PDA

View Full Version : Why not a Bell P-59 Airacomet?



XyZspineZyX
08-23-2003, 03:15 PM
I really can't belive no one is modelling this aircraft. There seems to be no interest in it at all.

Who cares if it is outclassed by the conemporary German jets? It was the first US jet fighter and is historically significant.

I think it would be a great addition, if I had the ability to model(which I don't) I would do it.

Anyone else interested in a P-59 Airacomet?


<center><img src= "http://www.luftwaffepics.com/LCBW4/FW190-A0-52.jpg" height=215 width=365>

<center>"We are now in a position of inferiority...There is no doubt in my mind, nor in the minds of my fighter pilots, that the FW190 is the best all-round fighter in the world today."

Sholto Douglas, 17 July 1942

XyZspineZyX
08-23-2003, 03:15 PM
I really can't belive no one is modelling this aircraft. There seems to be no interest in it at all.

Who cares if it is outclassed by the conemporary German jets? It was the first US jet fighter and is historically significant.

I think it would be a great addition, if I had the ability to model(which I don't) I would do it.

Anyone else interested in a P-59 Airacomet?


<center><img src= "http://www.luftwaffepics.com/LCBW4/FW190-A0-52.jpg" height=215 width=365>

<center>"We are now in a position of inferiority...There is no doubt in my mind, nor in the minds of my fighter pilots, that the FW190 is the best all-round fighter in the world today."

Sholto Douglas, 17 July 1942

XyZspineZyX
08-23-2003, 03:28 PM
Was it utilized before the end of WWII?
And on which front?

http://www.goblins.net/immagini/Logo/tdglogo_eng.gif

XyZspineZyX
08-23-2003, 03:37 PM
Go to http://www.military.cz/usa/air/post_war/p59/p59_en.htm
It has quite a lot of info on the P59.

To be able to fare well,
To avoid the frustration of misfortune,
That, in this world, is happiness.
-Euripides' Electra

XyZspineZyX
08-23-2003, 03:37 PM
Cippacometa wrote:

- Was it utilized before the end of WWII?
- And on which front?


No, but this in no way restricts it from being included in FB. Oleg is allowing aircraft up to 1947 I believe.



<center><img src= "http://www.luftwaffepics.com/LCBW4/FW190-A0-52.jpg" height=215 width=365>

<center>"We are now in a position of inferiority...There is no doubt in my mind, nor in the minds of my fighter pilots, that the FW190 is the best all-round fighter in the world today."

Sholto Douglas, 17 July 1942

XyZspineZyX
08-23-2003, 05:45 PM
EDtheHead6445 wrote:
- Go to <a
- href="http://www.military.cz/usa/air/post_war/p59/
- p59_en.htm"
- target=_blank>http://www.military.cz/usa/air/post_
- war/p59/p59_en.htm</a>
- It has quite a lot of info on the P59.


It says: "The P-59 was never a great performer and was quickly overtaken by development of other jet aircraft, mainly the P-80 Shooting Star. Only in operational service for about a year, the type was phased out of service by 1949. "
So, phased out in '49, it means that it should have been in service in '47-'48....a bit too late. And it was crap. Why to put this stuff in FB?
Waiting for a flyable MC.202/205 or G.55....

http://www.goblins.net/immagini/Logo/tdglogo_eng.gif

XyZspineZyX
08-23-2003, 06:00 PM
The P-51 was phased out in the fifties, if I recall correctly. Merely because an aircraft was phased out of US service years after the war does not mean it was a recent design. National guard units typically use aircraft that are decades old, yet they are still considered "in use" in US military jargon. I think there are even still a few bases using F-4 Phantoms. Those planes use vacuum tube electronics, they are so old.

The P-59 was The USAAF's first jet aircraft, and was operational during late 1943 and 1944, if I recall correctly. However, it was only a test bed for the jet engine; it was not ment to be an operational fighter. It's actually very odd that it was a fully armed aircraft.

Besides, it only had a top speed of around 398 mph, and took a long time to get up to that speed.

