RAF P-39 service career

It was pictured in Charles Darby’s book .
From memory a fuselage.

I seem to recall that at least one P400 survives (or survived) in PNG, and was an ex RAF ’39. Anyone know what happened to it?

Not sure about another contributors references to certain sensations from the guns, as neither the 20mm or 37mm guns extended back beyond the firewall and were mounted well above the drive shaft, firing through the reduction gear housing and propeller hub, rather than the drive shaft itself – but then I have never flown one!

Sorry late reply NW – but kept forgetting to find a pic of the Engine/Prop Shaft/Reduction Gear/Cannon relationship – the pilot would certainly be pretty close to the ‘whump’ as the Cannon fired,and metal shafts do transmit noise/vibration quite well – anyway I thought Ted Parks description of the ‘sensations’ felt during 37mm firing was definitely worth posting.

rgds baz

I would not imagine that the film gave much comfort to P39 pilots and probably gave them a dark humour laugh !

🙂 If they had any sense they should take it out somewhere uninhabited and bail out ,save the plane from killing anyone else.

Only in the absence of the illustrious Mosquito.

As far as I can tell – they only flew 2 flights on the AAF P39 spin tests – and the pilot had to bale out on the 2nd one LOL

The conclusions were …

Conclusions
1. The P-39 should not be spun intentionally under any circumstances.

2. The P-39 should not be snap rolled as the roll usually ends in a spin.

3. The best spin recovery is to simultaneously apply opposite rudder and neutralize the stick.

4. Power should be cut immediately if a power on spin is entered.

5. Care must be excercised during the recovery to prevent an accelerated stall and re-enty into the spin.

6. The wing tip spin chute does not aid recovery of the P-39Q from a flat spin.

Link to copy of the test report below

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/P-39/P-39Q_Spin.pdf

I would not imagine that the film gave much comfort to P39 pilots and probably gave them a dark humour laugh !

The irony of the video telling you how the aircraft can be corrected then the last one goes in after the pilot bailed.

Yes I laughed at that as well – also I noticed that (at least for the first spin) the subject a/c had what looked like a P63/Kingcobra Fin (Vert Stabilizer for the americans on here) so hardly representative of a standard production P39.

The irony of the video telling you how the aircraft can be corrected then the last one goes in after the pilot bailed.

tumbling is bs

As I posted previously – the ‘tumbling’ and spinning was dependant on C of G position (surprise !)
If the nose ammo was used up then the C of G moved rearward and the P39 tumbling/spinning characteristics became much worse,all the original spin tests were done with the a/c ballasted for normal C of G.

In his autobiography veteran test and airshow pilot R.A. “Bob” Hoover provides an account of tumbling a P-39. He goes on to say that in hindsight, he was actually performing a Lomcevak, a now common airshow maneuver, which he was also able to do in a Curtiss P-40. An informal study of the P-39’s spinning characteristics was conducted in the NASA Langley Research Center 20-foot Free-Spinning Tunnel during the 1970s. A study of old reports showed that during earlier spin testing in the facility, the aircraft had never tumbled. However, it was noted that all testing had been done with a simulated full ammunition load, which drew the aircraft’s center of gravity forward. After finding the original spin test model of the P-39 in storage, the new study first replicated the earlier testing, with consistent results. Then, the model was re-ballasted to simulate a condition of no ammunition load, which moved the aircraft’s center of gravity aft. Under these conditions, the model was found to often tumble.

Wiki has a long referenced entry for this type which reveals a variety of factors including tumbling and Bell fudging the performance to get acceptance..
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_P-39_Airacobra

tumbling is bs

Years of speculation about his fate came to an end in 2002, when his remains were found in the cockpit of his plane, buried about 2 m (6 ft 7 in) deep in a field near the Bavarian village of Egling an der Paar, 34 miles west of Munich. According to witnesses, the aircraft fell there on 12 April 1944, around 11:45. One of the propellers had bullet holes in it, which suggests that Warburton had been shot down. Parts of the wreck can be seen today in the Malta Aviation Museum.[12]

Thought he got taken down by Flak?

And to answer Chris’ original question, the nearest comparison is probably the Swift F1/2 – February to August 1954.

The Westland Welkin only served with the Fighter Interception Unit for 6 months

To get an interesting American view of the RAF P-38 saga, I can recommend Warren Bodie’s Lightning book – it does come across as a little Anglophobic at times, but makes some salient points. His opinion is that the prime reason the RAF wanted out the contract was the UK’s rapidly diminishing currency reserves meant we couldn’t afford it.

Consensus seems to be that he flew Marylands and a Beaufighter for most of his work in the Mediterranean, but I stand to be corrected.

