Curtiss P-40K Kittyhawk Mk III by realworkingsailor - Special Hobby - 1/72

[realworkingsailor]

For those following at home, my hobby time has been a little curtailed as of late last winter. Other projects took priority and time at the bench has been limited. I'm not yet ready to get back to it, since the weather continues to slowly improve, and the outdoor projects are stacking up, but I thought I would at least start a topic as a placeholder for when I get back into model building.

 

This particular project has come about as a result of another project I've been working on over the winter (and will be working on for a long time yet). It began with a google query made on the spur of the moment, and has since snowballed from there. To provide a little clarity, my great uncle was an officer in the 2nd Medium Regiment, Royal Canadian Artillery, during the second world war. He served in the Italian campaign as well as the final liberation of the Netherlands. He never spoke much of his experiences when he was alive, and even my uncles and aunt don't really know what he did during the war either. Just for a laugh, I decided to see if  the regimental war diary was available online. Well, I had great success there and I have discovered some amazing stories. Cross referencing the war diary with some history books, I've been able to put things in their proper context, and I'm endeavouring to create a more readable history to share with the rest of the family.

 

Anyway, getting more to the project at hand.

 

My great uncle and his regiment arrived in Sicily in early November 1943. As part of the wheeling and dealing that saw the Canadian forces in Italy brought up to Corps strength, they arrived without any of their heavy equipment (no transport, no guns, just the packs on their backs). They remained in Sicily until the end of the year, before moving to the mainland in January '44. While the regiment's time in Sicily was largely uneventful, one particular occurrence caught my eye.

 

On the evening of the 21st of November, a plane was seen to crash near one of the regiment's battery HQs:

 

 

My uncle was assigned to "Q" battery, so I'm certain he was well aware, if not involved in, the aftermath of the event. The war diary recorded few details concerning the plane that crashed, including the type and the serial number. This provided a great jumping off point and I was able to find some interesting information, and a bit of a mystery.

 

Researching the serial number, I found an online compilation of aircraft flown by the somewhat legendary 112 Squadron RAF. FR213, 42-45817 was delivered to the squadron as in July 1942, and assigned the code letters GA Q. It occasionally wore the code GA ? when used by squadron leader Billy Drake. The record I found doesn't note much else about the plane, other than it was a short tailed P-40K-5. The fate of the plane is recoded as "unknown".  

 

From my research, 112 squadron was based at a place recorded as "Mileni" towards the end of October 1943, and didn't move again until early '44. Although I can't locate the exact location, I think it was in the Foggia area. This brings up the first of many questions. If FR213 was still assigned to 112 Squadron, what was it doing in Sicily while the squadron was near Foggia (on the Adriatic side of Italy)? Secondly, it seems to have been quite an old plane by WW2 standards, almost 18 months, to still be in (front line?) operation, especially for the rough service conditions it would have experienced in the North African desert, maybe it's a good testament to the durability of the P-40 (its sister plane FR215 was struck off charge in April 1944, and some others made it until 1945!!).  The third mystery is who this American pilot may be. Nothing else is noted, so was the plane returned to the USAAF (which should have been recored somewhere)? If so when?

 

These questions aside, the thought of modelling FR213 (or at least, a version of FR213) proved to be very tempting. I will continue in part II with a description of the kit as well as some of the extras I've bought to go along with it.

 

 

Andy

 

 

[ccoyle]

Researching family military history in the various records can be very rewarding. When I began doing genealogy work years ago, no one in my immediate family had any knowledge of our family's service prior to WW2. Through unit roll calls and a variety of other sources, I was able to piece together my 2x-great grandfather's service in the Palmetto Sharpshooters during the 'Late Unpleasantness'. I was very surprised to learn that the PSS were a highly regarded unit within the Confederate armed forces and fought in many of its bloodiest engagements, including Second Manassas, the Peninsula Campaign, Antietam, and The Wilderness. I'm sure my ancestor could have recounted many harrowing tales, but sadly I have no evidence suggesting he ever left any written accounts.

 

Good luck on both your projects!

[realworkingsailor]

Thanks Chris!

