P-39... Any news?

[ATA]

Dont know facts at all,hmmm.
I'll give you some facts.
Brits got rid of them as soon as they could,americans did not want to fly that POS.
It is loosing to any russian fighter in every way.As soon as you empty gun ammo it became unstable,easily fall into flat spin.
How many top russian aces got killed becouse that thing was uncapble
to perform simple barrel roll or land with empty gun.
And i repeat like i said after 1942 p39's and P40's were given as punishment to squads that didnt "perform" too well.
Oooooohhhhh,American fighter...it MUST be good.
I can give you adress of web sites with russ. pilots discribing p39,but it's in russian.
Let me know.
Best regards.

[humble]

Originally posted by ATA
Dont know facts at all,hmmm.
I'll give you some facts.
Brits got rid of them as soon as they could,americans did not want to fly that POS.
It is loosing to any russian fighter in every way.As soon as you empty gun ammo it became unstable,easily fall into flat spin.
How many top russian aces got killed becouse that thing was uncapble
to perform simple barrel roll or land with empty gun.
And i repeat like i said after 1942 p39's and P40's were given as punishment to squads that didnt "perform" too well.
Oooooohhhhh,American fighter...it MUST be good.
I can give you adress of web sites with russ. pilots discribing p39,but it's in russian.
Let me know.
Best regards.

1st,

Most pilots who flew the P-39 loved the plane. The plane itself is relatively stable (all fighters are intrinsically less docile as a matter of design) and forgiving as a fighter. I read a series of 1st hand accounts from a US P39 pilot who was based in Central America (Panama I believe) who recounted how his commander landed the plane deadstick out of a loop ALL the time just for the fun of it. Further Bob Hoover (probably one of the best acrobatic pilots of all time) considered the P-39 to be an exceptional acrobatic performer.

As for your comments on the P-39 in Russia...again you couldnt be farther from the truth. The VVS "guards" units were the elite fighter units in the russian airforce and most of the P-39s went to them. As mentioned elsewhere in this thread the germans feared the P-39 more than any other plane the soviets had (including the la-5n, yak-3 & mig-3) and pilots were instructed to AVOID combat with the P-39 whenever possible.

The did not spin out particularly easily but the configuration made it convert to a flat spin very quickly. As a result pilots were told do abandon recovery attempts after a couple of turns (much like the later F7F) until Bob Hoover developed successful spin recovery procedures for the plane by dropping the landing gear.

[ATA]

I mean no disrespect,sorry if i'm wrong...but
My friend i am from Russia,i speak russian,i know better what they say in russian.I dont need to read TRANSLATED books.
I cant give you example or facts in Russian,they will be no help...
But here you go:) acording to V V S testing results they said this

