Jerry Yagen's new combat vet P-400 Airacobra project

[corsairkid]

It soon became the joke in the Pacific Theatre that a P-400 was a P-40 with a Zero on its tail.

yet it shot down more enemy aircraft than any other US made aircraft in ww2

The P-400? Or the P-40? Whichever one, I had never heard that. Could you point me towards a source that would educamate me on that subject (like who was #2, 3, also)?

Thanks.

[fiftycal]

The Bell P-39 Airacobra was one of the principal American fighter aircraft in service when the United States entered World War II. The P-39 was used with great success by the Soviet Air Force, which scored the highest number of individual kills attributed to any U.S. fighter type

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_P-39_ ... ite_note-6

[fiftycal]

The main problems with the P-39 were lack of supercharger which limited its performance over 20,000ft (which when designed it was not designed to fight over that altitude but times changed) and also the completely rearward CG when ammunition was expended.

with ammo or ballast the aircraft is so perfectly balanced that it can out turn anything even a zero, but once the ammo was gone and an inexperienced pilot would start pulling G the aircraft would obviously flick onto its back.

on top of this the early fighting was done in PNG where the Owen Stanley range has lots of 10-13,000ft mountains and the P-39's performance starts degrading around there.

another myth is P-39 "tumbling" it never happened, see the spin testing yourself here:

https://www.youtube.com/embed/BWwI6gZw67g

there is a good interview with Bob Hoover where he talks about trying to make one tumble as well and says thats its got a really bad name completely undeserved.

[Zachary]

The P-39 was used with great success by the Soviet Air Force, which scored the highest number of individual kills attributed to any U.S. fighter type

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_P-39_ ... ite_note-6

Not saying it's incorrect, but that is an interesting quote. Does it mean the P-39 scored more individual kills than any other U.S. fighter type while being used by all operators of the type, or does it mean the Soviets scored more individual kills in the P-39 than while flying any other U.S.-manufactured fighter? It's kind of open to interpretation the way it is written, and it only lists a note, not a reference citation that backs the statement. Interesting regardless.

Zack

[ErrolC]

The Bell P-39 Airacobra was one of the principal American fighter aircraft in service when the United States entered World War II. The P-39 was used with great success by the Soviet Air Force, which scored the highest number of individual kills attributed to any U.S. fighter type

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_P-39_ ... ite_note-6

That link isn't to a Citation to that claim:

The P-39 was used with great success by the Soviet Air Force, which scored the highest number of individual kills attributed to any U.S. fighter type.[N 2][citation needed]

Notes
1 Some sources give 6 April 1939 as the date of the first flight; there is very good evidence that 1938 is correct (see talk page).
2 The P-39 has the highest total number of individual victories attributed to any U.S. fighter type, not kill ratio; Finnish-modified Brewster Buffalos had the highest kill ratio.

[fiftycal]

Five out of the ten highest scoring Soviets aces logged the majority of their kills in P-39s. In fact, P-39 jockeys filled the number two, three, and four spots: Aleksandr Pokryshkin (59), Aleksandr Gulaev (57), and Grigoriy Rechkalov (56).

http://www.chuckhawks.com/airacobra_iron_dog.htm

Soviet P-39 kill ratio against the Luftwaffe was 4 to one in favor of the Cobra to the end of WW 2.

http://www.aviastar.org/air/usa/bell_p-39.php?p=2

http://www.skytamer.com/Bell_P-39Q.html

[Zac Yates]

No, they have another P-39 under rebuild in Oz... AP335 is still in storage in Va Beach as I understand it.

Cheers,

Lynn

Thanks Lynn! I was at work so didn't want to get too deep into my research on the subject

[JohnTerrell]

Here is the Pacific Wrecks page for Jerry Yagen's (former Jack Taft) P-400 project: http://www.pacificwrecks.com/aircraft/p-400/AP335.html
As mentioned already in this thread, the last public information about it (from a couple years back), was that it was in storage with MAM/Fighter Factory here in the U.S. Things may certainly have changed since then, however.

I believe there are 3 different P-39 projects at Precision Aerospace, with the furthest along being Jerry Yagen's P-39Q 42-20341. The other two are P-39F 41-7215 (not sure of the current owner) and P-39K 42-4312 owned by Kermit Weeks.

This photo was posted on the web several years back, taken in 2008(!) of Yagen's P-39Q 42-20341 at Precision.

[JohnTerrell]

Also, another item that was different between the P-39 and the export version, the P-400, was that the P-39 had a low-pressure oxygen system while the P-400 had a high-pressure oxygen system.

[Hurribuilder]

Wow, what a treat to see that aircraft in the skies once again. Hope she one day makes it up to CWH in Hamilton for a visit. Can't wait....

[AvroAvian]

The main problems with the P-39 were lack of supercharger which limited its performance over 20,000ft

Another myth perpetuated!

Anyone who has had anything to do with the Allison engine, as fitted to the P-39 and P-40, ie the 'E' and 'F' series engines, will tell you that it has a single stage, single speed supercharger. Even the "long nose" 'C' series engines were supercharged. The problem is that the engine was originally specified and designed to be used with a turbocharger, as in the P-38 Lightning, which would then give you the altitude performance.
Rolls Royce got the jump on the development of the Merlin from the single stage, single speed supercharged engine, to adding the gearbox for the two speed supercharger, to finally adding the second stage compressor and intercooler to produce the 60 series Merlin, because the British needs for performance were far more urgent and government cash was made available.
Allison developed the equivalent to the 60 series Merlin in the 'G' series, which had a two stage intercooled supercharger, driven by a constantly variable ratio hydraulic drive. Unfortunately, this engine was a little too late and it was also longer, making it not economical to redesign and retool the Mustang, which was being ramped up in production.
The P-82 Twin Mustang was designed to use the 'G' series engine (although the XP-82 flew with Merlins - see Tom Reilly's great project!) and flew with great success.
One needs to understand that a lot of progress happened in quite a short period of time.
I recommend reading Dan Whitney's terrific book "Vee's for Victory!" on the development of the Allison and the Rolls Royce Heritage Trust "The Merlin in Perspective".

[Bradburger]

According to a recent post on his Facebook page, Kermit Weeks mentions that Jerry Yagen's P-39/P-400 project is heading to Pioneer Aircraft in New Zealand along with his Kingfisher project, and also his Ki61 project for completion: -

https://www.facebook.com/KermitWeeks/ph ... =1&theater

Cheers

Paul

[Zac Yates]

As I mentioned on the previous page

[Chappie]

EDUCATE ME !

What was the difference (if any) between the P-400 and the P-39???

Thanks,
JV

http://www.fuselagecodes.com

The P-400 was simply the export version of the P-39D, which was still equipped with a 37mm cannon, not a 20mm. Like the A-10 decades later, the P-39 was designed around the Oldsmobile T-9 37mm cannon. The "400" was from Bell's over-enthusiastic boast that the P-39 was a 400mph fighter, which it really was not.

Chappie

[Nathan]

The P-39 was used with great success by the Soviet Air Force, which scored the highest number of individual kills attributed to any U.S. fighter type

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_P-39_ ... ite_note-6

Not saying it's incorrect, but that is an interesting quote. Does it mean the P-39 scored more individual kills than any other U.S. fighter type while being used by all operators of the type, or does it mean the Soviets scored more individual kills in the P-39 than while flying any other U.S.-manufactured fighter? It's kind of open to interpretation the way it is written, and it only lists a note, not a reference citation that backs the statement. Interesting regardless.

Zack

That title would go with the P-40. Not the P-39. It's not 100% confirmed yet, but it would be pretty damned close!