Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: DREDIOCK on March 24, 2008, 08:12:00 AM
-
Ok after spending a few days fling the 39 here are some of the impressions I have of it.
This is the Q model and WITH the wing guns
As someone who enjoys turnfighting I like it.
Nice guns and even the 50s alone do some real damage.
Complimented with the big gun and you can really make things go boom.
Doesnt exactly climb like a rocket and anyone flying it would be wise to resist the temptation to follow zoomers up unless you already have alot of E.
Takes a while for it to get to top speed in level flight and even in a slight climb its speed is reduced dramaticially.
Will go fast quick in a dive but
On the other hand. once it is going fast it seems to take longer for it to slow down as it does to speed up. So be wary of the overshoot and either reduce your throttle sooner or be ready to do something else.
Seems more quick then fast. if that makes sence.
Does turn rather well. You can definately get around on things. but it will become unstable at very slow speeds even with flaps.
Pretty nimble bird though.
Very nice buff killer. At around 10K you can zip past a flight of buffs and turn around to hit on them again almost faster then you want to.
Seems to take a licking and keep on ticking. reminds me of the jug in that regard.
I was rarely brought down by a single burst.
Army air corp training video claims it has "exellent visability in all directions"
I beg to differ.
Front and side views are great. Looking at your dead 6 is "only ok" but anything beyond that and there are several rather large blind spots
Looking behind you in any direction this bird is worse then the forward visability in the 190.
Rearward visability IMO is definately less then exellent LOL.
So remember to roll and jink the plane for SA and in locating that bogy on your 6.
All aroudn though I really like this plane.
should do well in a furball for whomever takes the time to learn it.
Best operating Alt seems to be 2-10 K
Nimble enough to hold its own against any of the turners here as well as to easily dodge the boom & zoomers
And rugged enough to take a few hits without disintegrating.
But thats just my opinion.
-
if its just me or is it almost ever time i get into a turn fight in the 39, i always feel like im fighting a stall. i thought it would have more power. it takes a crap of a long time to get over to the bish feild in FT. And when you get there, you kill a niki or a spit, lose all your E and then get it back. THE FUEL DOESNT EVEN LAST THAT LONG (with the exception of the DT). For that is my biggest concern on the 39Q. And the poor rear visiblity, which is bad. i have to zoom all the way in to have the biggest field of view through the back. Armlement is great, Speed is Average, SA is Average, and Defense is Great. but its a slow arse plane sometimes. Thats my Take on the 39Q.
:noid :noid :noid
-
I have to say I really like the P-39Q.
The 6 view isnt that bad if you customize it, zoom down, then forward. Corsair rear view is worse.
Its fast, turns well, dives well, climbs good enough, has good E retention, and the firepower even with no gondos is good. Its not for high alt, and its range is like the Yak, LA, Spit, so-so at best.
Its "fun"...thats what it is, Im having a hoot in it.
-
Yes, I like it as well. It doesn't do anything well except in the armament department. That being said, it doesn't do anything really badly. It's just an average plane when it comes down to performance.
It's great on slashing attacks against bommbers. One pass, one kill.
I've mostly enjoyed flying it offline but managed to get a 5 kill sortie out of it online over the weekend.
-
Not sure which P39 you guys are using. The ones I tried, well, I'd rather be in a P40. A couple more weeks and we wont be seeing any P39s in the MA skies :rofl
-
Yup I prefer P40E over it.
-
Not sure which P39 you guys are using. The ones I tried, well, I'd rather be in a P40. A couple more weeks and we wont be seeing any P39s in the MA skies :rofl
I think you are absolutely correct. Given that it is a new plane there really have not been that many of them around. I played a lot this weekend and only encountered a small handfull of them. And with the exception of shuffler planting a big 37mm into my face once, didnt have too much trouble with them. (It wasnt quite a HO Shuff, as I didnt quite have guns on you too, but it did hit me in the face. Call it a frontal quadrant pick as I was chaseing someone else)
-
Like everything else though, its perfect modeling will be changed a few times until it flies like a Spit err F4U err 109 :uhoh
-
Man, i made tater salad last night over 54 for about 3 hours in my p39.
