The BRUTAL Outcast Kingcobra P-63
In 1941, after the P-39 Airacobra had been in production for one year, Bell engineers began designing a new fighter after limitations became apparent on the P-39. The new aircraft would have roots in the design of the one that came before it, but the laminar-flow wing would be a defining characteristic. The P-51 Mustang, with its laminar design, was the most effective fighter aircraft of World war two —. Laminar-flow design uses a symmetrical airfoil that minimizes drag— and less drag means more speed.
The new airplane that finally materialized was designated the P-63 Kingcobra. As far as we know, it was the first American fighter to enter manufacture and see action following the outbreak of World war 2. The Grumman F7F Tigercat and F8F Bearcat were both manufactured after the war had already begun; however, neither aircraft ever saw active service. The P-63 may have looked like the P-39, but it was a much bigger and heavier aircraft. Unlike its earlier cousin, which was originally envisioned as a fighter/interceptor, the P-63 was designed as a ground-support/fighter bomber from the start.
The P-63 was based on the experimental P-39 E1 prototype and kept Bell’s trademark tricycle landing gear, automobile-style cockpit doors, and an engine behind the cockpit. The 37 mm cannon that fired through the propeller hub was kept, as well as the two synchronized .50 caliber machine guns in the nose and two additional .50 caliber guns located in under-wing pods, similar to the P-39Q.
#darkhangar
Lmfao the P-63 was designed for the same reason as the P-39. It was used in low altitude combat not as ground support. The 37mm was meant to kill bombers
See the recently destroyed P-63F at about the 3:35 mark in the video. The silver N6763 Kingcobra with "X" on the nose.
Wonder Woman flew one of these,but hers was invisible.
I really don't know where to begin.
Showing three Mustangs with the words "P-63 Kingcobra" is not a good start.
Saying that the F-7 Tigercat and the F-8 Bearcat didn't see active service is just plain wrong. They both saw active service towards the end of the war with the US Navy, but entered too late to see active combat.
The P-63 was not the first fighter or aircraft to enter service that was designed after the war began. The P-63 entered service in October 1943. The P-51A Mustang entered service in late 1942.
3:15 – "In the event of a war emergency" SERIOUSLY?! You don't know what War Emergency Power is? It is a throttle setting that is only to be used under dire circumstance , hence the increase in horsepower, but shortening of overall engine life.
7:48 – Pilots of the P-63 or ANY World War II fighter could not "eject". None of them were equipped with ejection seats. The proper term for abandoning the plane is to "bail out".
Most of the P-63s were sent over to the Soviet Union was NOT because of their reliability in low level combat. They were sent there because the US Army Air Force did not see the need for them, having P-51s, P-47s, and P-38s already in service and the P-63's performance wasn't significantly better than any of these fighters.
This is the worst "historic" aviation piece that I have seen. The narrated information is, at best, marginally correct or just plan wrong. The images do not match the narration at all and leaves an extremely misleading impression of the airplane. The sad thing is, almost everything the narrator talks about is there somewhere, just not in the right place. It's like the imagery and narration were made independently and then thrown together with disregard for content. Very sloppy film making!
Made in Cheektowaga! The old Bell factory , repourposed, still is there..
Chuck Yeager said it was a good plane, and the Russians liked it, but it was our trucks that helped them out the most.
This video is suppose to be about the P-63 yet at the beginning of this video is a picture of the P-51!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The 1 P-63F that was restored and flying with the Commemorative Air Force is no longer flying. It was recently destroyed in a mid-air collision with a B-17 at an airshow in Dallas, TX. And the P-63 was not designed for ground attack, if it were it wouldn't have been fitted with the remote 2nd stage supercharger. They were used quite a bit for ground attack by the Russians though, often with the second supercharger deactivated.
USSR never paid for these planes! US Ripped off! Bastards! Never forget!
Fuselage sounds like garage not fridge. Bakelite Bake-e-lite like bake a cake.
Just a production note, if I may- Throwing the title card graphic over three late model P-51's instead of, say, the thumbnail P-63 image?… not great. Likely caused more than a few of us to scratch our heads and chuckle. @0:41 😀 Also, it's kinda weird that @2:00 there is a quote put up that purports to be from Amit Katwala from Wired magazine about the P-63- He never said that and they never published any type of piece with this.. that's odd, right?