Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: humble on December 08, 2003, 04:02:46 PM
-
A. S. Nikilay Gerasimovich, could the Cobra really contend with the Bf-109G and FW-190 in aerial combat?
N. G. Yes. The Cobra, especially the Q-5, took second place to no one, and even surpassed all the German fighters.
I flew more than 100 combat sorties in the Cobra, of these 30 in reconnaissance, and fought 17 air combats. The Cobra was not inferior in speed, in acceleration, nor in vertical or horizontal maneuverability. It was a very balanced fighter.
http://airforce.users.ru/lend-lease/english/articles/golodnikov/index.htm
Interesting reading...was posted in a thread in AHII beta BBS
-
I realy hope we dont see this plane anytime soon, their are so many others that would realy be nice before we get yet another US fighter. Realy in the Grand scheam of things it was almost a token presence in the VVS compared to all their Fighter's.
-
Over 4,700 P-39s were delivered to the USSR, and others saw service with the US in the Pacific and Mediteranian. It was not an insignificant plane, unlike many of the others already modeled in AH.
ra
-
About 9,500 in all were made, and half went to the USSR (5,000), A quick glance threw a couple books puts soviet fighter production at, at least 100,000 planes for the war so all in all it is a prety small percentage of the total picture, as it was in other theaters even whear the US used it, in the SWPA are in late 42. early 43 it represented like 30 percent of all US Army types in theater, their it would represent the bigest over all contrabution to the war(in a theater), but from my perspective it would not at all help in any way to creat good plane match up's in that theater. My want's tend to fall toward filling wholes we have in the plane set and adding another US fighter to an area whear we are in nead of Japanese planes is somthing I would not ask for. As for the Russian theater, I would realy like to see some Real Russian planes instead of another US one. I am shure we will see the P39 in AH at some point all am geting at is that their are many countrys in ead of further fleshing out and to do one now would put them off even further.
-
i think it would just be a yak-t clone when it comes to usefullness but i hope im wrong
-
I didnt post it as a lobbying effort...personally i'd rather see a bunch of other planes first. I was just somewhat amazed that this one source at least viewed the plane as a formidable air to air combat plane.
As a side note he viewed the hurricane as a much less cabable plane....also the russians had no hurricanes that came with 20mm. They were russian field modifications using russian 20mm (1 per wing) with a 12.7mm mg as well.
-
I'd like to see it labeled as a Russian fighter, as part of the 1942~1943 setups.
-
The P39 was not insignificant......more flew combat for the VVs than did La7's or even if we look at single variants of the Yak3 or Yak 9U its quantity contribution was equal.
It was the preffered ride of VVS's 2nd highest ranking (and many would say most able) ace Pokryshkin. Who uniquely flew every VVS fighter variant during the GPW in combat.
It was flown by 4 of the VVs's top 10 aces. Most of whom were trained in the use of the P39 by Pokryshkin who perfected ACM methods best suited to this AC.
Reading Earls accounts of flying the P39 it was no uber plane and certainly would not out perform contempory 109's in terms of manouverability or acceleration. It was however very tough, very reliable, had more than adequate zoom capability and it packed a punch. Further its higher altitude limitations would not have hindered it on the Russian front.
For me the next VVS AC should be the Pe2, plus there are several Yak variants easily done from stuff already existing. Yak 9 M, Yak 9D, Yak 3 even.
However a p39 would certainly feature in any Russian front scenario worthy of the name.
-
Originally posted by humble
As a side note he viewed the hurricane as a much less cabable plane....also the russians had no hurricanes that came with 20mm. They were russian field modifications using russian 20mm (1 per wing) with a 12.7mm mg as well.
Correction - they did get some Hurri IICs and kept the Hispanos (mainly for ground attack IIRC). However, they stripped the .303s from the other versions they received and replaced them with their own guns as you say.
I suspect that part of their unhappiness with the Hurri was that it was designed to run on higher-octane fuel than the Russians could provide, so its mediocre performance was further reduced in Russian service.
Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website (http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk) and Discussion forum (http://forums.delphiforums.com/autogun/messages/)
-
The P-39 also had the benifit of the allison engine which could be overboosted and flown well beyond reccomended limitations. I don't know that the Russians had the fuel quality to utilize this capability but the Allison engine was more than up to the task.
