Warbird Information Exchange

Stumbled across this today and have never seen it before. Obviously a modded P-63 but does anybody have any more info?

_________________
Scott Rose
Editor-In-Chief/Webmaster
Warbirds Resource Group - Warbird Information Exchange - Warbird Registry

Be civil, be polite, be nice.... or be elsewhere.
-------------------------------------------------------
This site is brought to you with the support of members like you. If you find this site to be of value to you,
consider supporting this forum and the Warbirds Resource Group with a VOLUNTARY subscription
For as little as $2/month you can help ($2 x 12 = $24/year, less than most magazine subscriptions)
So If you like it here, and want to see it grow, consider helping out.



Thanks to everyone who has so generously supported the site. We really do appreciate it.

Scott, it appears it was just an experiment on a "Pinball" P-63.

RP-63G: "Pinball" target aircraft. Two prototypes (modified P-63Cs, s/ns 43-11723/11724) and thirty production aircraft (s/ns 45-57283 - 45-57312). 1,200hp Allison V-1710-135 engine. Another 420 cancelled. One experimentally fitted with V-shaped tail assembly.
Jerry

_________________
"Always remember that, when you enter the ocean or the forest, you are no longer at the top of the food chain."

I think Tex Johnston flew it once, and said never again, it flew pretty bad I guess.

There was also a swept wing version

The V-tail was an idea that got some traction during the war as a way to save weight. It was first suggested by a Polish engineer in a 1932 paper.
Obviously we know it was never widely used.
The V-tail P-63 first flew in December 1945...the same time as the Bonanza took to the air. Two were modified and at least one survived long enough to receive USAF (as opposed to USAAF) markings in 1947.

Oddly, Beech beat Bell with the configuration. Beech tested a V-tail on a AT-10 in 1943 during research for high speed aircraft. As aircraft were getting faster, it was found that a V-tail mounted high on the rear fuselage would take the horizontal tail surfaces out of wake of the wing. Beech research suggested that sizes being equal, a V configuration gave 40% greater control effectiveness over a conventional unit. On the first Bonanzas, Beech said the design saved 11.6 pounds and contributed to a reduction in drag. Beech also found that a V-tail made the aircraft more resistant to enter a spin and better spin recovery.

At the launch of the Bonanza in 1947, Beech said all its future designs would use it, none did except the Twin Quad feederliner prototype. Beech did consider the V-tail for the T-34.

The only other type with the feature to reach large scale production was the French Magister jet trainer which arrived shortly after the Bonanza (1951).

_________________
Remember the vets, the wonderful planes they flew and their sacrifices for a future many of them did not live to see.
Note political free signature.
I figure if you wanted my opinion on items unrelated to this forum, you'd ask for it.

Bf 109v48 (WkNr:14003 - VJ+WC, an early G-0) was fitted with a V-tail.
A report dated 22MAR43 indicated an increase in top speed of only 2.5kph, not sufficient enough to justify proceeding.

_________________
Lest Hero-worship raise it's head and cloud our vision, remember that World War II was fought and won by the same sort of twenty-something punks we wouldn't let our daughters date.

More to the point, it probably wasn't worth disrupting production for the mod. Also, one wonders how the pilots would have felt about the change?

_________________
Remember the vets, the wonderful planes they flew and their sacrifices for a future many of them did not live to see.
Note political free signature.
I figure if you wanted my opinion on items unrelated to this forum, you'd ask for it.

Okay,
1) That V-tail doesn't look nearly large enough for the rest of the airplane, hp. etc. The V-tails Bonanzas I've flown have a very subtle oscillation on the vertical axis, it must have been very pronounced on that prototype.
2) The swept wing P-63 was supposed to be the wing design to be used on the then future F-86A. That aircraft is supposed to be in storage in at the Smithsonian. It probably was much faster than the stock P-63's. Ever noticed how fat and non-laminar the wing is on a P-63? Very primitive wing shape compared to the rest of the sleek aircraft.

Given the constant variations and evolution of the 109 airframe it probably could have been incorporated without too much disruption, just like the taller tail and ERLA hood were.
If it had given a marked performance advantage over the conventional tail, the pilots would have given it a putzig nickname, and the Experten would have argued about how much nicer the old one was, but the advantage would have been gratefully accepted.

_________________
Lest Hero-worship raise it's head and cloud our vision, remember that World War II was fought and won by the same sort of twenty-something punks we wouldn't let our daughters date.

"Wikipedia"


The P-63 was fitted with a laminar flow wing.

Basically heavy and underpowered...

PS: This is what I'm referring that was stated earlier!

That may not have been the point.
Basically a flying wind tunnel model.

_________________
Remember the vets, the wonderful planes they flew and their sacrifices for a future many of them did not live to see.
Note political free signature.
I figure if you wanted my opinion on items unrelated to this forum, you'd ask for it.

BF-109 in question

_________________
Keep Em' Flying,
Christopher Soltis
Dedicated to the preservation and education of The Sikorsky Memorial Airport

CASC Blog Page: http://ctair-space.blogspot.com/
Warbird Wear: https://www.redbubble.com/people/warbirdwear/shop

Chicks Dig Warbirds.......right?

Scott,I just sent an e-mail to your old gmail adress. I have no idea if it's still active,but it was worth a try. I copied the pertinent pages from Birch Matthews book on Bell fixed wing aircraft "Cobra" and attached the pdf file to the e-mail. If this won't work,give me another adress to use and I'll try again.

Larry Kraus