PDA

View Full Version : For you Airacobra fans out there



Sillius_Sodus
09-25-2006, 02:32 PM
Hi,

I was scanning the shelves at Barnes and Noble Books and found a nice litte gem "Flying American Combat Aircraft of WWII" by Robin Higham. At first I thought "great, 300 of the 350 pages are probably ging to be about the P-51", but a bunch of aircraft are covered, including two, count'em, two chapters on the P-39, one of my favorite rides.

Anyway, for you CEM fanatics out there, here is some info on starting, take-off, climb and cruise procedures and settings:

"Starting the in-lone, liquid-cooled engine was quite simple (on the P-39Q-1 this was the Allison V-1710-85), especially in the Mediteranean-type climate. With the airplane ignition switch off, the three-blade propeller (AeroProducts prop on the P-39Q) was turned over two or three complete turns by hand. Then the battery switch was turned on and the ignition switch was turned to BOTH. The fuel selector valve was placed to RESERVE, the fuel mixture control was adjusted to the IDLE CUT-OFF, and the throttle was opened about one inch. At this stage the fuel booster pump was turned on and the engine primed two or three strokes when the engine was cold. Then the booster pump was turned off. With the engine properly primed, the pilot then energized the starter by pressing the starter pedal downward with his heel until the inertia flywheel sounded as though it had reached maximum rpm. The starter was engaged by tipping the pedal forward with the toe. When the engine started, the mixture control handle was pushed forward to AUTOMATIC RICH.

The engine warm-up on the P-39 was conducted at about 1400 rpm or a little less. Meanwhile, the pilot checked air and coolant temperature gauges and the air pressure gauge. Because of the p-39's tendency to overheat quickly, the coolant and oil shutters were usually fully open until takeoff. If everything registered in the green portion of the dial, the parking brakes were released and with appropriate radio permission from the control tower the plane was taxied to a takeoff position. No s-ing back and forth was necessary, as in the P-47 or -51 and the plane could be taxied at high speed with safety.

Before lining up for the takeoff run, the prop pitch control, located on the engine control quadrant, was moved back and forth to check for proper operation. After the propeller check was completed, the magnetos were tested at engine speeds of approx 2300 rpm with the prop in full low or takeoff pitch and the mixture control in AUTOMATIC RICH. It was normal for the righ mag to drop off 80 rpm and the left to decrease about 60 rpm. A loss of 100 rpm generally indicated faulty ignition or spark plugs, and the plane was usually returned to the flight line for inspection.

For the takeoff run the mixture control was advanced to FULL RICH and the rudder, elevator, and aileron trim tabs were checked. Then the throttle was advanced to obtain takeoff power (A maximum of 3000 rpm and 50 inches of manifold pressure was allowed at sea-level on the P-39Q). As takeoff power was applied, there was a strong tendency to pull left, but this could be corrected by application of right rudder.

Because of the tricycle landing gear, it was good practice to ease the ship from the ground when an indicated airspeed of 100 mile per hour was attained. As soon as the aircraft had gained a few feet of altitude, the landing gear switch was flipped to the UP position. When the gear was fully retracted, the landing gear switch was placed in the OFF position and the throttle was reduced to appoximately 35 inches of manifold pressure and 2600 rpm. Perhaps the best climbing speed for the Airacobra was 160 miles per hour, at which speed it would reach 15000 feet in 4.5 minutes. after reaching cruising altitude, the power was reduced to 2400 rpm and 28 inches of manifold pressure.

...The one plane that the large majority of the P-39 pilots in North Africa and Italy really hoped for was the P-63 King Cobra. Bell Aircraft Company Technical Representatives had been singing it's praises for months, and the word was it had retained all the P-39's good qualities while remedying its weaknesses. But the plane never appeared in American combat squadrons, though a few were delivered to the Russians late in the war. Nonetheless, I did eventually heve the opportunity to fly the king Cobra. After returning to the United States from a combat tour in the Mediterranean, I was able to win an assignment to a Flying Circus outfit equipped with P-63s, then engaged in making simulated attcks on B-29 crews preparing for duty against Japan. The P-63, without a doubt, was the sweetest flying fighter plane I ever climbed into. Because of a more powerful supercharged engine, modification in the wing structure, taller vertical stabilizer, and overall better balance, the King Cobra did solve all of the P-39's problems except it's relatively short range. It was basically an interceptor. The P-63 was fast (well over 400 mph), "climbed like a homesick angel" (over 5000 ft per minute which was much better than the P-47, -38 and -51) and could turn with the best. It's stall characteristics were as honest as those of the Thunderbolt."


