Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Spikes on January 25, 2008, 11:20:47 AM
-
Check out the homepage!
-
OMGGGGGGGG, THANK YOU HITECH! WOOHOO, P39Q'S FTW!:O :O
-
Sweet! Earlier versions for special events can't be far behind.:aok
-
Can't see what you're looking at.
-
Originally posted by MjTalon
OMGGGGGGGG, THANK YOU HITECH! WOOHOO, P38S FTW!:O :O
We have P38s.
-
Originally posted by BoostPSI
Can't see what you're looking at.
(http://www1.hitechcreations.com/news/images/p39/p39q2.jpg)
-
Looks cool! Can't wait HTC!
-
Aww how come I don't see it?
-
Should be an interesting addition to AH. If I remember right the Q had the 0.50s along with the 37mm. In the low altitude environment of the arenas this aircraft should have success and I'd love to one day see some Pe-2s or TU-2s being escorted by P-39s on missions.
With the Russian plane set filled out, and the HE-111 brought in, just think of the cool reenactments that could be done.
-
Looks awesome!!
Is this plane more suited for ground attack or air to air?
Thanks HTC!~
Curiously yours,
Boner
-
That is very welcome news!
WTG HTC and Fester!
Now, expectations of flight model? Will she handle like a cross between our P-40B and P-40E? Faster than either, but not as tight turning? Tough, durable damage model?
-
Always glad to see new planes being added WTG HTC!
Bruv
~S~
-
So were getting the P-39. Hmmm does that mean this is next?
(http://www.lonestar-mvpa.org/images/2005/05tempbl.JPG)
Yes I'm greedy!
-
Looks very nice. :aok
-
Thanx HTC, eventhough I cant see screenies on homepage. :(
-
I'm with red...
I do not see on the homepage to AH where you are seeing that.
68ROX
-
I am very happy :D
It is good to see the folks at HTC cranking out this beautiful air machine.
Are there any other details about the next release?
-
Originally posted by 5PointOh
So were getting the P-39. Hmmm does that mean this is next?
(http://www.lonestar-mvpa.org/images/2005/05tempbl.JPG)
Yes I'm greedy!
Nope!!
You'll see alot of this next!
(http://img177.imageshack.us/img177/1015/p39kel3.jpg)
Looks like it can double as a submarine!!
-
Originally posted by 68ROX
I'm with red...
I do not see on the homepage to AH where you are seeing that.
68ROX
You might have to reaload/refresh the page first. I guess you are still looking at cached version.
-
Originally posted by 1Boner
Nope!!
You'll see alot of this next!
Looks like it can double as a submarine!!
well I've said for a while we need some Uboats!!!
-
Are they going to model the CG problems which caused it to flat spin rather easly. And was even more pronounce after it fired it's ammo, creating an even worse CG problem. Or am I thinking of a different plane.
-
I see it now looks great. WTG Superfly
-
You can search "P39Q" and find quite a few of the older discussions on the plane, and probably the Wiki and various other links to information.
-
Originally posted by oboe
Now, expectations of flight model? Will she handle like a cross between our P-40B and P-40E? Faster than either, but not as tight turning? Tough, durable damage model?
It will handle like an AMC Pacer ........
Helm ...out
-
since my deflection shots usually hit behind the canopy im rather looking forward to this :D it does look cool though :aok
-
Originally posted by SFCHONDO
Are they going to model the CG problems which caused it to flat spin rather easly. And was even more pronounce after it fired it's ammo, creating an even worse CG problem. Or am I thinking of a different plane.
From what I read it was only a problem when zero ammo was carried. The weight of the empty shells was enough to resolve the issue..
-
WOO WOOOO!!! just saw! gimme gimme gimme gimme!!
-
Looks like its the P39 which is on display in the Finnish Air Force Museum in Jyväskylä, Finland:
(http://www.pienoismallit.net/media/kuvat/01/24/48/012448.jpg)
A few more pictures here: http://www.pienoismallit.net/galleria/referenssi_1422/
Here's the link to the museum website: http://www.k-silmailumuseo.fi/?action=etusivu
Excellent, thanks HTC! Brewster next? :)
Camo
-
COOL....
Thats a gunsight I made in the screenshot :D
(http://www1.hitechcreations.com/news/images/p39/p39q1.jpg)
-
Originally posted by Scca
The weight of the empty shells was enough to resolve the issue..
they dont get ejected?
just noticed the cannons in the cockpit, dam that must have been noisy :(
-
GREAT :aok :aok :aok
Good Job Superfly and Fester.
-
(http://www.aviation-history.com/engines/v1710-5.jpg)
(http://www.realtime.net/centex/MissConnieCopyright.jpg)
(http://www.airshows.org.uk/2005/airshows/legends/photographs/p39_1.jpg)
(http://www.ukairshows.info/2004/airshows/legends/photographs/p39_1.jpg)
-
just wondering if we will have the oil smears allover the cockpit when oil gets hit :)
-
WOOOOOWOOOOOOO!
Wtg HTC!
-
No
-
:aok :aok
Looks like the A-20 will be back in the hanger for a bit....
The Q should be a handful in the low level world of AH. Curious what 37mm is modeled. If its the same as on the 9T then it'll be a very deadly bird.
-
(http://www1.hitechcreations.com/news/images/p39/p39q4.jpg)
BAD ass.... WTG Superfly!
When is this expected to be up in flying? (No 2 week jokes either)
-
Please tell me a 39Q can't take out GVs...:lol
-
Thank you Lusche.
I went over to Netscape and it came up just fine...
AOL just shows the old cached version.
68ROX
-
Originally posted by panzerr
Please tell me a 39Q can't take out GVs...:lol
No one then a 9T or 30mm round. Only the IL-2 and Hurricane IId have true ap rounds. Should be able to take out softskin vehicles and track tanks however...
-
Originally posted by 1Boner
Nope!!
You'll see alot of this next!
(http://img177.imageshack.us/img177/1015/p39kel3.jpg)
Looks like it can double as a submarine!!
That's actually the paint scheme we're using in that pic. ;)
-
:eek: NICE!
-
Fantastic! Great Job guys! :D :D :D
...-Gixer
-
The P-39 cannon is a US made gun, (Oldsmobile T9 prototype, adopted as the M4 in USAAF service) not the 37mm used by the soviets. Like the soviet gun, though, it is an HE firing air to air weapon -- not an AP firing gun.
Would love to see a version without the gun pods...sure it will be coming. The P400 had a hispano in place of the 37mm T9, and 6 303s -- might be a nice dogfighter in the low alt AH environment.
-
Check out the Wikipedia Stats...
If it gets AH modeled to what this says, this plane will be a lot of people's new favorite ride....
This is a copy & paste: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P-39_Airacobra
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Bell P-39 Airacobra was one of the principal American fighter aircraft in service at the start of World War II. Although its mid-engine placement was innovative, the P-39 design was handicapped by the lack of an efficient turbo-supercharger, limiting it to low-altitude work, although the type was used with great success by the Soviet Air Force. Together with the derivative P-63 Kingcobra, these aircraft would be the most successful mass-produced, fixed-wing aircraft manufactured by Bell.
Design and development
In 1937, the United States Army Air Corps issued a specification for a new fighter via Circular Proposal X-608. It was a request for a high-altitude interceptor aircraft having "the tactical mission of interception and attack of hostile aircraft at high altitude". Specifications called for a maximum airspeed of at least 360 miles per hour (580 km/h) at altitude, and a climb to 20,000 feet (6100m) within 6 minutes[1]; the toughest set of specifications USAAC had presented to that date. Other competing designs included the Curtiss P-40, an outgrowth of a previous design, and the Lockheed P-38, which utilized a complex twin-engine twin boom configuration. Although Bell's limited fighter design work had previously resulted in the unusual Bell YFM-1 Airacuda, the Model 12[2] proposal adopted an equally original configuration with an Allison V-12 engine mounted in the middle of the fuselage, just behind the cockpit, and a propeller driven by a shaft passing beneath the pilot's feet under the cockpit floor.[2]
The main purpose of this configuration was to free up space for the heavy main armament, a 37 mm Oldsmobile T9 cannon firing through the center of the propeller hub for optimum accuracy and stability when firing. In fact, the entire design was made to accommodate this gun in the aircraft.[3] This happened because H.M. Poyer, designer for project leader Robert Woods, was impressed by the power of this weapon and he pressed for its incorporation though the original concept had been a 20-25 mm cannon mounted in a conventional manner in the nose. This was unusual, because fighters had previously been designed around an engine, not a weapon system. Although devastating when it worked, the T9 had very limited ammunition, a low rate of fire, and was prone to jamming.[4]
A secondary benefit of the mid-engine arrangement was to create a smooth and streamlined nose profile. The weight distribution necessitated a tricycle undercarriage, a first among American fighters, though the Lockheed XP-38 was concurrently designed with tricycle landing gear. Entry to the cockpit was through side doors (mounted on both sides of the cockpit) rather than a sliding canopy. Its unusual engine location and the long driveshaft caused some pilot concern at first, but experience showed this was no more of a hazard in a crash landing than with an engine located forward of the cockpit. There were no problems with propshaft failure.
As originally designed, the XP-39 had a turbocharger with a belly scoop (a feature shared by the XP-40); both were deleted for production.[5]
Bell P-39 Airacobra center fuselage detail with maintenance panels open.The XP-39 made her maiden flight on 6 April 1938[6] at Wright Field, Ohio, achieving 630 km/h at 6100 m (390 mph at 20000 ft), reaching this altitude in only five minutes.[citation needed] The Army ordered twelve YP-39s for service evaluation[6] and one YP-39A with the turbo-supercharger deleted.[7] After these trials were complete, which resulted in detail changes including deletion of the external radiator,[6][8] and on advice from NACA,[6] the prototype was modified as the XP-39B; after demonstrating a performance improvement,[6] the thirteen YP-39s were completed to this standard, adding two 0.3" (7.62 mm) MG to the two .50s as well.[6] Lacking armor or self-sealing fuel tanks, the prototype was 900 kg lighter than the production fighters.[citation needed]
After completing service trials, and originally designated P-45, a first order for 80 aircraft was placed 10 August 1939; the designation would revert before deliveries began.[6]
[edit] Technical details
The P-39 was an all-metal, low-wing, single-engine fighter, with tricycle undercarriage incorporating a very streamlined and aerodynamically efficient design.
The Airacobra was conceived with the T9 gun in mind. This weapon fired a 610 gram projectile capable of piercing 2 cm (.78") of armor at 450 m (500yd) with armor piercing rounds. The complete armament fit as designed consisted of the T9 with a pair of Browning M2 .50" (12.7 mm) machineguns mounted in the nose. This would change to two .50s and two .30s in the XP-39B (P-39C, Model 13, the first 20 delivered) and 2x0.50 and 4x0.30 (all four in the wings) in the P-39D (Model 15), which also introduced self-sealing tanks and shackles (and piping) for a 500pd (227 kg) bomb or drop tank.[6] The engine was placed behind the cockpit, so pilots often referred to this as "Allison armor."[citation needed] A long transmission tunnel passed through the fuselage, under the cockpit, and was linked to the three bladed propeller. The radiator was located in the fuselage.
In September 1940, Britain ordered 386 P-39Ds (as the Model 14), of 675 in all, differing in the 37 mm being replaced by a 20 mm Hispano and the 6x0.3 by .303 (7.7 mm). These began equipping 601 Squadron in September 1941, and were promptly recognized as having inadequate rate of climb and performance at altitude; only 80 joined the RAF (only 601 being outfitted), over 250 being transferred to the Red Air Force, about 200 repossessed by the Army after Pearl Harbor, and some 200 sent to Eighth Air Force in 1942 (the Army models being designated P-400).[6]
Because of the unconventional layout, there was no space in the fuselage to place a fuel tank. Although drop tanks were implemented to extend its range, the standard fuel load was carried in the wings, with the result that the P-39 was limited to short range tactical strikes.[citation needed]
A heavy structure, and around 120 kg of armor were characteristic of this aircraft as well. The production P-39's heavier weight combined with the poor performance of the Allison engine, limited the high-altitude capabilities of the fighter. The P-39's altitude performance was markedly inferior to the contemporary European fighters and, as a result, the first USAAF fighter units in the European Theater were equipped with the Spitfire V. However, the P-39D's roll rate was 75 degrees per second at 235 mph (378 km/h)– better than the A6M2, F4F, F6F, or P-38 up to 265 mph (426 km/h). see NACA chart).[citation needed]
Above the V-1710's full throttle height of about 17,000 ft (5,000 m), the P-39's performance dropped off rapidly. This limited its usefulness in traditional fighter missions in Europe as well as in the Pacific, where it was not uncommon for Japanese bombers to attack at altitudes above the P-39's operational ceiling (which in the tropical hot air inevitably was lower than in moderate climates).
The weight distribution of the P-39 supposedly is the reason for its tendency to enter a dangerous flat spin — a characteristic Soviet test pilots were able to demonstrate to the skeptical manufacturer who had been unable to reproduce the effect. After extensive tests, it was determined the spin could only be induced if the plane was improperly loaded, with no ammunition in the front compartment. The flight manual specifically noted a need to ballast the front ammunition compartment with the appropriate weight of shell casings to achieve a reasonable center of gravity. High speed controls were light thus high speed turns and pull-outs were possible although the P-39 had to be held in a dive since it tended to level out, reminiscent of the Spitfire. Redline dive speed was a respectable 525 mph (845 km/h) for the P-39.[citation needed]
The rear-mounted engine made the aircraft ideal for ground attack since fire would be coming from the front-bottom quarter and was less likely to hit the engine and its cooling systems. However, the arrangement proved to be very vulnerable to attacks from above and behind and nearly any hit on the fuselage from an attacking enemy fighter was virtually guaranteed to disable the cooling system and lead to the prompt demise of the engine and thus the airplane. Coupled with lack of high-altitude performance, the Airacobra was extremely vulnerable to any enemy fighter with decent high altitude performance.
A naval version with tail-dragger landing gear, the XFL-1 Airabonita, was ordered as a competitor to the F4U Corsair and XF5F Skyrocket. It first flew 13 May 1940,[6] but after a troublesome and protracted development and testing period, it was rejected.
By the time of the Pearl Harbor attack, nearly 600 had been built.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Holy Schneikies!!!!
How come we haven't had this all along?? It fits in all arenas!!
:confused: :confused:
How come we're gonna have to wait.........2 weeks!??????
:O :O :O
68ROX
-
:aok Nice job guys!! Can't wait to give it a try. Thank you for all the hard work.
-
another hanger queen. lol
-
Suhweet.
-
Originally posted by 68ROX
If it gets AH modeled to what this says, this plane will be a lot of people's new favorite ride....
T
On the other hand, I bet the gun may become an issue for those hoping to dogfight with her. The US 37mm M4 has a muzzle velocity of only 610mps, about 30% less than the Russians' N37 (in the Yak 9T) 37mm at 900mps and not much better than the Bf 109K's Mk103 30mm with 510 mps.
What's worse, the rate of fire reeks like a cesspool on a hot day. The German 30mm rate is 7 rounds per second; the Russian N37 is 4 rounds per second; the P-39's American M4 is 2.5 rounds per second. So the round moves slowly and fires even more slowly...meaning getting hits will likely be harder in the P39 than it is with the 30mm armed K4. There's going to be a lot more space between rounds for targets to fly through, even when you have the deflection lob just right.
On top of that, the other guns have dramatically different ballistics -- you'll get the four 50s of the P51 or the FM2, matched up with a tater gun that you pretty much have to load shell by shell. you'll almost have to choose whether to fire primaries or secondaries, because if you fire both one set is GOING to miss.
And don't underestimate the performance hit the bird will take from those gun pods, hanging way out on the wing and adding drag. So I suspect the Q will be seeing more action in ground support strafing.
All I'm saying is that I don't think it will end up as a "Favorite ride" any more often than, say, the G2. It's gunna get used, and it will be fun to learn to exploit its quirks. But it will take a pretty skilled pilot to make her sing, and to get that watermelon lobber to hit the target.
Regardless, big 's to HTC. They remembered the close vote and came out with a really interesting next bird for us to play with! I can't wait...especially as FSO flier!
-
Originally posted by Overlag
another hanger queen. lol
Yes, all we need are more LW uber cannon-armed speed demons and AH will be so much better!
:rolleyes:
Try flying scenarios, FSO's or the MW or EW arenas and maybe you'd see the need for filling the planeset.
Give us more hangar queens!
:aok
-
Originally posted by 68ROX
Check out the Wikipedia Stats...
If it gets AH modeled to what this says, this plane will be a lot of people's new favorite ride....
This is a copy & paste: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P-39_Airacobra
No offense, but using wikipedia as a reference has about the same authoritative ring as putting "My brother's friend said" as a reference in your thesis.
-
If you don't see the images on the homepage press F5, or Refresh.
-
Alot will depend on the FM in AH. The P-39 could outturn the 109E by a wide margin. From 8-12k it could more or less turn with a zeke, assuming an AH turnrate along the lines of an FM-2 and a top speed of 376 or so its not a bad plane at all. Hopefully the option to remove the wing .50 cals will be available as well.
-
This was one of the aircraft in the voting awhile back when the B25H won out.
I had voted for it back then :D
-
I'm wondering if those things will be true for the versions with the gun pods, though, humble. The Q only came with the pods, as far as I know, and was used lots as a ground strafer.
-
Originally posted by humble
Alot will depend on the FM in AH. The P-39 could outturn the 109E by a wide margin. From 8-12k it could more or less turn with a zeke, assuming an AH turnrate along the lines of an FM-2 and a top speed of 376 or so its not a bad plane at all. Hopefully the option to remove the wing .50 cals will be available as well.
That sounds great. Turns like an FM-2, nearly 380 mph top speed and a decent rollrate. Not bad a'tall. I am also happy to see the good forward visibility out of the cockpit.
-
I think the turn rate will still be pretty good either way. The British tests vs the 109E and spirfire were with the D model. I think we'll end up with a US version not the "russianized" reality....but will still be a good bird in AH.
I agree the US 37mm will be tough to hit with, but 4 x .50 and the great dive speed will make it possible to get a guy turning. If in fact it does turn better then a hurricane then it'll be tough to get away from.
-
in the game IL2:FB the P39 is total pants. i hopes it aint so.
-
can anyone read how many cannon rounds that is... looks like 30 to me
-
Originally posted by Simaril
The P-39 cannon is a US made gun, (Oldsmobile T9 prototype, adopted as the M$ in USAAF service) not the 37mm used by the soviets. Like the soviet gun, though, it is an HE firing air to air weapon -- not an AP firing gun.
Would love to see a version without the gun pods...sure it will be coming. The P400 had a hispano in place of the 37mm T9, and 6 303s -- might be a nice dogfighter in the low alt AH environment.
The whole aircraft was US made, we gave or sold them to the Ruskies during WW2.
-
Originally posted by crockett
The whole aircraft was US made, we gave or sold them to the Ruskies during WW2.
Read his post again but this time also read the one he made before. ;)
-
all i can say is about time. :D
-
Looks like a good addition, but I'm still waiting for the 410.
-
Originally posted by 5PointOh
So were getting the P-39. Hmmm does that mean this is next?
(http://www.lonestar-mvpa.org/images/2005/05tempbl.JPG)
Yes I'm greedy!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A26, NOW WE'RE TALKIN!!!
Cryin shame if its not next....
With a load of 1000lb'ers, it would be the HANGAR BANGER SUPREME!!!
Yeah Yeah Yeah.... We need other planes for scenarios first....
The Q looks cool tho!!! WTG HTC:aok
-
Looks like their already flying the p39 so that means only 2 weeks Yepee-Ki-A
-
Originally posted by humble
If in fact it does turn better then a hurricane then it'll be tough to get away from.
And why would it turn better than Hurri? Down low it was comparable to 109F in turn performance, in terms of speed and climb, 109F had slight advantage.
-
Here is a background on White 23 as per Festers skin.
http://lend-lease.airforce.ru/english/articles/sheppard/p39/index.htm
Has Fester modeled the fuselage patch forward of the tail section?
some interesting facts about White 23 there in.
Should be a fun plane .............. the visibility from the cockpit seems to make it ideal for lead shots compared to most other ac in the inventory.
This actual aircraft had it's wing mounted cannon removed and had been at some time fitted with a external tank for ferrying purposes.
Thinkiing you should add a can of US "Bully beef" some where in the cockpit......... cans of this were found in the wing s in the ordinence stores.
http://lend-lease.airforce.ru/english/articles/sheppard/p39/p39e.jpg
-
Originally posted by SFCHONDO
Are they going to model the CG problems which caused it to flat spin rather easly. And was even more pronounce after it fired it's ammo, creating an even worse CG problem. Or am I thinking of a different plane.
Only if your heavy handed.
-
awwww Fester !!! you should have skinned it for the 35FG, 39th FS "Cobra in the Clouds".... not that I'm prejudice or anything
-
Hope they sneak in the D and N also.:noid
-
Originally posted by 2bighorn
And why would it turn better than Hurri? Down low it was comparable to 109F in turn performance, in terms of speed and climb, 109F had slight advantage.
Actually it could turn circles around a 109F. The P-39 took less then 720 degree's to go from immediately in front to immediately behind a 109E in a flat turning circle. The 109 had the edge in both speed and verticals however. Those are british tests during the P-39's evaluation phase. The p-39s marginal superiority in a flat circle vs the hurricane and spitfire didnt make up for its lack of performance at higher alts and in the vertical vs the 109 compared to the other two.
-
Humble -- what version was used in those tests, and what year were they run?
-
Originally posted by Simaril
Humble -- what version was used in those tests, and what year were they run?
I think it was the D model.
-
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by SFCHONDO
Are they going to model the CG problems which caused it to flat spin rather easly. And was even more pronounce after it fired it's ammo, creating an even worse CG problem. Or am I thinking of a different plane.
Originally posted by Bronk
Only if your heavy handed.
Love it when someone doesn't answer the question to the post and just types some garbage. Guess I need to type s..l..o..w..e..r so some can understand the post....LOL. So if you know the answer to my two part question, I'd love to hear your version. Otherwise don't respond. I was just trying to find out if this was the aircraft that had CG problems and tended to go into flat turns easily, and if so would HT model it that way. Anyway thanks for stopping by Bronk. :D
-
Originally posted by humble
Actually it could turn circles around a 109F. The P-39 took less then 720 degree's to go from immediately in front to immediately behind a 109E in a flat turning circle. The 109 had the edge in both speed and verticals however.
Did you read how the tests were conducted (not sure if we are talking about the same tests)? British conclusion: it was useless against Luftwaffe. They've sent p-39 to fight barges...
Originally posted by humble
Those are british tests during the P-39's evaluation phase. The p-39s marginal superiority in a flat circle vs the hurricane and spitfire didnt make up for its lack of performance at higher alts and in the vertical vs the 109 compared to the other two.
Marginal superiority? In British tests, Spitfire (Vb) vastly outperformed P-39 in all aspects but top speed. Even the old Hurri was better in few areas...
-
Well hondo..... have you emailed HT or are you asking us to read minds for you.
-
thx for the compliments but Greebo did the excellent cockpit interior and wheel wells and flap interiors for the p39.
I just did the exterior :)
the gun pods are removable like the 109 series gondolas :)
and tilt I modeled it as it would look before getting the weight and drag and speed reduction of the nonaerodynamic patch around the radio compartment and tail. :)
there are some illustrations of this p39 as it went through phases showing its looks throughout its lifespan.
if you would like to know more about this particular p39Q it has a very interesting history....
the link is here...
http://lend-lease.airforce.ru/english/articles/sheppard/p39/index.htm
(http://lend-lease.airforce.ru/english/articles/sheppard/p39/p39k.jpg)
(http://lend-lease.airforce.ru/english/articles/sheppard/p39/p39g.jpg)
-
See Rule #4
-
Originally posted by Shuffler
Well hondo..... have you emailed HT or are you asking us to read minds for you.
I am asking if this is the aircraft that had CG problems and if so was wondering if they would model it that way. Figured some of the tech guys here that know this stuff would answer if this plane had CG problems. Or if I was thinking of another plane. Guess the part if they would model it with the CG problem, if in fact it has that problem would be subject to assumption. Since the way i stated that part was not to clear. Should have stated it a bit differently. But if you can read HTs mind for me, by all means let me know the answer...LOL
-
Originally posted by Bronk
See Rule #4
now now children...no need for this kind of stuff...let's continue talk of this P-39:t
What were the guns on it....1 37mm and 4 .50s?
#S#
Banshee7
-
And oh yeah....has someone started work on sounds for the 39?
-
Does anyone know the amount of ammo it held?
-
Originally posted by trax1
Does anyone know the amount of ammo it held?
30x37mm + 1000x.50 (2x200+2x300)
-
LOL Banshee, I'm not paying the kid any attention. I think I have my answer to my question on the P39. Should be a good addition.
-
Originally posted by SFCHONDO
LOL Banshee, I'm not paying the kid any attention. I think I have my answer to my question on the P39. Should be a good addition.
No kidding I answered it for you. What no thank you?
-
Can't wait to fly it.
-
Originally posted by FrodeMk3
Can't wait to fly it.
Wait for 2 weeks and yer good 2 go :noid
#S#
Banshee7
-
Originally posted by 2bighorn
Did you read how the tests were conducted (not sure if we are talking about the same tests)? British conclusion: it was useless against Luftwaffe. They've sent p-39 to fight barges...
Marginal superiority? In British tests, Spitfire (Vb) vastly outperformed P-39 in all aspects but top speed. Even the old Hurri was better in few areas...
Yes I have read them and am accuarately stating them. The 39 outturned and outdove the Vb in british testing.
-
Speed/climb chart from AHT for those interested.
(http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n277/1bronk1/p-39.jpg)
-
Originally posted by humble
Yes I have read them and am accuarately stating them. The 39 outturned and outdove the Vb in british testing.
I've never heard about any tests where p-39 out turned Spitfire.
Would you mind sharing some references, maybe a link, quotes, possible scans?
-
Originally posted by FrodeMk3
Can't wait to fly it.
Can't wait for others to fly them so that I can shoot them down :D
-
Originally posted by Bronk
Speed/climb chart from AHT for those interested.
(http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n277/1bronk1/p-39.jpg)
Note that this chart DOES NOT show max speed in combat power, only MIL power. A P-39Q, sans the under wing guns, could flirt with 400 mph at FTH (critical altitude).
I'm hoping that HTC gives us the option of omitting the wing guns in the hanger. Many, if not most Soviet P-39Qs had them removed.
My regards,
Widewing
-
Widewing,
Originally posted by Citabria
the gun pods are removable like the 109 series gondolas :)
:aok
-
If anyone is interested in the opinion of the P-39 by American ace Elliott Dent, I'll plug in a link below. Dent, under the handle of cdb11062, posted frequently to usenet news groups during the middle-late 1990s. Dent flew with the 49th FG, flying both the P-40N and P-38L.
Elliott Dent's thoughts on the P-39 (http://www.yarchive.net/mil/p39.html)
My regards,
Widewing
-
The British initially tested the P-39D vs a captured 109e. The 39 out turned the 109e so handily that it amazed the british. So they flew it vs the spit and hurricane. While it could outturn both in a flat circle it had much worse handling at altitude. The 39's were flown in some low alt rubarbs and got high marks from the pilots involved for its exceptional handling at lower alts but at higher alts it suffered greatly.
Bob Hoover felt the P-39 was one of the best fighters he ever flew. I'll look for the links for the tests for you...
-
Originally posted by SFCHONDO
I am asking if this is the aircraft that had CG problems and if so was wondering if they would model it that way. Figured some of the tech guys here that know this stuff would answer if this plane had CG problems. Or if I was thinking of another plane. Guess the part if they would model it with the CG problem, if in fact it has that problem would be subject to assumption. Since the way i stated that part was not to clear. Should have stated it a bit differently. But if you can read HTs mind for me, by all means let me know the answer...LOL
I've been trying since my post..... all I get is a hazy view and what looks like a spinning room. From time to time I see the hazy bottom of a vodka bottle. More as this progresses.....
Widewing good read... thanks!
-
(http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/mustang//p-51-37320-chart.jpg)
http://www.spitfireperformance.com/
-
Originally posted by Banshee7
And oh yeah....has someone started work on sounds for the 39?
just need folder names had sounds for this for awhile now
-
I'm assuming the P39 has 3 500lbs of bombs and maybe some rockets?
