Yuku free message boards

ChrisPat wrote:

---

Is that all the difference P-36 to P-40?

I couldn't really tell without access to the drawings and design documentation, but I'm sure that some stuff was moved around for c/g purposes (Allison + radiator was probably heavier than the radial and it probably had its c/g located farther from the firewall), the vertical tail probably needed to be enlarged (it's almost impossible for an aircraft to have too much vertical tail, and the in-line would have added area ahead of the c/g).  Overall, though, I think that there was more difference between the airframes of the P-40 and P-40D than between the P-40 and P-36.

I think that the P-36 could have been developed much farther than it actually was:  the R-1830 probably could have been developed to 1250hp by early 1941, and the very-similarly sized R-2000 to about 1400 hp at the same time.  By mid-war the R-1830 could probably have been developed to about 1500 hp, and the R-2000 to about 1700. 

Given that flight reports gave the P-36 very high marks for handling and maneuverability(see http://www.joebaugher.com...f_fighters/p36_10.html), I think a 1400hp version of the P-36, with appropriate equipment would have been a dangerous adversary. 

MBecker01 wrote:

---

"Is that all the difference P-36 to P-40?"

The P-36 version with an Allison was the XP-37. The P-40 looks very different than the XP-37 and Curtiss gave the plane a new internal designation, H-81. The P-36 was the H-75, with the P-40D came such a major redesign that the new planes became the H-87.

Not according to, among other http://www.chuckhawks.com/p40.htm, http://www.historyofwar.o...s_P-40_development.html, http://www.p40warhawk.com/Variants/XP-40.htm, or www.aviation-history.com/curtiss/p40.html.  It used the same tip and root airfoils as the P-36, so it probably did not have a different wing.