Harry Voyager

http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0YQDLAswcqmIpvWP9dLzZVayPXOmo6IJ16aURujNfs4dDETH84 Q6eIkCbWQemjqF6O8ZfvzlsvUUauJyy9GYnKM6!o3fu!kBnWVh BgMt3q2T3BUQ8yjBBqECLxFaqXVV5U2kWiSIlq1s6VoaVvRqBy Q/Avatar%202%20500x500%20[final).jpg?dc=4675409848259594077

XyZspineZyX
08-23-2003, 06:05 PM
HarryVoyager wrote:
- The P-51 was phased out in the fifties, if I recall
- correctly. Merely because an aircraft was phased
- out of US service years after the war does not mean
- it was a recent design. National guard units
- typically use aircraft that are decades old, yet
- they are still considered "in use" in US military
- jargon. I think there are even still a few bases
- using F-4 Phantoms. Those planes use vacuum tube
- electronics, they are so old.
-
- The P-59 was The USAAF's first jet aircraft, and was
- operational during late 1943 and 1944, if I recall
- correctly. However, it was only a test bed for the
- jet engine; it was not ment to be an operational
- fighter. It's actually very odd that it was a fully
- armed aircraft.
-
- Besides, it only had a top speed of around 398 mph,
- and took a long time to get up to that speed.
-
- Harry Voyager

That reminds me.. about 4 years ago they started to restor a Bell YP-59A Airocomet out at chino.. I wonder how it is comming along? At their web sight it only says

"Bell YP-59A Airocomet - (Restoration in progress)"

http://www.planesoffame.org/Restorations.htm



<font size= 3> <font color= blue>
TAGERT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=forum
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=discussion

XyZspineZyX
08-23-2003, 06:06 PM
yeah i would like to the the airacomet and the british vampire. as long as they are locked out of prop fights http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif


http://mysite.verizon.net/vze4jz7i/ls.gif

Good dogfighters bring ammo home, Great ones don't. (c) Leadspitter

XyZspineZyX
08-23-2003, 06:27 PM
The aircomet was not a great performer and it could barely even fly at all at first. It had a really poor P/W ratio. But for all I know they may have given it more powerful engines by '47. All I know it was a lead-sled during the intial trials and flight testing.

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin - 1755

XyZspineZyX
08-23-2003, 06:29 PM
Not only is it out classed by contemporary German jets, but its outclassed by contemporary German props! It was a true DOG. It was slower then typical prop aircraft, and not acrobatic at all. Its like me saying "Why not model that jet that came before the Me-262".

Gib

FW190fan wrote:
- I really can't belive no one is modelling this
- aircraft. There seems to be no interest in it at
- all.
-
- Who cares if it is outclassed by the conemporary
- German jets? It was the first US jet fighter and is
- historically significant.


I am now accepting donations to help get the PBY flyable.

<center><form action="https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr" method="post">
<input type="hidden" name="cmd" value="_xclick">
<input type="hidden" name="business" value="gibbage@lycos.com">
<input type="hidden" name="item_name" value="Gibbages IL2; FB PBY Catalina Fund">
<input type="hidden" name="no_note" value="1">
<input type="hidden" name="currency_code" value="USD">
<input type="hidden" name="tax" value="0">
<input type="image" src="http://gibbageart.havagame.com/donations.gif" border="0" name="submit" alt="Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure!">
</form></center>

XyZspineZyX
08-23-2003, 06:44 PM
It was never used in WW2, and came too late to be put into service in the war, just like the F7F tigercat

Boosher-PBNA
----------------
<center>Heaven is a place where the French are the cooks, the British are the butlers, the Germans are the mechanics, and the Swiss are the politicians. Hell is a place where the British are the cooks, the French are the butlers, the Swiss are the mechanics and the Germans are the politicians.<center>
<center>Boosher-ProudBirds-VFW<center>
http://proudbirdswing.tripod.com/proudbirds.htm

http://www.escadrila54.com/logo_sm.jpg

<center><marquee><FONT COLOR="RED"><FONT SIZE="+1">"The ProudBirds..Fly High and Proud..~S~"<FONT SIZE> </marquee>

XyZspineZyX
08-23-2003, 06:46 PM
nt oops

Message Edited on 08/23/0301:46PM by SlickStick

XyZspineZyX
08-23-2003, 07:43 PM
I understand it may not be a stellar performer but does that always have to be the point?