-
Originally posted by Widewing
If anyone is interested in the opinion of the P-39 by American ace Elliott Dent, I'll plug in a link below. Dent, under the handle of cdb11062, posted frequently to usenet news groups during the middle-late 1990s. Dent flew with the 49th FG, flying both the P-40N and P-38L.
Elliott Dent's thoughts on the P-39 (http://www.yarchive.net/mil/p39.html)
My regards,
Widewing
Thanks WW, good read.
-
Originally posted by Shuffler
I've been trying since my post..... all I get is a hazy view and what looks like a spinning room. From time to time I see the hazy bottom of a vodka bottle. More as this progresses.....
:rofl Good one :aok
-
Originally posted by VansCrew1
I'm assuming the P39 has 3 500lbs of bombs and maybe some rockets?
Nope, provisions for one bomb or DT. IIRC
-
Veteran P-39
pilots got the hell out at the first sign of a runaway prop.
:lol . Sorry but i had to laugh at that! Interesting read about the P39 WW, thank's sir. :aok
-
Originally posted by VansCrew1
I'm assuming the P39 has 3 500lbs of bombs and maybe some rockets?
it had 30 1.34lb, cal 1.46, gas propelled ballistic missiles. Initially, missile was guided by tubular device.
It also carried 500lb of "drop and forget" HE charges.
-
Originally posted by MjTalon
:lol . Sorry but i had to laugh at that! Interesting read about the P39 WW, thank's sir. :aok
Some great quotes in there...
A combat report of John "Shady" Lane, 35FG 39FS, gives you a sense of the
airfighting going on in those days, and the attitude of the kids fighting it:
"One definite, one probable, one damaged, one possible, twenty impossible and
hell knows how many I didn't see."
Some pilots didn't mind the engine behind them at all. When asked by a
journalist what aspect of the P-39 he liked, 7 victory ace George Welch
said, "Well, it's got 12 hundred pounds of Allison armor plate."
Quoting a P-39 Instructor: "This here airplane is perfectly safe as long as you don't crash it."
Personally, I think the P-39Q will be more uber than most expect in the low altitude environs of Aces High. I'm sure that I'll enjoy it.
My regards,
Widewing
-
Originally posted by Widewing
Personally, I think the P-39Q will be more uber than most expect in the low altitude environs of Aces High. I'm sure that I'll enjoy it.
Should be decent. Not the beginners ride though.
-
Nice to see it! :aok
Small note: Please make the underwing 12.7mm's "optional" ala the 109 series wing guns as most were removed in Russian service.
-
"It was a good-looking airplane. If looks counted for anything, it would have been a great airplane. And the Russians absolutely loved them, and wound up with most of them. Under 15,000 feet, the P-39, called the Airacobra, was a decent if underpowered performer.
But the Airacobra was mincemeat above 15,000 feet, and useless in Western Europe, where virtually all of the flying and fighting was at double that altitude. ...
But in October of 1942, I was thrilled to be flying it. It was unique, with its engine behind the cockpit, and the propeller drive shaft running between the pilot's legs. It had a tricycle landing gear, unlike anything in our arsenal except the P-38. And the cockpit was more like a car's, with a door instead of a swing-up or sliding canopy, and windows that actually rolled up and down with a crank. You could taxi the thing while resting your elbows on the sill, like cruising the boulevard on a Saturday night."
Bud Anderson
-
Originally posted by 1Boner
Nope!!
You'll see alot of this next!
(http://img177.imageshack.us/img177/1015/p39kel3.jpg)
Looks like it can double as a submarine!!
Pilot's remains were still in that bird when they dragged it up.
-
Here is some interesting pics and some very interesting information to read.
It seems that initially they were fitted with either a 20mm or a 30 mm ( to be used for either AP or HE)and 4 .50's (2 in nose and 2 in wing but later all 4 were in wing). So I wonder which we will have here. Either way is a nice read.
20http://www.marchfield.org/p39q.htm
sorry not sure how to post a link you will have to copy and paste in address bar
-
Originally posted by Bronk
Speed/climb chart from AHT for those interested.
(http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n277/1bronk1/p-39.jpg)
I'll bet you never see a Rook in this bird ever.
(No performance after 15K and barely aloft at 25K.... )
-
Originally posted by 2bighorn
I've never heard about any tests where p-39 out turned Spitfire.
Would you mind sharing some references, maybe a link, quotes, possible scans?
The link I had doesnt work, here is the quote that sent me looking originally...
The Soviets fought over terrain much like that of Iowa, were based close to the
enemy, and the Germans chose to send their bombers over at medium and low
altitudes. So none of the factors that worked against the P-39 in New Guinea
were present on the Eastern Front.
Also worth noting. An RAF Duxford comparison test of a captured Me 109E and
P-39C showed the Bell outperforming the 109 in every category except rate of
climb when below 15,000 ft. The P-39 could easily out-turn the 109--it took
the 'Cobra less than 720 degrees to get on the tail of an Me that was planted
on its tail.
So the P-39 should have had no trouble dealing with the 109 at the altitudes
common in the East.
It's in the link that WW posted above. I'll google the Duxford combat tests and see if I can find it. It's in the appendex/postscript and describes the "tests" with the spitty/hurricane as a bit of an afterthought in the summary. I dont think they were formal tests as much as friendly dogfights/follow the leader comparisions...
-
I saw the screens.
And my seat is, for some reason, quite wet.
Let's see what research I can scrounge up once I get addicted to this beast.
First mission: find out why the hell you Yanks didn't operate it very much.... it seems fine to me according to the on-paper data in my 'Hamlyn Guide to American Aircraft of WWII'.
-
This isnt the link I was looking for but its got some similiar 411. Where I'm a bit confused is the comparision here with the spitfire. It clearly repeats the P-39C's ability to handily out turn the 109E but then says it cant outturn the spitV. The 109E and spit V were fairly close with a slight but clear edge to the spitV. For the P-39 to handily out turn the 109 it would need to be a bit better then the spit.
In the documents I read the spit and 39 were more mock dogfighting & follow the leader. At higher alts the spit handily outclassed the 39 but at 10K the spit couldnt out turn or outdive the 39 and the spit pilot had to keep the fight climbing and in the verticals to combat the 39.link (http://home.att.net/~jbaugher1/p39_5.html)
Stanford Tuck was one of the pilots involved (he commanded 3 squadrons including 601 which flew the P-39)...
-
Looks fun and nice model. I was rather expecting to see this pretty soon based on how close the votes were.
It will be interesting to see how the quirks of this fighter manifest in AH.
A few comments on expectations though, it will not out turn a Zero and it isn't going to be popping tanks with a super 37mm cannon.
It shiuld turn nicely and handle pretty well at AH combat altitudes, but you'll want to avoid stalls as the odd CoG could be nasty. The 37mm cannon is such crap compared to other large caliber guns that most players would want to leave it in the hangar, but it will still be fun when you manage to hit with it.
I would not be surprised at all to see the P-39D added as well.
-
Well, they could always add the P-400. That eliminates the jam prone 37MM cannon, and replaces it with a 20MM.
-
AWESOME :D
-
Originally posted by humble
At higher alts the spit handily outclassed the 39 but at 10K the spit couldnt out turn or outdive the 39 and the spit pilot had to keep the fight climbing and in the verticals to combat the 39.link (http://home.att.net/~jbaugher1/p39_5.html)
Even your link above says: "Although the Airacobra was faster than the Spitfire up to 15,000 feet, it was outclimbed and out-turned by the Spitfire."
If you compare technical data of Spit Vb vs P-39, ie, weight, engine power, wings (wing loading and lift coefficient), there's no way in hell, P-39 could keep up in turn fight.
It should be a good match for 109E and F though. I still give advantage to 109, simply due to miserable 37mm tater gun in P-39.
-
The reasons the USAAF did not go with it are fairly straight forward.
ETO: They needed a fighter with long range and high alt performance, to escort bombers and combat the LW, which the P-39 had neither. P-38 and P-47 in 1942-3 were the logical types to go with, to partner with the heavy strategic bombers. For that reason neither the P-40 or the P-39 were used by the USAAF in England.
Pacific: They needed again, range, and a fighter with better performance to combat the Japanese types. The P-40 had better handling, and so was kept on as a secondary fighter into 1944, but as the P-38 and P47 became available in the Pacific, and later the P-51 Mustang, the P-39 was relegated to Tactical Recon units in the USAAF. The P-38 was king in the Pacific, it had range (above all), it was fast, it had a heavy warload.
The P39 did see some service in N. Africa, in the ground attack role, untill it could be replaced.
The P-39 just didn't serve what the USAAF needed in a fighter in WW2, unlike the Russians, who wanted a fighter that could fly low and fast, had reasonable low alt handling, range not being that much of an issue (they flew very close to the front), the P-39 was a welcome addition to their own domestic types like the Yak and Lavochkin. It was well built by Russian standards, and despite its quirks, they used anything that could be put to good use against the Germans.
-
Ah thanks, makes complete sense. I just thought it was adequate enough.
Btw, you all see the gunsight in that screens page? Looks to me like a nice change in gunsight reticle size, eh, Sax?
Or perhaps the gunsight itself is smaller on the Airacobra.
-
I can't wait!
-
I remember voting for this thing way back when. I think I voted for it each phase except the first (I voted Ki-44 then :( )
I've been fiddling with it in IL2'46. I'm a bit of a fist handed fool, it gets into those spins really easy, takes some patience to get the hang of. The '37 is pretty bad there to, but it's good on bombers.
Might also have something to do with the engine being behind you, might make it a bit tougher to shoot out. New HO bird of choice? *shudders*
I remember using it some back in Warbirds, but I was even worse back then (Even I'm not sure how I could be a worse pilot.) So it seemed kinda junky. But it's a darn fun plane, in IL2 at least.
Makes me wish I had a better computer sooooo bad, my old 2.8ghz celeron died this last month, I'm running on a legacy tech Pent III Coppermine 868mhz, 280mbs of ram, hunk of junk. I've probably got enough free processing power on idle, to play AH, offline. But my video ram sits at a nice round... 32mbs... :furious
I can't wait to fix my computer now.
-
Well it's not my A6M3, but almost any new plane is a good plane. Can't wait to try it out, it looks sweet. Wtg HTC. :aok
-
Originally posted by Squire
The reasons the USAAF did not go with it are fairly straight forward.
ETO: They needed a fighter with long range and high alt performance, to escort bombers and combat the LW, which the P-39 had neither. P-38 and P-47 in 1942-3 were the logical types to go with, to partner with the heavy strategic bombers. For that reason neither the P-40 or the P-39 were used by the USAAF in England.
Pacific: They needed again, range, and a fighter with better performance to combat the Japanese types. The P-40 had better handling, and so was kept on as a secondary fighter into 1944, but as the P-38 and P47 became available in the Pacific, and later the P-51 Mustang, the P-39 was relegated to Tactical Recon units in the USAAF. The P-38 was king in the Pacific, it had range (above all), it was fast, it had a heavy warload.
The P39 did see some service in N. Africa, in the ground attack role, untill it could be replaced.
The P-39 just didn't serve what the USAAF needed in a fighter in WW2, unlike the Russians, who wanted a fighter that could fly low and fast, had reasonable low alt handling, range not being that much of an issue (they flew very close to the front), the P-39 was a welcome addition to their own domestic types like the Yak and Lavochkin. It was well built by Russian standards, and despite its quirks, they used anything that could be put to good use against the Germans.
For all these reasons, I think the 39 will do well in the Main Arenas. The only thing that might hurt it is the guns package.
-
Originally posted by 2bighorn
Even your link above says: "Although the Airacobra was faster than the Spitfire up to 15,000 feet, it was outclimbed and out-turned by the Spitfire."
If you compare technical data of Spit Vb vs P-39, ie, weight, engine power, wings (wing loading and lift coefficient), there's no way in hell, P-39 could keep up in turn fight.
It should be a good match for 109E and F though. I still give advantage to 109, simply due to miserable 37mm tater gun in P-39.
Which is exactly what I told you, however the author is paraphrasing something he read and he doesnt note anything specific to the tests or the pilots. What he wrote doesnt really quite add up and is at odds with what Stanford Tuck actually wrote in the duxford tests. Stanford Tuck actually flew the 109E vs the spitfire Mk II and was quite impressed. His comments are markedly different from the earlier comments on the 109E vs spitI as well as those of various german, british and later "warbird" pilots who flew both. My thought is we're dealing with a significant variable in pilot quality as Sanford Tuck was one of the most gifted fighter pilots of WW2. Someone of his skill level would get alot more out of a 109 (or P-39) then even another pilot thought of as "good".
I didnt post that to prove or disprove my comments but to show what i'd "refound" so far.
-
I wonder if this plane will be listed as RUSSIAN on Planes, Vehicles, Boats page. Most P39s like this ended up in Russian service, so HTC might as well list this plane RUSSIAN.
-
Originally posted by mg1942
I wonder if this plane will be listed as RUSSIAN on Planes, Vehicles, Boats page. Most P39s like this ended up in Russian service, so HTC might as well list this plane RUSSIAN.
Doubt it. The only one we have to compare it too is the US built Boston Mk III, but the Boston Mk III was not used by the USAAF, later models were as the A-20 series.
The P-39Q was used by the USAAF as well as by Allied airforces, including the VVS.
-
Wow thats cool.
The AC that was found in in 2004 in a lake (if im not reading this wrong) was built in Buffalo,New York. I actually worked in the building where it was built, as a forklift driver. The building was turned into a candy factory/distro center at one point and thats what it was when I was there (Tetzo Brothers). Dont know what it currently is used for as I haven't been back since i quit 8yrs ago.
Wow, Cool.....
-
Originally posted by mg1942
I wonder if this plane will be listed as RUSSIAN on Planes, Vehicles, Boats page. Most P39s like this ended up in Russian service, so HTC might as well list this plane RUSSIAN.
Hmm, all those squadrons of the USAAF that operated them in the Pacific and those from the Aluetians and MTO don't count? :)
-
Originally posted by mg1942
I wonder if this plane will be listed as RUSSIAN on Planes, Vehicles, Boats page. Most P39s like this ended up in Russian service, so HTC might as well list this plane RUSSIAN.
He'd have to use Russian boost and weights, that wont happen.
