Curtiss XP-60C/60E

Justo Miranda

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
2 December 2007
Messages
7,701
Reaction score
10,884
Website
www.amazon.com
Curtiss XP-60C (Model 95C) technical data

Power plant: one 2,100 hp Pratt & Whitney R-2800-53, 18 cylinder,air-cooled radial engine, with General Electric turbo-supercharger, driving a six-bladed contra-rotating propeller with 12.1 ft of diameter, wingspan: 41.4 ft (12.62 m), length: 34 ft (10.38 m), height: 12.3 ft (3.75 m), wing area: 284 sq.ft (25.54 sq.m), maximum speed: 414 mph (666 kph), maximum weight: 11,835 lbs (5,368 kg), climb rate: 3,890 ft/min (1,186 m/min), service ceiling: 37,900 ft (11,552 m), armament: four 0.50 cal M2 wing mounted machine guns.

Curtiss XP-60E (Model 95D) technical data

Power plant: one 2,000 hp Pratt & Whitney R-2800-10, 18 cylinder, air-cooled radial engine, with General Electric turbo-supercharger, driving a four-bladed propeller, wingspan: 41.4 ft (12.62 m), length: 33.9 ft (10.33 m), height: 12.3 ft (3.75 m), wing area: 284 sq.ft (25.54 sq.m), maximum speed: 405 mph (652 kph), maximum weight: 10,320 lbs (4,681 kg), climb rate: 4,000 ft/min (1,220 m/min), service ceiling: 38,000 ft (11,582 m), armament: four 0.50 cal M2 wing mounted machine guns with 250 rounds per gun.
 

Attachments

  • 217.jpg
    217.jpg
    280.9 KB · Views: 413
  • 218.jpg
    218.jpg
    242.9 KB · Views: 363
Hi!
http://www.luftfahrtmuseum-hannover.de/images/wehrmann/Curtiss P-60.pdf

From Japanese blog.
XP-53
In-house name CW-88 (model 88). It was an improved version of XP-46, equipped with Continental XIV-1430-3 with laminar flow wing. Contracted on October 1, 1940, but canceled in November 1941 due to XP-60 plan. Two were built, one was converted to XP-60 and the other was used for ground testing.
XP-60
In-house name CW-90 (model 90). Prototype of XP-60 series completed with Rolls-Royce Merlin Mk.28. Eight 12.7mm machine guns were installed, and it made its first flight on September 18, 1941. Modified to XP-60D.
XP-60A
In-house name CW-95A (model 95A). Equipped with an Allison V-1710-75 and B-14 turbocharger, it made its first flight in November 1942. The maximum speed was 676km/h. One aircraft was manufactured and converted to XP-60B.
P-60A
XP-60A mass production plan type. 1900 aircraft were ordered, but all were cancelled.
YP-60A-1
Prototype of P-60A-1. Equipped with a single propeller. 26 aircraft were ordered, 2 of which were completed. One was remodeled into XP-60E.
P-60A-1
A model that was planned to be equipped with a counter-rotating propeller. Equipped with Pratt & Witney R-2800-10 engine. Armament were 4×12.7mm machine guns. 500 were ordered, but all were canceled prior to production.
XP-60B
In-house name CW-95B (model 95B). An aircraft that replaces the XP-60A turbocharger with SU-504-1 made by Wright. Equipped with 6 12.7mm machine guns. Finally refurbished as XP-60E.
XP-60C
In-house name CW-95C (model 95C). It had a contra rotating propeller, and was equipped with the Pratt & Witney R-2800-53 engine, but was scheduled to be equipped with the Chrysler XIV-2220 engine later. First flight in January 1943 with 6 12.7mm machine guns. The maximum speed was 666km/h. 1 aircraft producted.
XP-60D
In-house name CW-90B (model 90B). XP-60 with Packard V-1650-3 engine. Crashed on May 6, 1943.
XP-60E
In-house name CW-95D (model 95D). It was modified from XP-60B. XP-60C contra rotating propeller was changed to a 4-wing propeller, and it made its first flight in May 1943. The maximum speed was 660km/h. It was discarded due to an accident during the test, and the XP-60C aircraft was refurbished and the test continued.
YP-60E
An improved version of the YP-60A-1 that uses a bubble canopy, replacing the engine with the slightly more powerful R-2800-18 as a nominal mass-produced model. It made its first flight on July 15, 1944, but was canceled on December 22.
XP-60F
A modified version of YP-60A-1 with a different model of R-2800. Canceled before modification.
 

Attachments

  • Curtiss P-60.pdf
    341.8 KB · Views: 120
Last edited:
Hi! I made a table for P-53/P-60 fighter.
It was difficult to make a table, especially P&W R-2800 engine data.
I'm not sure each R-2800 turbocharged or not.
Perhaps this table include some mistakes. I will correct them.
 

Attachments

  • P-60.jpg
    P-60.jpg
    179.5 KB · Views: 287

Attachments

  • xp60c-1.jpg
    xp60c-1.jpg
    25.1 KB · Views: 240
  • xp60-2.jpg
    xp60-2.jpg
    32.7 KB · Views: 250
  • xp-60c_3d_164.jpg
    xp-60c_3d_164.jpg
    50.9 KB · Views: 322
Last edited:
Hi!
 