The pilot who wrote this served in the Med flying 191 missions in the P-38, -39 and -47.


Sillius_Sodus

Sillius_Sodus
09-25-2006, 02:32 PM
Hi,

I was scanning the shelves at Barnes and Noble Books and found a nice litte gem "Flying American Combat Aircraft of WWII" by Robin Higham. At first I thought "great, 300 of the 350 pages are probably ging to be about the P-51", but a bunch of aircraft are covered, including two, count'em, two chapters on the P-39, one of my favorite rides.

Anyway, for you CEM fanatics out there, here is some info on starting, take-off, climb and cruise procedures and settings:

"Starting the in-lone, liquid-cooled engine was quite simple (on the P-39Q-1 this was the Allison V-1710-85), especially in the Mediteranean-type climate. With the airplane ignition switch off, the three-blade propeller (AeroProducts prop on the P-39Q) was turned over two or three complete turns by hand. Then the battery switch was turned on and the ignition switch was turned to BOTH. The fuel selector valve was placed to RESERVE, the fuel mixture control was adjusted to the IDLE CUT-OFF, and the throttle was opened about one inch. At this stage the fuel booster pump was turned on and the engine primed two or three strokes when the engine was cold. Then the booster pump was turned off. With the engine properly primed, the pilot then energized the starter by pressing the starter pedal downward with his heel until the inertia flywheel sounded as though it had reached maximum rpm. The starter was engaged by tipping the pedal forward with the toe. When the engine started, the mixture control handle was pushed forward to AUTOMATIC RICH.

The engine warm-up on the P-39 was conducted at about 1400 rpm or a little less. Meanwhile, the pilot checked air and coolant temperature gauges and the air pressure gauge. Because of the p-39's tendency to overheat quickly, the coolant and oil shutters were usually fully open until takeoff. If everything registered in the green portion of the dial, the parking brakes were released and with appropriate radio permission from the control tower the plane was taxied to a takeoff position. No s-ing back and forth was necessary, as in the P-47 or -51 and the plane could be taxied at high speed with safety.

Before lining up for the takeoff run, the prop pitch control, located on the engine control quadrant, was moved back and forth to check for proper operation. After the propeller check was completed, the magnetos were tested at engine speeds of approx 2300 rpm with the prop in full low or takeoff pitch and the mixture control in AUTOMATIC RICH. It was normal for the righ mag to drop off 80 rpm and the left to decrease about 60 rpm. A loss of 100 rpm generally indicated faulty ignition or spark plugs, and the plane was usually returned to the flight line for inspection.

For the takeoff run the mixture control was advanced to FULL RICH and the rudder, elevator, and aileron trim tabs were checked. Then the throttle was advanced to obtain takeoff power (A maximum of 3000 rpm and 50 inches of manifold pressure was allowed at sea-level on the P-39Q). As takeoff power was applied, there was a strong tendency to pull left, but this could be corrected by application of right rudder.

Because of the tricycle landing gear, it was good practice to ease the ship from the ground when an indicated airspeed of 100 mile per hour was attained. As soon as the aircraft had gained a few feet of altitude, the landing gear switch was flipped to the UP position. When the gear was fully retracted, the landing gear switch was placed in the OFF position and the throttle was reduced to appoximately 35 inches of manifold pressure and 2600 rpm. Perhaps the best climbing speed for the Airacobra was 160 miles per hour, at which speed it would reach 15000 feet in 4.5 minutes. after reaching cruising altitude, the power was reduced to 2400 rpm and 28 inches of manifold pressure.

...The one plane that the large majority of the P-39 pilots in North Africa and Italy really hoped for was the P-63 King Cobra. Bell Aircraft Company Technical Representatives had been singing it's praises for months, and the word was it had retained all the P-39's good qualities while remedying its weaknesses. But the plane never appeared in American combat squadrons, though a few were delivered to the Russians late in the war. Nonetheless, I did eventually heve the opportunity to fly the king Cobra. After returning to the United States from a combat tour in the Mediterranean, I was able to win an assignment to a Flying Circus outfit equipped with P-63s, then engaged in making simulated attcks on B-29 crews preparing for duty against Japan. The P-63, without a doubt, was the sweetest flying fighter plane I ever climbed into. Because of a more powerful supercharged engine, modification in the wing structure, taller vertical stabilizer, and overall better balance, the King Cobra did solve all of the P-39's problems except it's relatively short range. It was basically an interceptor. The P-63 was fast (well over 400 mph), "climbed like a homesick angel" (over 5000 ft per minute which was much better than the P-47, -38 and -51) and could turn with the best. It's stall characteristics were as honest as those of the Thunderbolt."