-
Good skin choice
-
Just read through the pages...anyone who doesn't think the P 39 will do well,,,,I look foward to seeing you in the MA in my Kobrusha
(http://www.elknet.pl/acestory/foto/pokri1.jpg)
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
Hmm, all those squadrons of the USAAF that operated them in the Pacific and those from the Aluetians and MTO don't count? :)
I recall USAAF only used 39Cs and Ds
-
Looks as though yep, HT finally doing the P-39. Should be a low to mid alt powerhouse in the right hands. Possibly the Anti La7? :D
(I still will be prowling in my Macci O' Lovin and my 109 O' Doom) :aok
-
Originally posted by DaddyAck
Looks as though yep, HT finally doing the P-39. Should be a low to mid alt powerhouse in the right hands. Possibly the Anti La7? :D
(I still will be prowling in my Macci O' Lovin and my 109 O' Doom) :aok
Then it will not be a problem for us rooks. :D :D
-
Originally posted by mg1942
I recall USAAF only used 39Cs and Ds
You'd be wrong about that :)
USAAF had 39Fs, 39Ns and 39Qs as well. One of the surviving 39s is the 39Q flown by William Shomo, who later won the Medal of Honor in a P51.
(http://www.warbirdregistry.org/p39-p63registry/images/p39-snooks2nd.jpg)
-
Might just be enough to get me out of the 38G a bit :)
Our old Airwarrior buddy Earl Miller over Tunisia in his P39 "Eloise" of the 345th FS, 350th FG, 12th AF, MTO.
Ain't she purty :)
(http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s199/guppy35/Eloise2.jpg)
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
Ain't she purty :)
Yes, so don't touch it. :)
-
Our p39
(http://lh5.google.fi/mipoikel/R5r3p0jr5ZI/AAAAAAAAB2s/UG6VwxaotvE/s800/DSC_0512.JPG)
More pics http://picasaweb.google.fi/mipoikel/TikkakoskiMuseum
-
Originally posted by mipoikel
Then it will not be a problem for us rooks. :D :D
Probably not. Ya know I have found myself compelled to fight against y'all more often jsut for the higher altitude fighting. I kinda despise the on the deck furballin'. :D Yeah Im a knit.:)
-
Has to be one of the worst looking planes out there from the period but i guess its good news for the fans of the p39 :)
-
Originally posted by Widewing Elliott Dent's thoughts on the P-39 (http://www.yarchive.net/mil/p39.html)
fascinating link WW :aok
the "pure green peas" at Guadalcanal stuff is amazing, like the 58th were a flat-packed fighter group from IKEA :confused:
-
Bob Hoover felt the P-39 was one of the best fighters he ever flew.
If Bob said it, that'll be good enough for me.
-
Just need to make sure the wing guns are optional as a certainty.
:aok
More pictures,
(http://www.world-war-2-planes.com/images/p39_russian_550.jpg)
(http://hem.passagen.se/galland/Rechlak.gif)
-
I think you would be hard pressed to find a photo (not a painting done in error) of a VVS P-39Q with the .50 cal gondolas on, unless its a photo of the factory fresh birds "en route" to Russia, where they came off.
The USAAF did use them, and there are photos of them in the SW Pacific.
-
wing guns are optional.
-
Originally posted by Nilsen
Has to be one of the worst looking planes out there from the period but i guess its good news for the fans of the p39 :)
I heartily concur!
I expect it will be good fun though...
Turns like a 109F... hits like a 109K4.... sounds alright to me.
I can't see myself flying it often but it seems like it will be a good little 'fun' ride every now and then.
-
I won't claim to know what the -39Q should or shouldn't do without having technical charts - but I will say that if it has a sustained turn rate/radius comparable to a fully rated Bf 109F-4, then all the current sims with 39 variants have gotten their models horrendously wrong.
-
Originally posted by Nilsen
Has to be one of the worst looking planes out there from the period but i guess its good news for the fans of the p39 :)
"Worst looking"???
I don't think so....
(http://home.att.net/~historyzone/Airacobra2.jpg)
My regards,
Widewing
-
I think it was Fester who posted that the pods are optional like on the 109
-
Originally posted by kozhedub
I won't claim to know what the -39Q should or shouldn't do without having technical charts - but I will say that if it has a sustained turn rate/radius comparable to a fully rated Bf 109F-4, then all the current sims with 39 variants have gotten their models horrendously wrong.
Our 109F-4 weighs 6,393 lbs with full fuel and the lesser 20mm ammo load. It has a wing area of 174.38 square feet. This produces a wing loading of 36.66 lb/square foot.
The typical P-39Q weighs 7,570 lb with full fuel and the extra .50 cal gun pods. It has a wing area of 213.22 square feet. This produces a wing loading of 35.50 lb/square foot.
So, it should turn somewhat tighter in clean configuration. What makes the 109F-4 so effective in AH2 is the excellent flaps. We don't know how effective the P-39s flaps will be until we have a chance to test fly the plane.
Even without knowing how the P-39's flaps will be modeled, I can state that the P-39Q should have the advantage between corner speed (approximately 265 mph) down to just below 200 mph where the 109F can start getting flaps out. At speeds below that, we can't do anything but speculate at this point.
Keep in mind that the P-39Q's engine made 1,420 hp, while the 109F-4's DB 601 made 1,375 hp. This produced similar power loadings, meaning that sustained turn rates will be similar as well, with the P-39Q possibly having a very small advantage.
P-39 flaps could be set fully down at 150 mph. Max speed for beginning to lower flaps is at least 200 mph, the same for the landing gear. It may be higher, but I have not seen a reference that was specific enough. Flaps can set at increments between full up and 43 degrees.
Once I can test the P-39Q, I'll be better able to fill in the blanks.
I expect to see a maximum speed of 388 mph for the P-39Q with gun pods, and about 392 mph without. Climb will be somewhere in between the P-38J and P-51D. Rate of roll should be similar to the P-40E. Range will be rather short, about the same as the Yak-9U. Of course, P-39 will have the benefit of a drop tank (probably 75 gallons) that will increase range by about 70%. That's fairly close to that of a clean F4U-1D. Adequate range, but not great.
Overall, I expect the P-39Q to more than hold its own in the late war arenas. It will be very effective in the mid war arena. Likewise, if the P-39D is included, it will be effective in the early war arena, being faster than the majority of the early war plane set.
As others have mentioned, it will not be a good ride for noobs. Those who have excellent plane handing skills will quickly find ways to use the P-39s inherent instability to good measure.
My regards,
Widewing
-
Thanks HTC !!!!!
RASCAL
-
I found this to be a interesting read, 2 parts
"The Airacobra aircraft is considered by the Germans to be the most dangerous enemy and should be engaged in combat only when they [the Germans] have numerical superiority and the advantage in altitude and surprise."
http://lend-lease.airforce.ru/english/articles/romanenko/p-39/index.htm
and Borada means Beard? :)
-
Originally posted by Citabria
wing guns are optional.
Now THAT'S making things really interesting. I expect to be one of those taking a very serious look at this baby.
And yes, I think it's a good looking plane, like a dart with wings.
-
Don't forget that there's some precedent for how the P-39 will do: it was in WarBirds for a few years you know. ;-)
The 37MM gun was far from useless for A2A combat, but it was tricky. There, it was a slow bullet but it had pretty good ballistics, with a not-unacceptable rate of fire.
The plane didn't have a lot of power, but it was very VERY well streamlined and held E in the Zoom Climb pretty well, and it dove GREAT. Visibility was pretty good to (especially the rear), and it shrugged off certain damage pretty well. It's small like a Yak (it can spoil aiming). It has neat handling characteristics.
In fact, back then it was my second favorite plane, after the 190-A8.
During the 2000 Warbirds Con in Palm Springs, we had Robert "Mouse" Shaw giving a seminar. Afterwards, he joined us in the main ballroom, where I was flying the Iron Dog with the projector, for all to see. I was lucky enough to have a damn good sortie with Mouse watching the whole time with what appeared to be great interest. I was nailing cross-nose snapshots, clean D400 6 shots after saddling up, and a lot of other "theoretically impossible" shots with the 37mm spud gun. Most were one-hit kills.
Afterwards, I drove Mouse to the airport to get him home, when I admitted to him that I was a nervous wreck flying that plane with him watching. I told him I was a student of his must-read ACM book for a few years at that point, and that I felt like a student showing his teacher what he had learned from the class he taught. He honored me by saying that it looked like I learned pretty good.
Anyway, this little story isn't just to tell everyone how great I am ;-) , but to say that the P-39 has a lot of potential to be a fun little plane.
Don't forget that Chuck Yeager said it was his favorite fighter plane of all time...
-Llama
-
If HT follows the schedule that they did with the B-25 it will be out in the next update, twenty days from when the pics were released!
-
Without the wing guns, clean, it should be decent at low level. I never minded the Yak-9T its just the secondary armament with just a single 7.7mm MG is a joke. At least the P-39 has a pair of 12.7mm in the nose as well as the 37mm, you can at least still fight after the cannon runs out.
Hey WW, is there any data on TAS at sea level? Curious about its below 5k speeds. Im sure the 385 it gets is achieved at @ 15-20k.
-
Originally posted by Squire
Hey WW, is there any data on TAS at sea level? Curious about its below 5k speeds. Im sure the 385 it gets is achieved at @ 15-20k.
Looks like the P-39Q could do about 310 mph @ sea level in MIL power. I imagine around 320 mph in WEP, maybe 325 mph without the gun pods. It's best speed, in WEP is at 9,700 feet (above that is where the max power of 1,420 hp begins to tail off). Best speed in MIL power should be up around 12,000 feet (375-377 mph).
Much depends on what data set HTC uses.
My regards,
Widewing
-
Squire,
Just remember, the P-39's M4 37mm cannon is not anywhere near as good as the Yak-9T's NS-37 37mm cannon.
M4:
Muzzle Velocity: 610m/sec
Rate of Fire: 150rpm
NS-37:
Muzzle Velocity: 900m/sec
Rate of Fire: 240rpm
-
It's my pleasure to kill ANYTHING with a red star on it!
-
Originally posted by 5PointOh
So were getting the P-39. Hmmm does that mean this is next?
(http://www.lonestar-mvpa.org/images/2005/05tempbl.JPG)
Yes I'm greedy!
hey, my dad knows the mechanic of that plane in real life
at the georgetown airshow, when i was like 5 we got to go inside of it and my bro got to fly inside, i was too scared, then i saw it again about 2 years ago,
-
Originally posted by Widewing
"Worst looking"???
I don't think so....
(http://home.att.net/~historyzone/Airacobra2.jpg)
My regards,
Widewing
man that thing is sleek, its like the cadillac of the planes, not the best, but sure as hell the best looking
-
Originally posted by angelsandair
man that thing is sleek, its like the cadillac of the planes, not the best, but sure as hell the best looking
you not seen many P51's ??? :D
-
Originally posted by Widewing
"Worst looking"???
I don't think so....
(http://home.att.net/~historyzone/Airacobra2.jpg)
My regards,
Widewing
oh but i do.
yuck :lol
-
Originally posted by kvuo75
you not seen many P51's ??? :D
I once heard someone call P 51 a pregnant fish...
Seems right to me.
:cool:
-
Originally posted by RTHolmes
they dont get ejected?
just noticed the cannons in the cockpit, dam that must have been noisy :(
that isnt the 37 those are 50cals
-
Originally posted by JB73
COOL....
Thats a gunsight I made in the screenshot :D
(http://www1.hitechcreations.com/news/images/p39/p39q1.jpg)
can you send me that gunsight
-
I actually think the slighlty lower ROF of the M-4 37mm might not be too bad, the NS-37 burps them out a bit too quick for only 30 rnds of ammo.
In any case, to hit with the spud thrower, you get in close anyways. I guess we will see. Its interesting to note that the N-37 on the MiG-15 also had a slower velocity, 690 m/s. I saw an interview with a Chinese MiG-15 pilot that said you needed to get closer than 200 yards, which sounds about right to me.
Go for the kill with the 50s, and if the 37mm hits, great, if not, oh well.
-
MY GOD
THAT PLANE HAS DOORS
-
Originally posted by croduh
MY GOD
THAT PLANE HAS DOORS
It also has roll-up windows too... Handy for those pesty toll booths.
My regards,
Widewing
-
Originally posted by Widewing
Looks like the P-39Q could do about 310 mph @ sea level in MIL power. I imagine around 320 mph in WEP, maybe 325 mph without the gun pods. It's best speed, in WEP is at 9,700 feet (above that is where the max power of 1,420 hp begins to tail off). Best speed in MIL power should be up around 12,000 feet (375-377 mph).
Much depends on what data set HTC uses.
Here's the SEFC for the P-39Q-1...
(http://home.att.net/~historyzone/P-39Q-SEFC.jpg)
My regards,
Widewing
-
Originally posted by Squire
I actually think the slighlty lower ROF of the M-4 37mm might not be too bad, the NS-37 burps them out a bit too quick for only 30 rnds of ammo.
In any case, to hit with the spud thrower, you get in close anyways. I guess we will see. Its interesting to note that the N-37 on the MiG-15 also had a slower velocity, 690 m/s. I saw an interview with a Chinese MiG-15 pilot that said you needed to get closer than 200 yards, which sounds about right to me.
Go for the kill with the 50s, and if the 37mm hits, great, if not, oh well.
hehe I was going to say the lower rate of fire would be good for me, help me save ammo :lol
-
"I have traveled faster than any man on earth, and above it 620 miles an hour, almost 75 miles per hour faster than a bullet fired from a .45 caliber automatic. My adventure in super-speed happened while I was dive-testing a Bell P-39, the Airacobra, on a sort of "busman's holiday" from my job as a commercial air line pilot."
-Andrew Charles McDonough
July 1941 Popular Mechanics
http://www.mechanicalhistory.com/node/38
-
same for me on lower rate of fire. when i fire taters from yak9t or german 30mm i try to fire only one bullet. rate of fire on such a 1 shot kill gun isn't really that big of a deal.
-
I wonder which units are the first to receive this new fighter.
:noid
-
Any chance for the P-63 in the package????????????
-
Originally posted by Angus
Any chance for the P-63 in the package????????????
Doubt it. The P-63 is an entirely different aircraft, not just an upgraded P-39. Be like asking to get a Ki-44 in the Ki-43 addon (when it happens).
-
Doubt it. The P-63 is an entirely different aircraft, not just an upgraded P-39. Be like asking to get a Ki-44 in the Ki-43 addon (when it happens).
I do expect a P-39N with it, tho.