In fact the AAF ran it at 70" MAP in test against the A6M2 and in the Cleveland Air races post war it was ran run at high MAP to great effect winning the 1946 race against P-51's, P-38's and alike.
Again I don't know if the VVS could use this capability or not.
-
Well we all know production figures are not a determiner as to wheater or not a plane is included in AH, No mater how you slice it though over all they did represent a very small percentage of the total war time soviet fighter force. At this point in time I would be happy to see about anything New plane wise, I just hope as I alwsy do that we get a bit more Varity in term's of plane's from the lesser represented country's. I belave all in all the Yaks by them selvs amounted to over 30,000 planes ( I think 37,000 to be more exact).
-
I thought the 109 held the record of highest production run of any fighter with 35.000 built during the war?
-
One of My general refrence books sights over 37,000 for all Yak's built in WW2, it could be that they often consider the differing Yak's as diferent Planes, while the 109 is considered one Plane type with different models. I beleave the Most produced Plane of WW2 was the Il-2(42,000+ including Il-10's).
-
Originally posted by brady
One of My general refrence books sights over 37,000 for all Yak's built in WW2, it could be that they often consider the differing Yak's as diferent Planes, while the 109 is considered one Plane type with different models. I beleave the Most produced Plane of WW2 was the Il-2(42,000+ including Il-10's).
I rem this debate in AW........... I put the Yak variants up as the most produced fighter and was told it did not count as they were different model streams..... ( 1,3,7, 9)
Similarly 109 and Spit were so split.
This permitted the supporters of the P47 to claim the honour of most produced fighter AC. (Much to the chagrin of the P40 lobbiests)
I could not agree with the arguement that the P39's contribution was small or insignificant to the VVS fighter corps. It was the only LL fighter AC they liked. They positively disliked the Spit and the Hurris.
-
I think the p39 would be a fine addition. Although not at the expense of other needed planes.
For the p39 to get the use some think it would get we would need atleast 3 variants.
p39d
p39n
p39q
If we go by previous history HT would introduce the p39q10 or something and we would be sol trying to use it in other theaters. Look at the p38l, p47d11 etc....
Once we get 1 variant of the p39 the odds of seeing another any time in the next 5 years would be slim to none. :D
The next VVS ac should be a pe2/3
then more yak variants Yak 9m Yak9d Yak 1 Yak 7 then laGGs and ratas......
The japanese really need planes a6m3, ki84, ki100, ki43, betty and judy.
Please more VVS and Japanese planes........!!!
-
It is queit obvious that it did contrubitue, I dont mean to downplay the contrabution that the men who flew it made to war, I just think over all that when viewed in it's entierty the VVS Fighter force would be better served by the adation at present of some indiginious Early War Fighter's somthing compleatly lacking in AH, we have nothing at present to represent anything Early war for the Russian front, the earlest planes we have that served their are not Russian but LL. My main point is I dont see why at present we realy nead to add the P39 it's not going to help in making set up's in any theater it would fit in already has ample allied fighters are modeled for most it would fit in, and as Batz mentioned depending on the model we got it might not even fit then.
-
Originally posted by Tony Williams
Correction - they did get some Hurri IICs and kept the Hispanos (mainly for ground attack IIRC). However, they stripped the .303s from the other versions they received and replaced them with their own guns as you say.
I suspect that part of their unhappiness with the Hurri was that it was designed to run on higher-octane fuel than the Russians could provide, so its mediocre performance was further reduced in Russian service.
Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website (http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk) and Discussion forum (http://forums.delphiforums.com/autogun/messages/)
Tony,
I'm far from an "expert" on any of this stuff....
A. S. Did you ever have Hurricanes with English cannons?
N. G. No. They began to mount English cannons on Hurricanes some time later than we did, based upon our successful experience.
thats the Q&A I based my comment on, since he finished his career as a major general I assumed he's correct...obviously he could also be refering specifically to his wartime combat unit.
-
Originally posted by humble
Tony,
I'm far from an "expert" on any of this stuff....
A. S. Did you ever have Hurricanes with English cannons?
N. G. No. They began to mount English cannons on Hurricanes some time later than we did, based upon our successful experience.
thats the Q&A I based my comment on, since he finished his career as a major general I assumed he's correct...obviously he could also be refering specifically to his wartime combat unit.
