Groundhog Thread Part Deux - P-39 Fantasy and Fetish - The Never Ending Story (Mods take no responsibility for head against wall injuries sustained)

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

P-39 Expert said:
No it couldn't land on a carrier, but then neither could the F4U-1. And range was equivalent to either the Navy fighters.
Click to expand...
The range of the P-39 was half that of Navy fighters.
The F4U's range was 1,000 miles.
The F6F's range was 945 miles.
The F4F's range was 845 miles.
And even the SBD's range was 1,100 miles.
All these ranges are with internal fuel and combat loads - the ferry ranges were further.
And every single aircraft listed above operated from carriers during the war.
 

I'm sure with contract revisions Bell would have revised their performance estimates?

Maybe Bell was still full of shit?


P-39 Expert said:
The 7150lb weight is for a P-39D without wing guns and the nose armor (AHT).
Click to expand...

Ah, the infamous nose armour. What would a thread be without it?



I am confused.

Are you reconfiguring the P-39D to be a better weapon of war, or for just one point of time at one location during the war?
 
Greg Boeser said:
Well, if you dumped the .50s for pulse cannon I think the P-39 would be unstoppable.
Click to expand...

Don't be silly.

The pulse cannons didn't exist, and still don't.


The remote gearbox surely allows for the installation of a 20mm Vulcan in the nose firing through the hub, instead of the 37mm.

Once that is installed we can confidently ditch the nose armour, wing guns and probably the cowl guns. With the ammo the P-39 could carry, the firing time will be down to 1s or less.
 
While this thread and others like it involving members who cannot learn or accept facts are a lost course they do bring out the best information in the vain attempt to teach the unteachable, in that sense they do contribute to the forum.
 
" I just looked it up and the exact weight is 5849lbs gross per the contract signed in Feb 1940. This weight was the basis for the 400mph estimates, aka P-400. Final gross weight after the British finished with it in 1941 was 7850lbs"


Hmm, strangely enough, the P-39C went 5,070lbs empty, 7075lbs gross weight (combat) and 7300lbs max gross. They were ordered August 10th 1939. So, in Feb of 1940, 6 months later Bell is telling the British the plane will only weigh 5879lbs gross for combat?
809lbs useful load?
160lb pilot (including 20lb parachute)
290lbs just for the .50 cal guns and ammo
45lbs of oil (2 gallons for the gear box and only 4 gallons for the engine)

Leaves us about 70 gallons of gasoline and no gun sight.

There was absolutely no way Bell could have delivered a usable fighter aircraft even without armor or protected tanks with a gross weight of 5849lbs, regardless of what the British did.

On Sept 13th 1940 the USAAC ordered a bunch of P-39Ds and changed the contract for the 21st through 80th P-39C to P-39Ds with protection and wing guns.
From Joe Baugher's website on the P-39D page.
Weights: 5462 pounds empty, 7500 pounds gross, and 8200 pounds maximum takeoff.

Want to tell us in detail just what those perfidious sons of Avalon specified in the P-400s that the US was not specifying in the P-39D?
 
Regarding post #1311:

I respect your right to disagree, P-39 Expert, but we have looked at the actual airplanes in the last two days and there is no room for the Aux-stage supercharger without modifications that make the P-39 into not a P-39. Everything that is in the way would have be moved rearward, exacerbating the already-rearward CG issue, and the Aux supercharger just will not quite fit.

As I stated above, you are welcome to come visit and look yourself. But I doubt anyone will be granted access to disassemble that particular P-39. Still, there is another one in the airport and you can see inside easily. Sorry, guy, it doesn't fit.

With that, I am done with P-39s in this thread and also unless and until someone wants to discuss something realistic about the airplane. There is nothing wrong with a P-39 that cannot be discussed as long as stay with the actual facts. One of the most unloved fighters in U.S. service in WWII doesn't suddenly turn into an overnight success 75 years after the fact, despite a Groundhog thread.

Cheers.
 

This reminds me of my time at Lockheed when I would find issues on an aircraft out in the field, try to explain it to an engineer and I was told "that can't be right, you're not seeing that." Sometimes photos weren't even convincing.

I call this the "Platypus syndrome." From what I understand when the Platypus was first discovered, this animal with a beaver's body, webbed feet a duck bill, laid eggs and had a poisonous spur was described to scientists in England who said "that cant be, you didn't see that." Of course a specimen had to be delivered as proof.

In lieu of the groundhog, I think we should make the Platypus the official mascot of this thread.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

Paper comparing the flight performance of the P-40E Warhawk and the A6M2 Zero
Replies
8
Views
709
Ivan1GFP
I
The poor performance of the 343 Kokutai against USAAF fighters
2 3 4
Replies
60
Views
6K
GrauGeist
617th squadron and the bunkers in Ijmuiden.
2
Replies
23
Views
646
DerAdlerIstGelandet
M
P-39 Turbo - Here We Go Again
Replies
13
Views
2K
GregP
P-39-style fighter by other people?
2 3
Replies
50
Views
2K
GrauGeist
Menu
Log in
Register