It can turn on a dime once at 210mph, i soaked up TONS of damage MULTIPLE time's, and was still able to limp home with 2-4 kill on my belt each time i went up.
The 39 is not useless, it is capable, if you know how to fly a plane and use its weapons ..you stand a chance.
One thing to also consider is anyone who is good in a p40 should rightfully so be just as well off in a p39, and vice versa, give or take a few trates from each other.
And that 37mm cant be beat on a dog fighter, nothin' like sliding in behind a temp 800 out and snapping its wing off with one hit.
Yeah the yak's faster and has a way better gun, but the backup weaponry is a joke, nimble as she may be.
And for the punishment, forget about it.
Iron DOG indeed, get in front of my muzzle, ill bite.
-
The 39 is not useless, it is capable, if you know how to fly a plane and use its weapons ..you stand a chance.
One thing to also consider is anyone who is good in a p40 should rightfully so be just as well off in a p39, and vice versa, give or take a few trates from each other.
I still learning so what exactly are the P39s weapons? It cant turn, climb, run, or see behind it :confused:
-
The P-39s are fairly nimble in the middle of the speed range. Roll is ok if not spectactular, and she's fairly responsive in mid to high-speed maneuverability. Climb rate isn't remarkable and less-than-stellar acceleration, though she seems to retain E fairly well. The P-39Q actually is somewhat competitive in top airspeed at her optimal altitude range when matched against the other purely Midwar fighters (remember, the Q IS a Midwar ship) at co-alt. The Q has much more power and it shows, though neither aircraft are particularly well-equipped for sustained maneuvering.
The Q has four Browning .50s, which the Ma Deuce in any package should never be taken lightly, and I think she has a superior 37mm over the D's, although not as good as the Yak's. Does anyone know what 20mm the D has in the alternate configuration?
-
Not sure which P39 you guys are using. The ones I tried, well, I'd rather be in a P40. A couple more weeks and we wont be seeing any P39s in the MA skies :rofl
I disagree... the 39Q is a nice ride and can be very effective. It is one of the slickest AC in the game now with very low drag. It is most effective up around 12 to 14k. It holds E very well and can run down most planes in the game. Fly it without the extra underwing guns. It turns well and rolls decently.
-
Yup I prefer P40E over it.
Yea my impression is the p39 feels a lot like the P40, but you just can't see nothing behind you. If you could see behind you, then it would make a hell of a nice little plane IMO. I almost feel defenses in the 39 because of how horrible rear view.
-
I think its an OK plane. I like that at high speed almost nothing can out turn it, but at low speeds, it stalls and is realy hard to handle. It has a great package, if you can land a 30mm on it. It realy has crappy veiw.
Thats MHO.
-
Im not going to say its an uber-plane, or that Im "uber" in it. But Im glad the P-39 was included. Historically the airplane had a large presence in the war and it really deserves to be in the game. <S> to the AH staff for giving it to us.
Now the Whirbel I am thrilled with. I absolutely love that GV.
-
Seems a few are getting P-39D mixed up with P-39Q.
...Other than being 30 mph slower with a crappier climb rate? I cant think what a P-40E has on a P-39Q.
If I want my P39Q with 800 lbs of extra ballast for no reason? cool, ill roll a P-40E. :)
-
Yup I prefer P40E over it.
Some people simply like a certain aircraft for reasons they can't explain. I have a few I fly often despite being absolute dogs. However, the P-39Q is superior to the P-40E (which is modeled like a later P-40K, as the E did not have WEP).
Here's the data compiled by Mosq and me..
(http://home.att.net/~historyzone/P-39QvsP-40E-1.jpg)
Any questions?
My regards,
Widewing
-
i'd take the 39 over a 40E anyday :aok
-
Any questions?
My regards,
Widewing
Yes, where or how do you get this data?
-
I keep seeing people prefer the P40 over the P39 but I found that the P39 is much more maneuverable than the P40.
Do I fly the P40 wrong?
-
I keep saying people prefer the P40 over the P39 but I found that the P39 is much more maneuverable than the P40.
Do I fly the P40 wrong?