Yes that is correct – and he used 2 groundcrew photogs as voluntary crew – Cpl Norman Shirley and LAC Ron Hadden both being awarded the DFM for their good work with Warby.

The cancellation of the RAF P322 put a huge workload back onto lockheed. The P-38G-15-LO models are some of that order. You will find on many emgineering drawings that many cover the earlier G models up to -10, but do not apply to the -15. Incorporating the P322 back into P-38 production created two models G-15 and F-15 (I think) which carry multiple differences to previous F & G models. Interesting the extent of the workload created and yet the RAF hardly touched them.

Warburton died in a P38, not an RAF one, or even borrowed…

On 1 April 1944, he was posted as the RAF Liaison Officer to the 7th Photographic Reconnaissance Group, US 8th Army Air Force, then based at RAF Mount Farm in Oxfordshire.

Warburton was the pilot of one of two Lockheed F-5B photo-reconnaissance aircraft (a version of the Lockheed P-38 Lightning fighter) that took off together from Mount Farm on the morning of 12 April 1944 to photograph targets in Germany. Although, as a liaison officer, Warburton should not be flying missions, he was given specific permission to fly by the American base commander, Lt-Col. Elliott Roosevelt, the son of the then president of the USA. The aircraft separated approximately 100 miles north of Munich to carry out their respective tasks; it was planned that they would meet and fly on to a USAAF airfield in Sardinia. He failed to arrive at the rendezvous point and was not seen again.

Years of speculation about his fate came to an end in 2002, when his remains were found in the cockpit of his plane, buried about 2 m (6 ft 7 in) deep in a field near the Bavarian village of Egling an der Paar, 34 miles west of Munich. According to witnesses, the aircraft fell there on 12 April 1944, around 11:45. One of the propellers had bullet holes in it, which suggests that Warburton had been shot down. Parts of the wreck can be seen today in the Malta Aviation Museum.[12]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adrian_Warburton

Consensus seems to be that he flew Marylands and a Beaufighter for most of his work in the Mediterranean, but I stand to be corrected.

And as for Eric Brown and his Airacobra, I stand corrected:

In March 1946, a visiting Bell Test pilot visited the Test establishment to oversee Laminar Flow experiments being conducted with Bell P-63 Kingcobras.

Just for a laugh I asked him to test my old Bell Airacobra, which I had been using for so many hops around the country. He took off, did one very quick circuit, and came back ashed-faced. ‘I have never,’ he said, ‘flown in an aeroplane in such an advanced state of decay. This machine should be scrapped forthwith.’ So, on 28th March, I went up for a last aerobatic session in her, then bade a sentimental farewell. The last laugh was on me.

AH574 was duly scrapped shortly afterward,[4] and Brown was later given a Fieseler Storch as a replacement.[5]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AH574

Taken from Wings On My Sleeve: The World’s Greatest Test Pilot tells his Story, by Eric Brown.

Probably in the realms of the
imponderables. I suspect the emulsion is Kodachrome, but is it film or on a glass plate? If it is on a plate, the photographer could have taken just these two. Even if he had a full roll of film, that was most likely eight to a roll on 120 or 620, maybe even fewer on a big format like 118. Even a roll of 35mm film then might only have been 12 exposures, and the camera would almost certainly have been a German Leica or Contax. Sorry, you probably weren’t expecting that geeky an answer!

Adrian

This shot is an early 35mm copy slide. The original is almost certainly a 5×4 colour transparency, as a number of the shots obtained with this package.

Mark

About RAF use of the P-38, Wing Commander Adrian Warburton used American Owned F-5s (photo reconnaissance Lightnings for the newcomers here) for much of his recce work.

So there must have been a pool of aircraft for RAF use, and it was preferred for some missions.

Didn’t he tend to operate as a bit of a ‘free agent’ in some ways, flying for the USAAF as much as for the RAF?

About RAF use of the P-38, Wing Commander Adrian Warburton used American Owned F-5s (photo reconnaissance Lightnings for the newcomers here) for much of his recce work.

So there must have been a pool of aircraft for RAF use, and it was preferred for some missions.

I wonder how many colour photos he actually took that day? Nice to see.

Probably in the realms of the
imponderables. I suspect the emulsion is Kodachrome, but is it film or on a glass plate? If it is on a plate, the photographer could have taken just these two. Even if he had a full roll of film, that was most likely eight to a roll on 120 or 620, maybe even fewer on a big format like 118. Even a roll of 35mm film then might only have been 12 exposures, and the camera would almost certainly have been a German Leica or Contax. Sorry, you probably weren’t expecting that geeky an answer!

Adrian