"По скорости, скороподъемности, маневренности она на малых и средних высотах уступала отечественным истребителям. Но и не это являлось главным недостатком американской машины. Из-за того, что мотор стоял в центре тяжести самолета, «Кобра» сильно реагировала на изменение центровки. После израсходования пушечных снарядов центровка резко менялась и истребитель часто срывался в штопор. При запаздывании с выведением из штопора всего на полсекунды Р-39 переходил в еще более опасный плоский штопор. Достаточно было небрежности на глубоком вираже или боевом развороте, и пилот, чуть-чуть сильнее обычного нажавший педаль, тут же попадал в серьезную опасность. Штопор на «Кобре» был к тому же неравномерным — возникало биение ручки управления с большими физическими нагрузками.
   В отчете НИИ ВВС об испытании самолета P-39Q-10 (летчик К.И.Овчинников) указываюсь: «К штопору приводит и перетягивание ручки или передача ног на фигурах высшего пилотажа. При смещении центровки назад - тенденция штопора усиливается». Самой опасной являлась ситуация, когда боекомплекта на самолете нет, а маслобак заправлен под горловину. Применительно к ней говорилось: «Выполнять высший пилотаж на самолете весьма трудно... Малейшее перетягивание ручки на себя ведет к быстрому падению скорости и переходу в штопор».
   Штопор являлся причиной многочисленных аварий и катастроф в боевых частях. За два месяца 1944 года из-за этого только в 1-й гвардейской авиадивизии произошли две катастрофы и четыре аварии. Кое-где поначалу даже возникла паническая боязнь выполнения на Р-39 фигур высшего пилотажа (об этом, например, рассказывает в своих мемуарах И.М.Дзусов). Причем разбивались не только наскоро обученные пилоты военного времени, но и опытные летчики-испытатели. Только в НИИ ВВС произошли три катастрофы: 2 февраля 1943 года на «Аэрокобре» I погиб К.А.Груздев, 3 января 1944 года на P-39N - К.А.Автономов и 27 апреля того же года на P-39Q-10 - К.И.Овчинников.
   Положение было настолько серьезным, что осенью 1943 года в Москву прибыла специальная бригада фирмы «Белл» во главе с Л.Роджерсом, отвечавшим в компании за рекламации.
   Из попавшего в штопор Р-39 было нелегко и выпрыгнуть. Прыгали в левую дверь, которая в аварийной ситуации сбрасывалась.
   При этом часто человек ударялся о стабилизатор. Последствия этого могли быть и смертельными. Таким образом тяжелые травмы получили Герои Советского Союза Н.М.Искрин (в мае 1943 года) и Б.Б.Глинка (в июле 1944 года). Но даже если нилоту повезло и он выходил из штопора, его подстерегала новая опасность: из-за больших перегрузок у Р-39 деформировалось хвостовое оперение, заклинивало рули. В марте 1944 года после серии аварий и катастроф в 11-м истребительном корпусе провели проверку всех «Кобр». На 15 машинах выявили явные признаки деформации. Большая эффективность рулой могла привести и к тому, что высокие значения перегрузок можно было получить при резком маневрировании. Результат - тот же самый, деформация оперения и хвостовой части фюзеляжа. Вот строки из доклада старшего инженера 273-й дивизии (сентябрь 1944 года): «Выявлены <...> скручивание хвостовой части фюзеляжа на участке радиолюка при резких эволюциях в воздухе. Обнаруживалась деформация обшивки в нижней концевой части фюзеляжа... Был случай, когда в воздухе одна из половин стабилизатора загибалась во внутреннюю сторону».
   В СССР осуществили целую программу борьбы с основными дефектами «Аэрокобры». После тщательных испытаний выявили действия летчика, провоцирующие вхождение в штопор. В НИИ ВВС провели учебные сборы инструкторов, в части направили опытных пилотов, демонстрировавших безопасные приемы пилотирования американского истребителя. Сняли даже учебный фильм «Штопор самолета «Аэрокобра». Все это существенно уменьшило аварийность на фронте, хотя полностью от потерь избавить, конечно, не могло.
