Warbird Information Exchange

Over the years I've heard the word renaissance used to describe individual types of aircraft when they've "flourished", meaning multiple examples being brought back to flyable condition. Two that quickly come to mind are the P-40 and Hurricane. I believe this was because the overall infrastructure was strengthened for both aircraft. Sub-assemblies, components, multiple shops with working knowledge, and other factors contributed to the population of flyable aircraft, quadrupling the number in the past 15 to 20 years. P-47s have also seen a comeback, considering the number of flyable airframes back in the early nineties.

But what I'm wondering is: When will (if ever) we see the P-39 Renaissance happen? Will we ever see a supported infrastructure of newly manufactured parts, and knowledge begin to emerge to see a network capable of sustaining 12, 13, 14... flyable P-39's? Are there even that many airframes to go around? Or maybe at that point we'd have the capability to remanufacture the majority of the airframe?

All hypothetical. Comments? Questions? Concerns?

_________________
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?

I don't think we would see a P-39 renaissance. The other planes that you mentioned: Hurricane, P-40, P-47, were all usually well regarded by those that flew them and generally well regarded by historians. The P-39 was not held in such high regard (except for the Russians), and historians, likewise, have not spoken well of the P-39. I think that reputation takes away from the plane popularity and the ability for it to be widely restored and flown today.

The P-39 filled a need when there was no other plane available. As soon as other planes became available, it was unceremoniously kicked to the curb. I can't recall seeing any account of a P-39 pilot regretting having to switch to another aircraft. Burke Davis in "Get Yammamoto" indicated that Japanese pilots said they preferred to meet the P-39 over any other Allied aircraft.

Do I personally think the P-39 is a cool plane? Absolutely. Would have I wanted to go into combat in one? Absolutely not.

good thoughts/questions chris. i would offer that a lot of what will determine this is availability of serviceable V-1710s.

_________________
-recovering Viper crew chief
-AWACS driver/soon-to-be A-26 driver
-displaced Philadelphian

maybe not 1v1 a2a, but in a CAS/BAI role, it's a different story perhaps.

_________________
-recovering Viper crew chief
-AWACS driver/soon-to-be A-26 driver
-displaced Philadelphian

Actually, by all accounts, the P-39 was nice to fly. Eric Brown and Chuck Yeager were two of its fans, although neither flew it in combat. It was in many ways more advanced than the P-40, played a similar role, and would have been a good substitute had no P-40s been around.

A P-39 renaissance has already begun. For a long time there were two airworthy P-39s, both CAF. One retired to Michigan. But TFC has raised the number back to 2 (now with Lewis) and most of us are aware that there are several projects underway. In the long term each of the really big collectors (Weeks, Yagen, Allen) will have one and there will be a few others as well.

It may even parallel the Hurricane which went from 3 airworthy examples at its nadir to the current dozen or so. The P-40 has never been that rare and it is unlikely the P-39 will ever catch up.

August

i wasn't aware of a paul allen P-39. s/n# ?

_________________
-recovering Viper crew chief
-AWACS driver/soon-to-be A-26 driver
-displaced Philadelphian

when talking about type renaissances is it prudent to say that air force types will always outnumber navy types since the navy controls recovery efforts world wide. navy types are limited to existing airframes from surplus plus what will presumably be limited numbers of F4Fs, SBDs, and Avengers that will be release into private hand.

_________________
-recovering Viper crew chief
-AWACS driver/soon-to-be A-26 driver
-displaced Philadelphian

Not necessarily so. I'd say the Avenger has a much healthier population verses the AAC fighter types at the moment. I don't foresee there being more P-38's flying than Avengers, for example. While yes we only have around five flyable Hellcats and ten or so flyable Wildcats, the Corsair has a somewhat healthy number of around thirteen / fourteen.

Does the capability of building (basically) all new airframes enter into the renaissance question? Because if so, Im fairly certain the Navy / Government wouldn't have any jurisdiction at that point if we we're building new F4U's, F6F's, and F4F's, regardless of how expensive or impractical it would be.

_________________
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?

According to the AEHS site, they built North of 70,000 Indiana tractor motors

_________________
Don't make me go get my flying monkeys-

In the 90s, I befriended a WW2 vet who'd flown B-17s with the 91st BG. He later rotated back to the states and was flying P-39 target craft (I guess, the 'operation pinball' ones) at Las Vegas that were painted an almost daylgow orange (I have a copy of one of the photos of one he'd taken at Vegas somewhere around here, i need to find it and scan that). He said they were great little planes to fly but once he got his hands on P-47s in the National Guard after the war, he then realized why the 39s had the poor rep that'd had. Having been a bomber pilot, I can see why a 39 would have seemed like a 'hot plane' to him in comparison.
He passed away in 1999, and I think of him often. I wished I'd asked him more about his stateside experiences...

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

there's the question

_________________
-recovering Viper crew chief
-AWACS driver/soon-to-be A-26 driver
-displaced Philadelphian

Great post Chris, very accurate assessment.

As Saxman's pointed out, the other examples were important, highly regarded types in their own right, their problem being overshadowed by the primadonna P-51D and Spitfire that 'everybody' knows and thus wants first.

The P-39 is probably unfairly traduced, but I don't agree with August that it was 'as good' as the P-40; it's clear from the Pacific actions that the P-40 was holding the line that the P-39 couldn't manage.

So if you say the Spitfire and Mustang are in the first tier of 'what' and fame, the P-47, P-40, and Hurricane are in the second, and the P-39, P-63 are a tier below that - IMHO.

So in answer, there are several P-39s that are due to come out of Precision Aerospace, Wangaratta, Vic, Aus, for the aforementioned owners. If you want one, contact Precision, because they have the infrastructure to make you one from a wreck (which exist). However I don't think there's many (any?) more people likely to pay what that will cost to do.

So will we see more? Definitely.

A lot more? No.

So we should be particularly appreciative of people like the Cobra Den guys and collectors like Yagen, Weeks and Allen who are prepared to broaden collections beyond the ones 'everybodys' heard of.

Regards,

_________________
James K

"Switch on the underwater landing lights"
Emilio Largo, Thunderball.

www.VintageAeroWriter.com

Don't forget that Yanks has both a flyable/not-flown P-39 and P-63. The P-39 was built up from a Pacific wreck. I believe they have another carcass in storage as well, but I don't think they have any near term plans for it.

I've been told by a very experienced warbird rebuilder who said that the problem with P-39 restorations is that the airframe is complex compared to (say) a P-40, and there are critical parts which just don't exist today, although I don't remember the specifics of which items he was talking about.

Obviously, if someone has the money, anything can be done, but I think the discussion was under the premise of "What can be done at an unreasonable cost?", not "What is possible if you have Bill Gates' money?"

Problem really is that the cost of re-build does not come close to market value. Not too many serious collectors wish to spend 1.5- 2 mil to restore a 1 mil aircraft. The wildcat is a prime example. Spend 1.2 mil to restore a 900K airframe. Just my .02 + 30 years experience worth.

_________________
Expert:
Ex: Former.
Spurt: A drip under pressure.