Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Gorf on February 06, 2005, 10:17:50 AM
-
I know this has been brought up before but when are we going to get the P39.
It was good airplane and unique one at that.
Some people say it was a crappy plane and it was to later planes but on the other hand..if it was such a crappy plane then how come a majority of the Soviet WWII aces made most of their kills in a P39??
Anyway, I hope HiTech and Pyro are considering this plane for a release soon.
Would like the P-39D, P-39-Q and N models and of course the beloved P400..8-)
-
yeah! why not!! its about time they filled out the American plane set... it sucks they only have these to choose from!!
Boston III
A-20G
B-17G
B-26B
C-47A
F4F-4
F4U-1
F4U-1C
F4U-1D
F4U-4
F6F-5
FM2
P-38G
P-38J
P-38L
P-40B
P-40E
P-47D-11
P-47D-25
P-47D-30
P-51B
P-51D Mustang
SBD-5
TBM-3
LVT(A)2
LVT(A)4
M-3
M-8
M-16
PT Boat
-
"It was good airplane and unique one at that"
What??? It wasn't unique. There were other designs that had engines behind the pilot. Not many but more than enough to negate "unique".
WHAT?!?!? It was NOT a good plane. It had MANY MANY instability issues. Especially at low speeds. The advanced design (which didn't see any action if I recall) fixed some of this with additional stabilizer area, but the design was NOT very good. It was NOT well armed (4x 30cals spread out in the wings, 2 50s in nose, 1 37mm -- 3*mm -- whatever in nose with horrible trajectory -- might as well just give it 2x50cal and strip the others off)
This would be a HORRIBLE plane in AH. It would fly worse than teh P40E, and we ALL know how rampant those P40E dweebs are.. I mean what with filling up every game with 40% p40Es and all :rolleyes:
It's slow. It's weak. It's unmanuverable. It's limited in alt (no turbocharger/supercharger), and it's unstable at low speeds... Hrm...Yes.. I can see why people really MUST have this hangar queen.
-
Oh, I'm sure the P-39 will be introduced eventually. Along with the Ki-43, Ki-44, and other Japanese planes that are needed to fill out a Pacific ToD planeset.
It actually wasn't a bad plane, at least not by all accounts. It was a match for the Zero at low altitudes (according to some pilots anyway). The engine power fell off rapidly above 12k, which isn't a problem in the MA. THe main problem, for the MA, is that it is a pre-'45 aircraft, so it would see very little use.
The P-63 Kingcobra, on the other hand, might see a great deal of use. It was about as fast as the El Gay at low alt, had good acceleration, and could turn well. In other words, it would be an El Gay clone, performance-wise, but with a 37mm cannon and 2-4 .50s. It did actually see service with the Soviet Union, I believe 1 got a kill over Manchuria. That is the extent of the service, as far as I know.
-
Originally posted by Furball
yeah! why not!! its about time they filled out the American plane set... it sucks they only have these to choose from!!
Boston III
The Boston wasn't American wasn't it?
-
P-39
Brewster Buffalo
He-111
-
Originally posted by frank3
The Boston wasn't American wasn't it?
It was... DB-7 was made by Douglas.
-
Ah, didn't know that.
To easy all the reading; some pictures
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/68_1107729847_a_p-39_ho[1].jpg)
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/68_1107729864_aircraft20bell20p-39[1].jpg)
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/68_1107729882_p-39_selfridge[1].jpg)
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/68_1107729903_p39-8[1].jpg)
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/68_1107729936_p-39q-1[1].jpg)
-
Originally posted by Krusty
"It was good airplane and unique one at that"
What??? It wasn't unique. There were other designs that had engines behind the pilot. Not many but more than enough to negate "unique".
