Argentine Curtiss Hawk 75 H and Hawk 75-0 - Myths and Truths

[Badner]

According to some sources:

"Argentina bought 29 Hawk 75O’s, intended for rough-field operations and ease of maintenance. An additional 20 were licence-built by F.M.A. in Argentina in 1940. Also the Curtiss Hawk 75H demonstrator NR1277 (c/n 12328) was eventually sold to Argentina"

This is a fallacy. Although the Curtiss Hawk IV won the international fighter competition held at El Palomar Air base in 1936, the Argentines who had previously purchase the rather similar Hawk III, were aware that newer models would be soon available, did not award any contracts at this time. In the 1937 competition, Curtiss entered the list with its Hawk 75H (c/n 1228, U.S. civil registration NR 1277) which although bearing Argentine markings still carried a US civil registration, as a sales gimmick which was shipped to Buenos Aires by sea and arrived on 19 June. The Hawks sole competitor at these trials was the Seversky 2PPA Convoy Fighter, an aircraft which could mount a wide variety of engines. The sample sent to Buenos Aires was powered by a Wright Cyclone rated at 1,000 hp, while for the advanced trainer version it could be equipped with a with a 550 hp Pratt & Whitney Wasp. The Seversky arrived at Buenos Aires on 29 September. During the sea voyage, the oil in the crank case had drained to the lower cylinders and as a result the engine was damaged. The pilot, Frank Sinclair returned to Long Island, New York, while the Seversky firm tried to sell its demonstrator to the Argentine, which understandably y showed no interest. In the meantime, the Severky P-35 had been released for export, and Major Alexander De Seversky announced to fly to Buenos Aires on 22 November, but last-minute problems with the radio forced him to delay his departure his departure until the following day, but unexpectedly, the flight was cancelled. By now the Curtiss representatives were growing anxious that a last-minute arrival of another fighter could further delay the decision of the Argentine government. The company after all, had sent a considerable sum shipping the Hawk 75H to Buenos Aires, and both aircraft and crew had been there for six months. Furthermore, the Argentine government would not announce its decision until January 1938, when it placed an order for 30 aircraft of a variant known as the Hawk 75-0 (c/n 12768-12797) serial numbers 601-630, along with a manufacturing license to manufacture an additional 20 additional aircraft at Córdoba. In the meantime, the Curtiss reps in Buenos Aires decided to send back the Hawk 75H back to the United States inn its own power, via the Pacific Coast, hoping to interest the governments of Chile and Peru. The pilot, James Gray took off from Buenos AIres on 5th March, on an intended non-stop flight across the Andes to Santiago, Chile. Bad weather forced him to land at Mendoza, Once the storm abated, Gray resumed his flight and took off. However, the aircraft cartwheeled over the ground and was destroyed, while Gray walked away, dazed but unhurt.

Compare the undercarriage of the Hawk 75H and the Hawk 750

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

the Seversky firm tried to sell its demonstrator to the Argentine, which understandably y showed no interest

Argentina. Nobody uses "the Argentine" to refer to Argentina any more.

Furthermore, the Argentine government

In modern usage "Argentine" is generally used only as a demonym (describing people of a country) with the adjective form used here [the government of Argentina] being "Argentinian"/"Argentinean".

 

[Badner]

In Spanish one refers to the country as La Argentina (The Argentine) just as one refers to the U.S. as The United States

the preposition is always used. I attended a British public school in The Argentine, and that was the term employed...
Argentine

noun (2)
Ar·gen·tine
pluralArgentines
: a native or inhabitant of Argentina : ARGENTINEAN

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

'The Argentine' fell out of fashion during the mid-to-late 20th century, and now the country is referred to as "Argentina".

You presumably attended school some time ago.

 

[Antonio]

Spanish language modern rules still admits the old use of definite article preceding the name of some countries.
So there's nothing specially wrong with "La Argentina".