Probably. Those numbers do not tell you how a a fighter will do in a fight, in my opinion at list. The way it responds at low speeds when you have to roll over the enemy, what speed flaps come out, how it retains the little e left, can it pull its nose up just a enough for a shot, etc, is what makes the difference.
For example, some planes will nose over and point at the enemy while others will float to the earth. You cant see that in any graphs. WW is right that people like a plane but don't really know why. Its the feel of the plain. Assuming his numbers are true for AH, I still find the P40 a better fighter. If it was me vs me P40 vs P39, P40 would win
-
I think 39 use will be on the rise more than it is now. Even when the new wears off. It's a deadly fighter. The 80th flies it some as our namesake Squad did so back in the day. But as usual to each his/her own. <S>
-
Yes, where or how do you get this data?
Well Ded, it's a lot of work. Both Mosq and I have spent dozens of hours each test flying the P-39s. We have our own flight test cards, not unlike those used by real-world test pilots. Virtually every aspect of the flight envelope is explored and quantified.
For example, speed testing is done at increments of 5,000 feet, beginning at sea level (50ft). When I find myself close to the best altitude, I then test in 1,000 foot increments. I've actually broken it down to 100 foot increments on occasion. In the case of the P-39Q, it can reach 383 mph at 12,000 feet, with 383 mph at 13,000 feet and 381 mph at 14k. The P-39Q is a bit faster than the P-38J from 8k thru 13k and about 15 mph faster than the 190A5 at 12k... It's not a rocket, but it is competitive with most fighters between 8K and 14K.
Sea level speed is 329 mph, which is 30 mph faster than the P-40E. Comparing the La-7 to the 109G-14 produces the same speed ratio. Thus, it is quite significant. Moreover, the P-39Q is 10 mph faster at sea level using MIL power than the P-40E is using WEP. Again, this is substantial and an important fact.
Testing shows that the P-39Q accelerates faster and climbs faster than the P-51B or any of the -1 type Corsairs. Clean, it out turns them quite easily. The F4Us are better with flaps, but first they have to survive long enough to slow down and get them out.
So, why does the P-39Q out-perform the P-40E by such a margin? It's really rather easy to understand when you realize that the P-39 is much lighter, has more horsepower and similar wing area. It also has a much lower drag coefficient, which translates into speed.
My regards,
Widewing
-
So, why does the P-39Q out-perform the P-40E by such a margin? It's really rather easy to understand when you realize that the P-39 is much lighter, has more horsepower and similar wing area. It also has a much lower drag coefficient, which translates into speed.
My regards,
Widewing
It also has the mid-engine design, which shifts the CG. It also has a smaller nose area vs the P-40's large intake by the prop and the round front of air-cooled engines.
-
Awesome read WW. :salute
-
I dnt kno if u boys can fly it it might just take a girl to fly 39q i find evrything about the 39 is great other than the poor vis lookin behind u but other than that keep it fast lol dnt get low and slow first couple flights in the 39 i landed 17 kills total 3 sorties my first 3 but i use to play flight sims and alot of other stuff but now im stay at home mom lol but ya was just sayin cause 39 is 1 of my fav planes in this game now
-
It really seems to be able to hold its energy well, I had several 1 vs 1 fights at 15k-ish vs P-51s, and it kept up with them if they decided to turn and merge fight. Its a very "slick" bird when you get her up to speed. The real "clincher" I think is its ability to dive fast, it doesn't compress, and you come down like a rocketship if you have to, unlike a P-38, where you always look at the TAS nervously as it passes 450 mph, and its zoom climb is very respectable.
-
I am surprised no one has really noted the "interesting" stall characteristics of the plane. For me at low speeds it's like trying to ride a bull. It's mid-rear engine just makes the plane feel unstable as a grass hut in a hurricane.
-
I am surprised no one has really noted the "interesting" stall characteristics of the plane. For me at low speeds it's like trying to ride a bull. It's mid-rear engine just makes the plane feel unstable as a grass hut in a hurricane.