WHAT?!?!? It was NOT a good plane. It had MANY MANY instability issues. Especially at low speeds. The advanced design (which didn't see any action if I recall) fixed some of this with additional stabilizer area, but the design was NOT very good. It was NOT well armed (4x 30cals spread out in the wings, 2 50s in nose, 1 37mm -- 3*mm -- whatever in nose with horrible trajectory -- might as well just give it 2x50cal and strip the others off)
This would be a HORRIBLE plane in AH. It would fly worse than teh P40E, and we ALL know how rampant those P40E dweebs are.. I mean what with filling up every game with 40% p40Es and all :rolleyes:
It's slow. It's weak. It's unmanuverable. It's limited in alt (no turbocharger/supercharger), and it's unstable at low speeds... Hrm...Yes.. I can see why people really MUST have this hangar queen.
Hmmmm.....
Funny that the best pilot in the world (Bob Hoover) thought the P-39 was a fine aircraft and very capable at lower alt's. The russians prefered the P-39 as an air to air fighter vs every allied "lendlease plane including the hurricane & spitfire. In the low altitude combat prevelent here the P-39 would more than hold its own.
-
Woah woah woah! I'm all for bashing most planes, but bashing the P40 is just crossing the line.
The only trait that the P40 has that doesn't beat ***EVERYONE*** else is the speed. And since the rook can't speed away and is forced to fight, why should he bother to bring a P40?
-
Originally posted by Urchin
The P-63 Kingcobra, ................. I believe 1 got a kill over Manchuria. That is the extent of the service, as far as I know.
Kurile Islands after the Japanese had surrendered.............
P39 variants were the only lend lease ac the VVS actually liked and they developed CAP and ACM diciplines specifically for that plane.................
It did not shine in any specific (Western) Allied role but you can guarantee that its armament and robustness will attract certain folk.
-
The P39 shouldnt be added as a US compliment but rather as a Soviet complient.
Tex.
-
Agreed Tex, and as such its sorely needed.
Should be a lend lease skin, and the model most common to those shipped.
Question, is the US 37mm that much worse than the Russian 37mm used in the Yak9T?
If not why did the US hate it so much?
I guess I'd like to see a break down between the 2.
-
Yes, add the P-39 -- it was fast and pretty good at low alt (as demonstrated in WarBirds), and the Russians used it with excellent effect.
The Airacobra also has relatively unique traits such as a side entrance door, mid engine behind pilot, a big ol' cannon, tricycle landing gear, wing lower and not as forward as most fighters, and ...
it is the Prettiest Prop Pursuit Plane.
-
Originally posted by Ghosth
Question, is the US 37mm that much worse than the Russian 37mm used in the Yak9T?
The P-39's M4 37mm cannon was an absolute piece of garbage compared to the NS-37 in the Yak-9T. Much lower muzzle velocity combine with a high tendency to jam after the second shot.
-
Originally posted by Krusty
"It was good airplane and unique one at that"
What??? It wasn't unique. There were other designs that had engines behind the pilot. Not many but more than enough to negate "unique".
WHAT?!?!? It was NOT a good plane. It had MANY MANY instability issues. Especially at low speeds. The advanced design (which didn't see any action if I recall) fixed some of this with additional stabilizer area, but the design was NOT very good. It was NOT well armed (4x 30cals spread out in the wings, 2 50s in nose, 1 37mm -- 3*mm -- whatever in nose with horrible trajectory -- might as well just give it 2x50cal and strip the others off)
This would be a HORRIBLE plane in AH. It would fly worse than teh P40E, and we ALL know how rampant those P40E dweebs are.. I mean what with filling up every game with 40% p40Es and all :rolleyes:
It's slow. It's weak. It's unmanuverable. It's limited in alt (no turbocharger/supercharger), and it's unstable at low speeds... Hrm...Yes.. I can see why people really MUST have this hangar queen.
As for unqiue...as far as I know..the P39 was the only one of its kind to see combat in all theatres.
It was the only one with driver style doors on it
And as for crap.. yes it was out classed but if it was so crappy in your eyes then how come most soviet aces PREFERED the P39 over any other lend lease plane and those aces achieved most of their kills in this plane?
The P40E is a excellent dog fighter IF used properly as was the P40B.
OH the KingCobra would be an excellent choice also.
As for crap again.. then why is the early model 109s in the game..? in my thoughts the early version were POSs
IN Warbirds, I played P-39s all the time .. and it was in my mind one of the most stable bombing fighters to use. My uncle would agree on this..he flew them in the Pacific..20PSSqd..I believe.
