Impressions of the 39

[evenhaim]

I like the Q and fly it similiarly to my k4, very gentle on the controls, smooth imputs, and prop hang vertical overshoots. Its a fun little plane but the rear view is muy terrible.

[CAP1]

if its just me or is it almost ever time i get into a turn fight in the 39, i always feel like im fighting a stall. i thought it would have more power. it takes a crap of a long time to get over to the bish feild in FT. And when you get there, you kill a niki or a spit, lose all your E and then get it back. THE FUEL DOESNT EVEN LAST THAT LONG (with the exception of the DT). For that is my biggest concern on the 39Q. And the poor rear visiblity, which is bad. i have to zoom all the way in to have the biggest field of view through the back. Armlement is great, Speed is Average, SA is Average, and Defense is Great. but its a slow arse plane sometimes. Thats my Take on the 39Q.

                                                                   

i've only met up with the 39 3 times......i was in a zeke each time, and was victorious each time. on the third, i even lit him up like a roman candle. they don't burn as long as the zekes do.

<<S>>

[dedalos]

Well Ded, it's a lot of work. Both Mosq and I have spent dozens of hours each test flying the P-39s. We have our own flight test cards, not unlike those used by real-world test pilots. Virtually every aspect of the flight envelope is explored and quantified.

For example, speed testing is done at increments of 5,000 feet, beginning at sea level (50ft). When I find myself close to the best altitude, I then test in 1,000 foot increments. I've actually broken it down to 100 foot increments on occasion. In the case of the P-39Q, it can reach 383 mph at 12,000 feet, with 383 mph at 13,000 feet and 381 mph at 14k. The P-39Q is a bit faster than the P-38J from 8k thru 13k and about 15 mph faster than the 190A5 at 12k... It's not a rocket, but it is competitive with most fighters between 8K and 14K.

Sea level speed is 329 mph, which is 30 mph faster than the P-40E. Comparing the La-7 to the 109G-14 produces the same speed ratio. Thus, it is quite significant. Moreover, the P-39Q is 10 mph faster at sea level using MIL power than the P-40E is using WEP. Again, this is substantial and an important fact.

Testing shows that the P-39Q accelerates faster and climbs faster than the P-51B or any of the -1 type Corsairs. Clean, it out turns them quite easily. The F4Us are better with flaps, but first they have to survive long enough to slow down and get them out.

So, why does the P-39Q out-perform the P-40E by such a margin? It's really rather easy to understand when you realize that the P-39 is much lighter, has more horsepower and similar wing area. It also has a much lower drag coefficient, which translates into speed.

My regards,

Widewing

Check, I did not know if you were going of real life numbers or tests done in AH.  I'll go back to what you said.  People like a plane but don't really know why.  I think it is the feel of it.  I really don't know how to describe it, but I cant handle that plane.  P40, is a different story.

Then again, it depends on what one means by "better" also

[GFShill]

I prefer the D over the Q.  The Q seems nose-heavy with that big cannon on it, and when that runs out the twin .50s aren't anything to brag about.  The D offers the 20mm with ~30 more rounds than the Q's 37mm and has better ballistics on long-range shots at d400.  The D also supplements the .50s with four .30cals and plenty of ammo.  The D is slower on climb and level speed because it lacks WEP, but it handles better in the turns and rolls.

And they're both prone to rearward attacks by Typhoons, Mustangs, LA-7s, Nik's, and anything else that can cruise faster than 250 IAS.

The one thing the P39 can do is push 500 IAS in a dive without control lock, which is nice for escaping Spitfires, P-38s, and 109s.

[Hazard69]

The P-39Q is a bit faster than the P-38J from 8k thru 13k and about 15 mph faster than the 190A5 at 12k... It's not a rocket, but it is competitive with most fighters between 8K and 14K.

But was that accurate in RL? I am no history buff, but I was always under the impression that the P39 was an underpowered aircraft which was not as capable in the regimes of speed and climb as it seems here in AH . Seems the best defence a P38 would have against it would be a low speed knife fight or a spiral climb to the right .

[uptown]

The P39 is a junky waste of space! Now if they'd put a Bpony in the game with cannons, they'd be on to something!

[Squire]

Actually the only thing the D has over the Q is more weight, no WEP, poorer climb and poorer speed. It rolls no faster, nor does it turn better. Why would it? exact same wing area with less power, but the D is heavier.

...It does have the 20mm option, which with 60 rnds, isn't much of a bargain. The D is fine for SEA events, but I would never roll it over the Q in the MA.

"The P39 is a junky waste of space!"

Sounds like another that has not tried it. Its amazing all the posts there are re: new fighters, but then nobody will get out of the old ones. Oh well. Maybe when the add the P-80 super duper jet fighter.

[Hitman20]

I flew the P39 a few times and landed 6 kills in both the Q and D. It's a good low alt fighter when you have speed, but also has that nasty spin when you get to stall speeds.

[rabbidrabbit]

they don't burn as long as the zekes do.

Zeke pilots have become used to operating while flaming, hence, they have built up a greater tolerance.

[uptown]

Actually the only thing the D has over the Q is more weight, no WEP, poorer climb and poorer speed. It rolls no faster, nor does it turn better. Why would it? exact same wing area with less power, but the D is heavier.

...It does have the 20mm option, which with 60 rnds, isn't much of a bargain. The D is fine for SEA events, but I would never roll it over the Q in the MA.

"The P39 is a junky waste of space!"

Sounds like another that has not tried it. Its amazing all the posts there are re: new fighters, but then nobody will get out of the old ones. Oh well. Maybe when the add the P-80 super duper jet fighter.

I got in it the day it came out. It was wobbling all over the runway and I couldn't see out the back. Bailed out, and haven't been in it since.

[Squire]

It doesn't wobble unless you use auto-takeoff, which is a feature for total n00blets. The 6 view is customizable, zoom, down, then forward, the Corsair has a much worse 6 view than the P-39.

...Like I suspected, you have this severely negative opinion of it  "The P39 is a junky waste of space!", but in reality, you have not even seriously tried it. Have you landed a single kill in it? Thats ok, I don't care if nobody else wants to fly it, but posting about hows its such a POS when you know zippity-do-da about it?

"Bailed out, and haven't been in it since." So ends your expert testimony? Cripes.

  < Ughh, ya, whatever.

[uptown]

it's ugly too

[dedalos]

It doesn't wobble unless you use auto-takeoff, which is a feature for total n00blets.

I am a n00blet 

[Widewing]

But was that accurate in RL? I am no history buff, but I was always under the impression that the P39 was an underpowered aircraft which was not as capable in the regimes of speed and climb as it seems here in AH . Seems the best defence a P38 would have against it would be a low speed knife fight or a spiral climb to the right .

Yes, the performance listed is historic. Beginning with the P-39N, the Airacobra had 1,420 hp on tap. Being a small, very clean fighter, it was relatively fast. Performance fell off above 15k, but it was adequate below that. Indeed, the Soviets loved them (especially the late models) and gave the Luftwaffe a very hard time.

My regards,

Widewing

[Ack-Ack]

It doesn't wobble unless you use auto-takeoff, which is a feature for total n00blets.

We've come to the point that using auto-take off is now a sign of a non-vet, skilless n00b?  So very, very sad.


ack-ack