   Распоряжением главного инженера ВВС ввели ограничения на центровку самолета, запретили при перебазировании укладывать в хвостовую часть чехлы и инструмент. Высший пилотаж без боезапаса или равного ему по весу балласта категорически запрещался. Для смещения вперед центровки истребителя иногда практиковали снятие бронезащиты с маслобака. Занялись и усилением хвостовой части Р-39. Выяснилось, что запасы прочности «Кобры» ниже, чем принятые в СССР. В конструкторском бюро Центральной научно-эксплуатационной базы (ЦНЭБ) ВВС инженер М.С.Малков разработал методику подкрепления набора в хвостовой части. Опытный самолет переделали и испытали в НИИ ВВС. Вслед за этим доработку «Аэрокобр» развернули непосредственно в полках. Только в ПВО таким образом переделали 326 самолетов. В различных частях по собственной инициативе вносили в планер истребителя другие усиления. Так, в 273-й дивизии ставили накладки на лонжероны стабилизатора.
   Отмечались и другие недостатки «Аэрокобры». Хотя трехколесное шасси обеспечивало прекрасный обзор на рулении и взлете, и в принципе позволяло перемещаться по аэродрому с большой скоростью, не опасаясь капотирования, на неровных грунтовых аэродромах носовая стойка вибрировала и нередко ломалась, что вынуждало ограничивать скорость руления.
   Моторы Аллисон У-1710 были те же. что и на Р-40. но увязывались с удлиненным валом, шедшим через весь самолет к винту. Соответственно и проблемы оставались те же. Вот что сообщали из 67-го гвардейского полка в августе 1944 года: «Мотор положенные ему по ресурсу 250 ч. по норме не вырабатывает... За два года эксплуатации не было, чтобы мотор в боевых условиях нарабатывал хотя бы 60-70% от положенного». Вот только «стрельба шатунами» здесь оказывалась гораздо опаснее, поскольку они легко могли перебить проходящие рядом тросы рулей.
   Конечно, часть ответственности за это лежала на летном и техническом составе наших ВВС. Проверки в частях показывали, что летчики чрезмерно используют форсаж, не следят за состоянием маслосистемы. Да и не всегда пользовались необходимыми марками масел и бензина. У нас «Кобры» обычно заправляли бензином Б-78, который, конечно, был хуже американского. А в блокированном Ленинграде и Б-78 заменяли самодельной смесью «компот». Известен даже случай, когда в американский истребитель залили Б-70 и он благополучно взлетел!
   Кое-какие переделки связывались с опытом эксплуатации зимой: утепление магистралей, установка сливных кранов в маслосистсме и контурах охлаждения. Для работы с этими кранами в нижнем капоте радиатора прорезали небольшие лючки. С наступлением холодов частично заменяли смазку узлов и агрегатов на более морозостойкую советскую. Например, главный подшипник удлиненного вала смазывался зимой маслом НК-30. Пробовали эксплуатировать двигатели на более морозостойких советских антифризах, но это вынуждало переделывать систему охлаждения.
   Так же как на «Киттихауках», на Р-39 отмечались случаи разрушения трубок бензосистемы от вибраций, что приводило к возникновению пожара в воздухе. Так при перегонке самолетов под Гудермесом погиб Герой Советского Союза Н.Е.Лавицкий. В связи с этим американские дюралевые трубки у нас иногда заменялись отожженными медными.
   На Северном флоте и на Балтике пробовали установить на «Кобры» убирающееся лыжное шасси. Но это новшество не прижилось - Р-39 продолжали круглый год летать на колесах.
   Для ускорения процесса переучивания летчиков создали учебный самолет со второй кабиной впереди основной, очень похожий на американский ТР-39. Их по чертежам ЦНЭБ ВВС делали в разных частях и соединениях. В.П.Воронов, летавший на такой машине уже после войны в 6-м гвардейском полку, писал: «Свою задачу «гибрид» выполнял, но в передней кабине было очень неуютно: винт вращался сантиметрах в сорока перед глазами. А если, в случае непредвиденного, придется покидать самолет с парашютом, то уж попадешь на винт непременно». За исключением усиления хвостовой части, «Кобры» у нас не подвергались сколько нибудь серьезным существенным конструктивным изменениям. Можно только упомянуть о переделке нескольких десятков Р-39 под моторы М-105П из-за нехватки запасных двигателей «Аллисон». Некоторые мелкие изменения вносились непосредственно в частях. Например. Покрышкину переделали ручку управления, совместив гашетки пушки и пулеметов.
   В 1-й перегоночной дивизии на один Р-39 установили советский радиополукомпас РПК-10 и использовали эту машину как лидер при перегонке групп одномоторных самолетов. Радиополукомпасы на некоторых «Кобрах» ставились и в США. Такие машины тоже поступали в нашу страну, но, видимо, в очень небольшом количестве, так как их не хватало даже в частях ПВО. "