 

Interpreting the war diary has proven to be a much bigger project than I anticipated, but it’s really fascinating. Especially during combat, the entries are very abstract (dates, times and map coordinates), being able to “zoom out” and see the bigger picture, although sometimes complicated to piece together, has definitely provided much needed context. 
 

My hope is, when it’s all completed, to get it printed and bound in a hardcover book to share with my entire extended family (well, I will have multiple copies printed so there’s no squabbling 🤪)

 

Andy

[realworkingsailor]

And now for part 2!

 

The Kit

 

Armed with the information I uncovered, it was now time to find a kit. I was immediately drawn to the selection of P-40 kits offered by Special Hobby. I had a great experience building their Blackburn Skua a few months ago. That particular kit is definitely not meant for beginners, but it is nonetheless a great kit. For those not familiar, SH has a rather extensive line up of later model P-40s to choose from, most of them are recent toolings. There are options for anyone looking to build a P-40E, D, K, M and N (and their RAF name equivalents), based on a tooling dating to 2017, for the more adventurous there is a P-40 F or L based on a 2008 tooling. Focusing on the 2017 tooling, Special Hobby has designed the kit along a frame of parts that are common to each variant, along with a selection of alternative parts specific to each variant. The subtle differences in fuselage are accounted for by the addition of a small separate frame comprising the proper fuselage for the variant selected.

 

 

The kit itself is packaged in a rigid top opening box. This is one of the ways this kit is a generational step away from SH’s earlier offerings. You can see the differences clearly when compared to the package that came with the Skua. The lower tray is made of good stiff cardboard, even thicker that some kit boxes from other popular hobby brands. If you’re a stasher, this kit will happily (?) survive at the bottom of your stack.

 

 

The plastic parts are contained in a single plastic bag, however there is a smaller bag for the clear parts and a tiny bag containing a pair of fragile resin parts to use on one of the kit variations.

 

 

The clear parts are thin and very clearly moulded with minimal distortion. The canopy frame detail is well defined and for those who wish, they could cut their own masks relatively easily. There are two cockpit canopy options, so is can be posed open or shut, another nice change from their earlier models.

 

 

The rest of the kit comes as three grey sprues. The two moulded in a darker grey contain the “common” and optional parts. Three separate IPs, two different seats, and two different rear bulkheads, among others. For the most part the moulding is crisp and the moulded details are up to an acceptable standard. There is a small amount of flash here and there, but no other defects such as short shots or mould misalignments.

 

 

 

The fuselage halves come on a separate sprue, moulded in more of an “Airfix Grey” plastic and are specific to this variant. In this case, this represents one of the earlier P-40K variants. One of the issues pilots began to encounter was the P-40 could become unstable in a high speed dive. The first attempt to rectify this problem was to add an extended fillet on the leading edge of the vertical stabilizer, where it transitioned to the fuselage. While this helped a bit, it did not solve the problem entirely. A permanent fix was made by extending the fin and rudder aft, resulting in the “long tail” variant (it’s worth noting that only the fin and rudder were moved back, the tail plane stayed put). This modification was carried forward in all subsequent P-40 variants until the end of production.

 

 

 

The details on the fuselage, like the rest of the parts are crisp and finely moulded. The panel lines are very finely moulded, with the more prominent screws and fasteners well shown. The cockpit sidewalls are separate pieces, so the moulded interior detail is minimal. Of note, SH is now including locating pins and other moulded tabs and slots to aid in assembly!

 

 

The kit instructions come in a small booklet. They are printed in partial colour and include a sprue map which clearly shows which parts will not be used for this version. (the sprues also include numbers moulded beside the parts, yet another upgrade). There are paint callouts for Gunze paints, but the colour name is written out to ease choosing paints of a different brand.

 

 

The instructions are fairly clear, although there is a lot going on with each step.

 

 

The final pages of the instruction manual include full colour 4 view diagrams for each of the included paint schemes. In this offering there are three American schemes and one Soviet version. The last page comprises another 4 view diagram showing the stencil placement.

