All of you have caused me to get out P-39 books. Unfortunately, there is still varying opinion. First, remember during the depression any attack would be bombers coming in toward coastal areas. The defense would be interceptors. The P-38 and P-39 were interceptors and the XFM & YFM were bomber destroyers. The idea of escorts with the attacking bombers was thought not possible, which is why the USAAF was slow to catch on and unprepared in Europe. Dorr & Scutts (Crowood) point out positive reports from the Brits about it's speed and manoeuverablity. They dispell the myth that the Soviets used the 37mm as a tank buster because of it's low power and lack of armor penetration. By the time of Pearl Harbor the Brits opinion changed to "unsuitable". No mention of cockpit heater. The 37mm was a favorite of to the US army and as Mr. Bell had seen a demonstration of the cannon, he saw it as a plus to include in a prospective fighter. Birch Matthews work, "Cobra", has considerable info. I usually don't read the preface when I first get a book, so now reading the preface, Matthews points out myths such as the P-39E had laminar flow airfoil when it did not. He points out that the P-39 mission was always as an interceptor, not ground support or coastal defense. After the NACA report, Bell had to remove the turbosupercharger to have any hope of an army contract, needed to prevent company bankruptcy. Another critical problem at Bell Aircraft was the lack of "an exceptionally talented engineer equivalent to NAA, Lockheed, and Douglas." Bob woods refused to reconfigure the XFL-1 c.g. while still on paper. The problem remained, causing USN an easy out. Matthews points out the later P-63 never gained USAAF acceptance in a combat capacity because it had the shortest combat radius of any USN or USAAF fighter of the war. His research not mine, but checking easily available stats, is verified. Matthews conclusion it was due to clinging to the 37mm canon. Other books perpetuate the 390 mph ideas, such as Kinzey's "P-39 Airacobra" and Rick Mitchell's "Airacobra Advantage". Mitchell has a quote from Tex Johnston, test pilot later in the program, "The P-39 was truly a fine airplane when utilized for the mission for which it was designed. Many articles written by misinformed authors and /or unqualified pilots have adversely affected the reputation of a fine airplane." Kind of a quote from a company man, with ambiguity. Squadron's P-39 in action No.43 is more for modelers as is Kinzey's and Mitchell's books. I have yet to look in the Putnam book as I an tiring of the P-39 info. As far as a recommendation, Matthew's book is the one to study as he was a Bell employee with access to records, and as impartial as I have seen. Well written and documented.