Ive just put the wings on my 48 tamiya F4F-4 last night, and it struck me, those are some HUGE wings for such a tiny aircraft. But the control surfaces are proportionately tiny.
So my question, knowing what we know about aerodynamics and other stuff. How would you change a WW2 aircraft to improve it?
Pick one aircraft that you feel could be greatly improved by some small changes, and tell us how youd change it.
Ill pick the F4F. Enlarge the control surfaces. Add a second stage supercharger to the engine. And, maybe put a more powerful engine in it.
Oh and flush rivet everything.
Thinking on it now id probably put a bubble canopy on it too. Or at the very least put P-40 style scallops behind the pilot to improve visibility.
So what would you do?
"I am a leaf on the wind, watch how i soar"
Recite the litanies, fire up the Gellar field, a poo storm is coming
Check out my blog here.
P-40 warhawk - two stage supercharger, and an additional 2x 20mm hispano cannons too the 6 - 50cals.
This would not only improve the performance in higher altitudes but give it a better range, making it superior to the p-51. And faster to mass produce, which the P-40 was designed for.
How abot we turn this into a GB? Build your favourite plane, and modify it to suit yourself. I'll co-host with you? Since we are both hosting a GB each at the moment. So it would be easier if we co-hosted it?
I hope you like the idea, I've got a P-40N in the stash!
That sounds cool. Give this post a day or too, see what sort of interest we get.
I like that idea of the p-40. It sounds like the XP-40Q.
Found this P-40 too.
Twin P-40.
Have you seen the FM-2 Wildcat?
Dave
The P-40N twin. That was its name how original.
I like the P-40Q it was better than the p51. But the p51 was already in production so…
I hope this GB takes off then!
I always thought a P-38 with two Packard Merlins would be really cool.
Though, during the war, they couldn't make enough of those engines. They tried them in the P-40 too.
Also, it's my understanding that Packard and North American could not reach an agreement with Rolls Royce for Merlins after the war when they were making the P-82/F-82 Twin Mustang so they used Allisons instead.
The P-40F/L/K all had Merlin's, but they were only single stage superchargers.
The P-38's airframe could not support those huge merlins as well.
dmk Ill pick the F4F. Enlarge the control surfaces. Add a second stage supercharger to the engine. And, maybe put a more powerful engine in it. Have you seen the FM-2 Wildcat?
Yeah, the improvements were minor in the grand scheme of things. Increased engine power (doesn't account for much) Tall tail. Major control surfaces were left the same, i would have made them larger for improved manoeuvrability which was the most important thing against the zero's.
How's about a B-25 dropping the Wright R-2600s for Pratt & Whitney R-2800s?
P-47 "Superbolt" with the P&W R-4360 "Corncob"...
On the Bench: 1/32 Trumpeter P-47 | 1/32 Hasegawa Bf 109G | 1/144 Eduard MiG-21MF x2
On Deck: 1/350 HMS Dreadnought
Blog/Completed Builds: doogsmodels.com
the real red baron The P-40F/L/K all had Merlin's, but they were only single stage superchargers. The P-38's airframe could not support those huge merlins as well.
And? strengthen the airframe, nip here, tuck there, bobs your auntie.
In all seriousness. A P-38 could conceivable hold a pair of merlins. Beef up the undercarriage. Strengthen the airframe a bit. and with the added weight probably bring the engines back a bit.
Scorpiomikey Yeah, the improvements were minor in the grand scheme of things. Increased engine power (doesn't account for much) Tall tail. Major control surfaces were left the same, i would have made them larger for improved manoeuvrability which was the most important thing against the zero's.
I do remember reading somewhere that the P-40 actually had a very high roll rate, better than the Zeke's in fact. It doesn't seem like the Warhawk's ailerons are all that big either. I guess the Zeke just had a lower wing loading so it could pull much harder once it banked and got in the turn though because it could certainly out turn a P-40.
The larger ailerons had a higher roll rate at lower speeds.
The smaller ailerons had a higher roll rate at higher speeds.
The P-40 had a extremely high roll rate, as well as a very very very high dive speed.
http://www.chuckhawks.com/p40.htm
I look at it like this.
F4F, Aileron is quite deep, bet very short. Less than a 3rd of the wing.
P-40, Aileron is again quite deep, but short, less than half the wing.
Zeke. Aileron is very shallow, but very long. Which ones more manoeuvrable?
Lockheed had already tried the Merlins on the p-38, it would have been the P-38K. It did have improved performance (see link below). They (Lockheed) said it would take only 2 weeks to convert the production lines over while the War Department thought it would take several months. This was not allowed by the USAAF as it could have destroyed Allison and they wanted to keep that company viable. remember it cost the price of two Mustangs to build a P-38, so there was economic concerns.
http://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_fighters/p38_14.html
Mike T.
Beware the hobby that eats. - Ben Franklin
Do not fear mistakes. You will know failure. Continue to reach out. - Ben Franklin
The U.S. Constitution doesn't guarantee happiness, only the pursuit of it. You have to catch up with it yourself. - Ben Franklin
While we're talking P-38s with Merlins...what about a P-38 with R-2800s? That would be one MEAN-looking devil!