Warbird Information Exchange

on ebay if anyone is interested

http://www.ebay.com/itm/321782229651

You better be no more than 20 years of age and have a boatload of talent and money. Hats off to whomever tackles the project.

_________________
Hang The Expense

Cool that it's a combat vet, but yikes!

_________________
Taylor Stevenson

yeah i think some people would be better off heading out into the jungle and picking up one of the thousands of P-39's just left sitting there in pristine condition, give them a quick clean and fly them away

That reminds me of a story I once heard chatting with a guy at a museum (another visitor, not a staff member.) He told me about how the military has hundreds of these old WWII planes just sitting in storage on islands out in the Pacific, and whenever anyone needs warbird parts, they can just go out there and get them. No, really..he swore it was true! He also told me that when the Lancaster was first installed on its pedestal in Windsor, ON. they forgot to remove the guns. When someone remembered and went to get them, they had all been stolen! True story!

SN

its funny that things like this http://www.warbirdregistry.org/spitregi ... p9374.html spitfire, which sat in salt water for 70 years have been restored, yet you would need to be 20 to do a P-39...

the P-39 is all electrical not hydraulic like P-40's, spitfires etc, no complex spars, simple fuel systems etc, they are a very simple modular aircraft, anyone who can build an RV4 can rebuild a P-39 structure, but then some are DOers some are (sh..)talkers

As a long time lover of all things P-39 and having collected a significant amount of Bell material, I consider this to be an exceptional project.
Most P-39 projects you see advertised usually only retain the canoe or bottom hull section, to get a project with all the hard to get bits is very difficult.
I read recently that the Kiwi's are taking over the rebuild of several P-39's from Wangaratta - perfect timing for someone to tap into that experienced
team and get this happening.

_________________
Peter
ESAD (E-Science and Digitalisation)

Fiftycal, commenting on the condition of the project and/or the immense amount of work that a project will take does not infer that those making the statements don't understand the rarity of the project. Furthermore, while the Spitfire reference is valid with respect to what can be produced through effort and modern restoration, it's a little bit of apples and oranges when compared to the P-39 in terms of popularity, resale value after restoration, etc. If we are talking about pure depth of restoration, a more humorous reference would have been just posting a picture of a P-51 data plate. Not knocking the Cobras... They have a rich history and I'd love to fly one. Without a doubt, this project is a viable flyer... Just the person doing the restoration will need to REALLY want a P-39.

Also, based on your reaction, am I to assume this is your project that's for sale?

_________________
Taylor Stevenson

maybe not popular with you, but if you do your sums this can be rebuilt and flying for about 700k and you wont be able to buy a flying one for under 2 or 3 million, even a static wreck like the one from the Russian lake sold 10 years ago as a wreck for 350k (probably more like 500k these days).

these days warbirds will rarely fly over 10k feet and under 10k feet this will smash any P-51 or spitfire in speed and maneuverability when loaded properly, a P-39 even wont the 1947 Thompson trophy, and without a ton of armor it will, contrary to popular myth, actually out turn a zero.

P-39:
5,000ft 350mph 3000rpm 1150hp
P-51
5,000ft 363mph 3000rpm 1450hp

P-51 gains 13mph for a whopping 300hp more, thats pretty inefficient

I was never arguing performance. My only reference to the P-51 was out of jest, inferring that a modern Mustang can be built from scratch with nothing more than a data plate

I think your restoration estimate is a bit low and your sale price is high. Disclaimer: that is my opinion only. Furthermore, if I am thinking of the same "static wreck like the one from the Russian lake," that P-39 was substantially more complete than the eBay images portray this one to be. It may just be the images chosen.

Cobras ARE popular with me, but you can't legitimately argue that P-39s are more popular than Spitfires... (Remember, this is coming from a guy who would rather have the former). I was just rebutting your use of the Spitfire image.

I'm not trying to be a downer or degrade the significance of the P-39 or this project. I'm simply saying this is a big bite to chew and the one tackling the project had better REALLY want a Cobra. That's all.

Edit: I also agree with Digger, this would be a great project to be done with the rest. Get an assembly line going!

_________________
Taylor Stevenson

There is an entire industry in the UK rebuilding Spitfires. They can build you a new one from scratch if you want. No such infrastructure exists for the P-39, which means every part you make will be a one-off piece requiring you to build the tooling for the part or hire a dozen guys like Scott Dennison to beat 'em out of aluminum by hand.

The P-40 also has a pretty good parts supply chain if you know where to look. There's a guy who posted in this thread who has the tooling, equipment, and contacts to make you most of the parts for a P-40. I hear he does some B-17 stuff too.

Again, there is no such supply chain for the Aircobra. Meaning you'd need a LOT of resources (time, money, or both) to build a new one from the pattern shown in that ad...

Kyleb...spot on!

It is simply about the supply chain availability today for any particular type.

How much of P9374 was retained in the final build? Other than the data plate?

Yes historical.....but still a recreation from various original parts and a LOT of new metal.

With limited means, still a great starting point for a static restoration that would retain most of the original material however.

I view a lot of those basket cases found like this.

There are great exceptions once in a while ($$$$$, time, passion and devotion needed)

Take the P61. As a template it was a great starting point and look at her today!

My 2 Canadian centavos.

I've never seen a P-39 or P-63 project that was a "good project." In particular the Tallichet recovered airframes. They are always stripped down and missing everything you can possibly imagine. If a collector was burning to acquire a P-39 he could find a more complete example on static display or recovered whole. This example seems to fit the guy with lots of talent whose chance at ever buying something and really having something when he's finished. If he were rich he would've bought a P-51 project which , by the way, now cost $851K and you'll have to spend another million.
Anyone could buy this project and have plenty to do with their skill level. If a person was a talented aircraft mechanic, he might be able to build it up all the way to static display without spending a fortune.
Look at the Japanese Yokusuka "Judy" that POF restored to taxiable condition. They did a great job on a limited budget.

the airframe itself is not hard to build, everything is modular, the cab, the keel, the wings, the rear fuselage, the tail, the stabiliser, all control surfaces are extrusion, you build the jigs, you can make the frames any number of ways, and nail it together, the fuel tanks are rubber bags that are still being made, the u/c and flaps use 1/4 hp electric motors etc, no hydraulics, nothing too complicated, just like building an RV-4.

as for the $851k P-51, its a pattern ship anyway, after years and years of sitting every single rivet will be fizzed and need to be replaced, when you drill these fizzed rivets out you will then have an over sized hole and im not sure about the usa but here you cannot have an over-sized hole unless its a very very restricted "experimental" ie: no airshows, no passengers etc, it will also have tons of hidden corrosion. the only plus is that its got no crash damaged.

but im sure the P-51 buyer will be well aware of these things because if your spending that much your not going to be dumb.

anyone flying these 70 year old planes with original rivets and 30 year old overhauls is risking lives.

so anything that old must be rebuilt anyway.