Talk:Bell P-63 Kingcobra/Archive 1

Archive 1

Page appears to be Sourced

Or is there stuff in the article that isn't in this 1961 book? I have a 1994 book on fighters, but it mostly contains technical specifications, so I cannot confirm or deny the background story (The Soviet input into the design). Guapovia 10:25, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Definitely needs more sourcing in Operational service section

I'm going to look for more sources for this article (or find proper ones in the current sources). To make things a bit cleaner in the meantime I plan to remove some time next week:

"where a Soviet P-63A downed a Japanese fighter aircraft, an Army Nakajima fighter, Ki-43, Ki-44 or Ki-84, off the coast of North Korea. Sufficient aircraft continued in use after the war for them to be given the NATO reporting name of Fred. Some American pilots also reported seeing P-63s in service with North Korea during the Korean War."

Since these are unsourced AND seem pretty trivial (rumors, hear say, uncertain).

Be Bold In Edits (talk) 21:03, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

I concur, the claims of USSR P-63s still in operational use in the 1950s seem very dubious. This is the route that is most often employed: mark the statement with a "fact tag" such as (see this in edit mode), give the tag a date if needed, leave it in place for a period of time then legitimately call the statement in question as likely to be specious and remove it. No one will challenge that process. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 21:16, 5 April 2009 (UTC).

UK

UK Got 3 (!) Kingcobras, not 2.

Here it is the first: http://wp.scn.ru/en/ww2/f/681/9/0/1

Kingcobra Mk.I (P-63A-9-BE)

To RAF as Kingcobra Mk 1 FZ440. To Royal Aircraft Establishment, Farnborough, England Sep 20, 1944 for use by Aero Flight for research into low-drag wings and high-speed laminar flow. Stayed with RAE until sold for scrap Mar 16, 1949.

Second: P-63A-6-BE. 42-68937 to RAF as Kingcobra I FR408. Delivered to Aero Flight at Royal Aircraft Establishment, Farnborough, england

Third: Bell P-63A-9-BE Kingcobra 42-69837 to RAF as Kingcobra Mk 1 FR408. SOC Oct 18, 1945. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.112.238.223 (talk) 04:15, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Slight problem second a/c serial FR408 third a/c serial no FR408, second a/c was former 42-68937 third a/c was former 42-69387, notice anything similar. FR408 was probably 42-68937 MilborneOne (talk) 19:43, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

FYI, the RAE Aerodynamics Flight ("Aero Flight") at Farnborough was run by Eric "Winkle" Brown. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.7.147.13 (talk) 14:46, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

F2L???

F2L is listed in the USN fighter designation navigation box at the bottom of the article, but there is no mention of the F2L designation in the P-63 article. 188.221.129.72 (talk) 17:25, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

OK, found out it was actually a P-39 target drone variant - switching the USN nava box with the P-39 article. best, 188.221.129.72 (talk) 17:33, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Model Number

The Bell Model No. for the Kingcobra was 33 not 24.
Enzo Angelucci and Peter Bowers.The American Fighter. Sparkford, England: Haynes Publishing Group, 1987. 54.
Alain J. Pelletier. Bell Aircraft Since 1935. Annapolis, Maryland: Naval Institute Press, 1992. 42.
Lpdwyer (talk) 02:45, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

24 was prototype. 33 was main production. 43 was variant. Binksternet (talk) 04:59, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

References

N1K

Why the emphasis on the Kawanishi N1K in the article? I know it was considered a good fighter with commendable performance, but I'd never heard it was the fastest-rolling Japanese fighter, or particularly fast-rolling in general. And then it's the only Japanese fighter listed in the "similar aircraft" list...why is the N1K more similar to the P-63 than any other Japanese type? There were several Japanese fighters with performance meeting and/or exceeding the P-63, including the Nakajima Ki-84 and Kawasaki Ki-100. In fact, the Nakajima Ki-44 is probably even closer, since it's about as maneuverable as Western fighters and just as fast as the P-63. Same goes for the Kawasaki Ki-61, except it is even more maneuverable. If I was going to pick one Japanese fighter for the article, it would be the Ki-100, since it was developed from an earlier design (the Ki-61) kind of like the P-63 (although that's pretty much the only similarity)..45Colt 13:30, 9 February 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by .45Colt (talk • contribs)

Move Survivors to own "List of surviving Bell P-63 Kingcobras" page

Should we move the survivor list to its own "List of surviving Bell P-63 Kingcobras" page? Redjacket3827 (talk) 17:48, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

[[[[[[-]]]]] "By a 1943 agreement, P-63s were disallowed for Soviet use against Germany" - thats kind a strange, any links? Sounds like some maked up legend — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.85.49.33 (talk) 16:44, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

prikrytiye sukhoputnykh voysk [coverage of ground forces]

This does simply mean in Russian the preventing troops from enemy's air-to-ground attack. The planes are patrolling the sky over the troops, searching and fighting the enemy's aircrafts and sometimes attacking the ground enemies if possible. For the tank shooting Soviet Air Forces had the Yak-9 versions T (37-mm) and K (45-mm) with the more powerful cannons then Airacobra's. They were shooting the german tanks into the top plates, and were successful with a less armoured tanks.Gambit RUS (talk) 16:57, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

"Disallowed from use against Germany"

Can there be some clarification on why the Soviets would recieve multiple batches of these aircraft but then forbid them from use except in the event of a (still largely hypothetical by that time) invasion of Manchuria?

Some elements of this page make it seem like they were used somewhat regularly, while this passage makes it seem like it's a point of contention whether it was used at all, with a rather weak explanation that the Soviets downplayed Lend-Lease (a true post-war phenomenon, but rather weak as an explanation in this context). Just hoping for some clarification. 73.194.204.218 (talk) 21:51, 12 November 2022 (UTC)