 

 

The included decals are much better than their earlier offerings. I’m not sure who printed them, but they're almost Cartograph quality. I say almost as the stencil writing isn’t really legible where I’ve seen some impressively fine writing on the Cartograph decals included with Airfix’s kits. If you’re not worried about reading the various minute warning labels, that shouldn’t prove to be too much of a problem. The registration is accurate and the colour separation clear.

 

 

Overall, this looks to be a very impressive offering from Special Hobby. Everything looks to be a significant improvement over their earlier offerings. While not a “shake the box” kit, it should prove to be a nice kit to build, and I am looking forward to the challenge.

 

In the next part, I will go over the extras I have bought to upgrade the kit to build the model I wish.

 

Andy

 

 

 

Edited April 27 by realworkingsailor

[Egilman]

At the start of WWII this aircraft was the equal of the Me109, not quite as good as the A6M2 Zero... The RAF pilots were the first to use it in combat and began to experience it's tendency to go into control lock in a high speed dive... The AVG in China flying it against the Zero figured out the tactics that needed to be used to make it a winner.... But also reported it's tendency to control lock.... In the US this was being investigated by all the aircraft manufacturers as the problem appeared with the P-38 and the P-51 as well... (eventually appearing in the F4U Corsair as well) It's was the beginnings of recognizing the main problem of high speed flight, compressibility..... The aircraft is going so fast that the air at the leading edges of the control surfaces would "Pile" up causing a pressure wave to travel along the surface until it reached the rudder or elevator locking them in the straight position.... The only resolution at the time was to slow down the aircraft till the pressure buildup against the surfaces abated...

 

A partial solution was to move the pivot point of one of the control surfaces away from the other... On the P-40 this was the Rudder, they moved it behind the elevators, On the P-51 they extended the vertical stabilizer and rudder behind the elevator, on the P-38 they used another device, counterweights to forward load the elevator giving it greater mass... (a very weak solution, the high speed dive issue was never fully resolved in the P-38) And the F4U corsair was resolved by moving the elevator back behind the rudder... These were the best they could do when they really didn't understand the problem and what was causing it....

 

The Germans encountered it with the jet aircraft they were designing and resolved that swept leading edges were the solution... (yes, for sub 600kt aircraft)

 

Today these physical flight problems have been overcome, and understanding the engineering history is one of the fun parts of modeling these aircraft, (besides the unit and action histories)

 

I'm in brother, The P-40 represents the first American designed and built fighter aircraft to see significant combat service in WWII... And started us on the path to where we are today....

[realworkingsailor]

I think the P-40s reputation took its biggest hit in the immediate postwar era. Looking back now, while it didn’t have the high altitude performance (which only mattered in NW Europe, one theatre out of how many..), it was at least equal to its contemporaries when played to its strengths, and in some cases better. 
 

With the A6M2, it was a matter of keeping the speed up. At high speed, the P40 could out turn the Zero due to the structural strength of the P40, but if the pilot let the speed drop, the Zero regained the advantage.

 

Rex’s Hangar did a great pair of videos about the P40. As he puts it, a high speed, low altitude sledgehammer of a plane!

 

 

Edited April 27 by realworkingsailor

[Dave_E]

I have 3 different P-40 kits on the shelf to build… I’m in! 👍😀

[Canute]

A Flying Tigers P-40 kit was my first kit build. Raised lines to mark panels and markings. Rivets the size of oranges. I must have looked like Calvin (of Calvin and Hobbes cartoons) assembling that beauty.

 

I am most definitely in. Special Hobby has really upped their game with these improvements.

[realworkingsailor]

@Egilman Your insights and knowledge are most welcome! 

@Dave_E @Canute Welcome! I knew there were P-40 fans around here somewhere!

 

Welcome aboard everyone! I'm glad to see such interest in this build. 

 

For the next part, I thought we'd have a quick look at some of the extras I picked up to help with my build.

 

First up are a couple of CMK resin bits to add a little more detail to the cockpit. Starting with the cockpit sidewalls (and control stick):

 

 

While the kit supplied parts are very good, the resin parts are just that little bit better. The moulded details are crisper and clearer. This is likely due to the inherent limitations of injection moulded styrene. CMK and Special Hobby being the same company, these parts should be a drop in fit, no hacking or sanding needed. 