-
Originally posted by Citabria
.... on lower rate .... when i fire taters ..... fire only one bullet. rate of fire..... isn't really that big of a deal.
Yeah, I agree. If you aim your shot and land a 30mm or greater caliber cannon round on a vital part of your foe, something is dieing. :aok
-
Originally posted by Kweassa
I do expect a P-39N with it, tho.
N and Q are almost the same.
We should get a D and a L/K that would get all 3 motors.
-
Originally posted by Megalodon
N and Q are almost the same.
We should get a D and a L/K that would get all 3 motors.
D-2, k, and L have the 1590 hp wep. That would be nice =)
-
I'd guess we'll get a P-39D along with the P-39Q. Anything else is bonus.
-
Would like to see the P-39D-1 or the P-400 (both with the 20mm), it also fills the 1942 plane set.
-
I do not think any P-39 should have a 20mm option. It was extremely rare and in AH would be standard. It is just like requesting four cannon Spit Vs.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
I do not think any P-39 should have a 20mm option. It was extremely rare and in AH would be standard. It is just like requesting four cannon Spit Vs.
Not only that but the Brits poopooed the P-39 no 20mm version for them :p :t
The L was the fastest of the lot.
-
Originally posted by Simaril
What's worse, the rate of fire reeks like a cesspool on a hot day. The German 30mm rate is 7 rounds per second; the Russian N37 is 4 rounds per second; the P-39's American M4 is 2.5 rounds per second. So the round moves slowly and fires even more slowly...meaning getting hits will likely be harder in the P39 than it is with the 30mm armed K4.
Actually, it is an advantage. In YakT I always try to fire one round instead of 2. Long burst in this plane is simply a waste of ammo.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
I do not think any P-39 should have a 20mm option. It was extremely rare and in AH would be standard. It is just like requesting four cannon Spit Vs.
P400 was used a lot early in the Pacific Karnak. They had em in the MTO as well.
Definately not 'rare' like a 4 20mm Spit V
A few shots of 80th FS P400s as well as the well known Air A Qutie
(http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s199/guppy35/P400.jpg)
Norb Ruff's 80th FS bird
(http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s199/guppy35/Ruff3.jpg)
(http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s199/guppy35/AiraQtie2.jpg)
-
Originally posted by Karnak
Doubt it. The P-63 is an entirely different aircraft, not just an upgraded P-39. Be like asking to get a Ki-44 in the Ki-43 addon (when it happens).
Yeah, but externally they look very similar. Was just thinking whether they couldn't save a little up on the graphics work and get 2 for 1 ;)
P63=Absolute MA material.
-
Strange, military power limited to 15 minutes and emergency to 5 minutes?
***
I have been under impression that first of all the CoG problem existed regardless of ammo load and while the engine was placed so far back entering a spin the centrifugal force would shift the CoG so far back that recovery was virtually impossible. This for both P39 and P63.
In "Operation Pinball, the USAAFs secret aerial gunnery program in WW2" there was a passage where a combat vet flat stalled his P39 and the a/c plummeted to earth like a leaf remaining in one piece. Sadly the vet bailed out too late and died.
***
Why should it be able to reach 392mph?
The more common figure seems to be 376 mph (TAS) at 15000 ft and 325 (IAS) at deck?
***
Quite many 20mm versions illustrated: http://books.google.com/books?id=zdeu_vSQy8sC&pg=PA17&lpg=PA17&dq=p39+speed&source=web&ots=SpOskXNlIr&sig=2AcidAIxiVO3BT1e-s7Ml3bM3p4#PPA22,M1
-C+
-
The entire series is beautiful, if you ask me. P-400 is just a P-39 with a Zero behind it. :lol
I've gotta go play IL-2 now, practice practice practice. Etc. Even if it acts nothing alike, it'll make me feel better.
-
Dan,
I was under the impression that only about 50 P-39s had the 20mm cannon having been made for the Brits, then taken up by the USAAF when we got in it.
Guess I remembered wrong.
Originally posted by Angus
Yeah, but externally they look very similar. Was just thinking whether they couldn't save a little up on the graphics work and get 2 for 1 ;)
P63=Absolute MA material.
They look similar, but if you check the dimensions the P-63 is significantly larger, they do not share anything. So HTC would still have to do 100% more graphics work.
-
Originally posted by 5PointOh
So were getting the P-39. Hmmm does that mean this is next?
(http://www.lonestar-mvpa.org/images/2005/05tempbl.JPG)
Yes I'm greedy!
That's after the B-29. :aok
-
The USSR got 212 of the ex-RAF order of Aircobras, and the USAAC got 179 of that order. 100 of the USAAC P-400s were shipped to the Pacific.
So it was a major sub-varient. Used in the SW Pacific and Eastern Front.
...small compared to the 4000 P-39Qs made.
You could go with a P-39D as well, but you could also go with the P-400. I just think the P-400 is the more interesting.
There is also the P-39D-1 (20mm armed) that went to the USAAC and the VVS. Several hundred built, there are photos of them in the SW Pacific. Boyd Wagner flew a P-39D-1 from New Guinea.
*****************************************
"Why should it be able to reach 392mph?
The more common figure seems to be 376 mph (TAS) at 15000 ft and 325 (IAS) at deck?"
...you are quoting the P-39D, not the P-39Q.
-
They look similar, but if you check the dimensions the P-63 is significantly larger, they do not share anything. So HTC would still have to do 100% more graphics work.
Awww, what a waste. Anyway the P38 has some variants, so maybe we get some... couple plus different weapons loadout?
Looking forward to it.
BTW, how big is the difference between the ultimate P39 and a P63 performancewise?
-
Originally posted by Nilsen
oh but i do.
yuck :lol
Hadley M. Dixon, WWII veteran and P-39 pilot remembers thinking after he was introduced to the P-39: “Its gender was feminine. Something that pretty just had to be a she.”
He remembers, “As a result of the spin escapade, my attitude towards the P-39 changed. It was still a sweet piece of machinery but no the longer a toy with which to cavort about the skies. I had learned that I’d better handle her with kid gloves and keep my wits about me if I wanted our relationship to continue.”
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
P400 was used a lot early in the Pacific Karnak. They had em in the MTO as well.
Definately not 'rare' like a 4 20mm Spit V
A few shots of 80th FS P400s as well as the well known Air A Qutie
(http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s199/guppy35/P400.jpg)
Norb Ruff's 80th FS bird
(http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s199/guppy35/Ruff3.jpg)
(http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s199/guppy35/AiraQtie2.jpg)
Might as well get the good side
(http://www.swannysmodels.com/images/P400/real.jpg)
From what I can gather Only 80 or so P-400 were delivered to the Brits.
"Of the 675 Model 14s ordered by the RAF, 212 were diverted to the Soviet Union (54 of that number being lost in transit).
Of the rest, 179 were taken over by the USAAF. Retaining their RAF serial
numbers, over 100 Model 14s, designated P-400 in US service, and rearmed by replacing the .303 Brownings with two .50 Brownings in the cowling, and 2 .30 Brownings in each wing, the 20mm was left, as it would have been a major pain
in the rear to replace it with the 37mm cannon, were shipped to Australia in early 1942 to strengthen USAAF units there. Along with P-39Ds the P-400 became one of the first USAAF aircraft to see action when the 8th Group took it into action over port Moresby, New Guinea, in April 1942."
The P-39 sent to Britain under Lend-Lease was factory Model 14A. 494 with USAAF designations of P-39D-1 and -2 were ordered.
In July 1941 the RAF received three P-39Cs with an Allison delivering 1,150hp up to 12,000', after which power fell off sharply. Observed top speed in RAF tests was 359 mph, slower than they had been led to believe. Shortly after RAF received first Airacobra Is (which were later redesignated P-400 by USAAF) with self-sealing tanks, external drop tank, 20mm nose cannon, among other things. RAF flight tests demonstrated top speed of 355 mph, faster than Spitfire VB at 15,000', but with a slower rate of climb.
RAF 601 Sqn was equipped with Airacobras in Sept 1941 and they were in service about three months in numerous cross-channel missions to strafe ground targets and river barges. They were removed from service at the end of the year with performance deemed unsatisfactory and range too short.
RAF accepted only a total of 80 Airacobras, the rest of the order went to USSR, and to USAAF, who redesignated its 179 planes P-400 and assigned them along with P-39s to the 8th, 35th, and 67th Fighter Groups in the Southwest Pacific. By June 30, 20 P-400s had been destroyed in combat. In July, P-400s were only able to intercept four of nine Japanese bombing raids because they climbed too slowly above 12,000'. Thereafter they undertook strafing attacks on Japanese landing craft, where eight P-400s were lost in ten days, but invasion forces were severely damaged.
The 67th's 14 P-400s went to Guadalcanal in late Aug 1942, where in combat four were destroyed and six damaged. They were then switched to ground attacks, where they performed admirably, and their tricycle gear enabled them to take off from fields so muddy that other types could not. P-400s played a key role in beating off the enemy attack on Bloody Ridge on Sep 2, 1941, where strafing attacks by three planes — the entire available force — decimated troop concentrations. They continued yeoman work during the rest of the Guadalcanal campaign, sometimes flying as many as 11 sorties per plane per day. P-39s did solid ground attack and anti-shipping work in Solomons, becoming expert boat-busters. The P-400s were gradually replaced by P-39s in the Pacific, but were still being sent from England to Africa in early 1943 (81st FG, 350th FG). 52 P-400s were in Africa at end of Jan 1943, carrying out low-level strafing attacks with considerable success and low losses.
In the Southwest Pacific at the end of July, the 5th AF still had 30 P-400s, averaging 300 combat flying hours each. P-39s and P-400s were considered useless above 17,000' by 5th AF brass and unequal to the heavy demands being made on fighter forces in the theater. They requested P-38s, but were offered P-63s, which they countered with a request for P-47s — they ended up with P-40s.
http://www.aerofiles.com/p400.html
Out of the 10000 or so p-39's made about 400 of the p-400<20mm version> made were flown and only about 250 were flown in combat including the USAAF. Others were sent to training roll.
How many spit5's with 4 20mm were there? VC =2,467
"Only 94 Mk.VA's were produced bfore the Mk. VB went into production early in 1941. The VB for the first time introduced "clipped" wing tips to increase the roll rate. It also featured an improved armament of 2-20mm cannon and 4-.303 machine guns. Some 3,911 Mk. Vb's were produced before the armament was again changed to 4-20mm cannon, thus creating the Mk. VC. A further 2,467 Mk. VC's were produced."
Now I not going to argue with you about spits but what you saying about the spit 5, from what I can tell, dose not hold water. The p-400 was certinally more rare than a Spit Vc with 4 20mm.
Don't you agree?
-
"Nanette was an airplane. That should be made clear right at the start. She was not a very good plane; actually she stank. But she did a lot for me, I realize, as I look back on her. All the planes of that old war had distinguishing looks and personalities. The P-40, the Warhawk, was knobby and arrogant, a tomboy. The P-38, the Lightning, was lean and coltish, a rich debunte. The P-47, the Thunderbolt, was massive and dull, a peasant girl. The bombers had their distinctions, too, but I didn't know much about them. Of all the fighters, two could really excite a flyer. One was the P-51, Mustang, lovely to look at, honest, efficient, hardworking and dependable. In those days she was thought of as a wife, and I know men who married her, back then, and are still in love with her. The other was the P-39, the Airacobra. It was slim, with a gently curved tail section, a smoothly faired in air intake, and a perfectly rounded nose cone with its ugly, protruding cannon. But the Airacobra was lazy and slovenly and given to fits of vicious temper. It was a sexy machine, and rotten. Nanette was like that, and I was a little queer for her."
http://www.amazon.com/NANETTE-Her-Pilots-Love-Story/dp/0874747376/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1201543462&sr=1-3
-
Originally posted by Megalodon
Now I not going to argue with you about spits but what you saying about the spit 5, from what I can tell, dose not hold water. The p-400 was certinally more rare than a Spit Vc with 4 20mm.
Don't you agree?
Actually it does and no I don't agree :)
The Universal wing was capable of holding 4 cannons, but in service it rarely did. The only operational 4 cannon Vcs that I've ever found were 2 Squadron SAAF that flew Vokes filtered, 4 cannon Vcs in a ground attack role. The 4 cannon Vcs that went to Malta had two cannon removed immediately after they got to Malta. In effect it was how they sent back up cannons to Malta by shipping the 4 cannon Vcs, but they were not used in combat that way.
The P400s and the P39D-1s with the 20mm cannons were spread among numerous squadrons and groups.
After I posted last night I went through some of the squadron histories I have. Photo after photo of 20mm P400s and D-1s can be found in those combat units.
-
Originally posted by TimRas
"Nanette was an airplane. That should be made clear right at the start. She was not a very good plane; actually she stank. But she did a lot for me, I realize, as I look back on her."
http://www.amazon.com/NANETTE-Her-Pilots-Love-Story/dp/0874747376/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1201543462&sr=1-3
Just ordered this from Abe Books (http://www.abebooks.com/) , then I saw this.
Looks good.
wrngway
-
Originally posted by TimRas
"Nanette was an airplane. That should be made clear right at the start. She was not a very good plane; actually she stank. But she did a lot for me, I realize, as I look back on her. All the planes of that old war had distinguishing looks and personalities. The P-40, the Warhawk, was knobby and arrogant, a tomboy. The P-38, the Lightning, was lean and coltish, a rich debunte. The P-47, the Thunderbolt, was massive and dull, a peasant girl. The bombers had their distinctions, too, but I didn't know much about them. Of all the fighters, two could really excite a flyer. One was the P-51, Mustang, lovely to look at, honest, efficient, hardworking and dependable. In those days she was thought of as a wife, and I know men who married her, back then, and are still in love with her. The other was the P-39, the Airacobra. It was slim, with a gently curved tail section, a smoothly faired in air intake, and a perfectly rounded nose cone with its ugly, protruding cannon. But the Airacobra was lazy and slovenly and given to fits of vicious temper. It was a sexy machine, and rotten. Nanette was like that, and I was a little queer for her."
http://www.amazon.com/NANETTE-Her-Pilots-Love-Story/dp/0874747376/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1201543462&sr=1-3
Absolutely the best fighter pilot book ever written.