It is a historic aircraft and I think it would be fun to try and fly it. Since it was the first US work on a fighter jet I'm really suprised no one seems to be interested in it.

Come to think of it, does any sim at all model the P-59?


<center><img src= "http://www.luftwaffepics.com/LCBW4/FW190-A0-52.jpg" height=215 width=365>

<center>"We are now in a position of inferiority...There is no doubt in my mind, nor in the minds of my fighter pilots, that the FW190 is the best all-round fighter in the world today."

Sholto Douglas, 17 July 1942

XyZspineZyX
08-23-2003, 08:15 PM
Come to think of it, does any sim at all model the Heinkel 280? No? You know why? Figure it out genoius.

Gib

FW190fan wrote:
- I understand it may not be a stellar performer but
- does that always have to be the point?
-
- It is a historic aircraft and I think it would be
- fun to try and fly it. Since it was the first US
- work on a fighter jet I'm really suprised no one
- seems to be interested in it.
-
- Come to think of it, does any sim at all model the
- P-59?
-

I am now accepting donations to help get the PBY flyable.

<center><form action="https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr" method="post">
<input type="hidden" name="cmd" value="_xclick">
<input type="hidden" name="business" value="gibbage@lycos.com">
<input type="hidden" name="item_name" value="Gibbages IL2; FB PBY Catalina Fund">
<input type="hidden" name="no_note" value="1">
<input type="hidden" name="currency_code" value="USD">
<input type="hidden" name="tax" value="0">
<input type="image" src="http://gibbageart.havagame.com/donations.gif" border="0" name="submit" alt="Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure!">
</form></center>

XyZspineZyX
08-23-2003, 08:51 PM
Very simple: because it's *IRRELEVANT*.

XyZspineZyX
08-23-2003, 09:32 PM
The performance of the Airacomet was as good as the first Meteors.





Regards,

SkyChimp

http://members.cox.net/rowlandparks/SkyChimp2.jpg

XyZspineZyX
08-23-2003, 09:34 PM
nt = No Text

XyZspineZyX
08-23-2003, 10:40 PM
Gibbage1 wrote:
- Come to think of it, does any sim at all model the
- Heinkel 280? No? You know why? Figure it out
- genoius.
-
- Gib


Oh the irony.

Gibbage1 wrote: - Figure it out "genoius"

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAH


Gibbage - this thread is not about you. No one here asked you to do the P-59 professor.

Here it is in language you may understand a bit better:

Thiss thred iz not abowt yoo Gibaj! Thiss thred iz abowt teh pee-59 and iff anee-won wood lyk too sea it in Forgtin Baddles. I thot it mite bee kewl sins it wuz teh furst US jet fyter an oll. i gess maybee I wuz rong nobodee wants it sins it iz sloe. The pee-80 tho haz mad hops an wil pwnerz thoze looft-whinnerz and ther 262z. Nuff sayd!!!


<center><img src= "http://www.luftwaffepics.com/LCBW4/FW190-A0-52.jpg" height=215 width=365>

<center>"We are now in a position of inferiority...There is no doubt in my mind, nor in the minds of my fighter pilots, that the FW190 is the best all-round fighter in the world today."

Sholto Douglas, 17 July 1942

XyZspineZyX
08-23-2003, 11:04 PM
The irony is, you still did not answer the question! If you want the P-59 so bad, why dont you want the He280? Simple question. He-280 was Germany's first jet. That should be important correct? You said the P-59 is important because it was the US's first jet. So why no He-280? Enlighten us ow mightly Luftwhiner. Stop trying to dodge a valid question by resorting to personal attacks.

Gib

FW190fan wrote:
-
- Gibbage1 wrote:
-- Come to think of it, does any sim at all model the
-- Heinkel 280? No? You know why? Figure it out
-- genoius.
--
-- Gib
-
-
- Oh the irony.
-

I am now accepting donations to help get the PBY flyable.