He said one of his favorite aspects was the stability while in doing a dive bomb and the knowledge that at that time if he had enough alt.. there was nothing the Japs had that could catch him if he needed to break away... He flew P40s the on to Jugs and Stangs.
In WWII..there was no other plane like it....
-
Originally posted by Karnak
The P-39's M4 37mm cannon was an absolute piece of garbage compared to the NS-37 in the Yak-9T. Much lower muzzle velocity combine with a high tendency to jam after the second shot.
It also had a slower ROF, if you can imagine that. I think the German 30mm round had significantly more hitting power too. This gun could be the worst gun EVAR!!!! lol.
I'm a huge fan of the Hammerguns, but I wouldn't use the M4 on a dare.
-Sik
-
Besides all the arguments here..........
In the last dev. news update, this statement was pretty clear:
Originally posted by Pyro
Our development pattern is changing as all our coding resources, i.e., HT and Sudz, are going into full-time ToD development until that is completed. Sudz has one project left before he joins HT in ToD development, and that is an overhaul and upgrade of the film viewer. Aside from that project any more programming developments in the game will be minor or bug fixes until ToD is done.
However, we will continue to release new versions of AH2 while ToD is under development. These versions will focus on plane upgrades and additions, graphical enhancements, and flight modeling updates. Because of that, we’ll be putting out new releases a lot more frequently than we have in the past until ToD is done.
Given the fact that Pyro also stated the next version would focus on fixing up the FW 190's and the N1K2 FM, and that subsequent versions would focus on upgrading the rest of the fleet (and he did mention additions as well as upgrades), perhaps you should learn patience, Grasshopper.
-
lol, I think Krusty gave himself a hernia after that post. Apparently he hasn't met mr. objectivity.
...
The P39 was a radical "futuristic" design when it was first introduced to service in 1939 and much faster than any European models of the time. It was, as with many models, put into production before some bugs were ironed out.
And, yes, it certainly should have retained the turbo-supercharger it
was originally equipped with (which gave it a top speed of 390 mph at
20,000 ft when it was first flown in 1939. The P-63 was the aircraft the P-39 should
have been. The early versions of the P-39 were underpowered. The Q
version was actually quite good, performance-wise, but still suffered from
over-sensitive controls and the rearward movement of the center of gravity
once the nose ammo was expended. This made the plane susceptible to flat
spins. Experienced pilots could handle it. But most service pilots first
got their hands on a P-39 with less than 300 hours in their logbooks.
It was an easy plane to bail out of: merely jetison the door and roll
out.
[/size]
I don't buy the lame "it wouldn't be used" complaints. That's a weak and uninformed argument.
-
Okee... I think it has its place in history and probably in TOD, but I'm just not seeing its place in the MA. From what I hear the Yak9T would be equal to it or outperform it, and the 9Ts craptastic 37MM cannon is superior to that found in the p39. Since the usage of the Yak9T in the MA is stagnant at best, I'm still not convinced that this should take precedence over a good perk bomber, a heavy german bomber, or maybe more axis or russian planes.
Just my thoughts.
-
Originally posted by Howitzer
the 9Ts craptastic 37MM cannon...
:eek:
Best gun EVAR!!!!!
-Sik
-
Its a complicated relationship. Almost a love/hate thing.
Either I'm cussin myself for flying it instead of something with real cannons.
Or I'm breaking my arm patting myself on the back cause I just pulled off a sweet shot in it.
Call it magnatisim, it keeps pulling me back.
:)
Fact is on a good day (defined as one where I can hit what I shoot at) Its an easy bird to rack up 2 - 3 kills in. On a bad day it reminds me thats its slowly turning me into a russian. Sour, brooding & paranoiid. :)
-
I know how you feel. On saturday I had a run where I had 2 kills with the first 8 rounds expended, then spent the last 24 to pick up a 3rd :lol
But the problem with the T is more one of piss poor climb than the gun, not to mention low deck speed. If the Yak-9UT were in the game, I'm positive that we would see people coming out of the woodwork to use that gun.