Guppy35 comes from that book which I read for the first time when it came out back in about 1978. Guppy was his P38 buddy and they were both in the 35th FG. Guppy35
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
Actually it does and no I don't agree :)
The Universal wing was capable of holding 4 cannons, but in service it rarely did. The only operational 4 cannon Vcs that I've ever found were 2 Squadron SAAF that flew Vokes filtered, 4 cannon Vcs in a ground attack role. The 4 cannon Vcs that went to Malta had two cannon removed immediately after they got to Malta. In effect it was how they sent back up cannons to Malta by shipping the 4 cannon Vcs, but they were not used in combat that way.
The P400s and the P39D-1s with the 20mm cannons were spread among numerous squadrons and groups.
After I posted last night I went through some of the squadron histories I have. Photo after photo of 20mm P400s and D-1s can be found in those combat units.
Post them I"m sure Photo after Photo does not ad up to more than 10.
P-400 were d1's and d'2. The only ones made were for the british and had 20mm. thats a max of 675 MAX! How ever I dont think the whole order was completed.
I dont believe you answered my question. How many 4 cannon spit5's were produced? From what I can tell and find it was over 2400? Weather they were used or not. Last I noticed planes are mainly put into the game depending on numbers built?
Using the max numbers for each.
2476/675=3.65 to 1 says your wrong.
Cheers,
-
You told him to post his pictures, post your references too. Anybody can quote numbers..... heres one now 8,721 :D
-
2400 Spit Vc were produced, which means that 2400 Spit Vs with the Univeral wing came off the line. They rolled off the line with 2 cannons and 4 303s as standard.
While it was possible to fit 4 cannons, due to inadequate heating for the outboard cannon bay, this was not done, except for low alt ground attack squadrons, 2 SAAF being the only one I've ever found that carried that armament.
As for 20mm P400, and P39D-1s, off the top of my head I can point to the 35th FS, 80th FS, 39th FS, 67th FS, 41st FS, 46th FS, 345th FS, 346th FS, 347th FS, all operating P400s or D-1s with 20mm cannons.
So those 20mm 39s that fired their guns in anger far exceeds the 2 SAAF Spitfire 4 Cannon Vcs.
And do you realize how much great nose art you wipe out if you don't have that version of the 39? :)
Got the scanner going. 20mm 39s from 6 different squadrons. Safe to say the squadrons operated more then one example
46th FS on Makin Island
(http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s199/guppy35/46thMakin39D.jpg)
67th FS on Guadalcanal
(http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s199/guppy35/67thfs400.jpg)
80th FS Headhunters, New Guinea
(http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s199/guppy35/80thFS39.jpg)
35th FS, New Guinea
(http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s199/guppy35/35FSD1.jpg)
39th FS, New Guinea
(http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s199/guppy35/39thFSHawkEye.jpg)
41st FS, New Guinea
(http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s199/guppy35/41stFS39D.jpg)
-
From "Nanette" by Edwards Park. He flew 39s with the 41st FS, 35th FG in the Pacific
"The cannon was originally a 37-millimeter anti-tank gun which fired rather slowly-whump-whump-whump, like that-and since you were sitting on it in the little cockpit, your legs straddling it, the firing of it vibrated your prostate so that the whole experience of war became mildly sexual. I do not know if this was intentional.
Later cannon were 20-millimeter and fired much faster-babababababa, like that--and titilated you in a subtly different way. Some men enjoyed it more. I was a 37 millimeter man myself."
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
From "Nanette" by Edwards Park. He flew 39s with the 41st FS, 35th FG in the Pacific
"The cannon was originally a 37-millimeter anti-tank gun which fired rather slowly-whump-whump-whump, like that-and since you were sitting on it in the little cockpit, your legs straddling it, the firing of it vibrated your prostate so that the whole experience of war became mildly sexual. I do not know if this was intentional.
Later cannon were 20-millimeter and fired much faster-babababababa, like that--and titilated you in a subtly different way. Some men enjoyed it more. I was a 37 millimeter man myself."
:lol
lol good stuff.
-
Guppy35 The 37mm cannon was that an A.P. round or a H.E.? Either way i hope it comes close to the yak t cannon..
-
Originally posted by llama
Don't forget that Chuck Yeager said it was his favorite fighter plane of all time...
-Llama
Were you at the WarBirds con where Jerry Collinsworth spoke? He appeared to have disliked it immensely, saying that at one point during training exercises the one he was flying departed with almost no warning during maneuvers at about 6000 ft and he recovered just short of the ground... and that they lost several pilots to the P39's handling issues before they were reassigned Spitfires.
-
Originally posted by Ghastly
Were you at the WarBirds con where Jerry Collinsworth spoke? He appeared to have disliked it immensely, saying that at one point during training exercises the one he was flying departed with almost no warning during maneuvers at about 6000 ft and he recovered just short of the ground... and that they lost several pilots to the P39's handling issues before they were reassigned Spitfires.
Read "Nanette" :) He talks about the 39 a lot. Some of us old Airwarrior types know Earl Miller who flew 39s in the MTO. He liked the 39.
It sounds like it's one of those birds that you have to learn to fly and it takes a smooth hand. So it shouldn't be a newbies plane if what the vets say is true about the real deal.
But it also sounds like once you got a handle on it's quirks and stayed ahead of it, the 39 could do a nice job.
Earl Miller in a 39 on Corsica in 1944
(http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s199/guppy35/Corsica442.jpg)
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
2400 Spit Vc were produced, which means that 2400 Spit Vs with the Univeral wing came off the line. They rolled off the line with 2 cannons and 4 303s as standard.
While it was possible to fit 4 cannons, due to inadequate heating for the outboard cannon bay, this was not done, except for low alt ground attack squadrons, 2 SAAF being the only one I've ever found that carried that armament.
As for 20mm P400, and P39D-1s, off the top of my head I can point to the 35th FS, 80th FS, 39th FS, 67th FS, 41st FS, 46th FS, 345th FS, 346th FS, 347th FS, all operating P400s or D-1s with 20mm cannons.
So those 20mm 39s that fired their guns in anger far exceeds the 2 SAAF Spitfire 4 Cannon Vcs.
And do you realize how much great nose art you wipe out if you don't have that version of the 39? :)
Got the scanner going. 20mm 39s from 6 different squadrons. Safe to say the squadrons operated more then one example
Nice Pics :)
well yes I do and some of the best 39 nose art aswell but for a mere 176 planes it would be a major exception.
Yes Spit Vc's came off the line 2467 of them w 20mm and 3911 Spit Vb's w/ 4 .303 and 2 20mm came off the line?
yes most of those squads you mention had 15 planes or less a couple had 20. US Only had 176 and some of those were sent back as trainers. Using your number of squads <9> that flew p-400's/p39d1d2's a max possible19.5 per sqd.prolly more like 16. Total! They were not sent more p-400's, Man thats alot :D And going fast. :)
As for the nose art you are making very good point ;) but just not enough to warrant the plane.
In any event there were far more VC's than 400's :) the russians stripped theres as well. replacing the 20mm with a 23mm or I think a 30mm. Have to check on that 1.
Nice shot of Earl :)
-
i can't wait to try it........but i also fear a new weapon for the HOtards...........think this'll be their new favorite ride:D
-
Originally posted by Megalodon
Nice Pics :)
well yes I do and some of the best 39 nose art aswell but for a mere 176 planes it would be a major exception.
Yes Spit Vc's came off the line 2467 of them w 20mm and 3911 Spit Vb's w/ 4 .303 and 2 20mm came off the line?
yes most of those squads you mention had 15 planes or less a couple had 20. US Only had 176 and some of those were sent back as trainers. Using your number of squads <9> that flew p-400's/p39d1d2's a max possible19.5 per sqd.prolly more like 16. Total! They were not sent more p-400's, Man thats alot :D And going fast. :)
As for the nose art you are making very good point ;) but just not enough to warrant the plane.
In any event there were far more VC's than 400's :) the russians stripped theres as well. replacing the 20mm with a 23mm or I think a 30mm. Have to check on that 1.
Nice shot of Earl :)
We've got the Ta152 and 163, not nearly as many of those saw combat. And yes a Spit Vc with all it's variants would be fun, but oh so many variations :)
OK different approach.
My hope is 3 versions of the 39
It makes sense to me that we'd have the 400/D-1 with the 20 and the wing mounted 30s. Historically it's the bird they were flying early against the Japanese. Any scenario with the 5th AF or the Canal would have those birds.
It makes sense that we'd have a middle production version with the 37mm and the wing mounted 30s. Pacific, Aleutians, MTO, Russia
And it makes sense to have the 39Q with the option for the 50s in the wing pods or not, mainly because the Russians tended to take them off. It covers less USAAF work though outside of a bit of MTO and Pacific.
And if for no other reason then Air-a Cutie, I'd like to see that 20mm version :)
(http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s199/guppy35/AiraQtie.jpg)
-
Do we have any info that will give us an idea of how well the 39Q will accelerate?
Pipz
-
The Russians did not replace the 20mm or the 37mm in the P-400/P-39.
The Russians only received 108 P-39Ds. Some of which were the D-1 model, the rest D-2s. So the P-400 was actually the more numerous of the early types they had in the VVS.
http://vvs.hobbyvista.com/Markings/P39/p39-airacobrai-bx228.jpg
As for P-39Ds (the base model) in the USAAC, they had an order from Bell for 343.
...this is early in the war (pre war in fact for the USA) before major types were coming off assembly lines in great quantities. Thats one of the reasons the USAAC "hijacked" 179 P-400s and sent 100 of them to the SW Pacific.
...Spits with 4 cannons? do a search, plenty on that already, this is the P-39 thread, ;)
Regards.
-
2 weeks yet?
:noid :noid :noid
-
Originally posted by Charge
Why should it be able to reach 392mph?
The more common figure seems to be 376 mph (TAS) at 15000 ft and 325 (IAS) at deck?
376 mph reflects MIL power, not WEP (combat power).
See the chart below. Note that the power setting for the P-39Q at 376 mph is MIL power, which is (1,125 hp), not WEP (1,420 hp).
(http://home.att.net/~historyzone/P-39_data.jpg)
My regards,
Widewing
-
So Dan -
I know you've been a fan of Nanette for a long while, and you're passionate about the SW Pacific theater.
Is there a chance the P-39 might unseat the P-38G as your favorite ride?
-
Originally posted by Simaril
So Dan -
I know you've been a fan of Nanette for a long while, and you're passionate about the SW Pacific theater.
Is there a chance the P-39 might unseat the P-38G as your favorite ride?
80th flew 39s too :)
It seems like it will be one of those birds to take the time to get decent in and try and survive latewar, like the 38G is for me. I think most of the 80th guys will be driving it some of the time.
Not sure I could ever give up the G completely though. Only a Spit XII would do that I think :)
-
THE AMAZING JOURNEY OF AN AIRACOBRA NAMED BROOKLYN BUM
Good story
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3901/is_200409/ai_n9454068
"We devised all sorts of tactics. We would use hills as protection, pop over them and come down on the Jap targets firing like mad and taking photos. There was an intervolometer in the cockpit and we would set that to take photos. It seemed pretty useless and I do not really know if anyone paid any attention to the photos. Also, we would raise hell with the enemy shipping and those four .50s and the cannon would blow them right out of the water"
"The roll rate of the P-39 was very good. My head was always banged-up from smacking the door latches while learning how to fly the thing. I just fit in the cockpit, which seemed quite big until you climbed in with all of your support gear, which included parachute, jungle survival kit sewn into the back of the chute pack, small first aid kit strapped to chute straps, vest, .45-cal pistol in a shoulder holster, 21-rounds of ammunition, hunting knife, and other goodies."
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
We've got the Ta152 and 163, not nearly as many of those saw combat. And yes a Spit Vc with all it's variants would be fun, but oh so many variations :)
OK different approach.
My hope is 3 versions of the 39
It makes sense to me that we'd have the 400/D-1 with the 20 and the wing mounted 30s. Historically it's the bird they were flying early against the Japanese. Any scenario with the 5th AF or the Canal would have those birds.
It makes sense that we'd have a middle production version with the 37mm and the wing mounted 30s. Pacific, Aleutians, MTO, Russia
And it makes sense to have the 39Q with the option for the 50s in the wing pods or not, mainly because the Russians tended to take them off. It covers less USAAF work though outside of a bit of MTO and Pacific.
And if for no other reason then Air-a Cutie, I'd like to see that 20mm version :)
(http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s199/guppy35/AiraQtie.jpg)
I hope we get 3 versions as well. It would be nice if they make it a p-39d2 and have the option for the 20mm. The lighter 20mm gun just added to the rear heavy problem. P=400 just says Brit to me and they hated it. So they dont need it. K/L or M and the Q as you mentioned w/.50 wing option.
Allthough as 80th you could fly as Corky and Porky just need sum one to take up Cragg got any ideas?:aok :t
-
Originally posted by Megalodon
I hope we get 3 versions as well. It would be nice if they make it a p-39d2 and have the option for the 20mm. The lighter 20mm gun just added to the rear heavy problem. P=400 just says Brit to me and they hated it. So they dont need it. K/L or M and the Q as you mentioned w/.50 wing option.
Allthough as 80th you could fly as Corky and Porky just need sum one to take up Cragg got any ideas?:aok :t
Actually when Del and I got the 80th going he was CPorky :)
He went back to Del though. I kept CorkyJr.
As for the 39. Doesn't it make more sense for the early 400/D-1, the mid N and the late Q? That way you get all the combos of armament and cover all the theaters of the war the 39 flew in.
-
HTC
Thanks Gents
-
Thank you for the coming addition to plane set, HTC. Keep up the good working, and give us another one as soon as you can! :)
-
All the advice you want from the hanger bangers :lol
Good training film :)
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1335141778279527517&q=p-39&total=474&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=4]http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1335141778279527517&q=p-39&total=474&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=4
-
Is this one going to take "2 weeks" to come out as well? :D
-
Originally posted by Orgazmo
Is this one going to take "2 weeks" to come out as well? :D
I heard that it would take 14 days...
I found this poem about the WW2 "P" series fighters:
Don't give me a P-39 with an engine that's mounted behind
It will tumble and roll and dig a big hole
Don't give me a P-39.
Don't give me a P-38 with props that counter-rotate
They'll loop, roll and spin but they'll soon auger in
Don't give me a P-38!
Don't give me an old Thunderbolt. It gave many pilots a jolt
It looks like a jug and it flies like a tug
Don't give me an old Thunderbolt!