<center><form action="https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr" method="post">
<input type="hidden" name="cmd" value="_xclick">
<input type="hidden" name="business" value="gibbage@lycos.com">
<input type="hidden" name="item_name" value="Gibbages IL2; FB PBY Catalina Fund">
<input type="hidden" name="no_note" value="1">
<input type="hidden" name="currency_code" value="USD">
<input type="hidden" name="tax" value="0">
<input type="image" src="http://gibbageart.havagame.com/donations.gif" border="0" name="submit" alt="Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure!">
</form></center>

XyZspineZyX
08-23-2003, 11:11 PM
The He-280 would be perfectly fine with me!

I don't care if these fighters wouldn't win a dogfight with a P-11, I would just like to fly them.

Do you understand now?


<center><img src= "http://www.luftwaffepics.com/LCBW4/FW190-A0-52.jpg" height=215 width=365>

<center>"We are now in a position of inferiority...There is no doubt in my mind, nor in the minds of my fighter pilots, that the FW190 is the best all-round fighter in the world today."

Sholto Douglas, 17 July 1942

XyZspineZyX
08-24-2003, 01:36 AM
Then why are you asking for the P-59 if your such a Luftwaffa fan? Why has nobody asked for the He-280? I dont think the P-59 EVER carried guns and was only a jet trainer for a very short time to get pilots use to jets so they can fly a P-80. Its not a fighter, never was, and never will be. Just like the He-280. Its the first country's jet, and more of a test bed or proof of concept.

Gib

FW190fan wrote:
- The He-280 would be perfectly fine with me!
-
- I don't care if these fighters wouldn't win a
- dogfight with a P-11, I would just like to fly them.
-
-
-
- Do you understand now?
-
-
- <center><img src=
- "http://www.luftwaffepics.com/LCBW4/FW190-A0-52.jpg"
- height=215 width=365>
-
- <center>"We are now in a position of
- inferiority...There is no doubt in my mind, nor in
- the minds of my fighter pilots, that the FW190 is
- the best all-round fighter in the world today."
-
- Sholto Douglas, 17 July 1942
-



I am now accepting donations to help get the PBY flyable.

<center><form action="https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr" method="post">
<input type="hidden" name="cmd" value="_xclick">
<input type="hidden" name="business" value="gibbage@lycos.com">
<input type="hidden" name="item_name" value="Gibbages IL2; FB PBY Catalina Fund">
<input type="hidden" name="no_note" value="1">
<input type="hidden" name="currency_code" value="USD">
<input type="hidden" name="tax" value="0">
<input type="image" src="http://gibbageart.havagame.com/donations.gif" border="0" name="submit" alt="Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure!">
</form></center>

XyZspineZyX
08-24-2003, 03:16 AM
Actually the P-59 did carry weaponry, and was considered a very unusual for doing so.

As for why nobody is asking for a flyable He-280 right now, I'd hazzard for the same reason nobody's asking for a flyable Fairy Battle right now: nobody has asked for one. You don't need to frag the guy for asking.

Harry Voyager

http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0YQDLAswcqmIpvWP9dLzZVayPXOmo6IJ16aURujNfs4dDETH84 Q6eIkCbWQemjqF6O8ZfvzlsvUUauJyy9GYnKM6!o3fu!kBnWVh BgMt3q2T3BUQ8yjBBqECLxFaqXVV5U2kWiSIlq1s6VoaVvRqBy Q/Avatar%202%20500x500%20[final).jpg?dc=4675409848259594077

XyZspineZyX
08-24-2003, 03:39 AM
Harry, I understand your point, but Gribb is somehow right.
Just think logical before askin'... Why we don't have the Do-17, or He114,Savoia-Marcheti-79, Me-410, IAR39, He112, Ju-86...? and the list could be longer..
Those aren't jes, but they played more important roles in the war then any US jet(no offence).
Before asking just think a little... wich was more important?????
Wich of those was more famous?
If you ask an american wich was the most important US fighter of WW2, he'l say the Mustang, or the Thunderbolt!;
If you ask a brit, : "Spitfire"!
Ask an Italian;"Mc202"
A Romanian:"IAR80"
A German: "Me109"
A Russian " MIG"
.....
You seee, ppl (I mean pl without profound knolege about WW2 or aviation) will give different, and sometimes senseless answers.
Wan't a Jet, why not the JU 287 ? or the Ar234?
All the planes mentioned before have flown before the end of WW2, and were actualy "usefull"(in the meaning of not being set directly to a junkyard)
I don't mean to be sarcasic, but C'mon!!
Well it was tthe first US jet, but do we really need it??
Sholdn't cbe concerned by things more WW2 and EF releated?


