P-39 Airacobra & P-63 Kingcobra | The American Aircraft Loved By The Soviets | Bell Aircraft
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 14 фев 2023
- The P-39 Airacobra and the P-63 Kingcobra. Two North American Aircraft made by Bell and loved and appreciated by the Soviets.
The Bell P-39 Airacobra is a fighter produced by Bell Aircraft for the United States Army Air Forces during World War II. It was one of the principal American fighters in service when the United States entered combat. The P-39 was used by the Soviet Air Force, and enabled individual Soviet pilots to collect the highest number of kills attributed to any U.S. fighter type flown by any air force in any conflict. Other major users of the type included the Free French, the Royal Air Force, and the Italian Co-Belligerent Air Force.
It had an unusual layout, with the engine installed in the center fuselage, behind the pilot, and driving a tractor propeller in the nose with a long shaft. It was also the first fighter fitted with a tricycle undercarriage. Although its mid-engine placement was innovative, the P-39 design was handicapped by the absence of an efficient turbo-supercharger, preventing it from performing high-altitude work. For this reason it was rejected by the RAF for use over western Europe but adopted by the USSR, where most air combat took place at medium and lower altitudes.
Together with the derivative P-63 Kingcobra, the P-39 was one of the most successful fixed-wing aircraft manufactured by Bell.
General characteristics
Crew: One
Length: 30 ft 2 in (9.19 m)
Wingspan: 34 ft 0 in (10.36 m)
Height: 12 ft 5 in (3.78 m)
Wing area: 213 sq ft (19.8 m2)
Empty weight: 6,516 lb (2,956 kg)
Gross weight: 7,570 lb (3,434 kg)
Max takeoff weight: 8,400 lb (3,810 kg)
Powerplant: 1 × Allison V-1710-85 V-12 liquid-cooled piston engine, 1,200 hp (890 kW) at 9,000 ft (2,743 m) (emergency power)
Propellers: 3-bladed constant-speed propeller
Performance
Maximum speed: 389 mph (626 km/h, 338 kn)
Stall speed: 95 mph (153 km/h, 83 kn) power off, flaps and undercarriage down
Never exceed speed: 525 mph (845 km/h, 456 kn)
Range: 525 mi (845 km, 456 nmi) on internal fuel
Service ceiling: 35,000 ft (11,000 m)
Rate of climb: 3,805 ft/min (19.33 m/s) at 7,400 ft (2,300 m) (using emergency power)
Time to altitude: 15,000 ft (4,600 m) in 4 minutes 30 seconds, at 160 mph (260 km/h)
Wing loading: 34.6 lb/sq ft (169 kg/m2)
Power/mass: 0.16 hp/lb (0.26 kW/kg)
Armament
Guns:
1 × 37 mm M4 cannon firing through the propeller hub
2 × .50 caliber synchronized Browning M2 machine guns, nose-mounted
2 × .50 caliber Browning M2 machine guns one each wing
Bombs: Up to 500 lb (230 kg) of bombs under wings and belly
The Bell P-63 Kingcobra is an American fighter aircraft that was developed by Bell Aircraft during World War II. Based on the preceding Bell P-39 Airacobra, the P-63's design incorporated suggestions from P-39 pilots and was superior to its predecessor in virtually all respects. The P-63 was not accepted for combat use by the United States Army Air Forces. However, it was used during World War II by the Soviet Air Force, which had also been the most prolific user of the P-39.
General characteristics
Crew: One
Length: 32 ft 8 in (9.96 m)
Wingspan: 38 ft 4 in (11.68 m)
Height: 12 ft 7 in (3.84 m)
Wing area: 248 sq ft (23.0 m2)
Airfoil: root: NACA 66-116; tip: NACA 66-216
Empty weight: 6,800 lb (3,084 kg)
Gross weight: 8,800 lb (3,992 kg)
Max takeoff weight: 10,700 lb (4,853 kg)
Powerplant: 1 × Allison V-1710-117 V-12 liquid-cooled piston engine, 1,800 hp (1,300 kW)
Propellers: 4-bladed constant-speed propeller
Performance
Maximum speed: 410 mph (660 km/h, 360 kn) at 25,000 ft (7,600 m)
Range: 450 mi (720 km, 390 nmi)
Ferry range: 2,200 mi (3,500 km, 1,900 nmi)
Service ceiling: 43,000 ft (13,000 m)
Rate of climb: 2,500 ft/min (13 m/s)
Wing loading: 35.48 lb/sq ft (173.2 kg/m2)
Power/mass: 0.20 hp/lb (0.33 kW/kg)
Armament
Guns:
1 × 37 mm (1.5 in) M4 cannon firing through the propeller hub. From the A-9 version of the aircraft onward, the M4 gun was replaced with the slightly improved M10 37 mm cannon, which used a disintegrating link ammunition belt, increasing the ammo capacity to 58 rounds; the M10 also had a slightly higher rate of fire.