Don't give me a Peter Four Oh, a hell of an airplane, I know
A ground loopin' bastard. You're sure to get plastered
Don't give me a Peter Four Oh.
Don't give me a P-51, it was all right for fighting the hun
But with coolant tank dry. you'll run out of sky
Don't give me a P-51.
Don't give me a P-61, for night flying is no fun
They say it's a lark. but I'm scared of the dark
Don't give me a P-61.
Once again, as others have said,"It's not the airplane, but the Pilot!"
-
THE REAL STORY OF THE P-39 IN WW II
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3897/is_200508/ai_n14825564/pg_1
-
Originally posted by 5PointOh
So were getting the P-39. Hmmm does that mean this is next?
(http://www.lonestar-mvpa.org/images/2005/05tempbl.JPG)
Yes I'm greedy!
that a 61 Black Widow?
-
I believe thats a A-26 Invader. Black widow has two tails like a 38
-
Originally posted by kvuo75
you not seen many P51's ??? :D
Man I've seen TOO many P-51s. Thats the thing that doesnt make em a big deal.
-
Originally posted by The Fugitive
I believe thats a A-26 Invader. Black widow has two tails like a 38
Yep Korean War era painted A26
-
ive been flying the plane on IL-2 1946, The plane is sweet in this game but it does stall if you push it too hard.
heres some screen shots
(http://i193.photobucket.com/albums/z315/chrish483/IL-2/1.jpg)
(http://i193.photobucket.com/albums/z315/chrish483/IL-2/2.jpg)
(http://i193.photobucket.com/albums/z315/chrish483/IL-2/7.jpg)
(http://i193.photobucket.com/albums/z315/chrish483/IL-2/6.jpg)
-
in IL-2 1946 game they have the P-39Q-1 3 pladed prop
and the P-39Q-10 4 bladed prop. witch one will we get?
(http://i193.photobucket.com/albums/z315/chrish483/IL-2/9.jpg)
(http://i193.photobucket.com/albums/z315/chrish483/IL-2/11.jpg)
-
http://www1.hitechcreations.com/news/images/p39/p39q3.jpg
3 blader.
-
"376 mph reflects MIL power, not WEP (combat power).
See the chart below. Note that the power setting for the P-39Q at 376 mph is MIL power, which is (1,125 hp), not WEP (1,420 hp)."
Well according the engine chart you posted the MIL power is not maximum continuous (giving 1000hp) but it seems that the Allison had a normal "WEP", as we call it, for 15 minutes giving 376mph and a peculiar "extended WEP" which could give the 1420hp for 5 minutes, but for some reason it was not mentioned in the chart Bronk posted giving the the more common max (15min) MIL figure of 376mph for max speed. Bronk's chart showed the corresponding marks the given speeds applied to but your chart says only "P39" but you say it is Q.
Was the 1420hp setting actually usable at all?
Which of the charts is more accurate and are they from manufacturers manual?
-C+
Edt. Nice link: http://home.att.net/~jbaugher1/p39_15.html
Edt.2. Another: http://www.airpages.ru/cgi-bin/epg.pl?nav=us10&page=p39_01
Edt.3. Pics: http://lend-lease.airforce.ru/photogallery/p-39_c/index.htm
-
Start up, taxi and take off :aok
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jYcK9_rvgT8&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sRYhGzmSj7o&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EeLMDw2Fgso&feature=related
She had a accident in 2005 dont know if its back up and running yet?
-
Continues on page 10
Short AAR of sum 196 arados hehe
Comparisons to other planes
http://books.google.com/books?id=P0KiPMJuXkUC&pg=PA105&lpg=PA105&dq=james+hudson+345th&source=web&ots=bO4N_o_b_o&sig=YilT0emRb3VqSsQZhkF-zXSuV5U#PPA104,M1
-
FireDrgn posted this on our squadron forum.
http://www.tailwheel.nl/downloads/bellp39small.pdf
It is hard to read some of the charts, but it is interesting.
-
The posted 15 minutes of max MIL is for maintenace concerns only, fighters in WW2 never flew the entire mission at "full throttle" ,for one the gas consumption would be enormous and secondly the engines would require a lot more down time.
We dont pay any cost in AH for running at 100 throt the entire time, ir real life, you would be called on the carpet for it, in any air force.
So the 5 min is WEP, and the 15 min is a suggested max for full throttle MIL, thats all.
-
Originally posted by kotrenin
FireDrgn posted this on our squadron forum.
http://www.tailwheel.nl/downloads/bellp39small.pdf
It is hard to read some of the charts, but it is interesting.
Firedrgn, kotrenin, thanks for posting the manual, great stuff to have. :)
-
Originally posted by Gianlupo
Firedrgn, kotrenin, thanks for posting the manual, great stuff to have. :)
We've been trying to decipher the climb rate chart but it is hard to read the column titles. We're making a few educated guesses based on the numbers. :D
-
Originally posted by Squire
The posted 15 minutes of max MIL is for maintenace concerns only, fighters in WW2 never flew the entire mission at "full throttle" ,for one the gas consumption would be enormous and secondly the engines would require a lot more down time.
We dont pay any cost in AH for running at 100 throt the entire time, ir real life, you would be called on the carpet for it, in any air force.
So the 5 min is WEP, and the 15 min is a suggested max for full throttle MIL, thats all.
Yea BUT they dont expect most pilots to be up in the air for MORE than 15 min, so its not really worth it, and plus, some people like having full throttle all the time, prolly need it for slower planes. EX. Hurricane 2c
-
P39s did some squirrelly tumbles when shot down due to the mid engine mount.(as per interview with G. Rall) I wonder if AH will be modeling that also?
-
Originally posted by kotrenin
We've been trying to decipher the climb rate chart but it is hard to read the column titles. We're making a few educated guesses based on the numbers. :D
what page number is the problem on? I have this manual in different format, with each page scanned as a separate jpg...so may be easier to read the fine print stuff.
If you're looking at the table on page 23, the headings are as follows:
Leftmost column, labels for rows from top to bottom -- Gross weight 8100, 7600, 7200. All are labelled Combat Ferry.
Across the top:Sealevel to 3000 feet (subdivided under that into best I.A.S., then feet per minute, then time from sea level)
Next over is a block for At 5000 feet (subdivided into best I.A.S., then feet per minute, then time from sea level, then fuel from S.L)
The next blocks duplicate those subdivisions for 10,000, 15,000, and 25,000 feet.
All are with single speed blower, at 2300 rpm and 31inches manifold.
Special notes at the bottom of the table say to increase climbing time by (blank) % for each 10 degrees above zero free air temperature. Fuel includes warm up and take off allowance.
Hope that helps
Simaril
-
That is exactly it. Thanks a ton Simaril.:aok
-
"Yea BUT they dont expect most pilots to be up in the air for MORE than 15 min"
...sorry you have lost me.
The document that Widewing posted was for the real airplane, you follow? There isnt going to be any restriction to the "in game" MIL running time, because they would have to do that for ALL the a/c in the game, not just the P-39.
The WEP limit, I would think, will be 5 min max, as in the game, because WEP limit IS modelled in AH.
-
Originally posted by Charge
"376 mph reflects MIL power, not WEP (combat power).
See the chart below. Note that the power setting for the P-39Q at 376 mph is MIL power, which is (1,125 hp), not WEP (1,420 hp)."
Well according the engine chart you posted the MIL power is not maximum continuous (giving 1000hp) but it seems that the Allison had a normal "WEP", as we call it, for 15 minutes giving 376mph and a peculiar "extended WEP" which could give the 1420hp for 5 minutes, but for some reason it was not mentioned in the chart Bronk posted giving the the more common max (15min) MIL figure of 376mph for max speed. Bronk's chart showed the corresponding marks the given speeds applied to but your chart says only "P39" but you say it is Q.
Was the 1420hp setting actually usable at all?
Which of the charts is more accurate and are they from manufacturers manual?
Note that both charts that I have posted state P-39Q. Look at both again carefully.
This chart shows power ratings at specific altitudes and durations. This chart comes from the Pilot's Manual. This was the standard type of Specific Engine Flight Chart format used for all USAAF fighters. This one is for the P-39Q-1, but applies to all P-39Q models with the V-1710-85 engine.
(http://home.att.net/~historyzone/P-39Q-SEFC.jpg)
The other chart was published in America's Hundred Thousand and shows speed curves clearly marked as shown in the key above the chart.
(http://home.att.net/~historyzone/P-39_data.jpg)
There's ample evidence that the P-39Q was plenty fast at its critical altitude. There are several combat reports of the P-39Q chasing down 190A models and 109G models at low altitudes in the MTO.
Think about this: If the AH2 P-39Q can do 376 mph in MIL power at 9,700 feet, it will be 10 mph faster than the 190A-5 using WEP. It's a dead heat with the La-5FN. It will be 3 mph faster than the P-38J using WEP. It would be 5 mph slower that the Typhoon using WEP. It would be 9 mph slower than the Yak-9U. It would be 5 mph faster than the 109G-6 using WEP.
If modeled with the 1,420 hp WEP, and does the expected 392 mph @ 9,700 ft, it's faster than the Typhoon, Yak-9U, Ta 152, 109G-14, F4U-1, F4U-1D, and P-47D-11. It would be 2 mph slower than the La-7, 4 mph slower than the Tempest and 6 mph slower than the F4U-4. That's some pretty good company. Add to that a wing loading below that of the 109F-4, and I'd say you have a competitive fighter for the low to medium altitude environment of Aces High. Good enough to be a real threat, and absolutely deadly in the hands of a top level pilot.
We can speculate all we want, but when the P-39Q is introduced with the next update, we'll all have the opportunity to find out what it's capable of. Then players can argue if it's too good, just right or under-modeled. We'll know within a few weeks.
My regards,
Widewing
-
Based on what WW posted, it looks like it will and should be very competitive down low . . . which leads me to wonder how long it will be after its introduction before the "P-39 is ridiculously overmodeled" whines begin.
-
I'd rather have my 28 inch waist, ripped abs and my guns back... until then ...pffft
who wants to see a 50 year old male on a beach with all of that and gravitationally challenged balls?
:huh
Mac
-
WW
Wasn't the P-39D-2 utilizing the V-1710-63 pulling 1590 hp at 61 map?
Strange that an earlier model had a more potent engine.
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
Actually when Del and I got the 80th going he was CPorky :)
He went back to Del though. I kept CorkyJr.
As for the 39. Doesn't it make more sense for the early 400/D-1, the mid N and the late Q? That way you get all the combos of armament and cover all the theaters of the war the 39 flew in.
Okay... :)
The biggest changes to the model were the engine starting, unlike other models 51, 47 FW etc.. that had major changes to the structure, with V-1710/10-85 the D had a 35, D2 thru L1 had a 63 except for 2 J/K-5-BE, the M had the 67 and 85 and the N\Q had the 85. The Q itself had 9 varients not including pho/recon versions.
I agree it should be a P-39D V-1710/35 give it the 20mm option in the hanger.
I would like to see the Mid plane be the L1 or the M1 V=1710/67
if for no other reason :) "Pantie Bandit" P-39L-1-BE 93rd FS, 81st FG Q-T (42-4558)
I dont think it should be a N, Same as Q, V-1710/85.
{Who knows maybe we can have an armor option in the hanger in the future to cover all varients, it would be useful for all planes?}
Airacobra I - Direct purchase aircraft used by the RAF.
Airacobra II - Lend-Lease aircraft used by the RA:=-
Airabonita - Experimental shipboard version of the land-based P-39 Airacobra.
Britchik - Russian nickname [Lit: Little Shaver].
Caribou - Initial RAF designation later abandoned in favour of Airacobra.
F2L - US Navy target drones.
F2L-1 K - P-39Q used for smoke generator trials by US Navy.
Model 14 - Version of the P-39D built for the RAF.
Model14A - See P-39D-1-BE.
Model 14A-1 - See P-39D-2-BE.
Model15B - See P-39F.
Model 21 - See XP-39E.
Model 26 - See P-39G.
Model 26A - See P-39K-1.
Model 26C - See P-39N-1 .
Model 26C-5 - See P-39N-5.
Model26D - See P-39M.
Model 26Q-5 - See P-39Q-5-BE.
Model 26Q-10 - See P-39Q-10-BE.
Model 26Q-15 - See P-39Q-15-BE.
Model 26Q-20 - See P-39Q-20-BE.
Model 26Q-25 - See P-39Q-25-BE.
P-39C - Initial Production aircraft.
P-39D - Upgraded P-39D with self-sealing tanks, increased guns and fuel capacity.
P-39D-1-BE - Version produced for Lend-Lease powered by an Allison V-1710-35 engine.
P-39D-2-BE - Version produced for Lend-Lease powered by the Allison V-171 0-63 (E6) engine.
P-39D-3-BE - Reconnaissance versions with K-24 and K-25 cameras mounted in the rear fuselage.
P-39D-4-BE - Reconnaissance version of the P-39D-1-BE.
P-39F-1 - Fitted with Aeroproducts constant-speed propeller.
P-39F-2 - Fitted with belly armor and cameras in the rear fuselage for ground attacks
P-39G - Design changed rapidly and aircraft was eventually produced as K,L,M and N versions.
P-39H - Designation not assigned?
P-39J - Fitted with V-1710-59 engine with automatic boost control.
P-39K-1 - Fitted with V-1710-63 (E6) engine driving an Aeroproducts propeller.
P-39K-2 - Ground attack/photo reconnaissance version.
P-39K-5-BE - Fitted with V-1710-85 (E19) engine and acted as the prototype for the P-39N.
P-39L-1 - Fitted with Allison V-1710-63 engine driving a Curtiss Electric propeller
P-39L-2-BE - Photoreconnaissance version.
P-39M-1 - Fitted with V-1710-67 (E8) engine driving an Aeroproducts propellor.
P-39M-1 [Variant 1] - Fitted with V-1710-83 (E18) engine.
P-39M-2-BE - Photoreconnaissance version.
P-39N - Fitted with the V-1710-85 (E19) engine driving an Aeroproducts propellor.
P-39N-1 - Differed only in some minor internal changes.
P-39N-2-BE - P-39N-1-BE converted to ground-attack role.
P-39N-3-BE - P-39N converted to ground-attack role.
P-39N~5-BE - Fitted with lighter armour.
P-39N-6-BE - P-39N-5-BE to ground-attack role.
P-39Q - Fitted with 50cal wing guns.