<center>"The show must go on..."<center>
<center>http://www.hobby.ro/roarmy/aviatia/greceanu%20tudor/1.jpg
A 'good' landing is one from which you can walk away. A 'great'
landing is one after which they can use the plane again<center>

XyZspineZyX
08-24-2003, 01:52 PM
Gibbage1 wrote:

- Then why are you asking for the P-59 if your such a
- Luftwaffa fan?


Gibbage I can't figure out why you would ask this question.

Do you think I don't want US planes added?




<center><img src= "http://www.luftwaffepics.com/LCBW4/FW190-A0-52.jpg" height=215 width=365>

<center>"We are now in a position of inferiority...There is no doubt in my mind, nor in the minds of my fighter pilots, that the FW190 is the best all-round fighter in the world today."

Sholto Douglas, 17 July 1942

XyZspineZyX
08-24-2003, 01:58 PM
HarryVoyager wrote:

- You don't need to frag the guy
- for asking.


/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif Thanks HarryV







<center><img src= "http://www.luftwaffepics.com/LCBW4/FW190-A0-52.jpg" height=215 width=365>

<center>"We are now in a position of inferiority...There is no doubt in my mind, nor in the minds of my fighter pilots, that the FW190 is the best all-round fighter in the world today."

Sholto Douglas, 17 July 1942

XyZspineZyX
08-24-2003, 02:02 PM
Ehm compared to the 262 the He280 was in some points better and in some worse than the Messerschmitt, but overall it was comparable.

Its slowspeed maneuverability was better, and it reached a topspeed of ~800 km/h, while it used engines, with 600kp thrust (the 262 used ones with 900kp).
Three MG151/20 were installed in the nose of the aircraft.

I guess it would win a dogfight against a P.11 /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif .


The first German jet was the He178. Its first flight was on August 27th 1939.

-------------------
http://320015073007-0001.bei.t-online.de/il2-forum/signatur.gif
III/JG51_Atzebrueck

JG51 (http://www.jg51.de)
Virtual Online War (http://www.s-driess.de/vow/index.php?page=homeā§ion=home)
"Ich bin ein Wurgerwhiner"

Message Edited on 08/24/0303:08PM by Atzebrueck

XyZspineZyX
08-24-2003, 02:06 PM
Dilution dear boy, dilution...

Add any plane you like from any era, and the sim loses it's identity. It's called IL-2 Forgotten Battles, between Russia, Germany, and Finland, involving some action with Hungarian and Romanian units, taking place between 1941 and 1945.

That's what it's about, so I believe. In my opinion, once non-relevant aircraft are included, the whole theme goes down the pan and historical accuracy dissapears in the puff of smoke from the exploding Zero raining debris down on Leningrad as the Imperial Tie Fighter Warp-Plazma-drives back up to 100,000 meters in 0.3 seconds, to laser lock for it's next pass on the F4 Phantom currently engaging the Sopwith Camel somewhere over Helsinki....


And for an encore, go buy Lock-on, then ask the developers to model 109's and Yaks in it!


"If I had all the money I've spent on drink....I'd spend it on drink!"

XyZspineZyX
08-24-2003, 02:26 PM
Gibbs:


Yaks and 109s do not fit into the same era as the LOMAC jets as you know.

But the P-59/He280 etc. do fit into the FB era.

As far as the dilution thing, it is the developer himself who has decided to allow aircraft up to 1947 I believe. We are getting many aircraft that didn't serve on the EF, with Oleg's blessing. Remember, development updates indicate different theatre maps on the horizon.

Does this mean that Il2/FB must lose it's Eastern Front flavor?

I'm really not on some P-59 crusade here, just thought it would be interesting to fly. That's all. I thought other people would as well.


