Most Surprising Fighter Fact?

[oboe]

The Brewster Buffalo, one of America's most maligned fighter aircraft, produced more aces per airframe than the P-51 Mustang.

And I wholeheartedly agree with Widewing; a few varients of the P-39 would be great additions to AH.    I think the 'cobra is one of those aircraft that saw service in every theater of WWII, and then enjoyed life on the racing circuit after the war.    

Really an amazing airplane!

[frank3]

just because the P-47 was the heaviest fighter doesn't mean it needs the biggest wingspan does it?
I mean, it has a very strong engine so it doesn't need that much lift I guess?

[Zanth]

Sadly, I fear it will be a very very long time before we see any new planes.

[Wilbus]

As for wing span I'd say the Ta152 was the one with bigest wingspan that saw action. Not the largets wing area though.

[HoHun]

Hi Widewing,

>All in all, the P-39D easily out-performed the A6M2 in every category but low-speed maneuverability and range.

The funny thing is, P-38 ace MF Kirby maintained that the P-400 he was flying over New Guinea was outperformed by the A6M in every respect except top speed - with the Zero being close even there.

>Yet, today you would think the P-39D was an absolute pig. It wasn't.

He also decribed the Japanese bombers with their escorts conducting their attacks at altitudes the P-400 couldn't reach. (For some reason, the P-40E displayed a better high-altitude performance than the P-39/P-400 over New Guinea.)

>It also proved very formidable against the Luftwaffe at altitudes below 15,000 feet.

Well, Pokryshkin enjoyed great success in the type, but he still considered the P-39 too heavy compared to the Luftwaffe fighters. I have to admit that I haven't seen any good performance graphs to analyze P-39 performance so far, and numbers certainly tell us more than opinions.

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

[Engine]

Well, which single-engine had the most wing area then?

[F4UDOA]

Here is the report that Widewing is quoting from regarding the P-39. The thing about the comparison done between the P-39, P-38F, P-51A, F4F-4 and F4U-1 is that the P-39 was way overboosted for the test. They started by running it at 70" MAP but it started to detonate so they reduced MAP to 55".

During that test the A6M2 outclimbed the P-51A, F4F and was superior than theP-38F below 20K. The F4U-1 was superior at sea level and above 20K. Between 5K and 20K the situation varied.

Another factoid is that when the P-39Q was raced in 1946 against Mustangs, P-38s and an F4U-1 it won at 370+MPH lap speeds. Very fast indeed at low alts

Here is the full original report.

A6M2 flight test

[Guppy35]

Originally posted by Widewing
Somethings that don't surprise me, but certainly will surprise others.

Most P-39N/Qs were shipped to the Soviets, but several USAAF fighter squadrons based in Italy flew them, as did the Italians and Free French. When USAAF units switched over to the P-47 near the end of the war, most pilots were unhappy to exchange their P-39s, which quite frankly, was a much better fighter at the altitudes where they spent most of their time. The P-47, however, could haul better than 3 times the weight of under-wing ordnance.

So, while the early P-39D was a better performer than the A6M2 Zero below 15k, likewise, the P-39N/Q series was reasonably competitive with later war fighters at low to medium altitudes.

Wouldn't it be a hoot to have a late model P-39 in Aces High?

So, are you surprised?

My regards,

Widewing

The WW2 fighter pilot we had flying in Airwarrior, and who I believe has an account in AH although I don't think he flies much, flew 39s with the 345th FS, 350th FG, before transitioning to the P47 in September 44.  He loved flying the 39, and the key was what Widewing is referring to.  At the alts they were flying, the plane did the job very well.  He liked the Jug too and won the Silver Star in it, but when asked which he liked to fly, it was the 39.

They fought 109s and 190s down low too and held their own.  But they couldn't chase down the Ju88 recce birds at alt, so they ended up with some loaner P38Gs that they had on runway alert to try and get them because the 39 couldn't get up there.

image is Earl in his 39 "Eloise" over Tunisia

Dan/Slack

[F4UDOA]

Engine,

The Hellcat had 334Sq ft of wing area. By comparison the F4U had 314 Sqft and the P-47 300Sqft.

The P-47D was the heaviest empty at almost 10,000lbs followed by the F6F at 9200lbs and the F4U at 9,000LBS.

[Rafe35]

I have to say that Goodyear F2G-1D is almost the same size as Republic P-47 Thunderbolt, because that flaunted a huge 28-cylinder, air-cooled radial engine that drives a very large paddle-blade Hamilton-Standard constant-speed propeller.

[JB73]

Originally posted by moot
don't have the proportions of each of those in visual memory, but I remember visiting one of Phoenix's WWII planes museum, and in the fighters hangar, with a D13, a spitfire, a yak, a P51, a P47 (cage canopy), a 38, and some others, the Corsair was in comparison a titan by stance and volume.

komandant ..

i think it could have been Falcon field in Mesa Az to.

they had an emil and a yak and a ton of stuff. (the 109 was suposedly the only flyable 109 that exists.. or so the placard said)

i got to see it for about an hour 1 day ..too short.

my biggest suprise was how small the 109 and yak were compared to the allied planes.

btw at the eaa in oshkosh they have a p38 and its not as big as the f4u they have at least in height and diameter of the fuselage.

[GScholz]

Yes JB73, the 109 and Spit were the F1 cars of the European theatre. The others were dragsters or dump trucks with guns.

[Widewing]

Originally posted by hogenbor
Widewing, I have no doubt whatsoever that you can back up your claims, but what are your sources?

The only thing I've heard in all my life is that the P-39 was indeed a pig, with poor performance, dangerous handling characteristics and a very poor rate of climb, especially compared to the A6M.

Seems that for every theory available about WWII fighters someone has the data to disprove it...

On the other hand, the detailed data I've seen on Spits, 109's, F4U's and the technical problems of the P-38 in Europe is simply amazing. It is only a shame that people's judgement is so often clouded by their personal preference

I have many sources, most very reliable.

One common source available to everyone is Francis (Diz) Dean's monster book, "America's Hundred Thousand". Dean make extensive use of test data and has climb and speed curves for the various P-39 models described. There is also the USAAF's Informational Intelligence Summary No. 85, which was issued to fighter squadrons in the SWPA, PTO and CBI. I have a paper copy, but I'm pleased that F4UDOA has also found it on the web. This way, everyone can view it. Finally, I have a copy of Angelucci and Bowers' "The American Fighter". This is an excellent resource for detailed data and deployment. It's long out of print, but used copies can usually be found at http://www.alibris.com or through Amazon's book search service.

My regards,

Widewing

[vorticon]

some fighters could carry a greater bombload than several proper bombers...

[Furball]

The prototype Tempest managed 472 mph in 1943, in level flight.

Tempest's claimed 11 or 12 air to air kills Vs. Me262's, and in the korean war the Sea Fury (a development of the Tempest) went on to kill a Mig 15.

"The Messerschmitt Me 262's most dangerous opponent was the British Hawker Tempest - extremely fast at low altitudes, highly-manoeuvrable and heavily-armed."
(Hubert Lange, Me262 pilot)

Hawker Tempest