Theres a lot more where it came from:)
In short, Heroes(aces) of USSR say that p39 is a complete POS.

[Ack-Ack]

Originally posted by ATA
Oh please guys! We all now that USAF sold them to Russians because p39 were extremely crappy,Russians bought them because there were relocating factories to the east and had nothing else to fly.
After 1942 p39"s and P40 were given as punishment to squads  that didnt  "perform" too well.
Life time for p39 and p40 motor (as you know they had same engines) was 250 hrs.
They were lucky to "live" 60-70% of that.

Hmmm...and yet 2nd to the P-38, the P-40 was flown by USAAF aces in the PTO than the P-47 and P-51....strange for such a crappy plane.


ack-ack

[humble]

ATA....

I have no clue what resources your looking at but a tremendous amount of information has been translated already. Historically the facts are well documented.....regardless of what your "sources" say. You may be reading sources you consider to be valid that are really post war spin....it was tough for some elements of the soviet leadership to accept that a US cast off" was in fact the dominant fighter on the eastern front for much of the war. The same politics is what prevented the kingcobra from any real front line deployment.

Here are some information direct from russian sources...

"V. E. Golofastov conducted the flight testing. The Airacobra I underwent flight tests in April 1942 with some success. It developed a speed of 493 km/h at sea level and a maximum speed of 585 km/h at 4,200 meters. It reached 5,000 meters altitude in 6.5 minutes. The technical data and performance were on a level with serially produced Soviet and enemy fighters. The maneuver, takeoff-landing, and armament performance characteristics of the aircraft were considered positives. The following conclusion was made as a result of this testing: The Airacobra aircraft was simple in techniques of piloting and could be flown by pilots of average qualifications; it could be successfully employed for the conduct of aerial combat with all types of enemy aircraft, and also for the conduct of attacks at ground targets. The Airacobra received its "air worthiness certificate" in the Soviet VVS."



One who has carefully read the material above regarding the Airacobra might logically ask the question, why was this same model of the airplane so bad for British employment and so good for Soviet employment? What can explain this contradiction?

"There were several reasons. We will dwell on the most important: First, we received already "reworked" aircraft that lacked the initial deficiencies. Second, our specialists tested the Airacobra for the specific altitude envelope of the Soviet-German front, which corresponded well with the best flying performance characteristics of the aircraft. Third, the aircraft actually were not bad. And fourth, the brief test period did not permit sufficient testing to expose the basic weaknesses of design and construction that were later revealed in the process of mass exploitation. The flat spin, the engine throwing connecting rods, and other manifestations were yet to be discovered."

"22d ZAP trained air regiments on the Airacobra I for approximately a year, from April 1942 until March 1943. During this time two fighter regiments (153 and 185 IAP) were re-constituted and sent back to the front, the 153d two times, along with a number of individual crews (56 during 1942 and 67 in 1943). One regiment, 30th Guards (GIAP) was also trained on the Airacobra I, but later gave them up and was sent to the front on 13 March 1943 on later model Cobras"

"The myth regarding the employment of the Airacobra in the Soviet VVS almost exclusively as a "shturmovik" [ground-attack aircraft] is widespread in Western literature (W. Green, P. Bowers, E. McDowwell). This myth arose out of an insufficiency of information: both Soviet official and memoir sources were carefully screened by Glavlit [political censorship overseeing publication of all printed material in the USSR] and stood on the "only believable" conceptual positions, and almost until the 1970s attempted to conceal any information about Kittyhawks, Cobras, and Hurricanes, as though they almost never existed. This phenomenon was very astutely expressed by Larry Bell as far back as 1944 when in a conversation with Soviet test pilots he said, "I have sent you three thousand airplanes and I could just as well have thrown them into Lake Ontario! I know nothing about them, how they are fighting, and if your men are satisfied with them!"

"153d (28th Guards) IAP

The 153d IAP, at full strength, was formed on the basis of TOE 015/284 (2 squadrons, 20 aircraft and 23 pilots), under the command of Hero of the Soviet Union Major S. I. Mironov, arrived at Voronezh airfield on 29 June 1942. It began combat operations without any delay, on 30 June 1942. Later the regiment was relocated to Lipetsk airfield, from which it operated until 25 September 1942. In 59 flying days on the Voronezh Front the regiment conducted 1,070 combat sorties with 1162 hours of flight time; fought 259 aerial engagements, of which 45 were of a group nature; shot down 64 enemy aircraft, of which 18 were bombers (15 Ju-88, 1 Do-217, 1 He-111, and 1 FW-198), 45 fighters (39 Bf-109F, 1 Bf-110, 1 Me-210, 4 MS-200), and 1 aerial observation aircraft. Losses during these three months of combat were 3 pilots and 8 aircraft. "These relatively insignificant losses are explained in the first place by the experience of the pilots and the good flight performance characteristics of the Airacobra aircraft." Regiment commander Lieutenant Colonel Mironov, HSU (TsAMO, collection 28 Guards IAP, index 143456, file 1) [TsAMO - central archive of the Defense Ministry].