CVC. Foros

Foros moderados de debate sobre tres ejes fundamentales: el presente y futuro de la lengua española, su dispersión y variedades (Foro del español de hoy y mañana); su didáctica como lengua extranjera (Foro didáctico); su historia, su literatura y sobre la cultura expresada en el dominio...

cvc.cervantes.es

 

[Badner]

And there's nothing wrong with the term The Argentine....

 

[Badner]

Serial	c/no.	Prev. Identity	Delivered	Fate/Notes
601	12768		30.3.1939	Escuela de Aplicación, from 29.2.1940 RAE, from 20.3.1941 CentInstAv, crashed on 25.10.1941
602	12769		30.3.1939	Escuela de Aplicación, from 29.2.1940 RAE, from 20.3.1941 CentInstAv, from 16.1.1942 AE, became C-602 in 8.7.1944
603	12770		30.3.1939	Escuela de Aplicación, from 4.3.1940 G1C, from 22.3.1941 CentInstAv, from 21.1.1942 RA2, became C-603 in 8.7.1944
604	12771		30.3.1939	Escuela de Aplicación, from 4.3.1940 G1C, from 22.3.1941 CentInstAv, from 21.1.1942 RA2, became C-604 in 7.1944
605	12772		30.3.1939	Escuela de Aplicación, from 4.3.1940 G1C, from 22.3.1941 CentInstAv, from 21.1.1942 RA2, became C-605 in 7.1944
606	12773		30.3.1939	Escuela de Aplicación, from 4.3.1940 G1C, from 22.3.1941 CentInstAv, from 21.1.1942 RA2, became C-606 in 7.1944
607	12774		30.3.1939	Escuela de Aplicación, from 4.3.1940 G1C, from 22.3.1941 CentInstAv, from 21.1.1942 RA2, became C-607 in 7.1944
608	12775		30.3.1939	Escuela de Aplicación, from 4.3.1940 G1C, from 22.3.1941 CentInstAv, from 21.1.1942 RA2, became C-608 in 7.1944
609	12776		30.3.1939	Escuela de Aplicación, from 4.3.1940 G1C, from 22.3.1941 CentInstAv, from 21.1.1942 RA2, became C-609 in 7.1944
610	12777		30.3.1939	Escuela de Aplicación, from 1939 RA2, crashed at El Brete on 3.9.1939
611	12778		30.3.1939	Escuela de Aplicación, from 1939 RA2, crashed after mid-air with 612 at Pericota on 4.7.1940
612	12779		30.3.1939	Escuela de Aplicación, from 1939 RA2, crashed after mid-air with 611 at Pericota on 4.7.1940
613	12780		30.3.1939	Escuela de Aplicación, from 1939 RA2, from 22.3.1941 CentInstAv, from 21.1.1942 RA2, became C-613 in 7.1944
614	12781		30.3.1939	Escuela de Aplicación, from 1939 RA2, from 22.3.1941 CentInstAv, from 21.1.1942 RA2, became C-614 in 7.1944
615	12782		30.3.1939	Escuela de Aplicación, from 1939 RA2, became C-615 in 7.1944
616	12783		30.3.1939	Escuela de Aplicación, from 1939 RA2, became C-616 in 7.1944
617	12784		30.3.1939	Escuela de Aplicación, from 1939 RA2, wfu in 1944
618	12785		30.3.1939	Escuela de Aplicación, from 1939 RA2, from 22.3.1941 CentInstAv, from 21.1.1942 RA2, became C-618 in 7.1944
619	12786		30.3.1939	Escuela de Aplicación, from 1939 RA2, from 22.3.1941 FMA, became C-619 in 7.1944
620	12787		30.3.1939	Escuela de Aplicación, from 1939 RA2, from 22.3.1941 FMA, became C-620 in 7.1944
621	12788		30.3.1939	Escuela de Aplicación, from 1939 RA2, from 22.3.1941 CentInstAv, became C-621 in 7.1944
622	12789		30.3.1939	Escuela de Aplicación, from 1939 RA2, from 22.3.1941 CentInstAv, became C-622 in 7.1944
623	12790		1939	RA1, from 22.3.1941 CentInstAv, from 21.1.1942 RA2, crashed at Villa Maria on 13.9.1942
624	12791		1939	RA1, from 22.3.1941 CentInstAv, wfu in 1941
625	12792		1939	RA1, from 22.3.1941 CentInstAv, from 21.1.1942 RA2, became C-625 in 7.1944
626	12793		1939	RA2, wfu in 1941
627	12794		1939	G1O, from 21.1.1942 RA2, became C-627 in 7.1944
628	12795		1939	RA1, from 22.3.1941 CentInstAv, from 21.1.1942 RA2, became C-628 in 7.1944
629	12796		1939	RA1, from 22.3.1941 CentInstAv, from 21.1.1942 RA2, became C-629 in 7.1944
630	12797		1939	RA1, from 22.3.1941 CentInstAv, from 21.1.1942 RA2, became C-630 in 7.1944
631	01		30.5.1941	CEV, from 21.1.1942 RA2, became C-631 in 7.1944
632	02		30.5.1941	CEV, from 21.1.1942 RA2, became C-632 in 7.1944
633	03		30.5.1941	CEV, crashed at El Recuerdo on 23.6.1941
634	04		30.5.1941	CEV, from 21.1.1942 RA2, crashed on 23.5.1944
635	05		30.5.1941	CEV, from 21.1.1942 RA2, became C-635 in 7.1944
636	06		21.1.1942	RA2, crashed on 27.5.1942
637	07		21.1.1942	RA2, crashed after mid-air with 646 at Haedo on 2.11.1943
638	08		21.1.1942	RA2, became C-638 in 7.1944
639	09		21.1.1942	RA2, became C-639 in 7.1944
640	10		21.1.1942	RA2, became C-640 in 7.1944
641	11		21.1.1942	RA2, became C-641 in 7.1944
642	12		21.1.1942	RA2, became C-642 in 7.1944
643	13		21.1.1942	RA2, became C-643 in 7.1944
644	14		21.1.1942	RA2, became C-644 in 7.1944
645	15		21.1.1942	RA2, became C-645 in 7.1944
646	16		21.1.1942	RA2, became C-646 in 7.1944
647	17		21.1.1942	RA2, became C-647 in 7.1944
648	18		21.1.1942	RA2, became C-648 in 7.1944
649	19		21.1.1942	RA2, became C-649 in 7.1944
650	20		21.1.1942	RA2, became C-650 in 7.1944

