Curtiss monoplane fighters

ysi_maniac

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
26 January 2007
Messages
81
Reaction score
30
There is other Curtiss fighters thread already in this forum but under "Designation systems". IMO to speak about these projects must be done under "Early Aircraft projecs". Anyway, administrators can move this thread wherever they want.

I begin speaking about this plane: http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,1643.msg153832.html#msg153832

Taken from: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0764325809/ref=ox_sc_act_title_2?ie=UTF8&m=ATVPDKIKX0DER

In 1940, Pratt & Whitney purchased from Curtiss a complete H81A-1 (P-40) airframe, without engine, with the intention of using it to test their R-1830-SSC7-G Twin Wasp. The resulting aircraft looked like a P-36 on steroids.

By November 10 1942 P&W reported that this hybrid plane performed much better than P-40F.

By December 29 1942, the Air Materiel Command ruled that "putting the R-1830 engine into the latest type P-40 aircraft is viewed as not worth the trouble and engineering time".
 
The notion of a "Transport" version of the famous P-40 fighter is just about as improbable as, say, a P-26 water-bomber... ;D

And yet... the 1945-46 Curtiss-Wright models index lists precisely one such proposal under the designation "Hawk 87A-6"!!! :eek:

I really DO wonder what sort of a transport could be derived from a single-seat pursuit! Any ideas/clues/pointers, anyone?
 

Attachments

  • H87A-6.jpg
    H87A-6.jpg
    11.6 KB · Views: 677
No need to repeat here the photo from the other topic. The link is enough.

I don't think it would have been such a radically different version, though, since it was still a Hawk 87A-something, therefore part of the P-40E/Kittyhawk I family.

I have ventured this profile which is of course completely hypothetical and not based on any description or technical data. Just a work of the imagination...
 

Attachments

  • P-40 transport.jpg
    P-40 transport.jpg
    222 KB · Views: 621
Nice Stéphane! Here's another work of imagination using 'passenger pods' à la the Ju-87D-3 trials. Original P-40E artwork was by Evan McKenzie.
 

Attachments

  • hypothetical-p40-transport-after-evan-mckenzie.jpg
    hypothetical-p40-transport-after-evan-mckenzie.jpg
    17.1 KB · Views: 603
Apophenia said:
Nice Stéphane! Here's another work of imagination using 'passenger pods' à la the Ju-87D-3 trials. Original P-40E artwork was by Evan McKenzie.

This is unexpected and quite interesting...

Jemiba said:
I would have rather thought of something like the SNCAC NC.800 "Le Cab"

I like this idea. Not just because the NC.800 is a favorite but also because of some similarities with the XP-37 which would make a montage easier to do... ;)

Perhaps we ought to split the last three posts and move them to the "Theoretical" section?
 
Meanwhile, my attempts at a Cab-like P-37 and a Cab-like P-40E.

My impression is that the Cab configuration on the P-37 might have worked but that it would have made the P-40E way too nose-heavy.
 

Attachments

  • P-37 transport small.jpg
    P-37 transport small.jpg
    99 KB · Views: 562
  • P-40E transport small.jpg
    P-40E transport small.jpg
    127.2 KB · Views: 552
Great work indeed, thank you Stéphane !

Stargazer2006 said:
...but that it would have made the P-40E way too nose-heavy.

The compartment abov the wing may have resulted in no change of the CG, I think, just the
compartment behind the cockpit might be tricky. IIRC, the Douglas Skyraider was used as a
transport with a rear pasenger compartment, too, but it probably had to sacrifice tanks or
equipment positioned in the rear
 
Putting this here in lieu of no dedicated P-40 thread (image created by Alan Griffith - see below):

31-3.jpg
 
Last edited:
GTX, if you are going to use my artwork I would appreciate an accreditation for myself as well for The Aviation Historian article from which it came.

My article went into some detail about this design and others for ramming enemy bombers and may still be available from The Aviation Historian web site. These studies, in fact, completely negate ANY reference to the AAF wanting to use the P-79 as a ram. While this was clearly one of the ideas that Jack Northop had for the aircraft, by the time the initial proposal for the aircraft was made the AAF had long-since given up on anything as stupid and suicidal as ramming as an accepted tactic.

Respectfully submitted,

Alan Griffith
 
GTX, if you are going to use my artwork I would appreciate an accreditation for myself as well for The Aviation Historian article from which it came.

My article went into some detail about this design and others for ramming enemy bombers and may still be available from The Aviation Historian web site. These studies, in fact, completely negate ANY reference to the AAF wanting to use the P-79 as a ram. While this was clearly one of the ideas that Jack Northop had for the aircraft, by the time the initial proposal for the aircraft was made the AAF had long-since given up on anything as stupid and suicidal as ramming as an accepted tactic.

Respectfully submitted,

Alan Griffith

My apologies Alan - I actually just found it online and uncredited. Will correct it now.
 
