P-39

[Daubie]

re:

http://www.hitechcreations.com/wiki/index.php/P-39_Airacobra

The P-39 was notorious for getting itself into a flat spin.  Chuck Yeager talks about it in his 1st book and I think it was his 1st bailout during flight school.  He is usually at OshKosh---go ask him about it.  I have tried to flat spin it in Aces High. I can't do it.  I have done it in the La-7 and the Ta-whatever it is named (super 190) in Aces High.

My wife's dad worked at Bell Aircraft from 1942 to after the end of the war.  He did his machinist apprenticeship in the Wing department.  The whole time he was there, they made in that department, P-39s, all painted with the Russian star.  He told me, onetime they did a static wing loading test by placing many sandbags to the plant's ceiling until the wing spar snapped.  And, though he did not know what he was looking at, saw Bell's attempts at the early jet aircraft.

Why the Russian pilots were so good in their aircraft.  NECESSITY!  And Stalin was a SOB.  They had a choice, die in battle or die by Stalin's Gestapo type police.  

Just compare the average Allied pilot's experience to their German or Russian counterparts.  The German and Russian pilots, those that survived, had so many much more combat hours in the aircraft.

Maybe why the P-39 did better in the Russian war theatre, it operated in colder, denser air.  Maybe.

[Slade]

Slightly off topic (but looking for feedback)...

I want to like this plane but find it is a real handful to engage the enemy and make it back without another plane doing you in.  I think that is because many times after an engagement I am left without altitude or E.

What can you successful P-39 pilots advise to make the most of the two variants we have in the LW arena (convergence to tactics)?

Thanks,

Slade  

[Krusty]

Fly the P-39D like you would a P-40C. Get in, get your shots, GET OUT. Climb back up, repeat. You have to find the right fight, otherwise stay out of it. Draw enemy off the larger fight and separate them out.


Fly the P-39Q like an early model 109 (109F, let's say): Use your E, and then use WEP to regain it. It likes the vertical, although less than the 109 I have compared it to.

The Q is far more capable in the LWA environs than the D. If you want to enjoy this airframe, take the Q.

[Soulyss]

Slightly off topic (but looking for feedback)...

I want to like this plane but find it is a real handful to engage the enemy and make it back without another plane doing you in.  I think that is because it takes me all I can to use the existing E to down a late war fighter.  Many times afterward I am left without altitude or E.

What can you successful P-39 pilots advise to make the most of the two variants we have in the LW arena (convergence to tactics)?

Thanks,

Slade 

I fly the P-39D a fair amount, with marginal success.  It's certainly a challenge in Late War, situational awareness is paramount.  Know where the bad guys are AND where the good guys are at all times.  This is true of any plane really but whereas many of the late war planes can make up for mistakes with pure performance the P-39's aren't going to do that for the most part.  The Q is much more capable than the D, the D isn't going to do you many favors at all.   I take a little more alt with me going to the fight if I'm flying the 39D than if I'm in my P-38, the 39D must fight downhill whenever possible she hates to have her nose above the horizon and she hemorrhages E like crazy through maneuvers.  I start at the top and work downhill, when possible I try to leave myself a hard deck of a thousand feet or so that is my cue to get out of the fight and build up some E again, that 1K or so is there in case I get jumped and need E.  The P-39 doesn't accelerate particularly well.

Going back to SA, I keep two directions in mind at all times, the direction to "home" and where the enemy base is, these are the two most likely approach vectors for both my help and the bad guys.  When diving to attack I try to dive either towards home, or when that's not possible I attack perpendicular to the direction of their base.  I do not dive to attack at a con that is fleeing towards his base.  It's far to easy to end up under his help that's arriving on the scene and further from any help I may have, what's more the first attack usually fails in the MA which is either going to take me closer to his field or force me to burn E that I can't easily rebuild. E is precious, if you're going to spend it make sure you're getting something in return.


None of this is unique the P-39, it really applies to any plane that I'm flying but the P-39 forces you to make a much more fine choice, the margin of error is much smaller than if I was flying a La-7 for example.

[Widewing]

I fly the P-39Q often. Usually, I'm down low, so I have no reserve altitude to exchange for E. That means extra care is required in regard to SA. I use the "Q" to dogfight or beat back GVs. This tour, I have managed 25 kills for one loss (picked trying to exit a furball with pilot wound and empty guns). I manage to do well enough with it. The "Q" is not a world class fighter, but it's quite respectable for its mid-war vintage and capable of holding its own when you use tactics that suit its abilities.

[bozon]

Maybe why the P-39 did better in the Russian war theatre, it operated in colder, denser air.  Maybe.

Low altitude.

The P-39 performance is quite good for its period if you limit the altitude up to a couple thousand feet. The style of fighting and relative performance can change dramatically with altitude. Not that the jug was that bad at low altitudes, but it really shined up high in the stratosphere. The P-38 had several issues and limitations with high altitudes, but once sent to low-med altitudes (med and pacific theaters) it came into its own.

The Americans have a history of doing everything in reverse regarding operational altitudes: The P-38 and P47s were designed to high alts and the superchargers were major design considerations, but they gained most of their fame operating at low altitudes where supercharges is not really needed. The P51 on the other hand was designed to do low alt work for the british and instead it ended up as the major american high alt fighter. The P39 was designed for higher altitudes, but then some genius decided that the plane does not need to fight over 10k and that a one stage charger is plenty enough, thus screwing this plane forever.