iaclmac

Ok guys .... here is my story. Recently I was surfing the net for varients of the P-40. During my research I uncovered a TWIN ENGINE P-40. There wasn't much information out there. All that I have been able to find is a black & white photo of the plane. According to the article the twin engine was done as a mock-up only and never produced. Be that as it may ... somewhere and at sometime a 3-view of this aircraft has to have been done. DOES ANYONE OUT THERE HAVE THIS 3-VIEW OR KNOW OF HOW I CAN GET MY HADS ON A DECENT 3-VIEW???? I really want to scratch build this puppy!!!

JET FX

It does not look the 'designer' was serious?? it would fly about as well as a brick! Take a look at where the wheels are positioned, maybe if the wing spare was made from unobtainium!!! Seriously it has to be a joke

Sandmann_AU

There's no reason you couldn't do it, but the way it sits in that pic I'd have to agree that it'd be a poor flier. It'd need more wing than the mock-up has for a start, and a bunch more vertical too. That one looks like a normal P-40 that's had a pair of noses bolted to the standard wings and a lump of something with some barrels sticking out stuck in the standard engine bay. If you actually built it up like that it'd be way tail heavy and wouldn't have enough wing to lift the extra weight without an enormous wing loading, plus without the draught from the prop going over the fuselage the standard vertical & rudder would be fairly useless once the tail wheel left the ground.

CorsairJock

My Feedback: (90)

Tail heavy? With twice as many engines in front of the CG, I would think it would be NOSE heavy. Extending the tail would go a long way towards balancing it out, and would add much needed stability, but I'm thinking the tail surfaces would STILL need to be enlarged some, and adding a little more wing area wouldn't hurt either. Maybe somethinh like adding FULL wing panels aoutboard of the engines, with constant chord 'plugs' between engines and fuselage. And then there's the landing gear: even the twin Mustangs had to come up with a differnt main gear arangement than the P-51.

I am familiar with the story of this aircraft, have never seen anything (drawings, pics, or otherwise) of it other than the photo that you posted. As stated: it WAS a mockup. And altho it may have been seriously considered at some time: I'm sure the 'designers' quickly realized that a LOT of modifications would be needed to make it flyable.

AmishWarlord

My Feedback: (5)

Wow a twin P-40 would be SWEET! ....but not that one!

1 Lengthen wing.
2 Move engine nacelles under wing.
3 Move main landing gear into nacelles
4 Lengthen tail
5 Enlarge tail surfaces.

Ummmm this thing it starting to look like a Mosquito with shark mouths on the engines.

iaclmac

Thanks for the input .... Your points are well taken. In fact I had been already considering a lot of what you said. Also, since we are not dealing with an actual production plane, it has occurred to me that a certain about of "poetic license" could be employed. I have been looking at the P-82 twin mustangs as well as the twin Messerschmitt ME-109's for additional inspiritation. I haven't gotten it all sorted out in my mind yet. A lot of my thinking will probably under go a lot of changes once I start to draw out my version of this mock-up. Still it is a challanging project. One of the greatest thrills for me is to have something at the flying field that no one has ever seen before.

ZERO-322

My Feedback: (2)

wouldn't it make more sense to make the wing bigger and the nacelles smaller more proportional to the plane overall ? would that solve allot of the problems listed above ? I sure hope you make a go of it ! I would love to see it that's for sure !

joey_snaproll

My Feedback: (32)

Hey iaclmac,I say go for it. Thats what this hobby is all about.If you have to make some small changes to help it fly .do it. I like different birds.If you want to bash a arf, use a .60 nitro p-40 and get some .40 p-40 cowls ,widen the wing a bit at the root by making a new center section like a hanger 9 corsair /hellcat. enlarge the tail feathers and see what happens.

I have a few weird planes I 'm working on .I'll try and post a few pictures.

I say go for it.

Joe

joey_snaproll

My Feedback: (32)

Here are some pictures. Again try and do the twin ,I would like to see it. and the float plane I have built just need to tweek the balancing issue.

Joe

fockewulf37

My Feedback: (102)

Here you go It mostly done for you ....
ME 109-Z

http://www.rcuniverse.com/market/item.cfm?itemId=545761


ty

iaclmac

YOU guys have certainly done some exceptional work. I hope I can do as well with the P-40 Project

deatonbt

I've always thought that the P-40Q looked really cool.

Sandmann_AU

That's the problem.. the single engine is quite a way ahead of the CG, but the twin engines on the wing are just barely ahead of CG. You end up with a bunch of weight sitting on the main spar jacking up the wing loading with nothing out in front to balance the tail. Then you have the added weight of the two fuel tanks and two servos on or behind the CG. Think about the difference in size to balance a tail heavy plane between a heavy brass prop nut, and lead weights on the firewall - it's basic leverage, the further away from the pivot point the weight is, the greater the impact on the balance for the same weight. I came across the same issue when I converted my original 60 size trainer to twin 40's... I had to mount two 4.8V battery packs in the original (now enclosed) engine bay just to get the thing to balance. If you have a look at most full size twins the engines actually stick a fair way out from the wing's LE in an effort to get all that weight forward.

Sandmann_AU

Yeah that does look cool.. somewhere between a Spitfire and a P-51.

joey_snaproll

My Feedback: (32)

Yea I like that p-40Q,looks neat. As for the p-40 twin go electric and have the battery under each motor,all the electronics in the nose of the fuse,Still I say give it a go. put a add out and see if you can get banged up p-40 parts from people and go from there.you would have a interesting plane at your field.

Joe

paint-boy

Joe,

Just curious what the Me 109 / Fw 190 with swept gull wing is?

joey_snaproll

My Feedback: (32)

Hi Paint boy ,I don't want to steal the thread so I'll give a quick answer about the swept wing .it was a concept plane ,not sure if any were made ,but the germans wanted to see if they could get a faster FW-190 with a swept wing. It was a Fw 190 v-19 (falcon wing). I need to find info more on this plane .I thought it looked cool .I have the parts cut just need to find time to build.I'll do a thread when I build it.

iaclmac- not sure how much you would want to spend but I came across a plane at e-bay and some smaller p-40 cowls ,then if you went electric make a plug and vacuum form the back part of the engine cowl for the wing pods keeps weight down. The p-40 cowls are there small electric ones from the great plane ARF.Might work . Anyway I'll post the parts web address .

http://cgi.ebay.com/P-40-Warhawk-60-...d=p4999.c0.m14

http://cgi.ebay.com/Great-Planes-Cow...4999.m20.l1116. .

Joe

AmishWarlord

My Feedback: (5)

Hey Joey that is a awesome collection of rare birds you got there. I love the Extra 300 Float plane with the retractable float gear! Here is one you should ad to your collection!

CorsairJock

My Feedback: (90)

Another unique P-40, well sorta:
The wings (outer panels) of the Fisher (GM) XP-75 are P-40 wings, the tail feathers are from SBD Daunless, and I'm thinking the main landing gear was F4U Corsair:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XP-75