P40 engine managment

[unreasonable]

The Hawk 81 is, for me, the best looking of the entire series.

 

 

It seems often the way that the early planes in a series that develops for years are the best looking, I suppose because they have clean lines unencumbered by additional equipment that does not fit into the original air-frame, especially lacking disproportionately bloated engines. I always thought the Battle of Britain era Spitfire Mk.I was the best looking of that series too.

[Guest deleted@50488]

Great shot unreasonable! Thx for sharing!

[unreasonable]

Great shot unreasonable! Thx for sharing!

 

BlitzPig's shot actually: but I agree it is a stunner!

[ShamrockOneFive]

Technically it's John M Dibb's photo (one of the few fairly well known aviation photographers). I've been thinking about buying a re-print from his site.

 

http://planepicture.com/

 

Spectacular photo! The lines on the early P-40s are magnificent for sure. I'm also kind of partial to the long tail P-40M and N models... they look fast even if they aren't

[Stig]

 

 

The P40 was not considered second rate by the USAAF and others, who used it in frontline squadrons until 43 and beyond.

 

 

I have read quite a few threads about the P-40; on aviation enthusiast sites, not just sim game forums. They typically begin with something akin to:

 

'I know that the P-40 was considered outclassed by it's rivals, but I don't feel that it gets the credit it deserves....'

 

These threads are usually rather long, but by the time they end or go off topic, there is little if any evidence to back the OP's feelings. 

[6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann]

Well, I always said that a P-40B or C would have been a much better choice for BoM. The P-40E should have been a BoS Aircraft, with late 1942 Modifications like MAP Regulator and later engine upgrades. That would have been able to boost 56" regularly and would have been competitive, 

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

 

 

Well, I always said that a P-40B or C would have been a much better choice for BoM.

 

Yes, P-40 B would have suit Moscow so much better.

 

 

 

The P-40E should have been a BoS Aircraft

Though P-40E fits much better any Pacific scenarios so there are some benefits in future.

[Caudron431]

Well, I always said that a P-40B or C would have been a much better choice for BoM. The P-40E should have been a BoS Aircraft, with late 1942 Modifications like MAP Regulator and later engine upgrades. That would have been able to boost 56" regularly and would have been competitive, 

True. We can hope at some point there will be a collector P40 B/C. My wallet is ready you know...  

 

Anyway the ingame P40 may be difficult to fight with, but somehow it is really addictive with a lot of character. I find it really interesting, no tamed horse here.

[Farky]

 

It really is an interesting aircraft,  not only could it maneuver quite well, it also could dive at very high speeds safely.

 

At least our in game version has the dive thing right.

 

"Our" P-40E can dive at very high speeds, that is correct. But she does not behave in dive like real P-40, "our" P-40E is better in dive than IRL.

 

 

... The P-40E should have been a BoS Aircraft, with late 1942 Modifications like MAP Regulator and later engine upgrades. That would have been able to boost 56" regularly and would have been competitive,

 

There was no such thing like "late 1942 Modifications like MAP Regulator and later engine upgrades", not in Soviet Union or anywhere else.

[6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann]

"Our" P-40E can dive at very high speeds, that is correct. But she does not behave in dive like real P-40, "our" P-40E is better in dive than IRL.

 

 

There was no such thing like "late 1942 Modifications like MAP Regulator and later engine upgrades", not in Soviet Union or anywhere else.

Well, were there later Production/Modification P-40Es which had 56" released as official Emergency Power? 

[SCG_motoadve]

How long was emergency power meant to last in real life?

In game seems to last less than a minute and engine gets damaged, sometimes a bit more than a minute but never got more than 2 minutes WEP.

[ICDP]

Actually, the bf109 first flight was in 1935 and so was the Curtis P36, the basis of the P40. The P40 first flew in 1937.

 

The P40 was not considered second rate by the USAAF and others, who used it in frontline squadrons until 43 and beyond.

 

The 109E was used on the frontline until well into 41.

 

My point has not been refuted, the P-40 (all variants) were deemed unsuitable for Air combat in western europe.  By the time the P-40E faced the LW in early 42 it was woefully outclassed.  That does not mean it was as useless as it is portrayed in BoS (IMHO) but it was no match overall for the 1942 era 109 and 190.

 

I believe the BoS model should have a slightly improved low speed turn rate and a more durable engine.  My point is I think some of the people here have unrealistic expectations of the P-40.  It is one of my favourite WWII warbirds but I do not buy into the "myth" that is was incorrectly underrated.