I mentioned it in the Aircraft and Vehicle forum. The difference between the onset of shake and actual departure from controlled flight is almost nothing. So, when it begins to shake, it's mighty close to dumping the inside wing. Flaps are nearly useless for low speed maneuvering. They improve the turn radius by little more than 90 feet (in contrast to 300 feet in the F4Us), and the turn rate suffers badly. So, keep your speed up around 250 mph and it shines. Get below 200 mph and it can get into trouble against the better stall fighters.
My regards,
Widewing
-
Widewing,
At roughly 3700 ft/min, isn't the P39Q's one of the best climbing US, non-perked US planes? Granted that's only for 8K and below, but that's a lot of AH action.
The Spixteen outdoes it considerably, as does the La7. But planes like the F6F, P38, Typhoon, Hurricane don't match it at low alts and those see considerable LW usage.
Edit:
And as far as acceleration goes, is there any relationship between climb rate and acceleration? Do you do a test for acceleration?
Thanks for the info...
-
I like the Q and fly it similiarly to my k4, very gentle on the controls, smooth imputs, and prop hang vertical overshoots. Its a fun little plane but the rear view is muy terrible.
-
if its just me or is it almost ever time i get into a turn fight in the 39, i always feel like im fighting a stall. i thought it would have more power. it takes a crap of a long time to get over to the bish feild in FT. And when you get there, you kill a niki or a spit, lose all your E and then get it back. THE FUEL DOESNT EVEN LAST THAT LONG (with the exception of the DT). For that is my biggest concern on the 39Q. And the poor rear visiblity, which is bad. i have to zoom all the way in to have the biggest field of view through the back. Armlement is great, Speed is Average, SA is Average, and Defense is Great. but its a slow arse plane sometimes. Thats my Take on the 39Q.
:noid :noid :noid
i've only met up with the 39 3 times......i was in a zeke each time, and was victorious each time. on the third, i even lit him up like a roman candle. they don't burn as long as the zekes do.
<<S>>
-
Well Ded, it's a lot of work. Both Mosq and I have spent dozens of hours each test flying the P-39s. We have our own flight test cards, not unlike those used by real-world test pilots. Virtually every aspect of the flight envelope is explored and quantified.
For example, speed testing is done at increments of 5,000 feet, beginning at sea level (50ft). When I find myself close to the best altitude, I then test in 1,000 foot increments. I've actually broken it down to 100 foot increments on occasion. In the case of the P-39Q, it can reach 383 mph at 12,000 feet, with 383 mph at 13,000 feet and 381 mph at 14k. The P-39Q is a bit faster than the P-38J from 8k thru 13k and about 15 mph faster than the 190A5 at 12k... It's not a rocket, but it is competitive with most fighters between 8K and 14K.
Sea level speed is 329 mph, which is 30 mph faster than the P-40E. Comparing the La-7 to the 109G-14 produces the same speed ratio. Thus, it is quite significant. Moreover, the P-39Q is 10 mph faster at sea level using MIL power than the P-40E is using WEP. Again, this is substantial and an important fact.
Testing shows that the P-39Q accelerates faster and climbs faster than the P-51B or any of the -1 type Corsairs. Clean, it out turns them quite easily. The F4Us are better with flaps, but first they have to survive long enough to slow down and get them out.
So, why does the P-39Q out-perform the P-40E by such a margin? It's really rather easy to understand when you realize that the P-39 is much lighter, has more horsepower and similar wing area. It also has a much lower drag coefficient, which translates into speed.
My regards,
Widewing
Check, I did not know if you were going of real life numbers or tests done in AH. I'll go back to what you said. People like a plane but don't really know why. I think it is the feel of it. I really don't know how to describe it, but I cant handle that plane. P40, is a different story.
Then again, it depends on what one means by "better" also
-
I prefer the D over the Q. The Q seems nose-heavy with that big cannon on it, and when that runs out the twin .50s aren't anything to brag about. The D offers the 20mm with ~30 more rounds than the Q's 37mm and has better ballistics on long-range shots at d400. The D also supplements the .50s with four .30cals and plenty of ammo. The D is slower on climb and level speed because it lacks WEP, but it handles better in the turns and rolls.
And they're both prone to rearward attacks by Typhoons, Mustangs, LA-7s, Nik's, and anything else that can cruise faster than 250 IAS.