 

[Badner]

Another pic of the Hawk 75-0-published in a French magazine AVIONS, No.50, May 1997, years before I entered into contact with a certain "caballero (sic) " who claims paternity of other relevant section of my book, such as those on the Dewoitine D.31, Hawk 75-0, I.Aé 22, I.A.é 24, etc. As Augustus Cesar observed"

Acta est Fabula, Plaudite!​

 

[Badner]

Other pics of the Hawk 75-0

 

[Badner]

By the way, somebody in Uruguay sent me a pic of a Hawk75-0 armed with two 20 mm underwing cannon (No details found on FMA records ). One item that Pancho San Martín confirmed: the FMA recovered parts from w.o. Hawk 750s and incorporated them into new airframes made at the workshops, The euphemism in vogue in this case was "recuperación de matriculas"

 

[Roland55]

By the way, somebody in Uruguay sent me a pic of a Hawk75-0 armed with two 20 mm underwing cannon (No details found on FMA records ). One item that Pancho San Martín confirmed: the FMA recovered parts from w.o. Hawk 750s and incorporated them into new airframes made at the workshops, The euphemism in vogue in this case was "recuperación de matriculas"

I don't think that's the case, there were a few examples modified to accommodate 20mm Oerlikon cannons in the wings, i have the same pic you got + another from a different aircraft (C-633) there were at least a few modified to accommodate the cannons or a singular 100kg bomb in a ventral position.

+ Somewhere in my mac is the manual of the Curtiss hawk, and it mentions the wing mounted 20mm guns.