4 × 0.50 in (12.7 mm) M2 Browning machine guns (two synchronized in the nose, two in the wings)
Bombs: 1,500 lb (680 kg) bomb load on wing and fuselage
#airacobra #kingcobra #aircraft 
Наука
Click the link to watch more aircraft, heroes and their stories, missions: www.youtube.com/@Dronescapes
Now see, I've heard differently. I heard the Cobra was a slow sluggish plane, but stable which made a good platform to kill tanks. with. Which the russians call it: The Tank Killer.
@@queasylagumo The reason the Russion's liked the Air Cobra was it was the only Lend lease aircraft that had a Canon. The P39 didn't really do any thing real well!
@@mylanmiller9656 The reason the russians liked the air cobra is exactly what I said. It was a stable platform to kill tanks.
@@queasylagumo It wasn't used as a tank buster, perhaps because the US didn't provide the necessary ammunition. It was used as an interceptor and escort fighter and was successful at low level, because hat's where the fighting was and was where its lack of a supercharger was not a problem.
Fantastic Documentary. Always had a soft spot for the P-39.
👍
Same. Both the P39 and P40
My mother and one of her brothers worked at the plant. She was outside after their shift waiting for her ride back home when one of the P-39s out on a test flight crashed into the plant. She said that the memory of the smell of the smoke stayed with her forever. The incident was never made public, censorship rules precluded it. All that remains of the plant is a plaque in the parking lot of Buffalo International Airport.
Accidents and crashes were common with the P-39. Material Command stated that it was unacceptable due to roll-yaw instability near the stall making it a poor gun platform. Stick forces were also unacceptably light during g manouvers.
P-39s had 3x the accidents than P-40s at training units. Tumble and flat spins were problematic. Brits cast it off due to these handling problems but it was a perfect fighter though for export to Soviets who would take anything.
My instructor used to fly Aircobra in Soviet AF and did shot down six FW-190. I remember he said that this aircraft is good but not for novice pilots.
A fun fact about P-39 in Soviet union, the soviets love this plane so much is bcs it was so Similar with Yak-9 Fighters used by the soviets at the time (Yak-9 was the most produced fighter in ww2 (16.000 Units) in comparasion other Yakovlev Models was Just Half of this Yak-1 (4000), Yak-3 (3000), Yak-7 (1000)
the fact was almost all The P-39 soviet Pilots go sometime in a Yak-9 and was relatively similar Flying and in Combat, Principally with the Yak-9T variant bcs both had a 37mm Cannon (Yak-9T uses a NS-37mm cannon that is better than the M4 37mm used by USA but who cares)
This plane just on looks means business..nasty beautiful aircraft
From an aesthetics standpoint, I don't think there was a more beautiful plane in WW2, the Spitfire coming in second.
One correction. It was not the absence of a turbo supercharger that restricted performance, it was the absence of a two-stage supercharger (as used in the Merlin 60 series) that limited the P-39's performance.
*limited performance up high
If anything, not having the second supercharger gear helped low altitude performance as not having it requires less space and weight.
The video presentation is correct in this regard. The turbo supercharger that was originally planned for the plane is what was absent, and a suitable mechanically driven 2nd stage had not been planned for the plane and was unavailable for the V-1710 at that time.
I hadn't noticed this comment and basically repeated it above.
It was the absence of either that limited higher altitude performance
@@Jbroker404 And materials for impeller blades in high speed turbines in short supply. Plenty of action at various places going on between 12,000 ft and the dirt to justify cranking out P-40s and P-39s with the typical configuration. Not suitable for high altitude bomber escort, but there were other planes with proven records that could do that, save the tungsten for them.
EDIT:
I'll also add that the high octane fuel required to accommodate a really high manifold pressure boost wasn't universally available.