The one thing the P39 can do is push 500 IAS in a dive without control lock, which is nice for escaping Spitfires, P-38s, and 109s.
-
The P-39Q is a bit faster than the P-38J from 8k thru 13k and about 15 mph faster than the 190A5 at 12k... It's not a rocket, but it is competitive with most fighters between 8K and 14K.
But was that accurate in RL? I am no history buff, but I was always under the impression that the P39 was an underpowered aircraft which was not as capable in the regimes of speed and climb as it seems here in AH :confused:. Seems the best defence a P38 would have against it would be a low speed knife fight or a spiral climb to the right :eek:.
-
The P39 is a junky waste of space! Now if they'd put a Bpony in the game with cannons, they'd be on to something! :rock
-
Actually the only thing the D has over the Q is more weight, no WEP, poorer climb and poorer speed. It rolls no faster, nor does it turn better. Why would it? exact same wing area with less power, but the D is heavier.
...It does have the 20mm option, which with 60 rnds, isn't much of a bargain. The D is fine for SEA events, but I would never roll it over the Q in the MA.
"The P39 is a junky waste of space!"
Sounds like another that has not tried it. Its amazing all the posts there are re: new fighters, but then nobody will get out of the old ones. Oh well. Maybe when the add the P-80 super duper jet fighter.
-
I flew the P39 a few times and landed 6 kills in both the Q and D. It's a good low alt fighter when you have speed, but also has that nasty spin when you get to stall speeds. :mad:
-
they don't burn as long as the zekes do.
Zeke pilots have become used to operating while flaming, hence, they have built up a greater tolerance.
-
Actually the only thing the D has over the Q is more weight, no WEP, poorer climb and poorer speed. It rolls no faster, nor does it turn better. Why would it? exact same wing area with less power, but the D is heavier.
...It does have the 20mm option, which with 60 rnds, isn't much of a bargain. The D is fine for SEA events, but I would never roll it over the Q in the MA.
"The P39 is a junky waste of space!"
Sounds like another that has not tried it. Its amazing all the posts there are re: new fighters, but then nobody will get out of the old ones. Oh well. Maybe when the add the P-80 super duper jet fighter.
I got in it the day it came out. It was wobbling all over the runway and I couldn't see out the back. Bailed out, and haven't been in it since.
-
It doesn't wobble unless you use auto-takeoff, which is a feature for total n00blets. The 6 view is customizable, zoom, down, then forward, the Corsair has a much worse 6 view than the P-39.
...Like I suspected, you have this severely negative opinion of it "The P39 is a junky waste of space!", but in reality, you have not even seriously tried it. Have you landed a single kill in it? Thats ok, I don't care if nobody else wants to fly it, but posting about hows its such a POS when you know zippity-do-da about it?
"Bailed out, and haven't been in it since." So ends your expert testimony? Cripes.
:rock < Ughh, ya, whatever.
-
it's ugly too
-
It doesn't wobble unless you use auto-takeoff, which is a feature for total n00blets.
I am a n00blet :O
-
But was that accurate in RL? I am no history buff, but I was always under the impression that the P39 was an underpowered aircraft which was not as capable in the regimes of speed and climb as it seems here in AH :confused:. Seems the best defence a P38 would have against it would be a low speed knife fight or a spiral climb to the right :eek:.
Yes, the performance listed is historic. Beginning with the P-39N, the Airacobra had 1,420 hp on tap. Being a small, very clean fighter, it was relatively fast. Performance fell off above 15k, but it was adequate below that. Indeed, the Soviets loved them (especially the late models) and gave the Luftwaffe a very hard time.
My regards,
Widewing
-
It doesn't wobble unless you use auto-takeoff, which is a feature for total n00blets.
We've come to the point that using auto-take off is now a sign of a non-vet, skilless n00b? So very, very sad.
ack-ack
-
No, like stall limiter, its a sign your a vet, right? ;)
In any case of you turn it off its a non-issue, tad of rudder, and your up.
Regards.
-
No, like stall limiter, its a sign your a vet, right? ;)
In any case of you turn it off its a non-issue, tad of rudder, and your up.
Regards.