 

[Roland55]

By the way, somebody in Uruguay sent me a pic of a Hawk75-0 armed with two 20 mm underwing cannon (No details found on FMA records ). One item that Pancho San Martín confirmed: the FMA recovered parts from w.o. Hawk 750s and incorporated them into new airframes made at the workshops, The euphemism in vogue in this case was "recuperación de matriculas"

I don't think that's the case, there were a few examples modified to accommodate 20mm Oerlikon cannons in the wings, i have the same pic you got + another from a different aircraft (C-633) there were at least a few modified to accommodate the cannons or a singular 100kg bomb in a ventral position.

+ Somewhere in my mac is the manual of the Curtiss hawk, and it mentions the wing mounted 20mm guns.

Both Have the "hump" below the wings^
Cant be something recycled from other Hawks since the first examples didn't use 20mm guns.

 

[Badner]

don't think that's the case, there were a few examples modified to accommodate 20mm Oerlikon cannons in the wings, i have the same pic you got + another from a different aircraft (C-633) there were at least a few modified to accommodate the cannons or a singular 100kg bomb in a ventral position.

Those details from the manual would be appreciated. The strange thing is that the 2nd. demonstrator H75H did carry these underwing points. The production Hawk 750s didn't. Wonder if these points came along with the original aircraft but not installed initially. The 2nd. fighter Regiment c. 1943 also became the dive bomber squadron of the CAE, here is a page from my book on Argentine fighters showing the 100 kg. bomb rack fitted.

 

[Roland55]

its the second picture i uploaded, i would advise you to search in Nuñez Padin works for more details. Since thats where the image was taken from, (although mine looks horrible). I dont have the latest one anymore, the one i got is the old orange cover (second pic)





Meanwhile, ill see if i can get the mention of the manual about the 20mm guns.

 

[Badner]

Unfortunately, such books are not available here in the U.S...

 

[Badner]

Although official documents noted that the FMA intended to build 200 additional Hawk-750s, as can be seen in the attached pages, this was not more than a letter of intention, as by 1941 it was obvious that the Hawk75-0 was obsolescent by world standards, and besides, the FMA had only acquired sufficient aluminum profiles in the U.S. to build 20 aircraft. What Argentine aviation historians are not aware is that the FMA intended to build 100-150 Hawk 75As., similar to those ordered by the French Armée de l'Air

 

[Roland55]

Meanwhile, ill see if i can get the mention of the manual about the 20mm guns.

 

[Badner]

The Argentine Dirección General de Aeronáutica purchased a limited number of Madsen 20 mm mod... 1935 light A.A. gum, while the Army obtained 120 Oerlikon 20 mm L.70 mod.1938 An order of battle (U.S. Military Attaché reports, 1941-1943) show these in strength. Now the Madsen 20 mm mod. 1935 was rather Smaller and lighter. 1) Finnish Madsen 20 mm mod. 1935, 2) Argentine Army Oerlikon 20 mm L.60 mod. 1938, photographed 4 June 1943. I tend to think that that Hawk 75-0 mounted a pair of Madsen 20 mm. but have no way or proving it beyond the shadow of a doubt.
Masden 20 mm mod.1935

Specifications
Mass	55 kilograms (121 lb)
Length	2.5 m (8 ft 2 in)
Barrel length	1.2 m (3 ft 11 in) L/60[1]
Cartridge	20 x 120 mm
Cartridge weight	.29 kg (10 oz) AP .32 kg (11 oz) HE
Caliber	20 mm
Barrels	air-cooled
Action	recoil-operated
Rate of fire	400 rpm (cyclic) 250 rpm (practical)
Muzzle velocity	900 m/s (3,000 ft/s)
Effective firing range	500 m (1,600 ft)
Maximum firing range	2,123 m (6,965 ft)
Feed system	10, 15 or 60 round.

 

[Badner]

Just received the following email from a friend in Villa General Belgrano, in Córdoba:
Lieber Georg:
Ich habe das Buch von Benedetto:
Folgendes könnte Sie interessieren: -

I have the book by Benedetto:
You might be interested in:

"En lo que respecta al armamento, podía llevar una comninció de dos ametralladoras Madsen de capó.....y dos Madsen de ala de 7,65mm. Otras alternativas del ala eran dos cañones Oerlikon de 20 o 23 mm (sic) para uso de proyectiles explosivos"

1) Now while Hawk s/n. 633 was destroyed on June 23, 1941, the book mentions nothing about rearming these planes with 20 or 20mm guns, just that they COULD be so equipped.)