[II./JG77_Manu*]

 

 

By the time the P-40E faced the LW in early 42 it was woefully outclassed.

You could say that about any Allied or Comintern bird though. In early 1942 there was no fighter what so ever to come even close to the F4 (apart from the Zero, hence my mentioning). Lagg/Yak with P-engine, Mig3, Spit Mk5, early P38...all not really better fighters then the P40

[JG13_opcode]

Sadly for the P-40 and its many fans ICDP is correct. The UK Air Ministry withdrew it from service in Europe due to the unsatisfactory altitude performance where it could not perform bomber escort duties nearly as well as contemporary spitfire or mustang types.

Edited December 12, 2016 by JG13_opcode

[BlitzPig_EL]

True opcode, but the Air Ministry gave serious consideration to replacing the Hurricane with the P40.

[ICDP]

You could say that about any Allied or Comintern bird though. In early 1942 there was no fighter what so ever to come even close to the F4 (apart from the Zero, hence my mentioning). Lagg/Yak with P-engine, Mig3, Spit Mk5, early P38...all not really better fighters then the P40

 

But this thread is specifically about Allison engine (which uniquely means P-40E) as modeled in BoS is under performing.  Every other fighter you mentioned is irrelevant as far as this debate goes.

[Farky]

Well, were there later Production/Modification P-40Es which had 56" released as official Emergency Power? 

 

Yes, but not until late 1943. By this time, P-40Es had already been used only for training. P-40Es equipped with a MAP regulator ( i.e. with 56" as official War Emergency Rating) never get into a combat, that's what I am saying.

[JAGER_Batz]

 

Yet the Allison was operated for 20 minutes+ at 72 inches in the Pacific and North Africa and still got the pilots home.

 

Honestly guys, this constant round and round about the P40, and soon the P39 and Spitfire will go nowhere.   The devs have their ways set in stone and don't care about the player base beyond their homeland one little bit.

 

Jason, I'm sorry if this seems harsh, but I've been around since the beginning of IL2 and frankly am tired of this nonsense.

 

Allied aircraft will never get an honest representation here.

 

When flying Russian sim, fly Russian plane,   It's the only way to have any fun at all.

 

I'm out.

 

​You are not alone, if there'd been just the slightest sign from the developers side to look at the Alison, I and others would have pre-ordered Kuban already.

 

I agree, I would have also pre-ordered, russian plane, infinite energy !!

[BlitzPig_Bill_Kelso]

One thing that worked fro me was using the undocumented engine upgrade  unlock in the single player aspect of the game. I had to complete the single player campaign using every Soviet plane and be awarded the "Hero of Stalingrad" medal before it showed up as an unlock option online.

 

I typically get 60" of boost for at least 15 minutes if not more and have pushed it higher than that with the engine unlock.

 

Now I typically get at least 3-5 kills on German planes before having to RTB (return to base for you new players).

Edited December 12, 2016 by JG27_Targ

[Venturi]

My point has not been refuted, the P-40 (all variants) were deemed unsuitable for Air combat in western europe. Yes, it was not used. Why? Because the Allies were going to bomb the piss out of Europe and at 8km, the single stage, single speed supercharged Allison couldn't cut it, and, like all other single engine Allied fighters until the P51, it didn't have the legs to get to Germany. By mid to late 42, the P38 was in use instead, a MUCH less maneuverable aircraft than the P40E. Your point HAS been refuted, in that it is erroneous to begin with: You state that the P40 was not used in Europe because it was an all around inadequate performer - which is incorrect. It was an inadequate performer in the specific realm at which Allied strategic command saw use for it, IE strategic high altitude bombing. Additionally, the Pacific theater was in full swing in 1942, and there were hardly the airframes to send to Europe. At lower altitudes it was quite adequate against the best of its contemporary adversaries - the Bf109E and the Mitsubishi Zero.

 

By the time the P-40E faced the LW in early 42 it was woefully outclassed.  That does not mean it was as useless as it is portrayed in BoS (IMHO) but it was no match overall for the 1942 era 109 and 190.

And who here is claiming it is? ONLY YOU.

I said, equal to a 109E - which it currently, is woefully behind. It should outmaneuver the pants off a Bf109E, especially at low speed.

 

I believe the BoS model should have a slightly improved low speed turn rate and a more durable engine.  My point is I think some of the people here have unrealistic expectations of the P-40.  It is one of my favourite WWII warbirds but I do not buy into the "myth" that is was incorrectly underrated.