The pilot who wrote this served in the Med flying 191 missions in the P-38, -39 and -47.


Sillius_Sodus

ElAurens
09-25-2006, 03:34 PM
Thanks!

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

VW-IceFire
09-25-2006, 04:08 PM
Thanks! That part about the P-63C jives exactly with what we have in-game. An excellent aircraft that remidies virtually of the problems of the P-39.

leitmotiv
09-25-2006, 04:41 PM
I had high expectations for the P-63, but I always got creamed while I used it---the reason had to undeniably be Oleg's fault.

SkyChimp
09-25-2006, 06:37 PM
I'd be skeptical of any book that claims the P-63 could climb at over 5,000 fpm.

JamesBlonde888
09-25-2006, 08:02 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
An excellent aircraft that remidies virtually of the problems of the P-39. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No, the P-39 was always good. The bad P-39 pilots just got 'posted' or learned to love the beast.

I used to hate the damn thing until I learned that spinning is bad and I should stop doing it.

Sillius_Sodus
09-25-2006, 09:52 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SkyChimp:
I'd be skeptical of any book that claims the P-63 could climb at over 5,000 fpm. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hey Skychimp,

Actually, the book doesen't claim anything, the climb rate for the P-63 is the recollection of a pilot who actually flew the thing. To be fair though, it would have been helpful if we knew more about the aircraft configuration and flight conditions during that 5000fpm climb. He was flying in the US, presumably in a fighter that suffered from less abuse than an in-theater ship. Throw in a small fuel load and a cold winter day and that kind of climb rate becomes much more realistic. Of course we also don't know where the climb started from or how long it was sustained.

In the end I'm just glad that somebody took the time to write these things down so we can get a glimpse into what it was like to fly those great rides.

Good hunting,
Sillius_Sodus

VW-IceFire
09-26-2006, 04:37 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JamesBlonde888:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
An excellent aircraft that remidies virtually of the problems of the P-39. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No, the P-39 was always good. The bad P-39 pilots just got 'posted' or learned to love the beast.

I used to hate the damn thing until I learned that spinning is bad and I should stop doing it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
P-39 is good...the P-63 is ALOT better. Its a bit heavier and slightly less agile but at the same time quite a bit faster and carrying a much bigger bombload when you need it.

major_setback
09-29-2006, 12:23 PM
I haven't tried the P63 much. I used to fly P39 campaigns a lot a while ago, The only thing I didn't like was the way it tended to spin.
I'll have to try the P63 after reading that. Thanks for the tip.

DmdSeeker
09-29-2006, 12:35 PM
The P-63 has a couple of other refinements as well; such as WEP and an auto setting for the radiator.

Mind you; my favourite is still the P-39 N series where you could see out the back.

I don't understand why more fighters didn't use armoured glass as a pilot shield; as is found in the LA 5 & 7 instead of steel plate. Wieght, maybe?

Even in the P63; which is really fast on the deck; I'd still likie to see behind me before reversing to come back into the fray. It's one plane which really needs a mirror.

Nimits
09-29-2006, 05:38 PM
I do not think armored glass was as effecitve, and it was certainly more expensive.

VW-IceFire
09-30-2006, 08:20 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by major_setback:
I haven't tried the P63 much. I used to fly P39 campaigns a lot a while ago, The only thing I didn't like was the way it tended to spin.
I'll have to try the P63 after reading that. Thanks for the tip. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yeah if you enjoy the P-39...the P-63 is great. You have to get used to its weight which makes it feel quite a bit different when you want to roll or make a snap manuever. Generally you need to be more careful doing that...but its more stable than the P-39 and tends to spin less. And its REALLY fast....I find by 1944 everything can outrun the P-39 (its still a gem with its roll rate and turn) but the P-63 can, at low altitude, keep up with or even run down most fighters.

Give it a try...I really enjoy it!