Hi KL,
I fully agree with you, that "Hmmm
" is more than appropriate in this case. Thre is a controversy with this plane.
I browsed again all relevant posts and pages in Tabachenko book for relevant time period with interesting result.
According to Romanenko, Pokrishkin flew this P-39K-1 from April 02 to June 20. It was then re-numbered to "130" and passed to Samsonov who flew on it til October 1943...
Zlobin posted orig documents showing that Pokrishkin flew "130" in June (before Samsonov?)...
P-39D-2 138520 was comanders plane, Pokrishkin flew it once in April. From April 24, 1943 it was "personal" plane of P.P. Ketov. It survived till end of 1943... No tactical Number for this P-39D-2...
HOWEVER,
this is a shortened part of the article from Suchov?s (pilot in 16 GIAP since May 30, 1943) book Эскадрилья ведет бой about the moment when Pokryshkin exchanged his old ?13? with the new ?100?:
In mid-July ... We stopped by a fighter with the tail number "13". It is well known commander?s plane. Actually his former plane. "Thirteenth" already did its job?fought many fights, many forsages during hot days. It's time to change the engine...
Nearby is the aircraft... almost new one. To beat "Junkers" and "Heinkels" ? it needs more powerful weapons. And here it is: a 37-millimeter cannon ...
Pokryshkin is weighing the possibility of one and the other plane. He knows "thirteenth", he likes her. Or to take a new one?
Pokryshkin strode towards a new plane.
- Comrade Captain, what number to paint?
- The ?One? has to be for the regiment commander.
- He did not fly, he is "sick" all the time - Sasha Klubov says.
- All the same, is not allowed! - says Pokryshkin.
- Then the ?ten"!
- It is better to "thirty", the number of kills - says Regiment Engineer Captain Kopylov.
Lieutenant Nikolai Trofimov says with a smile:
- We must look forward - to count to one hundred ...
- Write "hundred"! ? Alexander succumbed to the general mood, too, laughed, waved his hand:
- Okay, if ?one hundred? then ?one hundred?. Paint it!
From that day a new call sign was approved for Pokryshkin: Hundredth ...
...Finally, this I found in the Pokryshkin?s book Небо войны (Sky of War) about replacement his old ?13? with new ?100?:
I flew almost all time on the plane with board number 13 and shot down more than 20 enemy planes. But when new Airacobras with the stronger armament arrived, I decided to take one of them. Stepanov received my ?13?. He did not want to fly with ?13? so they pained 0 behind 13. He was shot down during the first fight. Now I have also three-digit number on my plane and I have got order not to call with my name because German fighters already hunt me. I try to call with my new number but it was very difficult to pronounce. Boys laugh.
- Paint me hundred! I told them.
- Here hundred, here hundred. Short and clear, isn?t it?
Since that I flew plane with board number ?100?.
...Pokryshkin flew
also ?130? on 10-Apr-1943 and 17-Apr-1943 according to the ЖБД (журнал боевых действий ? combat book) of the 16 GIAP:
According to the Tabachenko's book:
8-Apr-1943, P-39K-1, 42-4421 (24421) delivered to 16th GIAP, group of 22 P-39s under command of Isaev flew to the front. Pokryshkin was part of this group. Means that Isaev - commander od 16th GIAP already had his own plane, Pokryshkin flew different plane (most probably 24421). And 138520 had still 2 weeks to come a part of 16th GIAP.
10-Apr-1943 (p.40), 07:48, 6 P-39 (Teterin-Starchikov, Bereznoy-Sapunov, Naumenko-Sutyrin),
08:55, 6 P-39 (
Pokryshkin-Paskeev, Shagov-Ostrovskij, Kozlov-Golubev),
09:55, 5 P-39 (Iskrin, Naumenko, Bereznoj, Sutyrin, Savin)
totally used 12 shells 20mm, no 37mm shell.
14:30, 12 P-39 (Kryukov,
Pokryshkin, Rechkalov, Stepanov, Shagov, Iskrin, Naumenko, Bereznoy, Starchikov, Sapunov, Nikitin, Savin)
neither 20mm nor 37mm cannon shell spent,
14:50, 4 P-39 (Tabachenko-Mametov, Ostrovskij-Paskeev) - no fight,
16:20, 8 P-39 (Fadeyev, Fedorov, Trud, Erchov, Chesnokov, Moiseenko, Gorochov, Efimov) - no fight,
16:55, 9 P-39 (Teterin, Iskrin, Naumenko, Rechkalov, Savin, Sapunov, Bereznoy, Nikitin, Starchikov),
17:35, 10 P-39 (
Pokryshkin, Shulga, Shagov, Isaev, Kryukov, Paskaev, Ostrovskiy, Mametov, Tabachenko, Stepanov)
17-Apr-1943 (p.61), 10:05, 11 P-39 (
Pokryshkin-Paskeev, Rechkalov, Tabachenko, Bereznoy, Sapunov, Iskrin, Sutyrin, Fadeev, Trud, Ershov),
15:32, 2x6 P-39 (Fadeev-Trud, Mochalov-Savin, Iskrin-Sutyrin and Bereznoy-Sapunov, Rechkalov-Tabachenko, Paskayev-Shagov).
22-Apr-1943 , P-39D-2, 41-38520 (138520) delivered to 16th GIAP. Is it possible that Isaev, commander of 16th GIAP was without his personal plane untill this moment? I am not sure with that.
End of June 1943 - Isaev, commander of 16th GIAP, signed order no.046 to pay reward 5000 rubels to Mayor Pokryshkin for 100 combat flights without aircraft damage, crash and without lost of orientation in the plane P-39 serial no. 24421 during time period from 9-Apr to 20-Jun 1943.
If all that is true, or at least if Tabachenko's book and data in the Combat Book is true, then:
1) 8-Apr-1943, P-39K-1, 42-4421 (24421) delivered 16th GIAP,
2.) 17-Apr-1943 Pokryshkin flew P-39 with the boad no. "130" (photo from Combat Book),
3.) 22-Apr-1943, P-39D-2, 41-38520 (138520) delivered to 16th GIAP.
and then it could mean that Pokryshkin flew P-39K-1 (armed with 37mm cannon), serial no. 42-4421 (24421), board no. "130" on 17-Apr-1943.And the same plane was most probably flown also on 10-Apr-1943, e.g. repainting "13" to "130" does not look very probably on this plane.
And question is what plane had board no. "13".
P-39D-2, 41-38520 (138520) belonged to the production series 41-38405 / 41-38562 produced in period Feb/Dec 1941, e.g. delivered to the 16th GIAP after about one and half year after produced,
P-39K-1, 42-4421 (24421) belonged to the production series 42-4244 / 42-4453 produced in period Jul/Nov 1942, e.g. delivered to the 16th GIAP after about half of the year after produced (
http://www.uswarplanes.net/p39p63.html and
http://www.americancombatplanes.com/p39_1.html).
So my previous "visual summary" of P-39 42-4421 (24421) and 41-38520 (138520) seems to be incorrect and need to be redone
Regards,
66misos