The cited document gives a an adequate representation of the fact whom did the Soviet Cobras contest successfully. For outstanding combat effort on the Voronezh Front, the 153d IAP was recommended for the "guards" designation."

These are just a few snipets from what appears to be a fairly comprehensive history of the P-39 in action.....link is posted in thread above....

[ATA]

Originally posted by Ack-Ack
Hmmm...and yet 2nd to the P-38, the P-40 was flown by USAAF aces in the PTO than the P-47 and P-51....strange for such a crappy plane.


ack-ack

Imagine what they would've done with la5fn-7?
Erich Hartmann would look like  newbe

[ATA]

Right Humble,again..
You questioning my "resources" and I'm questioning yours.
At least I'm trying to be nice..
My "resources"do not need to be translated ,yours do.
I speak English,Russian,Armenian,German(well a little).
I can compare facts from Russia,America,Germany...
You can not do crap,you dont even have any idea what i posted in Russian,i dont have time to translate that in two mounth 6 pilots died in accidents due to crappy design of p39,that there was a panick fear of flying p39 in 42-45.
Again,stick to your "opinion"
The only good fighter on eastern front was P51.Well....they have been shot down by LA-7.

[Mr No Name]

LOL 6 in 2 months for WW2 era was pretty good...  A LOT of really good pilots including Americas leading ace, Major Bong died in a testing accident. You had a better shot surviving being a test pilot than you had surviving one of Stalins purges! LMAO

[Joker312]

I would also like to see the P39/P400 added to the AH stable. Some of us like to fly disavantaged aircraft:)

Allied pilots in the PTO had a saying about the P400. Its a P39 with a Zero on its tail.

From what I have read, it suffered because it carried no turbo-charger so any combat above 15k was trouble but it vas a sweet ride at medium to low alts.

As for the USSR buying them thats not true. The US gave them away. And I have never seen the story about the Luftwaffe telling its pilots to avoid combat with them.  The Luftwaffe did issue a directive to its pilots on the eastern front "to avoid combat below 5000m with Yakovlev fighters lacking an oil cooler under the nose", the Yak-3, according to Bill Gunstons "Fighting Aircraft of WW2" Maybe thats what your thinking of.

[humble]

Originally posted by ATA
Right Humble,again..
You questioning my "resources" and I'm questioning yours.
At least I'm trying to be nice..
My "resources"do not need to be translated ,yours do.
I speak English,Russian,Armenian,German(well a little).
I can compare facts from Russia,America,Germany...
You can not do crap,you dont even have any idea what i posted in Russian,i dont have time to translate that in two mounth 6 pilots died in accidents due to crappy design of p39,that there was a panick fear of flying p39 in 42-45.
Again,stick to your "opinion"
The only good fighter on eastern front was P51.Well....they have been shot down by LA-7.

Obviously you have no actual flight time and little understanding of any form of complex single....let alone a piston engine fighter. The 109 was much much worse than the P-39 and so was F4U to name just two. I read a memoir from a british pilot who was transitioning from the spitfire to the 1st RAF mustang squad. He had 5 pilots in his training class....they had no two seat trainers....to make a long story short 2 of the 5 died during the initial training flight. I read a similiar memior from a P-38 driver (Italy/North Africa) in recalling his training in the 38 he mentioned that the pilot right in front of him taking off on 1st training flight crashed and burned on take off and he had to fly right thru the smoke over the burning wreckage (and pilot).