 

The next bit of resin is a replacement seat:

 

 

In this case it is representative of the seats used in the RAF Kittyhawks. Again, the kit supplies an appropriately shaped seat, but the resin one just features some finely moulded details not found on the basic part. The kit seat lacks the ridges and grooves on the seat sides and back, and the resin seat is just that much thiner and more "metal" like. It also includes the RAF style "Sutton" seatbelt harness moulded in (the kit only has decals for the American style seatbelts)

 

To finish of the cockpit, I've bought a Yahu Models pre-painted PE instrument panel:

 

 

I've used their instrument panels on my Beaufighter and Typhoon builds last year, and they're a great (and fairly inexpensive) addition to any cockpit. If you couldn't tell by now, I'm planning on displaying my model with the canopy open to show off all this great detail. Hopefully some of it will be seen!

 

Moving on to the outside, I'm not planning on doing any reworking of the exterior details, although it's worth noting, if you have a bit of a masochistic streak, CMK offers a litany of resin detail upgrades. Everything from the armament to the correct type of wheels can be found. Even a detailed engine bay complete with the correct Allison V1710 engine.

 

For my model I picked up a set of decals from DKDecals. This was a pricey set (it cost as much as the SH kit!), but there are over 20 different marking options, and unlike Xtradecal, the set should be good for supplying the markings for more than just one!

 

 

The decal set includes markings for a wide array of Kittyhawks used by the RAF, RAAF, and SAAF (as noted clearly on the instruction sheet above). Options for most, if not all, the later P40 variants used are covered.

 

 

It's a long list! In my case, the set includes both squadron code options (GA Q and GA ?) for the plane I wish to build, but doesn't include the correct serial number. From what I understand the GA ? code moved to whatever airplane Billy Drake was flying, and it's possible that FR213 was carrying  different code letters at the time of its crash in late 1943. As I have done in the past, I can easily re-create the correct serial number with some blank decal paper and my laser printer, so there's no problem there. I am planning on painting the plane as it would have appeared earlier in '43, in the RAF desert scheme.

 

 

Getting back to the decals themselves, they appear to be of a very high quality. The registration looks spot on, and the colour separation is sharp and well defined. The decal film looks fairly thin, so with any luck the markings should settle easily onto the surface of the model. My only qualm about the DK set, is they only show the left side of the airplane, along with a smaller view of the upper side to guide decal placement. It would be nice to see both left and right along with another small view of the underside, in order to confirm accurate decal placement (this is particularly important when dealing with nose art, which, for obvious reasons, didn't follow "official" doctrine!). I should also add, they've done a great job with the "shark mouth" decals! If you look closely, each of the five versions differs slightly from the other, so there's no do-overs! Hopefully I don't mess that part up!

 

Finally, the last little extra is a set of masks from SH:

 

 

 

Not much to note about the mask set, other than it was slightly cheaper than the Eduard set.

 

So this brings the introduction to its conclusion. I am looking forward to starting this build, although when that time comes depends on the weather, and how productive I am with the outdoor chores!

 

Thanks to everyone who's joining me on this build and thanks for all the kind comments, likes, and insightful information!

 

Andy

[ccoyle]

The argument about whether this fighter or that fighter was the 'best' is fun for us to debate years later, but it was largely mooted by strategic considerations, though folks were less aware of it at the time. In order to have any real chance of winning, the Germans (and indeed all the Axis powers) needed to negate the combined industrial advantage of the Allies. German, Italian, and Japanese fighters didn't just need to be equal to their Allied counterparts -- they needed to shoot down their enemies in numbers that far exceeded their own losses. They never accomplished this, even during the Battle of Britain, when the Luftwaffe had a considerable numerical advantage. The fact that the P-40 gave at least as good as it got was seriously bad news for the Axis powers -- if both sides lost resources (planes, pilots) at an equal pace, there was never a question of who would run out of them first.