I think you ought to stick to what you are saying, and stop trying to put words in other people's mouths.

 

But this thread is specifically about Allison engine (which uniquely means P-40E) as modeled in BoS is under performing.  Every other fighter you mentioned is irrelevant as far as this debate goes.

Don't forget the P39, which also used a Allison.

 

Sadly for the P-40 and its many fans ICDP is correct. The UK Air Ministry withdrew it from service in Europe due to the unsatisfactory altitude performance where it could not perform bomber escort duties nearly as well as contemporary spitfire or mustang types.

Yes, it was not good at 8km bomber escorting (not because of the airframe, which actually was designed for high altitude work) but because of the supercharger on the engine. Keep in mind that below 15,000', it actually had BETTER performance because of that supercharger... Because of this, the fact is that the Pacific.... and let's not forget, the NORTH AFRICAN campaigns were much better suited for it. 

Keep in mind, the Eastern front air war was, for the most part, at 3km... and below.

 

You could say that about any Allied or Comintern bird though. In early 1942 there was no fighter what so ever to come even close to the F4 (apart from the Zero, hence my mentioning). Lagg/Yak with P-engine, Mig3, Spit Mk5, early P38...all not really better fighters then the P40

This game represents the 109 as having amazing maneuverability, power, speed, climb, etc - with no flaws. In reality, the Bf109F was indeed very good for the 1942 era, but only when used within the limits it imposed on the pilot. It gave little room for high stick deflections and had high control forces at high speeds, a bad combination. It developed nose down tendencies as it increased speed in a dive, and did not trim quickly out of that tendency. Which, combined with high stick forces, meant many pilots who dove at high speeds did not have good outcomes. Besides this, it also did not accelerate in a dive as quickly as other fighters, a consequence of its light weight, which meant escape was relatively easy if you were in a P38 or P47 at 8km, for instance. You don't see those limitations as it is currently represented in BoS, which is a failing.

Edited December 12, 2016 by Venturi

[ACG_KaiLae]

My point has not been refuted, the P-40 (all variants) were deemed unsuitable for Air combat in western europe.  By the time the P-40E faced the LW in early 42 it was woefully outclassed.  That does not mean it was as useless as it is portrayed in BoS (IMHO) but it was no match overall for the 1942 era 109 and 190.

 

I believe the BoS model should have a slightly improved low speed turn rate and a more durable engine.  My point is I think some of the people here have unrealistic expectations of the P-40.  It is one of my favourite WWII warbirds but I do not buy into the "myth" that is was incorrectly underrated.

 

This is because like the P-39, it was just bad at high altitude. The aircraft developed top speed at only 15k and therefore was not suited to europe. Plus, it was about equal with the E series 109, slightly inferior to the early F models and inferior to the later F and G models (though not enormously so).

 

It should be a good turning, good diving, well armed plane. Right now you got 2 of those.

[ACG_KaiLae]

Yes, but not until late 1943. By this time, P-40Es had already been used only for training. P-40Es equipped with a MAP regulator ( i.e. with 56" as official War Emergency Rating) never get into a combat, that's what I am saying.

 

I got a document saying 60" (15 lbs/sq in) from Allison dated Dec 12, 1942 in a report listing that in the field the engines were being boosted well beyond that and the potential for that to cause damage. That's for a later time when I start digging into engine limits in the FM area.

[ShamrockOneFive]

This is because like the P-39, it was just bad at high altitude. The aircraft developed top speed at only 15k and therefore was not suited to europe. Plus, it was about equal with the E series 109, slightly inferior to the early F models and inferior to the later F and G models (though not enormously so).

 

It should be a good turning, good diving, well armed plane. Right now you got 2 of those.

 

True enough. Some of the guys in the FM section are talking about the CL Max on the P-40E-1 right now... That's an interesting line of discussion. If its revealed that it could be more accurate in that regime... it may make the P-40 a little more of a turn fighter performer than it is right now. It does seem to lack the kind of turn rate that I expected it to have and similarly I feel like its roll rate is a little low although I have nothing to back that up.

Edited December 12, 2016 by ShamrockOneFive

[ACG_KaiLae]

That would be me and a few others actually heh.

[ShamrockOneFive]

That would be me and a few others actually heh.

 

I just saw that! Duh on my part :D

[ICDP]

This is because like the P-39, it was just bad at high altitude. The aircraft developed top speed at only 15k and therefore was not suited to europe. Plus, it was about equal with the E series 109, slightly inferior to the early F models and inferior to the later F and G models (though not enormously so).