Bardzo dobry pomysł to połączenie dwóch filmów. Idealnie się uzupełniają i pogłębiają temat. Kolejny świetny odcinek. I ma napisy pl. Pozdrawiam.
Nice fighter plane aircraft one crew. Love the P-39 Airacobra.
What a great video. No hype, and straight forward. It must have been quite a rush to fly one of these beauties back in the day. 😁
🙏👍
It was a dog that got people kill in the Pacific. The Zero ate it for lunch. The commies love it in the ground attack roll.
@@chriszelez7970 I reckon the zero ate everything for lunch in a strictly dogfighting role, since it was so light with no armor. At least, until they lost all their experienced pilots. Hence the boom and zoom US tactics.
Meanwhile, you can call it a dog, but the P-39 was used by the Soviet Air Force, and enabled individual Soviet pilots to collect the highest number of kills attributed to any U.S. fighter type flown by any air force in any conflict (source: Wikipedia).
No hype, but lots of omissions regarding it's unacceptable handling (according to Material Command at Wright-Patterson).
From what I have read, the mid mounted engine turned the cockpit into a sauna, just minus the humidity.
I've been flying the 39 for a couple of years now. Eflight by horizon it's a rocket!! One of my favorite burds!!
Nice aeroplane, a fav, like the Hurri. I'd like to fly like that. They didn't talk about Gs or Gravity though. Nice job! Thanks.
Great video!
Thanks!
Great YouTubio! Was My Favorite Model To Build As Child, Awesome!!..
Beautiful aircraft. In my top 5
Great video. What was the piano piece at the end - it is entrancing, very nice.
Probably the best collection of footage on these Aircraft I have seen. Also at 7:40 for a quick second or two a Spartan Executive can be seen at left. THAT is fascinating. Maybe Larry Bell had one as is personal hack?
👍
ohh sweet outro _chefs kiss_ 👌👌
First time I've seen footage showing the P-39 firing the Oldsmobile cannon.
Very interesting.
👍🙂
From the pilots in WWII who flew them, the P-40 was their savior for dog fighting. The P-39 did not handle well with a sluggish engine. Most of the senior pilots felt it was coffin in a battle.
I think the P39 was a very good plane, considering the low altitude engine & the relative high wing loading. It could’ve done with a couple of added wing tips like the spitfire, making each wing nearly half a metre longer, that will do. I like the way Bell thinks outside the box. The nacelle setup on their twin engine job, the mid engine P39 & having the jet engines on their jet fighter flush with the fuselage sides ( seemingly the 1st to realise this benefit of not having props).
Now it seems the Allison engine had a reputation of better serviceability & reliability than the Merlin, yet post Lend Lease Mustangs with dual stage supercharged Allisons apparently had a very short service life. I have no idea whether that was the case with the P63
If Wikipedia figures are correct the P-39 wing loading was the same as the P-40 and lower than the P-51.
@@gort8203
Wing loading rating isn't the end all do all when it comes to turning radius like everyone thinks, power is another number that's important, that's why despite the FW190 having a better looking wing loading number than the P47 above 15,000 ft the P47 with it's turbo that can provide maximum boost to the engine up to 35,000 ft can not only turn inside of an FW190 it can gain altitude in that tigher turn while the FW190 will be losing altitude altitude in it's wider turn.
Greg from Greg's Airplane's and Automobiles goes over all that and explains why you can't just look at the wing loading number and think you can tell which plane can turn inside of another in his video on maneuverability, and he shows all the NACA test results from the P47 and FW190 as source material, from those you can see why a P47 could chew up an FW190 in a maneuvering dogfight at altitude.
Yea but the information you looked at that leads you to believe they had short service lives what did the times in different throttle settings look like on the engine's?
Because if it was from motors that were being pushed into War Emergency Power a lot while testing the aircraft or engine's of course they were going to be burned up quicker, if not there's no reason they shouldn't have lasted just as long as single stage supercharger Allison's, and the P38 Allison's that had a high altitude supercharger system with it's turbo feeding the engine's single stage supercharger, the engine itself doesn't care what's making boost for it, so the same boost levels irregardless of supercharger type or altitude shouldn't change an engine's service life.
