Warbird Information Exchange

I think I'd prefer something with a round engine in the CAS/BAI role....too easy for ground fire to hit a coolant line and ruin your day.

I'm by no means a P-39 hater. It apparently did fairly well at low altitudes, which is why the plane was very well regarded and fairly successful in Soviet hands. IIRC, one of their pilots racked up 55 kills in the P-39.

The Avenger's healthier numbers is due to a pretty fair number of them being assigned to the Royal Canadian Navy and sold surplus from the RCN. It's versatility as a tanker / sprayer, also made it popular to be purchased surplus from the USN as well. The air tanker operators helped preserve a lot of types that may not have been as numerous if they weren't useful in that role. Let's face it, if it wasn't for the air tanker role, how many F7Fs would have been preserved?

By my count there are at least 30 Avengers that are fliers. Among combat types, I think that is second only to the P-51 (by a huge margin)...at least until all those Spitfires that are crated in Burma come online

Yes, talk to anyone from Fighter Rebuilders about what it took to rebuild the Lewis example for Stephen Grey several years ago. I want to say about 40% of the vital stuff outside of the primary airframe had to be custom built, because there literally were no real parts left over.

The two 'fliers' with the CAF and Air Zoo were complete airworthy examples that were kept airworthy. All the other airframes that are on static are 'shells'.

_________________
Offer me solutions, offer me alternatives, and I decline......

The 'Pinball' aircraft were P-63s. Although similar-looking to the P-39, they were actually entirely different, with the cockpit doors being the only common parts between the 2 types.

I red somewhere that the P-39/P-63 are more complex to maintain to day, with the complex transmission due by the central engine.
From the accident report look like that the P-39 of TFC was lost with its pilot in France after a failure of this complex part.

_________________
Sorry for my bad English:-(

Iclo,

1) The TFC aeroplane was a P-63, not a P-39

2) To which report are you referring? I have never seen the accident ascribed to anything other than an in-flight engine fire.

Well, being 6'1" and not wanting a driveshaft buzzing between my legs might be a reason I would choose the P-40!

But one has to also look at which plane is more recognizable to the general public. The Flying Tigers made sure the P-40 would be a legend. I know that some Cobras and King Cobras sported sharks teeth, but, they are not AVG planes. This is the same thing with the Corsair, Baa Baa Black Sheep, Vs. the Hellcat

Just my crazy thoughts! Your mileage may vary!

From a historical perspective I think the P-39 has a lot going for it, as does the P-63. Unfortunately that doesn't equate to public awareness or popularity. If there were more airworthy P-39s I think that situation could be improved. They do look a little odd, and I think that is in their favor.

I wasn't very clear on that point. You're right of course, but he also flew 39s at Vegas, too. All were a loud red of orange color. The bottom line was he probably thought any single-seat pursuit aircraft was a 'hot ship' until he got his hands on a Jug after the war and realized that not every fighter is a hot aircraft. That was his point, and I have no reason to doubt that.

_________________
Life member, 91st BG Memorial Association
Owner, 1944 Willys MB #366014
Former REMF (US Army, O3)

Someone needs to make a movie adaptation of Nanette http://www.amazon.com/NANETTE-Her-Pilots-Love-Story/dp/0874747376/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1355342636&sr=8-3&keywords=Nanette

Aside from just being a great book, it would drive P-39 awareness.

_________________
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.

You'are right about the types: In my mind, it was one P-39 and one P-63 that TFC lost, but after checking it's two P-63.

For the report accident, from one people directly involved in the La Ferté Alais meeting (and friend of Stephen Grey), it's was probably a trouble with the bearing or the axel itself who cause the engine failure. Of Course, that could be wrong as no official report was published.

By the way, it looks that the P-39 TFC owned later (now with Rod Lewis) was operated very carefully and was considered as "a complex and touchy" aircraft.

Regards

_________________
Sorry for my bad English:-(

Between September 1941 and March 1945, there were about 400 fatal P-39 accidents in the continental United States.
There were a lot of flat spins that the pilots were unable to recover from. Very unforgiving. TM
Page 1196 - Volume III - Fatal Army Air Forces Aviation Accidents in the United States 1941-1945

_________________
.
.
.

"Welcome back Mr. Lasky."

I've researched losses at Dale Mabry AAF in Tallahassee, Florida and many of them were indeed P-39 crashes. That said, it was a fighter transition training base, so you're likely to have more accidents in whatever plane is most being used, and they used a lot of P-39s there until they could get Jugs and 'Stangs later in the war...

_________________
Life member, 91st BG Memorial Association
Owner, 1944 Willys MB #366014
Former REMF (US Army, O3)

One of the interesting points about the P-39 flight characteristics, is that based on pilot reports, it handles quite well/like an airplane should, with more weight up in the nose. (Not really related to, but sort of like the difference between trying to fly a paper airplane with and without a paper clip on its nose - resulting in the difference between the aircraft flying stable, and the aircraft flying out of balance). As long as there was enough weight in the nose, keeping the center of gravity in the right spot, it sounds like it would be a routine-handling aircraft, but that would change if flying the aircraft void of the weight that the ammunition provided up in the nose. As some pilots I've read have described, when the center of gravity got far enough aft after the nose had been 'emptied' (such as following a combat mission, or on a training flight), the aircraft could feel as if it were balancing on the head of a pin (similar thought would be a P-51D or late-mark Spitfire with the aft fuselage fuel tank full, making the center of gravity slip quite a ways aft). As has been brought up here and in magazines before, with the ex-TFC P-39 "Brooklyn Bum 2nd", now owned by Rod Lewis, the replica cannon rounds in the nose were purposely machined out of solid brass to help build up a good amount of weight in the nose.

Another 'quirk' of the P-39, is that it heats up extremely fast when parked or taxiing (similar to the early Spitfires), with the coolant and oil radiator intakes being so small. I believe "Brooklyn Bum 2nd" has a special spray bar added in as a preventive measure to keep the coolant temps down when it should become critical to do so.

While owned by TFC, "Brooklyn Bum 2nd" was flown through some great displays, such as at La Ferte-Alais in the hands of Stephen Grey, where the aircraft was put through various vertical and other aerobatic maneuvers.

Yes, it has spraybars, it can be a long taxi to and from the runway at Chino where it was initially flown. I haven't heard that the CAF example or any of the P-63s regularly operate with spraybars. Anyone know about those?