 

It should be a good turning, good diving, well armed plane. Right now you got 2 of those.

 

Yes it was about equal to 109E (a plane that preceded it by over 2 years) and in game it is a decent match for a 109E.  Though I think the P-40E should have a more durable engine and better low speed handling in BoS.

 

I agree the early 109F2 (DB 601N) was only slightly superior, especially at P-40E rated altitude where the speeds were similar.

 

I strongly disagree that the P-40E was not enormously inferior to the later F (DB 601 E) and early G (DB 605A)  series 109s.  Both Aircraft had a 20-30 mph speed advantage even at P-40E FTH.  This rose to 70+ mph speed advantage at the F4 and G2 FTH.  Both also had a considerably better climb at all altitudes.

 

If flown like it was in real WWII air combats, where tactics, experience and training were key, then yes the P-40E could and would give a good account of itself even against later LW fighters.  If flown like it is by typical BoS pilots it is woefully outclassed in speed and climb by 109F4, G2 and Fw190A.  A more durable engine and slight low speed maneuverability boost are not going to magically make it an even match up.

 

Maybe we just have differing opinions on what woefully outclassed means.  To me it means that no matter how well you fly, you are instantly and constantly on the defensive when caught 1 on 1 at co alt because a well flown 109F4, G2 or 190A will have complete dominance in the areas that matter.  These are the true contemporaries to the P-40E which was an early 1942 era fighter.

 

Basically:  A slight engine durability boost and a marginal increase in slow speed turn-rate will not magically transform a P-40E into a match for an F4, G2 or 190A.  I'm only saying this because a few posting in here seem to feel the P-40E as it is in BoS is under-modelled by a considerable amount.  They seem to feel it should be pushing massive MP boosts for considerable periods (cus anecdotal evidence said it did in the Pacific and the desert).

Edited December 12, 2016 by ICDP

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

I'm just reading Doomed at the Start and while P-40 (both B and E) was capable, impressions from 1941/1942 Philippine campaign make few things apparent - pilots would push engines to and above the limits if need be, that happened so often when they got jumped by a Zero or Ki-27 (Nate), .50 caliber machine guns quite frequently would jam on them, sometimes whole batter of six would seize to operate, aircraft was not hard to fly but taxing, take-offs and landings were no joke - there is plenty of evidence of pilots who crashed during those. There is in fact one instance when pilot switched from P-40 B to P-40 E and did not take into account weight increase which led to a pre-landing stall and crash, pilot was lucky to be alive. In terms of maneuverability aircraft was not impressive but marked improvement came when pilots removed radios, .30 caliber machine guns (in P-40B of course) and oxygen equipment since they were not flying above 13,000 feet. I'm looking for some interesting quotes that could give a better perspective. For one thing, this forgotten campaign of 1941/1942 became really appealing to me after reading half of the book. 

 

I need to find someone who could make for me a 1941 Philippine P-40 E skin because of that

 

 

 

A more durable engine and slight low speed maneuverability boost are not going to magically make it an even match up.

No, but they could give some confidence for pilots flying the warbird. P-40 is rarely flown, even some minor improvements could make it more appealing. 

[ACG_KaiLae]

Yes it was about equal to 109E (a plane that preceded it by over 2 years) and in game it is a decent match for a 109E.  Though I think the P-40E should have a more durable engine and better low speed handling in BoS.

 

I agree the early 109F2 (DB 601N) was only slightly superior, especially at P-40E rated altitude where the speeds were similar.

 

I strongly disagree that the P-40E was not considerably inferior to the later F (DB 601 E) and early G (DB 605A)  series 109s.  Both Aircraft had a 20-30 mph speed advantage even at P-40E FTH.  This rose to 70+ mph speed advantage at the F4 and G2 FTH.  Both also had a considerably better climb at all altitudes.

 

If flown like it was in real WWII air combats, where tactics, experience and training were key, then yes the P-40E could and would give a good account of itself even against later LW fighters.  If flown like it is by typical BoS pilots it is woefully outclassed in speed and climb by 109F4, G2 and Fw190A.  A more durable engine and slight low speed maneuverability boost are not going to magically make it an even match up.

 

Maybe we just have differing opinions on what woefully outclassed means.  To me it means that no matter how well you fly, you are instantly and constantly on the defensive when caught 1 on 1 at co alt because a well flown 109F4, G2 or 190A will have complete dominance to control the fight.