I have the feeling you were looking at test data because P51's never flew with the 2 stage 2 speed Allison supercharger engine except for the single test bed one, after flying it they dropped the idea of producing them because jets were quickly becoming the new thing and the USAAF wanted their money put into them instead of more variant's of prop planes.
@@dukecraig2402 You are the one who said the P-39 had relatively high wing loading that detracted from its performance, not me. I just pointed out that it actually did not.
@@dukecraig2402 Oh, I see I got your comment mixed up with the original and I thought you were contesting what I said instead of elaborating. My apologies for the confusion.
P39... info. And. Documentaries. Are. Not. Common... thank.s. man... have. A. Nice. Day....
Same to you
Airacobra and Merlin, what a dream plane.
true, but the Merlin couldn't accept that drive shaft system.
I can't help thinking that a twospeed, two stage supercharger as used in the Spitfire would have probably solved the altitude problem.
That could have been true,, it was also a fact that there was such high demand for the Packard merlin engine for the P51 Mustang, they even stopped building the Merlin p 40. Because it was a waist of a good engine that was needed in the Mustang.
adding 300 lb plus intercooler radiator would have been a weight and space (and drag) challenge to an already crowded airframe with limited internal fuel. IIRC the Merlin couldn't accept that drive shaft system either.
That was a sexy aircraft people
The US Army Air Force should have assigned a group of roughly 48 fighter planes of the P-39 Airacobra to every US Army infantry division. These P-39 Airacobras should have been optimized ground attack missions. Forward air controller detachments with mobile motorized radio controllers should have been attached to infantry regiments to coordinate ground attack missions including putting artillery smoke shells to locate targets for pilots. These Airacobras would have been heavily armored with self sealing fuel tanks with protections of vital components. Weapons configurations and ammo loads would have been maximized for strafing or bombing enemy ground targets directly in front of American infantry.
These Airacobras sole purpose would have been close ground support of US Army soldiers. The Airacobra should have been the Army division commander's flying artillery, similar to the German Henschel He-123 biplane or Soviet Il-2 Sturmovik. These Airacobra pilots would have avoided aerial combat against enemy warplanes. The sole purpose of these Airacobras would be to bomb, strafe and blast enemy ground targets directly in front of American infantry soldiers with pinpoint accuracy. The Airacobra would have needed to work from primitive runways close to the frontlines to have flown the maximum number of ground attack sorties each day. The concept here would have to have primitive forward airstrip for refueling, rearming and repairs. Major overhauls of the P-39 Airacobra would have been done at Army Corps levels with frequent squadron rotations to the rear.
The concept here would have been to give every infantry regiment engaged in combat its own organic divisional close air support/ground support fighter group. The Airacobra fighter groups would have provided a continuous ground support mission dedicated solely to assist the American infantryman. I wish the bulk of the US Army Air Force had spent less time on dubious strategic bombing and much more effort placed upon maximizing operational bombing and tactical close air support missions in support infantry divisions.
Extra Armour needed for that little fighter already with a high wing loading and limited bomb load. I agree with your doctrine though, just need a more robust aircraft and pilots trained as attack pilots not fighter pilots. The Skyraider came along too late.
My great grandfather flew one of these for the Confederacy during the Civil War.
Cofefe!
The engine placement was a HUGE problem for Soviet Air Force pilots. They were frequently in low level combat - too low to parachute so a forced landing was the only option when severely damaged. However, anyone who did that in a P39 was crushed to death by the engine when the plane touched the ground.
I have always felt that the Airacobra was so sadly underdeveloped.
The airacobra was the prefered prey of german aces....
Take a look (as an example) at Erich Hartmann's record.
@@benedikt7218 I can believe that. Hence my underdeveloped comment. A badly wasted potential imo.
Certainly a slick airframe, but it had handling problems and lots of accidents resulted.
It’s a shame that they have ruined the first third of an otherwise excellent film by distorting the aspect ratio (stretching it horizontally). 😢
Had a Revell plastic model1/48 or 1/32 scale of this plane as a kid in early 1960s in bright school bus yellow and clear canopy. Always wondered why the model was molded in yellow.
Great model though. Always thought it kinda out of place with the tricycle front gear. Have no degree in aeronautics or anything for that matter but felt the overall design was sleek and upon viewing clips of the plane flying it really had a grace about it that no other had. It's rumored the Russians liked them. Though any soviet caught praising western equipment were frowned down. The big players got into the game early had the big political players behind them.