[Egilman]

15 hours ago, realworkingsailor said:

I think the P-40s reputation took its biggest hit in the immediate postwar era. Looking back now, while it didn’t have the high altitude performance (which only mattered in NW Europe, one theatre out of how many..), it was at least equal to its contemporaries when played to its strengths, and in some cases better. 
 

With the A6M2, it was a matter of keeping the speed up. At high speed, the P40 could out turn the Zero due to the structural strength of the P40, but if the pilot let the speed drop, the Zero regained the advantage.

Yeah, a lot of great airplanes took the same hit immediately postwar, the P-47 to name the most recent one.... The best version of the P-40 was the Packard-Merlin engined one... It's performance up to 25k feet was almost equal to the P-51's and the USAAF put in a large order for them.. But right after that, the WPB put a stop to it, declaring all Packard Merlin's were strictly dedicated to Mustang production... So after a few Curtiss had to go back to the Allison engine which wasn't a bad engine, they just never put the resources into producing a two stage supercharger for it, that was it's major drawback... (besides the Mustang was the superior aircraft, it's laminar flow wing was leading the way to understanding airflow around an airfoil and was the first step to conquering the compressibility issue in the future)

 

By the end of the war, under 20k feet the P-40 was the equal of anything in the air... (when flown within it's envelope, and so was the F4F Wildcat with a 50% more powerful engine)

 

Prewar engineering compared to wartime engineering... Nothing moves engineering advancement faster than warfare....

 

The P-40 suffers from being the first out there so it's deficiencies are highlighted more than all the rest....

 

 

[Egilman]

2 hours ago, ccoyle said:

They never accomplished this,

Nope, when Japan attacked Pearl, it was said that Winston Churchill danced a little bit of a jig, he was elated... Cause he knew, like Roosevelt did, that once we were fully integrated in the war, the war was over for the Axis, the only question was how long it was going to take... (it took 18-24 months for the US to get to full industrial production, once that happened, it was a done deal)

[realworkingsailor]

30 minutes ago, Egilman said:

Yeah, a lot of great airplanes took the same hit immediately postwar, the P-47 to name the most recent one.... The best version of the P-40 was the Packard-Merlin engined one... It's performance up to 25k feet was almost equal to the P-51's and the USAAF put in a large order for them.. But right after that, the WPB put a stop to it, declaring all Packard Merlin's were strictly dedicated to Mustang production... So after a few Curtiss had to go back to the Allison engine which wasn't a bad engine, they just never put the resources into producing a two stage supercharger for it, that was it's major drawback... (besides the Mustang was the superior aircraft, it's laminar flow wing was leading the way to understanding airflow around an airfoil and was the first step to conquering the compressibility issue in the future)

 

By the end of the war, under 20k feet the P-40 was the equal of anything in the air... (when flown within it's envelope, and so was the F4F Wildcat with a 50% more powerful engine)

 

Prewar engineering compared to wartime engineering... Nothing moves engineering advancement faster than warfare....

 

The P-40 suffers from being the first out there so it's deficiencies are highlighted more than all the rest....

 

 

When you look at the basic engine specs, the Allison and the Merlin/Packard-Merlin are more or less equal. As you said, the Merlin was better as it had a fully developed two stage/two speed supercharger. 
 

While I fully agree that the F and L P40 variants had the best performance, I have to wonder if it was the best performance for that airplane when viewed in the context of the role it found itself. 
 

For a good part of the desert campaign, and most of the Italian campaign, the P40 fell into a similar role that the Hawker Typhoon, and P-47 found themselves in NW Europe. Low altitude, close air support, where its ability to carry a reasonable amount of ordnance, and drop it with a reasonable amount of accuracy on ground targets was used to good effect. Which engenders the question, what good is high(er) altitude if you’re not going to need it?

 

When it comes to comparing the P-40 and P-51, I think it really comes down to timing. When the P-51 was introduced, the P-40 was a relatively mature design. Even the later versions had only incremental improvements over earlier variants. The P-51 was only at the beginning stages of development. So its full potential was yet to be realized, and it took full advantage of the new technologies that Curtiss may not have been able to. 
 