Well, nearly 3,000 Hurricanes were supplied, and given the scale of operations in the USSR even a major general can't have been expected toknow everything that was going on. This is from 'Flying Guns: World War 2': it was contributed by Emmanuel, so I don't know the source he used:
"The armament of Browning .303 guns installed in early Hurricanes was considered deficient, as having an effective range of only 100 to 150 meters. It was considered to install four ShVAK cannon, four UBTs, or two ShVAK and two UBT guns; although a preference existed for the second option the last one was chosen, because there were not enough UBT guns. So about a 1000 Hurricanes Mk.IIA and Mk.IIB were modified to have two ShVAK cannon and two UB machine guns, a quite powerful combination by Soviet standards. The Hurricane's armour protection also fell below Russian standards, and it was replaced. The Mk.IIC with its four Hispano Mk.II cannon retained its armament, and was used as a ground attack and anti-shipping aircraft. By 1941 the Hurricane was obsolescent as a fighter, and it was not highly regarded. "
Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website (http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk) and Discussion forum (http://forums.delphiforums.com/autogun/messages/)
-
Thanks, Humble, very interesting article.
I'm glad to see the P-39 getting a little more credit. I've always considered it the most beautiful prop fighter ever made, perfect from all angles.
I'm a little biased, since my half-brother went off to war in a P-39 and later was killed by ack flying recon in a P-51.
-
P39 would be fine in AH, or maybe rather it's big brother, the Kingcobra (P63?)
Decently fast, nice roll rate and high speed handling, very rugged, good landing gear, tankbusting qualities, and LOTS of ammo.
What's wrong with that?
-
What would the p63 provide for AH? Another late war useless variant. Even in the main it wont get used more then the top 5.
What we need are planes that have use outside the main. For Ah2:ToD for instance, for events and the CT. Top speed was what 405-410? No big deal compared to the current speed demons. With its 37mm gun and small ammo load most folks will stay away from it. I mean a yak9t is more manuverable, the g10 is faster both have big guns. You would see it flown against gvs even though thats not its roll.
Plugging a P63 into the planeset doesn't do much overall. If you get a p63 the odds of seeing a p39 variant goes way down.
With out getting the necessary planes to fill the gaps in the plane set for Ah2:ToD then theres very few theaters that can be run.
-
Quote from the abovementioned interview:
A. S. Nikolay Gerasimovich, if you compare the Hispano-Suiza 20mm cannon and the ShVAK, which was better in your opinion?
"N. G. Ours, without a doubt. The ShVAK was twice as reliable. The Hispano simply required an unbelievable amount of maintenance. The smallest exposure to dust, congealed lubricant, or any other kind of little thing, and the gun would not fire. Very unreliable.
The ballistics of our cannon were better. Our cannon had a flatter trajectory, which is significant for applying lead. When you talk about the Yaks, then one didn’t even need a sight. The tracers were almost straight, take aim and fire, and where the nose is pointing is where the rounds struck.
Our ShVAK had a higher rate of fire.
Regarding the target effect, these two cannons were about equal. In either case, there was no difference that I could see with the human eye."
-
2952 hurricanes were supplied to ussr:
mkIIa 210
mkIIb 1557
mkIIc 1009
mkIId 60 and
mkIV 30
These came from england and canada, missing numbers were flown from stocks held at middle-east.
Source Francis K.Mason: The Hawker Hurricane: An Illustrated History.
Book has also serialnumbers if needed.
-
Originally posted by TimRas
The ballistics of our cannon (ShVak) were better (than the Hispano). Our cannon had a flatter trajectory, which is significant for applying lead.
This certainly does not seem to be the common opinion.
Momentum figures per round at the muzzle would indicate otherwise...........there does not seem anything to favour the ShVak aerodynamically over the Hispano.
-
Tony Williams would know this stuff.
But I have never seen anything that indicates superior ballistics of the Shvak, - quite on the contrary.
-
The Hispano was heavier (50 v 42 kg) and slower-firing (600 v 800 rpm) than the ShVAK, and I can well believe that it needed more careful maintenance, especially in dusty conditions. The Browning was noticeably more reliable.
However, the comments about ballistics and target effect are not supported by the facts. The Hiapano had a higher muzzle velocity (850-880 m/s v 750-790 m/s) and heavier shells (120-130 v 91-99g) which would have kept their velocity better, so it would have had a flatter trajectory. The shells also hit harder, and contained significantly more HE.
Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website (http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk) and discussion
forum (http://forums.delphiforums.com/autogun/messages/)