Bell got in to late on both accounts. Howard Hughes spilled the beans on the crooked way government & corporations work together...nobody ever listens...
There's a chap in New Zealand that restored king cobra...
Too bad someone hasn't dropped a merlin or the luftwaffen copy 109 engine into a P-39...the German side mounted turbo intake may have worked well.
Cheers
I really need to reinstall IL2 and fly this plane again...
👍🙂
Pin Ball Do not tilt. Pin ball wizard. P-39.
Am I right that this plane was a favorite of Chuck Yeager?
Seems like way too many things to remember to do while climbing, accelerating, diving, etc. Who could remember all that while suddenly in a dogfight? And only for 5 minutes lest you damage the engine?
Just imagine if Germany had somehow planned in advance and cooperated with Japan to set up an arctic base somewhere that could have intercepted those as they were being flown in with non-combat pilots. That could have potentially ended the war in Russia. Definitely the air war, though I suppose it would have geared up one closer to North America that they’d have ultimately lost. Interesting though.
Japan and the Soviet Union had a non-aggression pact that both sides honored until August 1945. American ships would leave San Francisco via a publish route enroute to Vladisvostok, flying the sickle & hammer banner of the Soviet. Interdicting aircraft in the manner you suggest would have been a treaty violation. Good idea though.
What a tragedy that the P39 was deprived of the two-stage supercharger that it so obviously needed.
Allison never made a reliable high altitude system. The Aux supercharger used in the P-63 was without intercooler, aftercooler or backfire screens. The P-82 used in Korea was a maintenance nightmare regarding its Allisons.
5 feet inches tall?
I heard him say aero cobra
Bell had a reputation for building 6 th rate Aircraft!
Did they build you?
@@kenneth9874 No you were theier last mistake.
Larry knew the secret handshake.
Whats with the swept wings?
Post war mule for swept wing experiment.
swept wing P63 was only test aircrafts, but swept wing add zero advantage on slow aircrafts under 850km/h...
The Japanese Zero in the Pacific arena used this aircraft for target practise.
👏👏👏👏👏💓👍👍👍👍👍
👍♥️👍
😊😊😊❤❤👍👍👍👍👍
Use your words Charles, you're a big boy now.
I've heard that one reason the Soviets like the P-39 and P63 is because they had heaters. Is this true?
Interesting question. Anyone?
@@Dronescapes In fact, Soviet fighter aircraft had the opposite problem, because of the engine in front, the cockpit could get very hot, especially in summer.
and radios.
Certainly a slippery aircraft with the Q version. Better climb and dive speeds than the P-40, but...
Accidents and crashes were common with the P-39. Material Command stated that it was unacceptable due to roll-yaw instability near the stall making it a poor gun platform. Stick forces were also unacceptably light during g manouvers.
P-39s had 3x the accidents than P-40s at training units. Tumble and flat spins were problematic. Brits cast it off due to these handling problems and lack of speed performance on production units, but it was a perfect fighter though for export to Soviets who would take anything.
Same here. Wonder how much more effective it would have been with the Merlin engine. Nah, the reason the Merlin wasn't used for the P-39 is because of politics, stupid intrusive politics.
No, it wasn't necessary
What politics? Give us some facts. Why would they think of putting the Merlin in this airplane when by that time the P-51 was getting them and the P-47 and P-38 had already been performing the high altitude fighter role.
I study this stuff quite a bit I've never heard of an Oldsmobile Cannon, what....like the car? 🖕
If you look those up, you will find a few of them
No Brrrrrrrttttttt comments????
I'm disappointed in RUclips people!!!!!!
🙂
The Brits didn't even uncrate most of the P-39s they received. They were conned by Bell with respect to the required speed performance. They were promised 394 mph, but production aircraft only managed 359 mph. Handling was also a major issue.
They were so bad, they had to give them away. The AAC tried to cancel the contract but it was cheaper to finish the production run and send them to Russia.
They weren't bad, they just didn't fit the West's missions. They were successful in Russia where they flew lower.
The Russians thought highly of them. Even forming air wings made up of their best fighter pilots made up solely of P 39s.
6 of the top 10 Soviet aces did it in the P39. It was a great low altitude fighter in the right hands and conditions. The Russians preferred the P39 over spitfire and Mustangs.