Ki-44: Can it turn (or even out-turn) or BnZ with USAAC/USMC/USN fighters?

[HoHun]

Hi Widewing,

>Personally, I believe that the P-43 was superior to the P-40 in vitually every aspect of combat performance. Why more were not purchased by the USAAF is a mystery to me. It was the only combat-ready high altitude fighter available to the USAAF early 1942. Even though the P-47 was well into development, it was still a long way from combat-ready in the summer of 1942.

You have a point there ... the turbo-supercharger made the P-43 a better altitude performer than the Allison-powered P-39 and P-40. I'm still not certain why the USAAF really refused the use of a turbo-supercharger for the P-39, either!

One thing counting against the P-43 might have been its wet wings. I'm not sure it was ever fitted with proper self-sealing tanks, this appears to be very difficult at least without sacrificing a large share of the fuel capacity.

Recently, I tried to get an idea of how the P-43 performed in comparison to the P-40 and prepared the following chart. The P-43 bit is more of a rough sketch as I couldn't find much data on the type, but it still serves to illustrate its strong points:

http://hometown.aol.de/HoHunKhan/P-43AvsP-40E.gif

It would be interesting to compare it to a contemporary Spitfire V, too. I'd say the P-43 would have been competitive above its full-throttle height - good news at a time when the fights were carried to ever higher altitudes.

Maybe if the USAAF would have purchased the P-43, they would not have needed to rely on British Spitfires in the ETO.

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

[Captain Virgil Hilts]

From everything I've read, the USAAF had the turbo removed from the P-39 in order to better streamline it, and also because
the GE turbos were single sourced and in relatively short supply.

Plenty of Allison powered planes would have been MUCH more competitive had they also had GE turbochargers and Hamilton Standard props. The USAAF/USAAC and the War Production Board
really screwed the pooch on second sourcing.

There was a guy who had a P-39 with a P-38 engine complete with the B-33 turbo setup and I think a four blade prop who was
the man to beat for a few years after the war.

As small and light as it is, I've often wondered why no one has built a P-39 air racer with an Allison and turbo setup recently.
The turbo Allison is making well over 3000HP in unlimited hydro
racing and lasting all season. You'd think a P-39 with 3000 HP and a good prop would be a serious bird to contend with.

[hogenbor]

Originally posted by Captain Virgil Hilts


There was a guy who had a P-39 with a P-38 engine complete with the B-33 turbo setup and I think a four blade prop who was
the man to beat for a few years after the war.

As small and light as it is, I've often wondered why no one has built a P-39 air racer with an Allison and turbo setup recently.
The turbo Allison is making well over 3000HP in unlimited hydro
racing and lasting all season. You'd think a P-39 with 3000 HP and a good prop would be a serious bird to contend with.

I also heard that after the war the P-39 was succesfully used for air racing. What races and how the plane was set up (maybe the way CVH suggested?) I do not know. I suspect Widewing will know this kind of stuff.

Besides, the P-39 is darn pretty airplane

[HoHun]

Hi Hilts,

>From everything I've read, the USAAF had the turbo removed from the P-39 in order to better streamline it, and also because
the GE turbos were single sourced and in relatively short supply.

Ah, thanks! I had read about the streamlining issue, but the turbocharger procurement concerns are new to me. Baugher mentions that the turbos were abandonded as a result of isolationist ideas (no aircraft could possibly threaten continential USA, so no high-altitude fighter was necessary), but your suggestion seems more sensible to me.

>As small and light as it is, I've often wondered why no one has built a P-39 air racer with an Allison and turbo setup recently.
The turbo Allison is making well over 3000HP in unlimited hydro
racing and lasting all season. You'd think a P-39 with 3000 HP and a good prop would be a serious bird to contend with.

Maybe it's a question of size? Where were the turbo-superchargers located in the XP-39? The P-38 superchargers seem to be rather bulky, even though they are so well integrated in the twin tails that one tends to forget about their size.

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

[Widewing]

Originally posted by hogenbor
I also heard that after the war the P-39 was succesfully used for air racing. What races and how the plane was set up (maybe the way CVH suggested?) I do not know. I suspect Widewing will know this kind of stuff.

Besides, the P-39 is darn pretty airplane

Here's some info on the post-war racing P-39s.



1/48th scale model of the 1946 Thompson Trophy winner. Tony LeVier's P-38 finished 2nd, a P-51B finished 3rd.

From Baugher:

After the war was over, the USAAF rapidly disposed of most of its Airacobras, with most being scrapped during 1946. However, a few were sold as surplus on the commercial market.

Some surplus P-39s ended up on the postwar unlimited racing circuit. Perhaps the best known of these were a pair of surplus P-39Qs named Cobra I and Cobra II. They were originally P-39Q-10s 42-20733 and 42-20869 respectively. Bell test pilots Chalmers "Slick" Goodlin, Alvin M. "Tex" Johnston, and Jack Woolams prepared these planes for entry into the Thompson Trophy race which was to be held over the Labor Day weekend in Cleveland, Ohio in 1946. They were lightened by the removal of all military equipment, and they received uprated Allison V-1710-135 (G4) engines taken from P-63s and were fitted with four-bladed propellers. When so equipped, they were capable of achieving speeds as high as 420 mph at low altitude.

On August 29, both planes qualified for the race. Untortunately, before the race was run, Cobra I was lost on August 30, 1946 over Lake Ontario, killing the pilot, Jack Woolams.

Cobra II (flying under the civilian registration of NX92848) went on to win the 1946 Thompson Trophy air race, with Tex Johnston at the controls, at an average speed of 373 mph over the 300-mile course. Cobra II raced again in the 1947 Thompson Trophy race, finishing 3rd. It raced yet again in the 1948 Thompson trophy race, but was unable to finish owing to engine difficulties.

Cobra II did not race again. It sat derelict for many years and was sold to Ed Maloney in 1960. He restored it to wartime colors and displayed it in his museum in Claremont, California. It was purchased in 1967 by Mike Carroll for use in an attempt to break the world piston-engine speed record, held at that type by the Messerschmitt Me 209. He installed a highly-modified V-1710-CG engine rated at 2850 hp, driving a four-bladed propeller. Four feet of outer wing were removed from each tip. Unfortunately, Cobra II crashed on August 10, 1968 during a test flight, killing pilot Mike Carroll.

P-39Q-15 (44-2433/NX57521) was flown in the 1946 National Air Races by Earl Ortman. This plane is now in storage at the NASM facility at Silver Hill, Maryland painted with the name Galloping Gertie.



A photo of the Cobra II.



Revell's model kit box.

My regards,

Widewing

[Raptor]

Originally posted by HoHun
The AVG received the following fighters available: P-40, P-43, CW-21. The P-40 was the predominant type. Only a few P-43s were received, which were preferredly used as top cover for the P-40s since they enjoyed better high-altitude performance due to their turbo-supercharged engines. The P-43s were troubled by leaking tanks, however, and didn't see much combat before being grounded. Of the CW-21, there were only a handful sent, and it seems they all were lost on their ferry flight.
 

The book I read on the AVG did not mention P-43s, but did state that they recieved a new P40 varient that had a bomb rack (their P40Bs did not have then and they did not like being asked to go on straffing missions) and they used their new P40's to bomb and perform straffing missions while they used their older P40s as top cover.