Andy

Edited April 27 by realworkingsailor

[Egilman]

1 hour ago, realworkingsailor said:

When it comes to comparing the P-40 and P-51, I think it really comes down to timing. When the P-51 was introduced, the P-40 was a relatively mature design. Even the later versions had only incremental improvements over earlier variants. The P-51 was only at the beginning stages of development. So its full potential was yet to be realized, and it took full advantage of the new technologies that Curtiss may not have been able to. 

Yep, that is exactly what the WPB decided... If they had placed one of the first Packard Merlin's into a P-40 when they first acquired one, it may have been decided differently... But, by the time they became available in sufficient quantities to mount in a P-40 in a production environment, the potential of the Mustang was beginning to be realized... Under 25k ft, the Mustang was still a slightly superior airplane to the P-40... And in wartime, sentimentality and old friends in high places does not help the war effort... That is what Roosevelt created the WPB for.... Heck I would have chose the Mustang over the  P-40 family for the same reasons.... It's a no brainer...

 

The Mustang could deliver the same bomb load as the P-40, it has 6 guns all .50's, was 10 knots faster at 25k ft, which made it a better aircraft than the P-40 under 25k ft altitude, then you add in the ability to combat maneuver at 36k ft and an extra 800 miles of range... Like I said, no brainer...

Edited April 27 by Egilman

[realworkingsailor]

33 minutes ago, Egilman said:

Yep, that is exactly what the WPB decided... If they had placed one of the first Packard Merlin's into a P-40 when they first acquired one, it may have been decided differently... But, by the time they became available in sufficient quantities to mount in a P-40 in a production environment, the potential of the Mustang was beginning to be realized... Under 25k ft, the Mustang was still a slightly superior airplane to the P-40... And in wartime, sentimentality and old friends in high places does not help the war effort... That is what Roosevelt created the WPB for.... Heck I would have chose the Mustang over the  P-40 family for the same reasons.... It's a no brainer...

 

The Mustang could deliver the same bomb load as the P-40, it has 6 guns all .50's, was 10 knots faster at 25k ft, which made it a better aircraft than the P-40 under 25k ft altitude, then you add in the ability to combat maneuver at 36k ft and an extra 800 miles of range... Like I said, no brainer...

I think, too, it’s worth looking briefly at Curtiss’ production order book. Not only did they have the USAAF’s purchase orders to satisfy, but they were sending planes to the French (before mid 1940), the British, including Canadians, Australians, New Zealanders and South Africans, the Russians, and even Brazil got a few as well (among others I may have missed). Delaying production to retool for a new plane could have been disastrous. NAA was not as burdened with orders (sure they were making T6s, but their loss rate was significantly less than a frontline fighter), so they could take the time needed to tool up without risking critical output.

 

Oh, and aside from the P40D, P40L, and some of the early P40Ns, the rest of the latter P40s had six .50 cals too. But yes, the P51 was just that half-generational step ahead of the P40, so a much more worthwhile investment in the long term.

 

Andy

[chadwijm6]

A little late joining, just catching up on the fascinating fighter discussions. 

Some interesting aftermarket purchases Andy, by manufacturers that I haven't seen before in the UK. I'm in for sure. 👍🏻

[realworkingsailor]

1 hour ago, chadwijm6 said:

A little late joining, just catching up on the fascinating fighter discussions. 

Some interesting aftermarket purchases Andy, by manufacturers that I haven't seen before in the UK. I'm in for sure. 👍🏻

Thanks James! Don’t worry, you only missed the trailers, the main feature hasn’t yet begun!

 

I got everything from Hannants, they have a pretty good selection of aftermarket bits.

 

Andy

[CDW]

Love this plane! I'm in.

[realworkingsailor]

1 hour ago, CDW said:

Love this plane! I'm in.

Welcome! Glad to have you along for the journey!

 

Andy

[realworkingsailor]

A bit more fun for everyone:

 

 

Andy

[chadwijm6]

9 hours ago, realworkingsailor said:

I got everything from Hannants, they have a pretty good selection of aftermarket bits.

I'll take a better look at their site. Thanks Andy

[realworkingsailor]

For best results this video must be played LOUD:

 

😀

 

Andy