It gets a bad rep in game for a few reasons: 1. Low ammo load. This isn't a gun that you can spray and pray with. 2. Low Rate of Fire. No matter what you're used to, the NS-37 is a lot slower, so if you're maneuvering, there is a HUGE spacing between your shots. I remember taking my Kurland Squad out to the SEA to practice, and when fighting over water, you could actually SEE the shots bracketing the other planes :lol and finally 3. HE shells don't pop tanks. A lot of folks buy into the "Anti-Tank" Myth of the Yak-9T and wonder why they aren't able to knock out a Panzer with the hammergun.
I find that the key to being any good in the Yak-9T is to fire three shot bursts. It only takes one shot to destroy almost any fighter, and three should take care of almost any bomber. By the time the third round is out, you need to re-aquire your target. From what I've read on the subject, this is the same firing discipline that the Soviets used.
But with all of my Grandstanding and posturing aside, I do agree with Howitzer: The Yak-9T is superior to the P-39 in many ways, and yet sees very little MA usage, so I think it would be erronious to believe that the P-39 would fair much better. Maybe the P-400 with the Hizooka would though.
Either way, It'll be nice for Events, the CT, and someday, maybe, dare to dream: the Pacific ToD. :)
-Sik
-
so what we're saying is..... the p39 would be junk, so..... bring on the P63!
(http://www.blueyonder.com/flight/images/wb-p63.jpg)
-
P39 free version
P63 Light Perk
-
it had x4 .30's and x2 .50's in the cowling,with a 37mm. "or x4 .50's and x1 37mm /with bombs and drop tanks"
now compare even that fire power to the one found on the yak9t,and i think you will agree,for a dog fighter,or ground bomber..its a heck of alot better than the yak,not to mention it can carry bomb's and drop tanks.
Something the yak9t cant do,i would take the bomb load out,the added weapons for air to air,and a slow,weaker 37mm any day.
After that main yak9t rail gun is used up,your just about useless for air to air, unless you have ungodly aim and kill the pilot/engine with your remaining 1 gun.
did the "american" p-39 also have a crap load of armor,part of the reason it was so heavy?
I figure if people dont mind going down to the ground in a tail first matter like the 110,whats a few flat spins? heck we may learn to like it/ use it. as a menuver.
Pluss rare is it we can add planes to three nations by makeing just a few diffrent version's of ONE plane. usa,britian,russian.
cant be all that bad.
and yeah,maby it would not be mega ubber ground attack plane in the MA,but if 10-15 people play it per day,vs the yak9t then its fairly usefull.after all they can now go into a more "dog fighter" mode with the added fire power the p39 would give them,not to mention diffrent options depending on what "type" of p39 they would like. strict dog fighter,fighter bomber,or anti tank.
Could someone get a weapon/speed load out for all p-39's made from start to finish?
im interested in what diffrent types had to offer,thanks.
-
i would fly it cause itsa sexy
-
Originally posted by BaDkaRmA158Th
it had x4 .30's and x2 .50's in the cowling,with a 37mm. "or x4 .50's and x1 37mm /with bombs and drop tanks"
now compare even that fire power to the one found on the yak9t,and i think you will agree,for a dog fighter,or ground bomber..its a heck of alot better than the yak
Er, no. The Yak-9T's single 37mm is better than all that, plus it has two 12.7mm guns. The P-39 would be better for ground attack, but who's going to take it for that when you have the P-38L and P-47D-40 to pick from? Sorry, but you're way off base.
As to the "heavy armor", Saburo Sakai broke one in half with two 20mm rounds from the Type 99 Model 1 cannons on his A6M2. It wasn't even manuvering so there wasn't high stress on the airframe when it happened either.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
Er, no. The Yak-9T's single 37mm is better than all that, plus it has two 12.7mm guns. The P-39 would be better for ground attack, but who's going to take it for that when you have the P-38L and P-47D-40 to pick from? Sorry, but you're way off base.