During preparations for the D-Day landings, General Eisenhower surveyed the beaches from a modified P-51 B Mustang, at the time the best low-altitude recce airplane available.

Moving fast forward, several "warbird" P-40s have been converted to two-seaters by installing a second seat behind the pilot's set. This requires removing some armour, radios and perhaps a fuel tank.
Dozens of single-seater P-51s, etc. have been similarly converted almost to TF-51 configuration. In Britain, the industry focuses on converting Hurricanes, Soitfires and Messerschmitt 109s. Only handfuls of two-seater Spitfires and Me-109s were built during WW and zero 2-seater Hurricanes. Only a handful of military Hurricanes were converted during the war (e.g. in Russia).
There is a growing industry that offers "warbird experiences" in exchange for thousand dollar "donations" to the charities that own these warbirds.
 
GTX, could you tell me where online you found it? I may need to have a word with the folks there, too. Thanks in advance. Also, note in the drawing that the armor protecting the face and head of the pilot folded forward so as to out of the way for "normal" combat - at least as much as an extremely overloaded P-40 could handle.

Riggerrob, I'll have to look it up. It was back in 2014 or so and is little bit back in my memory and records. You can look it up on The Aviation Historian's website. The article was entitled "America's Rammjaegers".

AlanG
 
According to TAH Index: 'America’s Ramjägers', The Aviation Historian, Issue Number 9, pages 30–37

 

Attachments

  • TAH-9-contents.jpg
    TAH-9-contents.jpg
    210.1 KB · Views: 190
Last edited:
During preparations for the D-Day landings, General Eisenhower surveyed the beaches from a modified P-51 B Mustang, at the time the best low-altitude recce airplane available.

Moving fast forward, several "warbird" P-40s have been converted to two-seaters by installing a second seat behind the pilot's set. This requires removing some armour, radios and perhaps a fuel tank.
Dozens of single-seater P-51s, etc. have been similarly converted almost to TF-51 configuration. In Britain, the industry focuses on converting Hurricanes, Soitfires and Messerschmitt 109s. Only handfuls of two-seater Spitfires and Me-109s were built during WW and zero 2-seater Hurricanes. Only a handful of military Hurricanes were converted during the war (e.g. in Russia).
There is a growing industry that offers "warbird experiences" in exchange for thousand dollar "donations" to the charities that own these warbirds.
Some additional info here
 

Attachments

  • 270.jpg
    270.jpg
    159.6 KB · Views: 180
  • 271.jpg
    271.jpg
    57.8 KB · Views: 175
  • 3_11_b1.jpg
    3_11_b1.jpg
    123.4 KB · Views: 172
  • media-17021.jpeg
    media-17021.jpeg
    36.9 KB · Views: 158
  • media-401074.jpg
    media-401074.jpg
    77.8 KB · Views: 132
  • media-401135.jpg
    media-401135.jpg
    76.9 KB · Views: 140
  • 267.jpg
    267.jpg
    355.1 KB · Views: 139
  • 268.jpg
    268.jpg
    358.6 KB · Views: 146
  • 269.jpg
    269.jpg
    238.8 KB · Views: 168
Some additional info
Sources
-Wings palette
-Republic P-47 Thunderbolt by Martin Velek, MBI 1997
 

Attachments

  • 315.jpg
    315.jpg
    154.1 KB · Views: 141
  • 318.jpg
    318.jpg
    60.8 KB · Views: 157
  • 319.jpg
    319.jpg
    353.5 KB · Views: 177
  • 321.jpg
    321.jpg
    386.9 KB · Views: 179
  • 316.jpg
    316.jpg
    109.1 KB · Views: 162
  • 317.jpg
    317.jpg
    122.2 KB · Views: 123
  • 320.jpg
    320.jpg
    121.2 KB · Views: 157
Model 30A, one of the proposals for what became the XP-37 and surely one of the ugliest designs of its era. Mid-engine driving the prop by way of an extension shaft with turbo and associated equipment in the nose.
curtiss model 30a.png
 
Model 30A, one of the proposals for what became the XP-37 and surely one of the ugliest designs of its era. Mid-engine driving the prop by way of an extension shaft with turbo and associated equipment in the nose.

What is your source ?.
 
Hi,

Curtiss P.259 & P.264 were a twin engined fighter projects,I ask if they depended on P.253/AT-9 or
not ?.
 
Commentary on those drawings by 3D modeller Witold Jaworski:
-- https://airplanes3d.wordpress.com/2020/02/23/yp-37-with-the-r-2600-radial-engine/
Fascinating research, thanks! The kind that is only too seldom found in so-called "specialized" press (one of the reasons I no longer buy aviation magazines, and prefer the research of online enthusiasts...) It offers a great glimpse into the thinking and decisions of engineers faced with a variety of choices and how they narrow it down along the way. I had a feeling there must have been more to the P-37 story and it all confirms it in a pleasantly unexpected way.
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom