F.A.Q Section

Q: Do you take aircraft requests?
A: I have a list of aircraft I plan to cover, but feel free to add to it with suggestions:)

Q: Why do you use imperial measurements for some videos, and metric for others?
A: I do this based on country of manufacture. Imperial measurements for Britain and the U.S, metric for the rest of the world, but I include text in my videos that convert it for both.

Q: Will you include video footage in your videos, or just photos?  
A: Video footage is very expensive to licence, if I can find footage in the public domain I will try to use it, but a lot of it is hoarded by licencing studies (British Pathe, Periscope films etc). In the future I may be able to afford clips :)

Q: Why do you sometimes feature images/screenshots from flight simulators?
A: Sometimes there are not a lot of photos available for certain aircraft, so I substitute this with digital images that are as accurate as possible.

Feel free to leave you questions below - I may not be able to answer all of them, but I will keep my eyes open :)

'doesn't like high altitudes, has stability problems, a bit fat' - now I see why I relate to the P-40...

The P40 was the workhorse, never got any attention but it just plugged away and killed many more than it lost. One of the greatest aircraft made

My great uncle flew P-40's in North Africa (260 Squadron RAF), but disappeared on a mission in 1942 and was never seen again. He was, however, awarded the DFM, (Distinguished Flying Medal) posthumously, for his previous actions in battles, some of which they were outnumbered in by four to one.

The P40 was a good example of success in warfare being a combination of what you've got and what you do with it - look at the Finns and the much derided Brewster Buffalo

The Flying Tigers would not look the same without them.

The wildcat, P-40, and Sherman tank may not have been the best, but when needed in quantity it was all we had. They were good enough to get us through when we desperately needed them..

I think it was general mismanagement at Curtiss that ruined the company. They had some good ideas but just didn't invest enough in research and development to keep abreast of new tech. The P-40 was a good plane but Curtiss relied too much on that contract. I think the SB2C damaged Curtiss more than the P40 ever did.

"The P-40 was a high speed, low altitude sledgehammer of a plane." -Best description ever. I have for many years been smitten by this plane. Thanks for the in-depth review, as well as the defense of her honor.

The story of the Australian 75 squadron was impressive, a rough start ...rough conditions..... tough enemy with excellent planes and experience.

The P-40 is one more evidence how underappreciated "good enough" often is.
It was a solid performer, shining trough those qualities most only value when they really needed it.
Brings to mind the Focke-Wulf FW 187, another plane not recognized as what would be truly necessary.

I've had a soft spot for the P-40 since I was a kid, and I'm glad you've given it the recognition on a platform with such wide reach that it deserves.

I was once fortunate enough to see a P-40, a P-51 and an F4U all fly together in a V formation at an airshow, all three of my favorite warbirds at once, a real treat to see and hear!

Interesting fact: Later model P-40s could actually develop over 1700 horsepower from the Allison V-1710 by going above the maximum recommended manifold pressure, which it turns out later models of V-1710s could do quite comfortably with a few small tweaks. So in the hands of experienced pilots and maintenance personnel, the Kittyhawk could be very fast indeed at low altitude. And the Allison V-1710 was better engine than it gets credit for.

My father was a frogman and my mother was an army nurse, both during the Normandy invasion. They never talked much about it. It made me endlessly curious about the 2nd world war. I am fascinated by everything. But aircraft especially. So thank you so much for such well-produced videos on these aircraft. I've very much enjoyed them.

Both P40 videos have been excellent. Many thanks.

As aviation was evolving at such a rapid pace  I feel like it was the first really cool and tough looking fighter of that time.  Being so cool and versatile it flew in every theater of the war from day one to VJ Day and beyond

"You must use the strong points of your equipment and deny the enemy the advantage of his. Each type of plane has its strong points and weaknesses . . . . You can count on a high top speed, faster dive and super firepower. Japanese planes have a faster rate of climb, higher ceiling and shorter radius of turn. If they can get you into their kind of fast-turning combat, they are deadly. Use your superior speed and faster dive to make a pass at your opponent, get in a quick burst and then break away. You have the edge in that type of combat".
  "Our planes can take a beating and still be patched up to fly again. Many times the ruggedness of our airplanes has been all that has kept us in the fight".
 General Chennault to his "Flying Tigers".
Excellent documentary. Thank You

The Dutch NEIAAF used the P-40N they retained from 120 Sqn during the early phase of the Indonesian Independence war,  remaining active until July 1949 when they were replaced with surplus P-51D/K's.

One  point of order:  The Royal Australian Air Force P-40s were not replaced by P-38s.  The RAAF only received 3 Lightnings, variously described as P-38Es or F-4 reconnaissance Lightnings.