2) There's a photo on pag.31 of Hawk number 633, carrying two "buches"(probably he means pods) but surprise, surprise, no cannon. Wonder if that photo of a Hawk carrying an armament of two Cannon which appears on pag.33 of Benedetto's book is spurious. Interestingly enough, neither the Argentine air force book on the History of the Fighter Arm, nor Halbritter make any reference to this so-called cannon armament.

 

[Roland55]

Just received the following email from a friend in Villa General Belgrano, in Córdoba:
Lieber Georg:
Ich habe das Buch von Benedetto:
Folgendes könnte Sie interessieren: -

I have the book by Benedetto:
You might be interested in:

"En lo que respecta al armamento, podía llevar una comninció de dos ametralladoras Madsen de capó.....y dos Madsen de ala de 7,65mm. Otras alternativas del ala eran dos cañones Oerlikon de 20 o 23 mm (sic) para uso de proyectiles explosivos"

1) Now while Hawk s/n. 633 was destroyed on June 23, 1941, the book mentions nothing about rearming these planes with 20 or 20mm guns, just that they COULD be so equipped.)

2) There's a photo on pag.31 of Hawk number 633, carrying two "buches"(probably he means pods) but surprise, surprise, no cannon. Wonder if that photo of a Hawk carrying an armament of two Cannon which appears on pag.33 of Benedetto's book is spurious. Interestingly enough, neither the Argentine air force book on the History of the Fighter Arm, nor Halbritter make any reference to this so-called cannon armament.

The Hawk's manual mentions this as a something that could be fitted, some export users eventually fitted the H-75 with cannons, in those argentina. Padin books on the subject have the clearer images we shared and probably the best explanation on this 20mm topic.

About the photos, i dont think they are fake, it could just be that they removed the cannons for X reason (common practice) and what's seen is the modification to the wing to house the mechanism. Or in another case, testing of the aerodynamic profile of the plane with the underwing "buches" prior to be fitted with the guns.

 

[Roland55]

From Zona Militar
Greetings

There were only two Argentine Hawks that had the possibility of using 20mm Oerlikon cannons, the FMA-Curtiss H75-0 number C-633 and the number C-628, which were recognized by the "Buches" under the wing where they "hid". Part of the cannon mechanism.

Something similar to the "buches" on the bow of the IAe 24 Calquin numeral A-31 that carried two 20mm Hispano Suiza HS-404 or its English version (it was also the only Calquin photographed with those weapons and that I think I have already shown).
Kind regards

 

[Badner]

About the photos, i dont think they are fake, it could just be that they removed the cannons for X reason (common practice) and what's seen is the modification to the wing to house the mechanism. Or in another case, testing of the aerodynamic profile of the plane with the underwing "buches" prior to be fitted with the guns.

What makes me doubt it (nor for sheer argument's sake) is the fact that neither the Argentine air force book on the History of the Fighter Arm, nor Halbritter make any reference to purported cannon armament.
Can you upload the photo of Calquin s/n A-37?
Thanks

​

 

[Roland55]

Could have been just a thing evaluated at FMA and weren't noteworthy enough i guess? might not be the first time something is omitted..

About A-31*

 

[Badner]

Could have been just a thing evaluated at FMA and weren't noteworthy enough i guess? might not be the first time something is omitted.

Probably, Ihe conversion might have been done at another repair facility. However, the military (air attaché who was given authorization to visit Argentine military installations would have probably detected, as for example he did on other aircraft built" debajo la mesa: by the FMA technicians (and undetected by Argentine aviation historians) such as a few Curtiss Hawk IIIs built pre-war. I mentioned this to Pancho San Martín, who stated that the FMA had rebuilt or built Haw 750s (and perhaps a Northrop 8A-2), under what was termed as recuperación de matriculas."

