P-40E v P-39D

[tigercub]

Looking at what the U.S.A.A.F official report said about the P39 "specially disappointing" its low ceiling,slow rate of climb,relative lack of manouverability, which put its pilots at a decided disadvantage where ever they fought, The P39D Airacobra was a poor interceptor and practically useless over 17,000 feet.

Hence i will be toning it back its over rated, climb rate is one thing that is not right if you calculate as has been done with the other planes a climb of 2,200 f.p.m is what it should be.

info R.J Francillon and willian green

Tiger!

[xj900uk]

Me109 was actually far more manouevable than either the P39 or P40,  and also slightly better than both the Spitfire or Hurricane (from the BoB).  However it wasn't very structually sound and very few pilots (unless really desperate) would really fly the wings/airframe out to the absolute limit of its envellope.
 
I'm reading 'Fire in the Sky' at the moment by Bergund(?) about the SW Pacific air campaign, it has a lot to say about both the P39 and P40.  For all it's faults, and when the problems with the 37mm cannon were ironed out, the P39 was a very good low-level strike fighter and ground attack plane, ideal for shooting up the Japanese barges.  Everyone agreed it was rubbish above 10/12k feet, but good at low-level with a fast rate of role and was very nippy,  rather than hang around to fight the Oscar's and Zero's it could get away from them which was more important.  P40 was a better dogfighter but a lot less manouevreable than the Japanese planes, however it could out-dive them and certainly absorb a lot more punishment.  Once the Allied pilots leared the hard way not to dogfight with the Japanese but rather have one slashing attack from an ideal height/vantage point and keep on going like a dingbat out of hell,  then it was successful.  Hagning around in the air superiority role though trying to dogfight Zeros & Oscars and getting into a low-speed turning match - sorry, forget it!

[castor troy]

ORIGINAL: xj900uk

Me109 was actually far more manouevable than either the P39 or P40,  and also slightly better than both the Spitfire or Hurricane (from the BoB).  However it wasn't very structually sound and very few pilots (unless really desperate) would really fly the wings/airframe out to the absolute limit of its envellope.

I'm reading 'Fire in the Sky' at the moment by Bergund(?) about the SW Pacific air campaign, it has a lot to say about both the P39 and P40.  For all it's faults, and when the problems with the 37mm cannon were ironed out, the P39 was a very good low-level strike fighter and ground attack plane, ideal for shooting up the Japanese barges.  Everyone agreed it was rubbish above 10/12k feet, but good at low-level with a fast rate of role and was very nippy,  rather than hang around to fight the Oscar's and Zero's it could get away from them which was more important.  P40 was a better dogfighter but a lot less manouevreable than the Japanese planes, however it could out-dive them and certainly absorb a lot more punishment.  Once the Allied pilots leared the hard way not to dogfight with the Japanese but rather have one slashing attack from an ideal height/vantage point and keep on going like a dingbat out of hell,  then it was successful.  Hagning around in the air superiority role though trying to dogfight Zeros & Oscars and getting into a low-speed turning match - sorry, forget it!

a Me-109 was more manouverable than a Spitfire? Which model? All of them? [&:]

[witpqs]

So, there is still no answer to why the P-39 has better game stats than the P-40, but performs worse in-game?

Any other developers monitoring this thread? (Elf and TreeSpider have already weighed in without having an answer.)

[PaxMondo]

ORIGINAL: xj900uk

I'm reading 'Fire in the Sky' at the moment by Bergund(?) about the SW Pacific air campaign, it has a lot to say about both the P39 and P40.  For all it's faults, and when the problems with the 37mm cannon were ironed out, the P39 was a very good low-level strike fighter and ground attack plane, ideal for shooting up the Japanese barges.  Everyone agreed it was rubbish above 10/12k feet, but good at low-level with a fast rate of role and was very nippy,  rather than hang around to fight the Oscar's and Zero's it could get away from them which was more important. 

This is consistent with what the SOV said about it as well. I cannot reconcile the reputed high roll rate with the charts posted earlier, but every pilot account I have ever read on the P-39 talks about it's incredible roll rate. Go figure, disputed data. [:D]

[tigercub]

The Me109 was more manouevable than a Spitfire!(the pilot is the key) Which model? All of them? (no) but the me109-E3 could turn with the spit mkI and MKII when pushed also more than one German Ace said they have never been out turned by a spitfire, Reason combat flaps and above average skill was needed to out turn the spit as a lot of average pilots were not able to use the combat slats with effect therefore not able to turn with the spit,MKV spit was left behind by the fw190 and the ME 109F4-g1-g2-g5 models using combat slats these models were able to out turn the spitfire MkV (MKV was the most produced spitfire) The MKIX and later models closed the gap as the ME109G6 lost manouevablty when they placed wing mounted cannon on.(at this stage the Germans used 2 fighter groups one to attack bombers with wing cannon less nimble and ones with out the weapons to help the cannon wing mounted types or the FW190 was used to attack bombers)all this said, i am not saying the the ME109 was better than the spit but in some cases it was.