P-39Q-1-BE - Fuel capacity of the P-39N-5 and armor ofthe P-39N-1.
P-39Q-2-BE - Q-1s modified for photo-reconnaissance by adding cameras in the aft fuselage.
P-39Q-5-BE - Lighter armor fit of the P-39N-5 and full wing fuel capacity of the P-39M.
P-39Q-6-BE - Q-5s modified for photo-reconnaissance by adding cameras in the aft fuselage.
P-39Q-10-BE - Increased internal fuel capacity and armour.
P-39Q-11-BE - Q-1a modified for photo-reconnaissance by adding cameras in the aft fuselage ..
P-39Q-15-BE - Minor equipment variations.
P-39Q-20-BE - Underwing 50cal machine gun pods were sometimes omitted in this version.
P-39Q-21-BE - Four-bladed Aeroproducts propeller was fitted.
P-39Q-25-BE - Wing guns were deleted from these aircraft, which were exported to the Soviet Union.
P-39Q-30-BE - Reverted to the three-bladed propellor.
P-45 - Designation initially applied to the first proposed production model.
P-400 - Model14s returned to the USA or delivered to the Russians
RP-39Q - Advanced two-seat trainer redesignated TP-39Q after 1944.
RP-39Q-22 - P-39Q-20 converted to advanced two-seat trainer.
Oh and just to be clear :) "Porky" was Craggs 1st plane in NG and was 39D/400?
Great picture of "Porky" looking at "Corky":t
http://www.oceanicexpeditions.org/pdf/headhunters2003.pdf
I was looking up "Porky" trying to find a picture of the 39 and found the 1st 38's issued to the 80th as the 38H "Porky II" Hmmm.... Corky Jr>Askew-off the correct or expected course, G..eee ;)
-
Originally posted by Widewing
There's ample evidence that the P-39Q was plenty fast at its critical altitude. There are several combat reports of the P-39Q chasing down 190A models and 109G models at low altitudes in the MTO.
Think about this: If the AH2 P-39Q can do 376 mph in MIL power at 9,700 feet, it will be 10 mph faster than the 190A-5 using WEP. It's a dead heat with the La-5FN. It will be 3 mph faster than the P-38J using WEP. It would be 5 mph slower that the Typhoon using WEP. It would be 9 mph slower than the Yak-9U. It would be 5 mph faster than the 109G-6 using WEP.
If modeled with the 1,420 hp WEP, and does the expected 392 mph @ 9,700 ft, it's faster than the Typhoon, Yak-9U, Ta 152, 109G-14, F4U-1, F4U-1D, and P-47D-11. It would be 2 mph slower than the La-7, 4 mph slower than the Tempest and 6 mph slower than the F4U-4. That's some pretty good company. Add to that a wing loading below that of the 109F-4, and I'd say you have a competitive fighter for the low to medium altitude environment of Aces High. Good enough to be a real threat, and absolutely deadly in the hands of a top level pilot.
We can speculate all we want, but when the P-39Q is introduced with the next update, we'll all have the opportunity to find out what it's capable of. Then players can argue if it's too good, just right or under-modeled. We'll know within a few weeks.
My regards,
Widewing
Quit it Widewing, you're getting me excited. :o
-
Originally posted by Bronk
WW
Wasn't the P-39D-2 utilizing the V-1710-63 pulling 1590 hp at 61 map?
Strange that an earlier model had a more potent engine.
I've seen this too, but the rating was for 2,500 feet. The V-1710-63 was installed in the P-39K and the P-39L too. If I recall correctly, the P-39L was rated at 367 mph at 2,500 feet, 386 mph at 9,000 feet and 373 mph at 12,000 feet. Again, this is quite competitive with the late war beasties at common AH2 altitudes.
The primary drawback of the P-39 was poor performance at altitude. That's not much of a factor in Aces High. Down low, it should be very competitive. 386 mph at 9k is faster than the Yak-9U. The gap is even wider at 2.5k. Indeed, at 2.5k it's about 20 mph faster than the Spit16 and has a similar wing loading.
I read a combat report submitted by Lt. Hugh Dow of the 346th Fighter Squadron. Dow obtained his first Luftwaffe kill flying a P-39L in 1943. He was also able to log 8 hours of flight time in a captured 109. Being familiar with the 109, the next time he encountered one, he didn't hesitate to take it on in a classic one on one duel.
Spotting each other, Down turned his P-39Q-15 into the 109 and they merged on opposite headings. Both pilot reefed their fighters around in punishing left turns. Dow saw vapor streamers coming from the 109's wing tips. Dow knew the the P-39 would out-turn the Messerschmitt. Within two turns he gained nearly 180 degrees. Having used up his cannon ammo, and most of his .50 rounds strafing, Dow opened fire at close range in a hard turn. He fired the remaining .50 cal ammo, scoring hits which caused a fuel leak. He then continued shooting with his four .30 cal MG, igniting the fuel. The 109 pulled into vertical climb with Dow's P-39 right on its tail. At the top of the climb, the 109 pilot pitched off his canopy and jumped out. Dow climbed past the burning 109 and rolled off to the right. He watched the 109 crash onto a road at the entrance to a bridge Dow had just recently strafed. The German pilot landed in some brush near the road and Dow flew past him wagging his wings. The German was seen to wave his hand in return.
In the MTO, the P-40 flew more than twice as many combat sorties as the did the P-39. However, four times as many P-40s were lost. Loss rates per sortie for the P-39, in the MTO, SWPA and Aleutians were typically half that of the P-40.
Loss rates to ground fire in the MTO were, in order of losses per sortie:
P-47 (.2 per sortie)
P-38 (.3)
P-39 (.4)
P-40 (.8)
A-36/P-51 (.8)
The Soviets concur that the P-39 was more resistant to damage than the P-40 and that pilots shot down in air combat were more than twice as likely to survive if flying the P-39 as opposed to the P-40. 1,200 lb of Allison armor behind the pilot must have been beneficial.
My regards,
Widewing
-
A question 109e vs p39d : could not the 109e perform the standard trick - either stand on its tail climbing at high angle, or stand on its nose - diving away from the p39d using its good acceleration to get away, and later zoom climb ?
-
"Note that both charts that I have posted state P-39Q. Look at both again carefully. "
Not even looking carefully it's there, sry.
"Wasn't the P-39D-2 utilizing the V-1710-63 pulling 1590 hp at 61 map?"
Again more common figure: "V-1710-63 (E6) engine 1,325 hp"
http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/URG/p39.htm
Where did you find that figure?
I saw somewhere that the nose mounted 20mm Hispano had 60 rounds of ammo so it was the drum fed model.
-C+
-
Originally posted by Charge
"Wasn't the P-39D-2 utilizing the V-1710-63 pulling 1590 hp at 61 map?"
Again more common figure: "V-1710-63 (E6) engine 1,325 hp"
http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/URG/p39.htm
Where did you find that figure?
-C+
AHT page 191 table 25.
T.O. 1325
WEP 1590
mil 1150
norm 1000
How is 1325 the more common figure?
-
"AHT"
Ok.
"How is 1325 the more common figure?"
Because if you make a search with term "V-1710-63 (E6)" you find 1325 hp and 1590 is never mentioned. I don't understand why. I think it is essential to know with which hp the maximum alleged airframe speed is achieved, although the max speed seems to be debatable too.
Here is some data of P-51's V-1650-7 for comparison:
http://www.icon.co.za/~pauljnr/specs1.htm
1720hp on WEP so is the top speed of 437mph achieved with CID (T.O.?)or WEP? Or is the 437mph achieved with the most commonly quoted 1649hp and with 1720hp it could actually do 501mph?
From this site I found 1580hp for V-1710-73
"bojový 1580 hp (1178,2 kW) v 762 m, při 3000 ot/min. a plnicím tlaku 60,0 in Hg (2032 mbar/hPa)"
http://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allison_V-1710
-C+
-
Originally posted by Simaril
I have this manual in different format, with each page scanned as a separate jpg...so may be easier to read the fine print stuff.
Do you mind sharing it with us? :)
-
Woo!!! Go Team America!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Need the B-29... i mean TU-4 next!
(http://dictatorshipoftheair.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/07/tu4.jpg)
Or how about the Washington?
(http://www.militaryimages.net/photopost/data/522/b29raf.jpg)
-
Shut up, little punk, you can't complain anymore about OUR game! :D
-
Charge that is the problem i am having looking for specs online.
They only give one number. We are then left to try and figure out what it is, TO, normal, or wep? Very frustrating IMHO.
-
Originally posted by Widewing
I've seen this too, but the rating was for 2,500 feet. The V-1710-63 was installed in the P-39K and the P-39L too. If I recall correctly, the P-39L was rated at 367 mph at 2,500 feet, 386 mph at 9,000 feet and 373 mph at 12,000 feet. Again, this is quite competitive with the late war beasties at common AH2 altitudes.
The primary drawback of the P-39 was poor performance at altitude. That's not much of a factor in Aces High. Down low, it should be very competitive. 386 mph at 9k is faster than the Yak-9U. The gap is even wider at 2.5k. Indeed, at 2.5k it's about 20 mph faster than the Spit16 and has a similar wing loading.
I read a combat report submitted by Lt. Hugh Dow of the 346th Fighter Squadron. Dow obtained his first Luftwaffe kill flying a P-39L in 1943. He was also able to log 8 hours of flight time in a captured 109. Being familiar with the 109, the next time he encountered one, he didn't hesitate to take it on in a classic one on one duel.
Spotting each other, Down turned his P-39Q-15 into the 109 and they merged on opposite headings. Both pilot reefed their fighters around in punishing left turns. Dow saw vapor streamers coming from the 109's wing tips. Dow knew the the P-39 would out-turn the Messerschmitt. Within two turns he gained nearly 180 degrees. Having used up his cannon ammo, and most of his .50 rounds strafing, Dow opened fire at close range in a hard turn. He fired the remaining .50 cal ammo, scoring hits which caused a fuel leak. He then continued shooting with his four .30 cal MG, igniting the fuel. The 109 pulled into vertical climb with Dow's P-39 right on its tail. At the top of the climb, the 109 pilot pitched off his canopy and jumped out. Dow climbed past the burning 109 and rolled off to the right. He watched the 109 crash onto a road at the entrance to a bridge Dow had just recently strafed. The German pilot landed in some brush near the road and Dow flew past him wagging his wings. The German was seen to wave his hand in return.
In the MTO, the P-40 flew more than twice as many combat sorties as the did the P-39. However, four times as many P-40s were lost. Loss rates per sortie for the P-39, in the MTO, SWPA and Aleutians were typically half that of the P-40.
Loss rates to ground fire in the MTO were, in order of losses per sortie:
P-47 (.2 per sortie)
P-38 (.3)
P-39 (.4)
P-40 (.8)
A-36/P-51 (.8)
The Soviets concur that the P-39 was more resistant to damage than the P-40 and that pilots shot down in air combat were more than twice as likely to survive if flying the P-39 as opposed to the P-40. 1,200 lb of Allison armor behind the pilot must have been beneficial.
My regards,
Widewing
man i was hoping it was gonna come in january, hopefully its in early febuary
-
Tougher than a P40, Fast OTD, armed with a BFG, probably a better forward view than a Corsair for pulling lead (no engine to look over), low wing loading? I got wood :)
Oh yea and a nose gear for kewlness
What kind of ord can this thing carry?
How about range and drop tanks?
-
Originally posted by Magoo
Tougher than a P40, Fast OTD, armed with a BFG, probably a better forward view than a Corsair for pulling lead (no engine to look over), low wing loading? I got wood :)
Oh yea and a nose gear for kewlness
What kind of ord can this thing carry?
How about range and drop tanks?
One 500lb or one 250lb bomb or a 75 gallon drop tank. About 24 minutes in the MA at MIL power, increasing to roughly 40 minutes with the drop tank.
Should be a good ride for killing light-skin GVs using the 37mm. The 500 lb bomb should take care of anything, except the Tiger (a direct 500 lb bomb hit may be enough).
My regards,
Widewing
-
Originally posted by save
A question 109e vs p39d : could not the 109e perform the standard trick - either stand on its tail climbing at high angle, or stand on its nose - diving away from the p39d using its good acceleration to get away, and later zoom climb ?
Alexander Pokryshkin tactics to defeat the Me-109.
(http://wio.ru/pokr/blokn_obl.jpg)
Two vs one (attacker and cover):
(http://wio.ru/pokr/blnt_ris_5.jpg)
Two vs two (attacker and cover):
(http://wio.ru/pokr/blnt_ris_6.jpg)
Turn with a Me109:
(http://wio.ru/pokr/blnt_ataka_6.jpg)
(http://wio.ru/pokr/blnt_ataka_3.jpg)
Evasive climb to turn:
(http://wio.ru/pokr/blnt_uhod_0.jpg)
Evasive climb with attack:
(http://wio.ru/pokr/blnt_uhod_1.jpg)
http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/aviation/p-39-d-aircobra-vs-me-109-a-318-5.html
-
Where does he get the E for that last one? It looks like the sort of maneuver you pull on a blind and hamhanded noob in AH.
-
maybe he trims chops a little and pulls vert and gasses it :D
-
http://www.enginehistory.org/Sounds/P-39Q_2.mp3
notice the howl in the gearbox.
-
P39-D Data
(http://img131.exs.cx/img131/3425/p39iii49zd.jpg)
(http://img131.exs.cx/img131/9751/p39iii50dt.jpg)
-
1 37mm(30 rounds)
2 .50cals( 200 rounds/gun)
4 .30cals( 1000gounds/gun)
WOOT
:noid :noid
-
and nose art (was too racey for p39d default skin so it will be a player add on :D )
(http://i185.photobucket.com/albums/x205/p38fester/p39copy.jpg)
-
:O
I want my Air-a-cutie! :D
-
Fester - doesn't the violet-and-bright-green gunsight belong on the L-Gay?
-
Originally posted by Citabria
and nose art (was too racey for p39d default skin so it will be a player add on :D )
(http://i185.photobucket.com/albums/x205/p38fester/p39copy.jpg)
Fester,
Once again you've proven why many consider you the "King" of skins!!
-
What fun!
Airacutie made me laugh.
-
Only took a while, but you guys finally got your wish.
We want the P-39! (http://forums.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=28015)
-
Originally posted by JeepinAZ
Only took a while, but you guys finally got your wish.
We want the P-39! (http://forums.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=28015)
Only took 7 years! :p