It's a non-issue if it's on...well, at least to most people except for those "special" few.
ack
-
Beginning with the P-39N, the Airacobra had 1,420 hp on tap.
Isn't that the unofficial, field-boosted level? Standard factory levels were around 1200+
Since when does HTC model in over-boosted engines in this game? :furious
-
Isn't that the unofficial, field-boosted level? Standard factory levels were around 1200+
Since when does HTC model in over-boosted engines in this game? :furious
Boy would you wine about the 1590 hp at 2.5k model. ;) This would be the D-2, k and L.
Edit: AHT. pg 191, table 25, P-39N/Q..... V-1710-85 wep= 1420 at 9.7k.
-
Well AHT has been inaccurate according to some of you folks on other issues. Also that may be field-modified (as per my post).
I did a search on 2 dozen webpages with google to refresh my memory before posting. All of them list the P-39Q as having 1200hp. I thought it was 1200-something, maybe 1300 tops, but I was kinda surprised that every resource in a random web sampling all had the same levels. Even museums and military webpages listed 1200 for the Q and N (which was what the Q was modified from)
-
Well AHT has been inaccurate according to some of you folks on other issues. Also that may be field-modified (as per my post).
I did a search on 2 dozen webpages with google to refresh my memory before posting. All of them list the P-39Q as having 1200hp. I thought it was 1200-something, maybe 1300 tops, but I was kinda surprised that every resource in a random web sampling all had the same levels. Even museums and military webpages listed 1200 for the Q and N (which was what the Q was modified from)
Take off is listed as 1200, just so you know.
-
takeoff is usually similar to emergency, as in short-duration, max power.
EDIT: None of the pages I sampled said "takeoff" though
-
takeoff is usually similar to emergency, as in short-duration, max power.
EDIT: None of the pages I sampled said "takeoff" though
Did a quick google myself. None of the pages listed take off, normal, mil or wep.
-
Krusty from zeno's.
(http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n277/1bronk1/p-39chart.jpg)
-
Not sure which P39 you guys are using. The ones I tried, well, I'd rather be in a P40. A couple more weeks and we wont be seeing any P39s in the MA skies :rofl
Unless you bish, you will probably be seeing one ME!
-
Bronk: thanks.
Now my question is: Why is a small increase in MAP with no increase in RPM making such a giant leap in horsepower? Also, is this a field-mod, as we hear many tales of the Soviets over-boosting their engines, swapping them out with little regard of maintaining them, etc?
-
I had to look for it.
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,230639.0.html
The E6B doesn't even reach these boost levels.
It also has this problem on the P-40E. We can compare the P-40E and see that its power and speed curves are inconsistent for BOTH the P-40K and the P-40E. It is a hybrid, sort of like our typhoon has been described.
This makes me think the P-39s are also not spot-on, if the E6B and the actual boost don't match up.
We have standard boost P51s, P47s, P38s, I'd like to see a standard P39, personally. That's just me.
-
I had to look for it.
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,230639.0.html
The E6B doesn't even reach these boost levels.
It also has this problem on the P-40E. We can compare the P-40E and see that its power and speed curves are inconsistent for BOTH the P-40K and the P-40E. It is a hybrid, sort of like our typhoon has been described.
This makes me think the P-39s are also not spot-on, if the E6B and the actual boost don't match up.
We have standard boost P51s, P47s, P38s, I'd like to see a standard P39, personally. That's just me.
Krusty I won't speak on the P-40, I will on the 39Q. The max speed and and climb is about as I expected. I'm thinking the M.A.P indicator is just off. I'm willing to bet HT fixes the indicator and performance will remain the same.
I also could be wrong, time will tell.
-
Bronk: thanks.
Now my question is: Why is a small increase in MAP with no increase in RPM making such a giant leap in horsepower? Also, is this a field-mod, as we hear many tales of the Soviets over-boosting their engines, swapping them out with little regard of maintaining them, etc?
Tell ya what jump in a stock 08 mustang. Now jump in one with a turbo producing as little as 4lbs of boost.
-
Im sure the manifold guage is just off, thats all. New version, there are always a bunch of bugs, we will just have to wait for patch 3.