 

Enormously inferior does not seem to fit. I'm thinking 109E4 vs Hurricane, which is about the same speed disadvantage. I do that every sunday in ACG in the Hurricane and I can tell you while it's difficult to fight in an inferior airplane it's not impossible. 

 

Definitely inferior. But not something like I-15 vs 109 inferior. When the time that G model 109's are around, good term would be obsolescent. At least, at the lower altitudes that you would see in the east, Pacific, and North Africa. 

 

I'm just reading Doomed at the Start and while P-40 (both B and E) was capable, impressions from 1941/1942 Philippine campaign make few things apparent - pilots would push engines to and above the limits if need be, that happened so often when they got jumped by a Zero or Ki-27 (Nate), .50 caliber machine guns quite frequently would jam on them, sometimes whole batter of six would seize to operate, aircraft was not hard to fly but taxing, take-offs and landings were no joke - there is plenty of evidence of pilots who crashed during those. There is in fact one instance when pilot switched from P-40 B to P-40 E and did not take into account weight increase which led to a pre-landing stall and crash, pilot was lucky to be alive. In terms of maneuverability aircraft was not impressive but marked improvement came when pilots removed radios, .30 caliber machine guns (in P-40B of course) and oxygen equipment since they were not flying above 13,000 feet. I'm looking for some interesting quotes that could give a better perspective. For one thing, this forgotten campaign of 1941/1942 became really appealing to me after reading half of the book. 

 

I need to find someone who could make for me a 1941 Philippine P-40 E skin because of that

 

No, but they could give some confidence for pilots flying the warbird. P-40 is rarely flown, even some minor improvements could make it more appealing. 

 

Minor improvements don't interest me. Accuracy compared to the actual plane does, which is my goal, either positive or negative as required. 

Edited December 12, 2016 by Kai_Lae

[Farky]

I got a document saying 60" (15 lbs/sq in) from Allison dated Dec 12, 1942 in a report listing that in the field the engines were being boosted well beyond that and the potential for that to cause damage. That's for a later time when I start digging into engine limits in the FM area.

 

I really don't want to discuss it again from the beginning. Engine was already discussed in detail here - https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/21234-p-40-engine-settings-i-found-them-bit-weird/ , including Allison memo.

 

 

I'm just reading Doomed at the Start and while P-40 (both B and E) was capable, impressions from 1941/1942 Philippine campaign make few things apparent - pilots would push engines to and above the limits if need be, that happened so often when they got jumped by a Zero or Ki-27 (Nate),

 

You can actually find only one or two cases of pushing engines to and above limits in Doomed at the Start. Same in Every Day a Nightmare (sort of sequel to Doomed at the Start). Both excellent books btw.

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

 

 

Minor improvements don't interest me. Accuracy compared to the actual plane does, which is my goal, either positive or negative as required. 

Than prove it and provide data to Developers like it was done with 190.

 

 

 

Every Day a Nightmare

Will have to get this one as well. Thanks Farky for recommendation.  

[ICDP]

No, but they could give some confidence for pilots flying the warbird. P-40 is rarely flown, even some minor improvements could make it more appealing. 

 

I agree up to a point because despite what Venturi is saying, the true contemporaries of the P-40E (a late 1941 - mid 1942 era fighter remember) are the F2, F4, G2 and 190A, not the 109E which was relegated to jabo, or lower priority fronts by this stage of the war.

 

If you are flying a P-40E in 1942 against F4, G2 and 190A fighters you will almost always be defensive.

Edited December 12, 2016 by ICDP

[VBF-12_Snake9]

 

 

in game it is a decent match for a 109E.

 

I can't let that stand.    

 

       

 

109e is the best dog-fighter in the game.  p40 is the worst dog-fighter in the game.  It's not even close.  

 

wow     

[Venturi]

The P40D (kittyhawk mk I), which was identical to the E model (kittyhawk mk Ia) except for gun configuration, was delivered to the front lines starting in May 1941.

 

From a timeframe perspective, it is equivalent to the 109F-2, introduced April 41, and the 109F-4, introduced in June 41. In reality, it faced 109Es and Fs in the MTO and eastern fronts, and Zeros and Oscars on the Pacific and indochina fronts, and while it was better in some areas than these enemy AC, and worse in others, the P40 held its own. THAT is historical fact, jack.