As was graphically expressed in the words of I. G. Rabkin, the Airacobra at the institute was never far from view. Highly qualified specialists of the NII VVS pored over it through the course of an entire year: pilots V. E. Golofastov, K. A. Gruzdev, Yu. A. Antipov, A. G. Kochetkov, engineers P. S. Onoprienko, V. I. Usatov, P. S. Ivanov, and V. Ya. Klimov. After the defects in the engine, the most serious "illness" of the Cobra was its tendency to enter into a flat spin. The correct diagnosis of this "illness" was not discovered immediately. It took several months of testing, during which one of the best pilots of the NII, Major K. A. Gruzdev, died. This experienced test pilot, from a front-line unit (former commander of 402d and 416th IAPs, 17 kills), took off in AH628 on 2 February 1943. He spun the aircraft for about an hour in the sky above the town Koltsov, near Sverdlovsk, where the institute had been evacuated. After this the aircraft went into a dive and exploded on impact with the ground.  

In addition to the VVS of the Red Army, Airacobra Is were actively employed in the air forces of the VMF (navy), albeit exclusively in the VVS of Northern Fleet [10]. Here in two fighter regiments (2d Guards Mixed and 78th Fighter Regiments) of 6th Fighter Brigade was a broad assortment of aircraft equipment from the Soviet-produced I-16 to imported Hurricanes and Kittyhawks. The reason was simple: these regiments were responsible for air cover of Allied convoys and the destination port Murmansk. Therefore aircraft unloaded there were made available to these units first (by the timeless principle, "that which you guard you shall have"). And if one speaks seriously, this was indeed very dangerous duty. A pilot who was shot down over these northern waters faced almost certain death. The war did not show mercy even to such an ace as Twice Hero of the Soviet Union B. F. Safonov, who went down in the sea near convoy PQ-16 [flying a P-40 that day-JG].



It doesnt take mauch in this day and age to find decent translated resources....It was namely his comrades in the 2d Guards Mixed Air Regiment, which by order of the People's Commissar of the Navy was named after their commander B. F. Safonov, who first received the Airacobra I in the spring of 1942: squadron commanders Captains A. A. Kovalenko and A. N. Kukharenko, and pilots Lieutenants N. A. Bokiy, Z. A. Sorokin, and P. D. Klimov. Just one fact serves as sufficient description of their successes in the Cobra: by the middle of 1943, all of them (except Z. A. Sorokin and A.N. Kukharenko) had received the rank Hero of the Soviet Union, which was awarded for not less than 10 personally destroyed enemy aircraft. (Sorokin received this distinction on 19 August 1944.)

[Panzzer]

Some of the Russian units did really well in those P-39's. P-39's were regularly seen over the Gulf of Finland in summer 1944 - they weren't probably flown by Guard regiments then - they had transferred to Yak9's already, but neither were they given to squads "not performing too well" (as stated by ATA). Since the fights stayed low (under 3km most of the time), the P39 fared rather well. And some of the top Russian aces scored most of their victories in one (Alexander Pokryshkin as an example).

Yes, I'd like to see the P-39 in AH.

[MOSQ]

Let's see how the top Soviet Aces did in the P-39:

Several of the Red Air Force's ranking aces flew the P-39 for a major portion of their combat sorties.

The top ace in the P-39 and number four overall was Guards Major Gregoriy Rechkalov, who shot down 50 of his total 56 kills while flying a P-39.

Guards Colonel Aleksandr Pokryshkin, who finished the war as the number two Soviet ace with 59 individual and 6 shared kills, reportedly flew the P-39 for 48 of his kills.

Another high scorer in the P-39 was Guards Major Dmitriy Glinka, who destroyed 20 German aircraft in 40 aerial engagements in the summer of 1943, and finished the war with an even 50 kills, 41 of them while flying the P-39.

Third-ranked Soviet ace Guards Major Nikolay Gulaev. Among these top Soviet Airacobra aces, the most "efficient" has to be Nikolay Gulaev. He flew his first P-39 combat mission on 9 August 1943 and his last mission on 14 August 1944. In 12 months and five days he shot down 41 German aircraft while flying the P-39. No other Soviet pilot scored so effectively. By the way, Gulaev was the number 3 Soviet ace with 57 individual and 3 shared kills by war's end. He went on to command high-level Soviet Air Force units, his last being the 10th Air Army headquartered in Archangelsk.


Sounds like the top Soviet Aces did pretty well in it.