As to the "heavy armor", Saburo Sakai broke one in half with two 20mm rounds from the Type 99 Model 1 cannons on his A6M2. It wasn't even manuvering so there wasn't high stress on the airframe when it happened either.
The Yak 9U has 2 MGs with a single 20mm.
The Yak 9T has 1 MG with a single 37mm.
-
A different web page on the P-400 and P-39.
http://www.aerofiles.com/p400.html (http://www.aerofiles.com/p400.html)
-
Originally posted by StarOfAfrica2
The Yak 9U has 2 MGs with a single 20mm.
The Yak 9T has 1 MG with a single 37mm.
True, but Tony Williams still gives the Yak-9T the edge in both Ammo power and gun power over the P-39.
One thing to remember, is that two of the .50s on the P-39 are syncronised, causing a reduction in their ROF. I would bet though, that the P-400, with a Hispano in the place of the M4 would probably be close to the Yak-9T. I would expect the M4 to be almost useless. Too slow firing and weak (due to HE ammo) to be effecting against GVs, too slow MV to be of much use against Aircraft. I guess you could shoot bombers with it if you got close enough.
Don't get me wrong, I actually want to see the P-39, since I'm an Early pac guy. I just don't think it will get much MA use. And of course I think that it would be vastly inferior to the Yak-9T in terms of Air combat, but then, that's to be expected considering the P-39 is 2 years older than the Yak-9T.
And again, in case anyone missed it: The M4 was junk. You could throw the round faster than the gun could fire it :)
-Sik
-
Another interesting quote:
"In New Guinea through 1942 and well into 1943, the chief U.S. opponent of the Ki-43 was the P-39, and the Ki-43 generally made short work of any P-39 it encountered (since all the P-39's plumbing was in the rear, and poorly protected, only a few well-placed rounds would finish it off). The boys in the 8 and 35 FGs had a very tough time of it, and soon gave the Bell fighter the nickname "Fearless Fosdick." They didn't think much of the P-39's fighting qualities at all. Yet against another opponent on another front, the P-39 proved itself formidable--the Soviets apparently thought very highly of the P-39 and many of their aces flew it.
One key to why they thought so highly of it might be discovered in the flight tests the RAF carried out with a P-39C against an Me 109E at Duxford in mid-1941. The Bell demonstrated clear superiority to the 109 in all but one category up to 15,000 ft.--the lower the altitude the greater the superiority. (The exception was rate of climb, the advantage of the Bell held only briefly). It was noted that when the 109 was planted on the tail of the P-39, the Bell was able to out-turn it to such an extent that it would be on the 109's tail in less than two 360s and there was nothing the 109 driver could do to shake it--he couldn't outrun it, outdive it or outturn it.
So if the Russians in their P-39s were getting in low-level dogfights with 109s, the superior maneuverability might have been very important--it might have been what kept them from getting those few deadly rounds in the cooling system that would put the Bell down."
From:
http://yarchive.net/mil/ki-43.html (http://yarchive.net/mil/ki-43.html)
If the P-39 could outmanouver a 109-E, it might be a heck of a ride in TOD as long as missions stay under 10K.
-
Those things are the UGLIEST planes ever.
-
au contraire ... the P-39 is the most beautiful WWII fighter.
-
I would fly the P-39 and would like to see it in the game.
-
Bring the Bell P-400!!
(http://www.wsstudios.de/Flugzeuge/Airacobra/p400_2_big.jpg)
-
Apparently, P-39s were used with great success at hights 3000-5000m while Yaks and Laggs were mainly used up to 3000k. According to various sources, P-39 was used to cover Pe-2 bombers while Yaks , Laggs and from 1943 - La5s were used to cover Il-2s.
BT- Pe-2 will be a nice addition to AH plain pool, here is a link (though in Russian)
Pe-2 (http://combatavia.com1.ru/index2pe2.html)
-
How many types of ammo did the 37MM cannon in the P39 have? Was it only HE?
What was the ammo load for the MGs?
How many and what types of bombs/rockets could it carry?
Did the armament vary from one model to the next?
As far as early war plane sets go, the P39 was faster than the P40 and more importantly the Zero.
Magoo