[JG13_opcode]

True opcode, but the Air Ministry gave serious consideration to replacing the Hurricane with the P40.

I think they followed through on this in the Desert theatre, didn't they?

[Crump]

 

 

I strongly disagree that the P-40E was not enormously inferior to the later F (DB 601 E) and early G (DB 605A)  series 109s.  Both Aircraft had a 20-30 mph speed advantage even at P-40E FTH.  This rose to 70+ mph speed advantage at the F4 and G2 FTH.  Both also had a considerably better climb at all altitudes.

 

But none of those aircraft can fly as slow as the P-40E.  That seems to be the biggest issue and will directly affect relative turn performance.

 

Nobody is saying the P-40E should be as fast as the late Bf-109F series and early G series.   

[ICDP]

The P40D (kittyhawk mk I), which was identical to the E model (kittyhawk mk Ia) except for gun configuration, was delivered to the front lines starting in May 1941.

 

From a timeframe perspective, it is equivalent to the 109F-2, introduced April 41, and the 109F-4, introduced in June 41. In reality, it faced 109Es and Fs in the MTO and eastern fronts, and Zeros and Oscars on the Pacific and indochina fronts, and while it was better in some areas than these enemy AC, and worse in others, the P40 held its own. THAT is historical fact, jack.

 

The P-40E first entered combat in WWII on Jan 1st 1942 with the RAF in North Africa.  The fact that the P-40D was delivered to USAAC front line units in May 1941 is irrelevant because the USA was still neutral.

 

I'm not arguing the P-40 didn't historically hold it's own when flown using proper tactics.  If you ignore those tactics and fight like you are on a BoS server then it is and should be totally outclassed.

 

The context of THIS sim is very late 1941 - early 1943 and at that stage the LW consisted mainly of 109F2, F4, G2 and 190A and the 109E was relegated to jabo or less important fronts.  In that context the P-40E is utterly outclassed where it matters by 1942 era LW fighters and a small boost to low speed stall fighting and engine durability will only slightly improve matters for the P-40E pilot.

 

I believe the P-40E needs slightly improved low speed handling and a slightly more durable engine.  It should not get 56" + MAP for extended periods, or out stall fight 109s 100% of the time based on nothing but anecdotal evidence.

 

Ironically I think you and I want the same thing, a more realistically modeled P-40E (and all aircraft to be fair).  Us arguing over front line introduction dates and "contemporary aircraft comparisons is pointless to that goal.

Edited December 13, 2016 by ICDP

[Dakpilot]

Would according to 'test' figures, the long tail and short tail have the same CL/max?

 

In all I have read the long tail F, K and later models are mainly complimented on decent handling, but the E model specifically does not get the same praise. Surely there were good reasons for the changes? Was it unusual in a combat aircraft for it to be prohibited to do spins? this seems unusual, and did the later models also have this restriction, or only the E

 

Am I correct in thinking that USAAF only flew long tail F and later models in WD and Med or have I got that wrong

 

does anyone have an article or info directly comparing the E to later models, 

 

and yes we all want a more realistically modelled P-40E, but just maybe what we secretly want is an F or an N, after all the E was the least used on Eastern front, and had short time as a 'fighter' in WD

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[ICDP]

The P40B/C had a tendency to yaw considerably during speed changes, the later P-40E model was considered to be even worse.  This taken from is from AHT.  The fuselage was lengthened to improve lateral stability and to help deal with the increase torque from subsequently more powerful versions of the Allison engine.

Edited December 13, 2016 by ICDP

[II./JG77_Manu*]

Once again: http://lend-lease.airforce.ru/english/articles/romanenko/p-40/index.htm

 

 

The biggest complaint of some Soviet airmen was its poor climb rate and problems with maintenance, especially with burning out the engines. VVS pilots usually flew the P-40 at War Emergency Power settings while in combat, bringing the acceleration and speed performance closer to that of their German rivals, but could burn out engines in a matter of weeks

[Dakpilot]

Well perhaps this known 'lateral instability'(and large rudder surface) is exacerbated by wrong yaw/roll coupling, that dev's are going to fix for all aircraft in future patch

 

Perhaps this will lead to an overall better flight performance/better handling

 

 

^^EDIT^^

 

*Manu that article in full is discussed in previous page(s) the words "initially" and "attempted" give a slightly different view than your single sentence, it is all a matter of interpretation, In the manual it also allows for use of 'overboost' above max continuous

 

 

 

Cheers Dakpilot

Edited December 13, 2016 by Dakpilot