Had a lazy day at home today, was reading through the Crowood Press book on the P-39. Always overlooked, and many say compared with the P-51 & P-47, not the P-36 & P-40 which were designed at the same time. The only USAAF WW2 fighter without a pilot association perhaps says it all. Anyhow, was wondering if there were any views at all, underpowered at altitude thanks to the lack of supercharger, which in part is why the Russians liked it, well armed, ahead of its time with the undercarrage design….
Odd looking thing though, can’t say that in looks it does anything for me !
By: Cees Broere - 26th January 2008 at 15:04
That tumbling habit of the P39 seems to be a “myth” and a lot of pilot’s claim to have never experienced it. I do not claim to have knowledge on this but the various books with pilot’s reports mention this.:)
There is still a lot of raw material available for restoration (Tallichett recoveries?)
Cheers
Cees
By: Oxcart - 26th January 2008 at 11:41
In his autobiography, Chuck Yeager says he loved flying them – but he also mentions a contemporary song that some wag made up- i have no idea of the tune, but the lyrics went something like “Lord don’t give me a P-39, it’ll tumble and roll and dig a big hole- don’t give me a P-39!!-for what its worth, i don’t mind it – the fuse has a nice shape- apart from that intake on top
By: Malcolm McKay - 26th January 2008 at 00:11
Well the nose wheel must have been a joy. Probably easy to land and control on the ground
According to one account I read this was a mixed blessing. On the RAF grass airfields the moisture would get into the brake linings and render them useless. Resulting in rather long landing runs.
By: DCK - 25th January 2008 at 18:46
Well the nose wheel must have been a joy. Probably easy to land and control on the ground
Sign In
January 25, 2008 at 5:33 pm