 

[Roland55]

Could have been just a thing evaluated at FMA and weren't noteworthy enough i guess? might not be the first time something is omitted.

Probably, Ihe conversion might have been done at another repair facility. However, the military (air attaché who was given authorization to visit Argentine military installations would have probably detected, as for example he did on other aircraft built" debajo la mesa: by the FMA technicians (and undetected by Argentine aviation historians) such as a few Curtiss Hawk IIIs built pre-war. I mentioned this to Pancho San Martín, who stated that the FMA had rebuilt or built Haw 750s (and perhaps a Northrop 8A-2), under what was termed as recuperación de matriculas."

FMA was essentially the place where this conversions were made, since they were making and servicing said aircraft, i don't really think that the Air Attache could have been there regularly enough to witness every single work done by factory.

About the "recuperation de matriculas" never heard or read anything like it, there should be any proof that the FAA had more than 50 H-75, 12 Hawk biplanes, 30 8A-2...you get the idea. Again, if i check Padin's book for serials, they dont seem to be re-serialized or anything regarding some other example being built from surplus or rebuilt.

 

[Badner]

Actually, the US Attaché was given complete access to Argentine military installations, and many of the reports were marked as "Visit authorized by the Argentine War Ministry" See for example this excerpt from another one of my books. I brought the subject when I met with the son of Brigadier Jun Ignacio San Martín in 19997, and he told me about the Hawk 75-0 and Northrups built as under the same conditions. I am not surprised that other Argentine air historians are unfamiliar with such details. See Francisco San Martín comments about such reports I translated for him. In the German club there was a saying about history: and historians: " We alll have PARTS of the puzzle, but none has the ENTIRE puzzle." A typical example? Halbritter, a good solid air historian in his book on the history of the Argentine aeronautical history mentions the initial negotiations between the Argentine gov.t and Lockheed to manufacture the Lockheed T-33A under license in 1954 but is apparently unaware that these negotiations also included the license production of te Lockheed F-94 at the IAME, or the request of the Argentines for 25 T-33s.

 

[Roland55]

Again, access to the installations doesn't mean that he got access to everything that FMA was doing/working/modifying during this timeframe. Its no wonder if something might have slipped through, given that he wasn't overseeing the projects and their development or whatever FMA was doing...but just visiting.

The thing about the so called "recuperacion de matriculas" that makes me dubious..is simply that, there was no other aircraft with newer serials, the Northrops were 30, all with US serials, the hawks...same deal 30 original ones with US serials, 20 with Argentine Serials, 12 hawk biplanes (including 2 demonstrators). Sure a few were rebuilt after accidents, but their serials weren't changed...

Idk if Argentine Historians are unfamiliar with this, then again...i dont have the updated book on the subject, but if there never was a mention of this...im skeptical.

 

[Badner]

You should read the detail accounts of the arsenals and manufacturing plants visited and read what Pancho San Martin's thought of such reports...As an old Seargeant in the USAF used to say, "No brag, just fact." There is no reason to skeptical.

 

[Roland55]

You should read the detail accounts of the arsenals and manufacturing plants visited and read what Pancho San Martin's thought of such reports...As an old Seargeant in the USAF used to say, "No brag, just fact." There is no reason to skeptical.

If you happen to have such reports, ill be happy to read them.

Dont get me wrong, but like with the 20mm guns (thing that i initially didn't believe, until others proved me wrong), if there is no certain proof about this...im talking images, records or any kind of a report by FMA stating such a thing...im gonna have my doubts.

 

[Badner]

I'll send you a PM. My experience with certain archives in the Argentine is that many have stolen reports and or photographs, or even have torn pages from books and official got. publications. There was a bounder of the worst type selling such stuff at the San Telmo flea market. Now, I was given this photo of a Hawk III (from the AGN) by ma friend in Buenos Aires years ago. On the back the inscription "avion Jawk (sic) en reparaciones., but a second copy of this print I acquired myself back in 1999 read "caza biplane en construcción en la Fábrica Militar De Aviones". In my book about piston engine fighters I decided to err on the side of caution.