Tomahawk 41-13297

[Jack Cook]

Does anyone know the status of this P-40B?
This post was one another forum and peeked my curiosity.


I'm wondering if you can help me with some information.
Is it true that the Curtiss Wright Historical Assoc. in Torrance CA, has sold 3297 to the Fighter Collection?
I am a life member to this group, and have not gotten any newsletters in years.. I tried to call them, but the number has been switch to a residence.
If they did do this what did they do with the money? As they are a 501 C 3??

[CWBuff]

I can't tell you much about the CWHF... I tried to contact them years ago to give them my money but no joy... not a peep.

As far as I know, the Hawk in question had been acquired by the TFC some time back and was on hold until the Hawk 75 was finished. I have no information other than that and what has been in the rags... a recent ish of Warbirds Illustrated has a bit about it I'm told, but I haven't seen that rag yet.

So I too would like to hear from anyone who has an 'inside scoop'...


Fade to Black...

[vanguard]

I guess neither of you guys have seen the new AIR CLASSICS

[Jack Cook]

I guess neither of you guys have seen the new AIR CLASSICS

You would be correct. I don't spend my money on Challenge Aviation publications.

[Walrus 7]

People,

I need more educating.

When was a P-40 a 'Tomahawk', a 'Kittyhawk' or a 'Warhawk'? I was under the impression that only Commonwealth P-40s were 'Tomahawks' or 'Kittyhawks' and that 'Warhawk' was a US term. I have since read that 'Kittyhawk' was used for any lean-lease P-40 that was returned to US service.

I also read that the RAF, RAAF and SAAF called the Hawk 81 airframes 'Tomahawk' and Hawk 87 airframes 'Kittyhawk.' Did the US do the same, and if so, what was a 'Warhawk.'

I am off to Wangaratta on 10 Sept to look over Precision Aerospace and would love to get this straight so at least it sounds like I know what I'm on about.

All advice greatly appreciated.

Walrus

Last edited by Walrus 7 on Mon Aug 29, 2005 12:32 am, edited 1 time in total.

[Jack Cook]

I've always refered to the P-40B/C whether US or not the Tomahawk.
With the P-40D thru Q has the Warhawk except for the marks operated by you Commonwealth folks then it's Kittyhawk Mk___. Just my way of keeping it straight.
Now the experts can tell you the correct way.

[vanguard]

you dont have to buy it. Borders will let you thumb all the magazines without buying them. They even have nice chairs to make it even better.
Its like the library but the books and magazines are new.

[CWBuff]

I guess neither of you guys have seen the new AIR CLASSICS

Perhaps you'd like to enlighten us then?


Walrus, the names 'Tomahawk' and 'Kittyhawk' were given by the British to the Hawk 81 and Hawk 87 respectively.

I think the name 'Warhawk' was given by Curtiss around the time production of the P-40F started. In any event, for the most part the name Warhawk stuck in the USA for all Hawk 87s, but some in the USAAF called 'em Kittyhawks and some called 'em both names. Bob Scott was one of the latter; in his books he refers to the P-40 as both 'Warhawk' and 'Kittyhawk'.

Heck, some folks called the Hawk 81s Warhawks, and I think it was a matter of personal preference... some folks just didn't care what they were 'officially' called and picked whichever name appealed to them.

As a side note... I don't think that the RAF, SAAF or RNZAF officially called them P-40s, but I believe that the RAAF did. Maybe someone else can answer that for sure...

I personally refer to Hawk 81s as Tomahawks, regardless of service. To me USAAF Hawk 87s are Warhawks and RAF, SAAF, RAAF and RNZAF Hawk 87s are Kittyhawks. The rest, USSR, Brazil etc, are all Warhawks to me. That's just me though...

But in the end, they're all P-40s and they're all Hawks...


Fade to Black...

Last edited by CWBuff on Mon Aug 29, 2005 2:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.

[Mick Grinter]

Don't forget to say hi most of us only know they all smell the same must be that jungle dust.
The guys will talk to you so don't be shy.
Mick

[Graeme C]

From the sources ive found on the net, its seems that the TFC have bought the P-40b Tomahawk. It will be great to see a P-40b in the Uk, as the last P-40b the TFC got never made it to the UK

(http://www.avions-de-legende.com/tablprof/Tabrest.htm) lists the aircraft as under restoration at CWHA, Torrance, CA.

One rumour i have heard is that the CWHA are planning to build a production run of P-36s, as they restored the TFC's hawk 75 this makes some sense.

[bdk]

...as they restored the TFC's hawk 75 this makes some sense.

They did?

[vanguard]

I dont know where that web site got its info. But CALIFORNIA AEROFAB was the primary contractor on the HAWK 75/P-36 belonging to THE FIGHTER COLLECTION. He had also purchased the assets of the now defunct CURTISS WRIGHT HISTORICAl ASSO. The former CWHA p-40 is now at CA AEROFAB being restored.

[CWBuff]

...as they restored the TFC's hawk 75 this makes some sense.

They did?

Uhh... if they had any connection to the project it certainly cannot be said that they restored the aircraft.

The wings were done in New Zealand by Pioneer Aero Restorations and the fuselage was done in Chino by Fighter Rebuilders, although I think that some work may have been done at Duxford prior to delivery at Chino. If so, I dunno what work was done. The whole sha-bang was put together at Fighter Rebuilders.

You can see some images of the Hawk 75 on my site...

Hawk 75-C1 N°82


Fade to Black...

[John-Curtiss Paul]

Fuselage was done by Matt Nightengale's crew at his shop in Ontario, not Fighter Rebuilders in Chino.

[big fatty]

I was talking to the guys at fighter rebuilders and they told me that the only thing they did on the hawk 75 was admire it. California aerofab restored everything but the wing and did all the final assembly on chino airport somewhere other than the Air Musuem. It arrived at the museum the same day Steve Hinton it flew for the first time. California Aeros guys worked on it at the museum until they took it apart to ship to Duxford.