Attachments

  • P-47 VS XP-60E.jpg
    P-47 VS XP-60E.jpg
    114.2 KB · Views: 287
I reviewed the table of P-60 series fighters, referring to justo-san's wonderful data. It's a very difficult task for me.
 

Attachments

  • P-60 VARIATION 1.jpg
    P-60 VARIATION 1.jpg
    190.3 KB · Views: 212
  • P-60 VARIATION 2.jpg
    P-60 VARIATION 2.jpg
    185.7 KB · Views: 193
This aircraft must be YP-60A-1 or XP-60E .
Thanks a lot Johnbr-san. You have many amazing pictures.:)
 
Oh XP-60E!! Thanks a lot dan_inbox-san.:)
Bubble canopy is YP-60E.
 
Last edited:
Hi! Difficult.....I will continue the investigation.:)
 

Attachments

  • p-60.jpg
    p-60.jpg
    38.7 KB · Views: 205
Last edited:
What went wrong with Curtiss, that sunk them in ten years ? 1937-47 ?


From Wikipedia, and related to this topic:

"Curtiss-Wright failed to make the transition to design and production of jet aircraft, despite several attempts. During the war, the company had expended only small amounts on aircraft research and development, instead concentrating on incremental improvements in conventional aircraft already in wartime production. This was especially true in the first two years of the war. Curtiss' failure to research and develop more advanced wing and airframe designs provided an opening for North American, Bell, Lockheed, Northrop, and other U.S. aircraft manufacturers to submit newer and more advanced aircraft designs. The P-60, the firm's last prop-driven fighter design, was merely an extrapolation of its 1930s P-36 Hawk, offering no advantage over other designs already in service. With the rapid development of jet engine technology and near-supersonic flight, this technological lag resulted in Curtiss losing a number of critical postwar military aircraft orders. The final nail in the coffin was the choice of the Northrop F-89 Scorpion over the XF-87 Blackhawk; after the F-87 was cancelled October 10, 1948, Curtiss-Wright shut down its entire Aeroplane Division and sold the assets to North American Aviation."


The company already exists in 2020

 
What went wrong with Curtiss, that sunk them in ten years ? 1937-47 ?


From Wikipedia, and related to this topic:


...Curtiss' failure to research and develop more advanced wing and airframe designs provided an opening for North American, Bell, Lockheed, Northrop, and other U.S. aircraft manufacturers to submit newer and more advanced aircraft designs. The P-60, the firm's last prop-driven fighter design, was merely an extrapolation of its 1930s P-36 Hawk, offering no advantage over other designs already in service....

The rap on Curtiss-Wright has long been that they tried to get by on the cheap and that they relied too long on stretching old designs. This doesn't seem to me like an adequate explanation. They tried to replace the P-40 with a totally new design, the P-46. The remarkable fact is that it performed so poorly, and there's no obvious reason. Its general layout is remarkably similar to NAA's competing NA-73, which, of course, became the excellent P-51. NAA's ventral radiator design is cited as a big part of its aerodynamic edge, but is that the only real difference?
As for the P-60, dismissing it as a mere "extrapolation" ignores the fact that it also used a completely new wing and, in its later versions, new everything. I think Curtiss' management might be forgiven for not rolling the dice on another totally new prototype after the loss of time and money they experienced on the P-46. Granted, their engineers may not have had the genius of an Ed Heinemann leading the way, and their later designs were, let's just say, uninspired (XP-62, for example). It may be that Curtiss had one clear shot at beating its rivals in the Air Force fighter game, and the XP-46 was it. After that failed, it was either play it safe or take even bigger risks.
 
Curtiss XP-60E, Connie II, No. 80 at the SDASM Archives

See also:
The labels and picture descriptions might be false. Also some of these pictures have been posted before, either here in this topic or somewhere else in this forum. That is the main reason, why I won't attach or link each individual picture here in this forum. :)
 
Hi! XP-60E.
I can see fuselage bottom air outlet and fuselage side air outlet (before US Army Aviation International Sign).
I imagine that fuselage bottom air outlet is turbocharger drive gas outlet (engine exhaust gas) and fuselage side air outlet is intercooler cooling air outlet.
Also I imagine that fuselage bottom air intake is for turbocharger and intercooler. Perhaps oil cooler is located bottom of the engine.
I want to know your opinion.

https://www.mediastorehouse.com/mar...urtiss-model-95-xp-60e-42-79425-10631986.html
 

Attachments

  • XP-60E LARGE.jpg
    XP-60E LARGE.jpg
    253.3 KB · Views: 159
  • Curtiss XP-60E Flying.png
    Curtiss XP-60E Flying.png
    1.7 MB · Views: 160
Last edited:

Attachments

  • YP_60E_43_32763_02_large.jpg
    YP_60E_43_32763_02_large.jpg
    639.9 KB · Views: 156
  • YP_60E_43_32763_01_large.jpg
    YP_60E_43_32763_01_large.jpg
    186.4 KB · Views: 148
  • yp60e_03.jpg
    yp60e_03.jpg
    56 KB · Views: 158
  • p60e-2.jpg
    p60e-2.jpg
    50.1 KB · Views: 266
Last edited:
From the book, The American Fighter The Definitive Guide to American Fighter Aircraft from 1917 to the Present.
 

Attachments

  • 1.png
    1.png
    817.4 KB · Views: 180

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom