an all purpose American fighter. You can even give it a production designation of the P-40Q as it is cited as such by several sources if that makes you feel better.

Ground Attack:

4x20mm cannons or 6x.50cal machine guns
6xHVAR rockets ?
2x500lbs or 1000lbs bombs

Escort:

Internal range around 950mi
Extended range with 2x75gal or 108gal drop tanks arond 1,400mi
Extened service ceiling to 39,000ft with standard operationg ceiling around 20,500ft (high altitude bombing)

Dogfighter:

Maneuverability equal to or in excess of Spitfire and Zero
Top speed in level flight @ 422mph (just under Mustang and over Spitfire)
Could most likely catch Me 262's or He 162's in shallow dive like the Mustang did

Interceptor:

20,000ft in 4.8 minutes as compared to P-51H's 15,000ft in 5 minutes and the P-80A's 20,000ft in 5.5 minutes and the Spitfire XIV's 20,000 in 5.5 minutes

- BH_Blue - 07.05.2009

would be interesting to have, but id like to get some of the earlier models/marks first. A particular favourite of mine is the merlin powered F.

- Guest - 07.05.2009

I rather like that one here. Ideally, we could have a P-40 Collection like the Mustang Collection start that incorporates the fixes being made on the P-40 as it currently exists and adds the rest of the variants from the F to the Q. (Not to be confused with F and U) :lol:

- caldrail - 08.05.2009

Nothing wrong with a what-if? aeroplane if a modder wants to build it. I do note though that the official reason the Q model was not developed was that performance did not match contemporary P51's and P47's.

An important point too is that a prototype, in this case the XP40Q, would not have been sent into production. American practice was to ensure the design worked, then proceed to pre-production models to test suitability for mass production and sort any issues arising from that, which would have been the YP40Q. If satisfactory, the P40Q-1 (or whatever model number was appropriate) would have then come off the production lines and sent to combat units.

Most importantly then, the XP40Q was a prototype and was therefore not encumbered by service equipment. The good performance quoted earlier - it had a level speed of up to 422 mph if I remember right - was the result of a clean airframe. The production examples would have been heavier and less capable. This was always an issue with warplanes. The British found that the Airacobra they ordered was nowhere as good as the figures quoted by Bell for that reason - Bell were using performance figures from a highly polished prototype weighing a ton less than production models

- Guest - 08.05.2009

Interesting points, if I remember correctly, the XP-40Q-3 was basically what the production model would have looked like. I could be horribly wrong, but that's what I remember reading. The major difference is that it would have been rearmed from 4x.50cal to probably 4x20mm. My guess is that the difference in weight and ammo means that the change wouldn't have maimed performance.The main reason it's performance didn't match the P-51's and P-47's was that it was slower by 15mph for the Mustang and 11mph for the Thunderbolt at 422mph. It could still fly circles around them. I know all this about the American system of designating aircraft and service testing. I said that some quoted it as being called the P-40Q. This was a mistanke on their part but much closer to the truth since the XP-40Q had been through numerous changes by the time it got to model 3 and was ready to be produced as-is. That's what I remember so don't shoot me if I'm wrong. Besides, with alot of planes, the engine company made a better version of the engine tested when they found out the plane was going to be produced. Therefore, I think it would be fair to use the original specs for the XP-40Q-3 (except for arrament) if added to the game. Oh yeah, if made, it should have weapon provisions as well.

- caldrail - 09.05.2009

A prototype (in American methodology) isn't production ready. It's a test platform or a proof of concept. Prototypes are hand made as much as possible (you don't want it going wrong at that stage) and in no way represent production ready examples. That's why the YP40Q would have been necessary. Building one off prototypes doesn't reveal any of the problems in adapting the design to mass production methods.

Now some prototypes were adpated from the original airframe and for that reason might justify jumping the pre-production stage and sending the design to the manufacturers. In the case of the XP40Q, that isn't true. The airframe wasn't 'standard' - it was new. In any case, the X designation means 'experimental', not combat ready.

The manoeverability of the P40 isn't in question but notice it wasn't enough to keep the aeroplane in the forefront of development, even at the beginning of the war. That was the entire problem. For all it's agility the P40 wasn't good enough, hence the Americans found better designs and the British restricted it to army co-operation duties in overseas theatres.

The fact remains that no american prototype would be sent into action. A YP40Q in small numbers? Possibly... They did that with the YP80 (two were sent to operational duty but never saw combat) but the reason there was that no-one had any idea how jets would perform in the field.

It's ultimately up to the modder who makes this, but really the final model should be designated P40Q-? and the performance should reflect the added weight of operational equipment. Since the engine wouldn't have been upgraded from the prototype anyway that would only be a fudge to please the uber-flyers.

Don't get me wrong, I'm happy with 'what-if' aeroplanes, but we shouldn't get carried away with reputations or urban myth when the sim is supposed be historical. I'm not shooting you down - I'm just making a case for realistic appraisal.

- RedChico - 09.05.2009

It has already been requested.

- Guest - 09.05.2009

OK, understood. From my understanding, the service testing designation was applied to the original service testing variant of the plane. I don't think it was applied to later variants when changing models. In otherwords, I don't think that they would have made a service testing model since I can't find any evidence of the USAAF having service models made before producing planes like the P-51H or the P-47N. Then again, I remember seeing something about a YP-47M being made. I guess it just depended on the plane. The P-40 went from the XP-40 to the P-40 to the P-40B anyways. Oh well...

- caldrail - 10.05.2009

From aviation-history.com

The prototype XP-40, the Curtiss Hawk Model 81, owed its origin to the earlier Model 75 of 1935 vintage. With the standardization of the Allison V-1710 , the P-36 design was reworked to incorporate this engine, becoming the XP-37 which was equipped with a General Electric turbo-supercharger, and featured numerous other modifications, including a rearward positioned cockpit. Thirteen YP-37s were built for service evaluation; but, with increasingly ominous signs of an approaching war, development of this fighter was abandoned in favor of a less complex and more direct conversion of the P-36 for the Allison engine, the XP-40. This was, in fact, the tenth production P-36A with an integrally-supercharged 1,160 hp Allison V-1710-19 (C13) engine, and first flew with its new power plant in the autumn of 1938. Successful in a US Army Pursuit Contest staged at Wright Field, in May 1939 it was awarded what was at that time the largest-ever production order for a US fighter, totaling nearly thirteen million dollars.

I also note the existence of a YP40F, no doubt to prove the installation of a Rolls Royce Merlin. Incidentially, the P40A was never built and seems to have been intended as a recconsaisance variant

- Guest - 10.05.2009

Ok, fair enough...

- Guest - 21.08.2009

MustangNF Wrote:I found it...

NX300B Thompson Trophy 1947

good idea
beautiful plane

MustangNF Wrote:Any modder want to help us out? Please...

???????????? :roll:

- Guest - 22.08.2009

edited by PabloSniper

[Image: aec01830-1.jpg]

- GeneralPsycho - 22.08.2009

I would love to see this plane in IL2

The looks are very sleek and smooth, i just fell in love with this plane :oops:

- BomberBoy - 22.08.2009

MustangNF Wrote:Kill ratios for the P-40 varry depending on unit, air force, etc. However, the best statistic available is 23.8/1 for the AVG. The statistics on the AVG varry for exact losses but using the USAAF records available here: http://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/factsheets/factsheet.asp?id=1354, they had 286 kills for 12 losses for either MIA or KIA. To better that account, there were four confirmed deaths of AVG pilots in combat. Using that statistic, the ratio jumps to 71.5/1. If you want even better, the AVG got 297 kills including ground plane kills. I won't use these numbers because it seems kind of cheap to do so. Now, back to topic...

Quote:NMUSAF Fact Sheet
286 Japanese planes shot down at a cost of 12 AVG pilots killed or missing in action.

Planes vs. Pilots. That's not the same thing as planes shot down vs. planes lost.

Back on topic....
The P-40Q is an interesting side note to the P-47 and P-51. Kind of a backup plane like the B-32 was to the B-29.
I would think the most difficult part of making a mod for this plane would be to get a reasonably accurate FM.

- Guest - 22.08.2009

With the technology we have today, that shouldn't be a problem. It just seems that modders don't like this plane or don't have or won't make the time to get it in. Please don't come shouting here that it's hard to be a modder and everything that anyone wants can't get into the sim. I know, I'm just calling it the way it is, or at least the way I've been told it is. I'm glad to see that some people have faith in IL2 still. For me, it's aging and I'm not seeing what I wanted the game to have in it like the P-40Q, every Mustang from Mustang I to ETF-51D-5NA to F-6D-20NT to P-51J-NA, the P-47M and P-47N and some other stuff for the Americans. It would seem that instead of building up the American planes for 1939-1946 along with the rest of the neglected countries like Italy and Britain, people are making WWI and Korean stuff while others have totally overloaded themselves with good projects and are now taking a long time or have gotten fed up with everything and quit AAA. It's sad really. I think I might try X-Plane 9...