• Military Menu                       

• Introduction
• Systems
• Facilities
• Agencies
• Industry
• Operations
• Countries
• Hot Documents
• News
• Reports
• Policy
• Budget
• Congress
• Links

• WMD
• Intelligence
• Homeland Security
• Space

Curtiss XP-62

In January 1941, the USAAC issued a requirement for a new heavily-armed, high-performance interceptor fighter. The fighter was to be powered by the under developed 2300 hp Wright "Duplex Cyclone" twin-row radial engine. This was the heaviest engine to be mounted in a fighter, and was the same engine to power the B-29 bomber. Built-in armament was comprised no less than eight 20-mm cannon, the Curtiss proposal was submitted to the Army in April 1941.

The US Air Force Command put forward a specification for the development of high speed and well-armed interceptor, with the obligatory use of the engine P&W R-3350-17 "Duplex Cyclone" (2300 hp). With such power interceptor was to develop speed of at least 753 km/hr at an altitude of 8230 meters. The arms had no equal - six 20-mm guns or twelve 12.7 mm machine guns. The fighter had a huge engine for this type of aircraft weight.

Designed for a mission that never evolved – neither Germany nor Japan developed high-altitude, high-speed strategic bombers – and because the B-29 had absolute priority for the R-3350 Duplex Cyclones, this design was, in effect, “doomed from the start.” Neither Curtiss nor the Air Corps knew this in the summer of 1941.

The XP-62 interceptor design had to simultaneously solve a number of problems, some of which proved to be too difficult. In particular, the installation of the large size and weight of the motor required creating the most reliable design of the fuselage, possessing good aerodynamic qualities. To withstand a volley of six 20 mm machine guns, it was required to develop an enhanced wing design. Another problem was the installation of the turbocharger, which at the time left a lot to be desired. However, the engineers were able to design a very promising interceptor, the final draft of which was presented to the Air Force April 29, 1941.

Among other things, the XP-62 involved the installation of a pressurized cabin, which was developed for the twin-engine fighter F-38, and two co-axial three-blade propellers. Two months later (27 June 1941) Curtiss received an order to build two prototypes received the designation XP-62 and XP-62A. The first of these had to submit to test in 15 months, and the second within eighteen months.

Prior to the construction of prototypes, on 02 August 1941, the Air Force made new changes in the terms of reference, mainly to reduce the maximum speed of up to 448 miles/hr (721 km/hr) with increasing take-off weight to 1537 pounds. There were about 90 smaller changes. But that was not all - on 01 January 1942, in approving the project XP-62, the military demanded that the gross weight of the interceptor did not exceed 14,000 pounds, armament was reduced to four 20-mm cannon, and the propellers deprived of de-icing equipment.

In June 1942, the Army ordered two prototypes under the designation XP-62. Without waiting for the completion of construction of the first prototype, in May 1942 the Army drew up a contract for interceptor 100 modified P-62A. On 25 May 1942 a contract for 100 P-62 fighters was awarded.

The company did not delay the start of construction, but then intervened in the case tactical considerations. The main problem lay in the fact that with the end of 1941 the Curtiss plants were loaded production of the P-40, and, most importantly - P-47G-CU, considered as high priority. There was a question, not prevent any construction and optimization of the XP-62 work in the mass production of "Thunderbolt"? The answer was obvious, especially as the P-47G could not quite cope with the function of high-altitude interceptor, as they had turbochargers and only slightly inferior armament.

In early 1943 wind tunnel tests investigate the effect of various vertical tail arrangements upon the stability and control characteristics of an XP-62 fighter model. Rudder-free yaw characteristics with take-off power and flaps deflected were satisfactory after dorsal fin modifications. Directional stability was obtained with all modified vertical tails. Satisfactory rudder effectiveness resulted partly because the dual-rotation propellers produced no asymmetric yawing moments. Pedal forces in sideslips were undesirably large but may be easily reduced.

At this point the XP-62 lost its former priority. The construction of the prototype was delayed by almost a year and the first flight was made only 21 July 1943, when the series already produced multi-purpose fighter aircraft P-47D fighter and heavy P-38s. The planned pressurized cockpit was never implemented, unfortunately, as this was going to be its main selling point. Even though the Army really had no need for another high performance interceptor, the XP-62 project continued.

The USAAC order for 100 P-62s was cancelled on 27 July 1942. The cancellation was generally reported to have been issued because the P-62 production would have interfered with the Curtiss licensed production of the essential P-47 Thunderbolt. As it was, the Curtiss built Thunderbolts were never used in action and all went to training units in the US. Unable to reveal the strategic importance of the top-secret B-29, the “official reason” given for the cancellation was that P-62 production would have interfered with the production of license-built P-47s.

The tests of the XP-62 (41-35817) showed a little more speed, but otherwise it was almost equivalent to them. Flight testing proceeded slowly due to the XP-62's low priority. Flights lasted until the middle of 1944 [other accounts say the autumn of 1943], when the Air Force ordered a cease to all work on the interceptor. As a result, the XP-62 was a single copy, which was soon scrapped. The XP-62 was the last Curtiss designed prop fighter.

This was yet another failure of a Curtiss designed aircraft and just added to the growing list of cancelled projects and designs (mostly due to the inability to meet specifications or poor workmanship) that was to plague the company until it went bankrupt several years later. The Curtiss Airplane was in deep trouble. They had been the leading fighter producer with the P-36 and P-40s but as much as they tried to update their P-40 line or advance new designs, their designs never warranted investing money into the programs and upsetting the wartime production quotas for other aircraft.