[humble]

Thanks MOSQ.....

My understanding is that many of the top soviet aces continued to fly the P-39 long after "better" planes had been introduced. It became a bit of a political issue since the concept that a 2nd rate lend lease castoff was better then any soviet plane was obviously disturbing.

The reality is that the P-39 was an outstanding bird whose performance was horribly nuetered by changes forced on the design team after the fact by the US Army. Since the engine was stripped of its high alt capabilities it was always limited at higher alts....but once the russians cleaned it up it was the equal of anything it faced at lower combat alts. Even in 1944....

[Magoo]

I think I've seen this info quoted in other P39 threads, but it bears repeating for this particular thread. Here is a copy and paste from Joe Baugher's website:

The AFDU also did some comparative dog-fighting tests with the Airacobra against a Spitfire VB and a captured Messerschmitt BF 109E. The Airacobra and the Bf 109E carried out mock dog-fighting at 6000 feet and 15,000 feet. The Bf 109E had a height advantage of 1000 feet in each case. The Bf 109, using the normal German fighter tactics of diving and zooming, could usually only get in a fleeting shot. The Bf 109 could not compete with the Airacobra in a turn, and if the Bf 109 were behind the Airacobra at the start, the latter could usually shake him off and get in a burst before two complete turns were completed. If the Bf 109 were to dive on the Airacobra from above and continue the dive down to ground level after a short burst of fire, it was found that the Airacobra could follow and catch up to the Bf 109 after a dive of over 4000 feet. When fighting the Bf 109E below 20,000 feet, the Airacobra was superior on the same level and in a dive.

A similar trial was carried out against a Spitfire V. Although the Airacobra was faster than the Spitfire up to 15,000 feet, it was outclimbed and out-turned by the Spitfire. Unless it had a height advantage, the Airacobra could not compete with the Spitfire. If on the same level or below, at heights up to about 15,000 feet, the Airacobra would have to rely on its superior level and diving speeds and its ability to take negative "G" without the engine cutting out. Above 15,000 feet, the Airacobra lost its advantage in level speed.

The Airacobra was considered to be very suitable for low altitude operations because of the excellent view and controllability, and it was fully maneuverable at speeds above 160 mph. It was not difficult to fly at night, but the exhaust flames could be seen by another aircraft flying three miles to the rear. The flash from the nose guns was blinding, and could cause the pilot to lose not only his target but also his night vision. Firing of the nose guns caused the buildup of carbon monoxide contamination in the cockpit, and this could reach a lethal level very quickly. The guns were fairly inaccessible, and maintenance was troublesome.

By the end of September, No. 601 Squadron had received permission to take its Airacobras into action. On October 9, two Airacobras took off from RAF Manston and flew across the Channel on a "rhubarb"--a code name for a small-scale raid by fighters against targets of opportunity. On this raid, they shot up an enemy trawler near Gravelines. The next day two Airacobras visited the same area, but found no targets. On October 11, two aircraft flew to Gravelines and Calais and hit some enemy barges and then three Airacobras flew to Ostend, but no targets were found.

After these four missions, the RAF Airacobras were taken off operations because of difficulties encountered with the compass. The compass was too close to the guns in the nose, and when the guns were fired, the compass got thrown out of alignment. Deviations of anything from 7 degrees to 165 degrees were recorded. Without a reliable compass, pilots tend to get themselves lost. In December of 1941, the Airacobra was officially withdrawn from operational service with the RAF.

In spite of the problems with the compass and the need for flame dampers for the exhaust and flash suppressors for the nose guns, the RAF concluded that the Airacobra would make an excellent day fighter at altitudes below 20,000 feet and was well suited for the ground-attack role. However, before these plans could be implemented, a decision was made to divert the bulk of the British Airacobra contract to Russia.

[Krusty]

Okay, humble, don't start this again:

"The 109 was much much worse than the P-39 and so was F4U to name just two"

This from the guy that claims the 109 was the WORST fighter ever to be made, and was totally useless in 1941, let alone all the years later. and blah blah blah. Just, .... choose your words carefully. I myself need to work on the same thing.