<center><img src= "http://www.luftwaffepics.com/LCBW4/FW190-A0-52.jpg" height=215 width=365>

<center>"We are now in a position of inferiority...There is no doubt in my mind, nor in the minds of my fighter pilots, that the FW190 is the best all-round fighter in the world today."

Sholto Douglas, 17 July 1942

XyZspineZyX
08-24-2003, 02:33 PM
So you're saying we should include an aircraft that didn't even see combat, let alone in WWII or on the Eastern Front, because it's historically significant?

Good point! I'm hoping to see the Wright Flyer, the Spirit of St. Louis, the 747 and the Space Shuttle in the next patch.

XyZspineZyX
08-24-2003, 02:59 PM
Hey calm down folks! Fw190fan just sugested a plane that would be fun to fly, no need to go ironic on his ***.

It was just a suggestion, nothing more for crying out loud!

Sheeesh!

<center>

http://www.webforum.nu/member/Fornixx/190.JPG</p>
<center>

Proud member of Vattholma hell moppers</p>

XyZspineZyX
08-24-2003, 03:28 PM
Then don't include the p-80.It didn't see combat and the specs that everyone is printing is for a much altered korean war version.I don't care if you don't believe me read for yourself.Does anyone think that H. Hughes was going to use the original engines in his 262 to race against a sabre jet?

XyZspineZyX
08-24-2003, 04:00 PM
turenne wrote:
- Then don't include the p-80.It didn't see combat and
- the specs that everyone is printing is for a much
- altered korean war version.I don't care if you don't
- believe me read for yourself.Does anyone think that
- H. Hughes was going to use the original engines in
- his 262 to race against a sabre jet?
-
-

Completely incorrect. The specs I posted were for the P-80A-1-LO, the very first production P-80 that was delivered to the USAAF in February 1945.



Regards,

SkyChimp

http://members.cox.net/rowlandparks/SkyChimp2.jpg

XyZspineZyX
08-24-2003, 04:07 PM
Yepp, doubt very much that the guys doing the modelling, not even mentioning Oleg would make the mistake of using 1950:s data for a 1945 plane.





<center>

http://www.webforum.nu/member/Fornixx/190.JPG</p>
<center>

CWoS Asshat since 2003</p>

XyZspineZyX
08-24-2003, 04:38 PM
Posted by 190Fan: "Yaks and 109s do not fit into the same era as the LOMAC jets as you know."

I was using my exaggerated and mildly humourous analogy to make a point. The aircraft you mention didn't come within a million miles (another exaggeration http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif of the Theatres in question either, so why have it?

In my opinion, the developers energy and ingenuity would be better spent in two areas: improving an already stunning sim, and introducing some aircraft that were relevant to the Theatre but as yet unavailable (Do17, Bf110 flyable, Spitfire, plus others.)



"If I had all the money I've spent on drink....I'd spend it on drink!"

XyZspineZyX
08-24-2003, 04:46 PM
I was discussing what Skychimp had posted as p-80 specs,not what Oleg would have used.The specs that you printed say 1950 right on the page.There's nothiong wrong with saying first issues of planes were dogs.190's would go afire,p-51 were dogs without merlin,meteors were pitiful until upgraded.There are very few instances of planes being perfect from drawing board to first flight.I also wouldn't take a book that is sponsored by a company(ie. bell) and believe all there material.I would believe test pilots and comparisions.A book witten with FW's help would naturally state higher figures and say how good their planes were.Jane's "the xp-80 was designed around a dehaviland h-i engine,later a general electric engine was adopted for the yp-80,max speed 880 km".Also if we are going by what jets fought in ww2 only the meteor should be allowed for the allied side.

XyZspineZyX
08-24-2003, 05:06 PM
turenne,

P51s were not "dogs" without Merlins, they just had some trouble over 20,000',/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif just like the Fw190A./i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif Are you saying the Fw was a "dog"?/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

The I-40(J-33) was developed from the British engine.

Lockheed built the P-80, not Bell.

---

SC, how many P-80s had been produced by the time of Japaneses official surrender, for that is when WW2 ended.

http://www.stenbergaa.com/stenberg/crandall-stormclouds2.jpg