The ME109F could be turned so tight you could tear the wing off and some ACES did do this killing them self's.

Tiger!

[Mike Scholl]

ORIGINAL: tigercub

The ME109F could be turned so tight you could tear the wing off and some ACES did do this killing them self's.

Tiger!

Most people would say that proves they COULDN'T be turned that tightly... [:D]

[xj900uk]

Len Deighton's excellent BoB book 'Fighter' compares the turning circles of the Me109 (E model) compared to the Spit 1 & Hurricane 1 in the Battle of Britain.  This is based upon trials carried out by the RAF Establishment on a captured Me109.
However,  it is a genunine concern as to the structural viability of the Me109 (indeed all marks & models) and the fragility of the wings - most pilots wouldn't dare push it to the edges of the envellope.
Plane for plane IMO the Me109 just edges it, better turning circle & also add to this the fuel-injection Daimler Benz engine which gives it a tad more horses than the excellent Merlin which only increases with altitude - above 20k the yellow-noses ruled supreme.  Having said all that,  the german bombers flew mainly between 8k & 18k so often the yellow-noses would be up int he Gods at 25k+ waiting and watching for the swarms of British fighters to come up, at which point they would wingover and zoom down on any stragglers - many a good British pilot was caught and died with his plane slipping and sliding in the icy atmosphere.  However the power dive would often then take the hunters far away from the bombers they were supposed to be protecting...
 
BTW the most manouevable monoplane fighter of WWII was the Oscar.  Could do Immelman after Immelman with a hammerhead stall to round off and in the hands of an ace,  nothing could touch him.
Worth noting that plane for plane,  most Oscars were shot down being used as heavy bomber interceptors, a role for which they were totally unsuitable with their two light mg's...

[castor troy]

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

ORIGINAL: tigercub

The ME109F could be turned so tight you could tear the wing off and some ACES did do this killing them self's.

Tiger!

Most people would say that proves they COULDN'T be turned that tightly... [:D]

that pretty much was my thought when I read the above statement. Using an aircraft to an extend that it disintegrates is obviously beyond the capability of the aircraft.

[Nikademus]

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

ORIGINAL: tigercub

The ME109F could be turned so tight you could tear the wing off and some ACES did do this killing them self's.

Tiger!

Most people would say that proves they COULDN'T be turned that tightly... [:D]

109 could not outturn Hurricane/Spit or P40 (low/med alt) under normal circumstances. 109 experten quickly learned that attempts to match these planes in turning fights were non-habit forming. Some of the best Experten could briefly get away with it, such as Marssialles but these were exceptions vs. the rule. Another experten got away with it from time to time vs. I-16's, a plane which could turn on a dime and was way more nimble in this way vs. the 109.

109 was a nimble design (less so as you progress from E to G) but it's primary strength lay in vertical maneuvers vs. these planes. The Russians made similar note regarding P40 as with Commonwealth exp in the desert. UK veteran pilots, being used to having the edge in turning fights was part of the reason why they preformed poorly initially when facing the JNAF and JAAF for the first time in Asia. Situaiton was reversed there.

[tigercub]

True it was not needed a lot of the time because the ME109 could out dive and out climb the spit.

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

ORIGINAL: tigercub

The ME109F could be turned so tight you could tear the wing off and some ACES did do this killing them self's.

Tiger!

Most people would say that proves they COULDN'T be turned that tightly... [:D]

109 could not outturn Hurricane/Spit or P40 (low/med alt) under normal circumstances. 109 experten quickly learned that attempts to match these planes in turning fights were non-habit forming. Some of the best Experten could briefly get away with it, such as Marssialles but these were exceptions vs. the rule. Another experten got away with it from time to time vs. I-16's, a plane which could turn on a dime and was way more nimble in this way vs. the 109.

109 was a nimble design (less so as you progress from E to G) but it's primary strength lay in vertical maneuvers vs. these planes. The Russians made similar note regarding P40 as with Commonwealth exp in the desert. UK veteran pilots, being used to having the edge in turning fights was part of the reason why they preformed poorly initially when facing the JNAF and JAAF for the first time in Asia. Situaiton was reversed there.

[xj900uk]

Certainly until the mid-year Spits (like the Mark VIII & IX) started getting fuel-injection carb systems and better turbo-chargers on their Merlins which negated a lot of the advantages the Me's were enjoying