P-40K Recovered from Russia and Restored
- Thread starter MIflyer
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Cool!
- Thread starter
- #3
MIflyer
Captain
From Flight Journal
September 29, 1943: pilot J/Lt. I.I. Mikailov anxiously scanned the Russian tundra below for familiar landmarks. He had just survived a battle with four JGS Bf 109s, but as the fuel gauge edged toward empty, it was obvious he was still going to lose his aircraft. Resigned to his fate, he bellied his P-40 into the soft turf, and the war was over for Curtiss Warhawk 42-10256. Mikailov was unscathed, but 10256 would sit for another 50 years before its badly brutalized remains would be rescued.
P-40 42-10256 was a "K" model, which was a continuation of the P-40E line but with the more powerful Allison V-1710-73(F4R) engine installed. The bigger engine required more vertical tail authority, so the initial production batches used the short fuselage of the "E" models with additional vertical tail area in the form of a fin fillet. Later, the horizontal tail was held at the original length, but the rudder and fin were moved back nearly two feet as they were on the "F" models
When 42-10256 was recovered, it was barely above junk status. A bomb blast had removed any trace of fuselage from behind the canopy, and locals had hacked off everything that could be removed. When the remains hit Ken Hake's facility in Tipton, Kansas, he stripped it down to its primary structure and began to build a new airplane around the bones. Then Fagen Fighters, owned by Ron Fagen in Granite Falls, Minnesota, bought the airframe and continued the process. Erik Hokuf completed the restoration; it was his first attempt at such a monumental undertaking
September 29, 1943: pilot J/Lt. I.I. Mikailov anxiously scanned the Russian tundra below for familiar landmarks. He had just survived a battle with four JGS Bf 109s, but as the fuel gauge edged toward empty, it was obvious he was still going to lose his aircraft. Resigned to his fate, he bellied his P-40 into the soft turf, and the war was over for Curtiss Warhawk 42-10256. Mikailov was unscathed, but 10256 would sit for another 50 years before its badly brutalized remains would be rescued.
P-40 42-10256 was a "K" model, which was a continuation of the P-40E line but with the more powerful Allison V-1710-73(F4R) engine installed. The bigger engine required more vertical tail authority, so the initial production batches used the short fuselage of the "E" models with additional vertical tail area in the form of a fin fillet. Later, the horizontal tail was held at the original length, but the rudder and fin were moved back nearly two feet as they were on the "F" models
When 42-10256 was recovered, it was barely above junk status. A bomb blast had removed any trace of fuselage from behind the canopy, and locals had hacked off everything that could be removed. When the remains hit Ken Hake's facility in Tipton, Kansas, he stripped it down to its primary structure and began to build a new airplane around the bones. Then Fagen Fighters, owned by Ron Fagen in Granite Falls, Minnesota, bought the airframe and continued the process. Erik Hokuf completed the restoration; it was his first attempt at such a monumental undertaking
I'm dismayed at the amount of historic artefacts still being recovered and plundered for data plates for the sake of $$$$$.
Whilst it's lovely to see an airworthy P-40, why couldn't they just give the replica (for that's what it is) a homebuild construction number and PRESERVE the historic and original artefact?
You wouldn't expect the Colosseum in Rome to be 'restored' in this way, or the megalithic Stonehenge, so why do warbird custodians think it's permissible?
Plainly the warbird community has a LONG way to go before it can ever be considered custodians of our collective historic aircraft heritage.
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Whilst it's lovely to see an airworthy P-40, why couldn't they just give the replica (for that's what it is) a homebuild construction number and PRESERVE the historic and original artefact?
You wouldn't expect the Colosseum in Rome to be 'restored' in this way, or the megalithic Stonehenge, so why do warbird custodians think it's permissible?
Plainly the warbird community has a LONG way to go before it can ever be considered custodians of our collective historic aircraft heritage.
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
SaparotRob
Unter Gemeine Geschwader Murmeltier XIII
The purist in me agrees with what you say. However, there's something wonderful about seeing that s/n plate surrounded by a factory spec(?), correct(?) airframe. I imagine far more folks would see it in the air than at a museum.
How many people are either worried or will ever even see the data plate. All of that can happen without a data plate and the original aretfact can be preserved.
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Users who are viewing this thread
Similar threads
