How to use the Aircobras?

[Shark7]

ORIGINAL: Offworlder

One of my main 'problems' as an Allied player is how to use the Aircobra. It seems to be a sturdy enough fighter but is really a sitting duck for Japanese guns. The P-400 with 20 mm gun is a bit better and I have used it with decent results in the front lines. Its a pity that such a numerous fighter just sits there...

So how do you use the Aircobras (original version)?
Are later versions of '43 any better?

Truth is that for now I only employ them either as trainers or as CAP over ports which only Japanese bombers without escorts can reach. So any other ideas?

Thanks in advance!

To uses, both of them in the training role...

1. Set them to 90% train behind the lines, rotate your pilots to the reserve pool as they get to the point you want them.

2. Put them on the front lines as cap and let them train Japanese pilots (my favorite.) [:D]

While I'm being a bit humorous here, the Aircobra is just not good at dogfighting Japanese fighters. Ground attack might be a better role, or training.

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: Mundy

ORIGINAL: EUBanana
There is actually a need for training a/c in AE, so I suspect that is what I'll be using Airacobras for in the later war- filling up west coast training squadrons.

Which is entirely historical.  If I remember correctly, in his autobiography, Yeager mentions being trained for fighters in them.

They were definitely a step up from the Wirraways, before they got bomberized. (I always thought an "emergency CAP" option would have been nice for light bombers.  You'll pay dearly against escorts, but if you have nothing else...)

It's a pity the 39's performance wasn't that hot at altitude.  I always thought it was one of the nicest looking aircraft of the war.  Very clean lines.

Ed-

It was a pretty plane, but a fighter with a door indicates the chief engineer had lost the pitch on the way to the plate.

[JeffroK]

I sent at a Fighter Group of P39 into SE Asia.

The RAF is so short of fighters anything is of assistance. Plus they make a good ground attack platform.

AND, you have a FG there which can upgrade to P47 etc etc.

[Mundy]

An excellent shot of its lines.

Ed-

[Walloc]

Hmm, interresting that its almost all seems to dislike the P-39. When i compare the P-39 vs P-40 results in my PBEMs. The kill ration of my P-39 is significantly better than the P-40s vs Zero's/Oscars. Mostly cuz less gets lost.
Key is never to go high, as in not above 10k in my experience. 7-9k is perfect for them in my experience.

Kind regards,

Rasmus

[Walloc]

Just went back and checked some of the bigger battles where i had both figthers vs Zeros of KB.
In one battle where i had 5 squadrons of 3 P-40 and 2 P-39 on sweep(thanks for allowing that) vs 58 Zeros of KB initial quality pilots. 85%(17 in all) of the downed Zeroes was from the 2 P-39 squadrons. On average the P-39 only lost about half of the losses than of the P-40 squadrons. So it cant be that only the P-39 was engaged. Ofc this is a single example and one have to becarefull with that. Non the less its not that far from what i tend to see.
My pilot quality was about the same.

Kind regards,

Rasmus

[vinnie71]

Well had to commit the P-400 in the advance defence of the DEI, and they seem to be holding their own against Oscars and the occasional Zero. The only P-39s in the 'frontline' are three squadrons at Tulagi (no fear of escort fighters as yet) and 2 squadrons in the Aleutinian islands. Since I haven't enough Warhawks to send to India as yet, I'm thinking of converting 3 squadrons to P-39s and send them to patrol the skies in the area around Calcutta where there seem to be numerous unescorted Betty raids. As for the rest, they're either training of piling up in the pool...
 
At the cost of sounding fastidous (sorry) has anyone used the upgraded 1943 Aircobra in action as yet? From the stats it didn't seem that impressive but maybe some have found some use for it...

[Alpha77]

Well the US has not much other "better" fighter in 1942, or have they ? They have P40 and P39, some P400. So they need to do their work. Well you get some P38 also but not many........

I was quite amazed that the US used these modells so much, as I know that Luftwaffe pilots held them for easy prey (at least P40s in Africa). [X(] And the Luftwaffe in NA flew mostly standard BF109s no FW190s

EDIT: Now after July/Aug 42 in my game and the Jap airforce in some theaters weakened also my pilots are a bit better now, even these modells do their share of shooting down Japs. However Zeros are still much better. But I even lost some better Hurries in Burma to Oscars, so......

[Zebedee]

ORIGINAL: Alpha77
I was quite amazed that the US used these modells so much, as I know that Luftwaffe pilots held them for easy prey (at least P40s in Africa). [X(] And the Luftwaffe in NA flew mostly standard BF109s no FW190s

239 Wing RAF claimed a 3:1 kill rate against 109s with their Kittyhawks. Even allowing for over-claiming that's 'prey' with some teeth

[Alpha77]

In Germany we say "Die Ausnahme bestätigt die Regel", the exception proves the rule

US built P-40 Tomahawk/Kittyhawk also went to the DAF as it was unsuited to European operations which were generally fought at much higher altitudes and against more formidable opposition. The P-40 was used initially as an air superiority fighter but it was also adapted (and found to be ideally suited) to ground attack missions.
The DAF always outnumbered its Axis opponents and concentrated on long-range interdiction and direct tactical Eighth Army support. Unfortunately these tactics meant that the faster Messerschmitt Bf 109s of Jagdgeschwader 27 usually had the advantage of height and surprise over the low-level, slow-flying DAF fighters and losses were correspondingly heavy.

n 1942, the DAF reorganized its tactics and upgraded its inventory. Spitfires were eventually assigned in the air superiority role, becoming operational in August 1942, which allowed the DAF to finally turn the tide.

Well from Wiki [:'(]

And maybe your figures are from the time when they converted to Spitfires and also had even higher numerical superiority in this theatre....

[Zebedee]

ORIGINAL: Alpha77

In Germany we say "Die Ausnahme bestätigt die Regel", the exception proves the rule

US built P-40 Tomahawk/Kittyhawk also went to the DAF as it was unsuited to European operations which were generally fought at much higher altitudes and against more formidable opposition. The P-40 was used initially as an air superiority fighter but it was also adapted (and found to be ideally suited) to ground attack missions.
The DAF always outnumbered its Axis opponents and concentrated on long-range interdiction and direct tactical Eighth Army support. Unfortunately these tactics meant that the faster Messerschmitt Bf 109s of Jagdgeschwader 27 usually had the advantage of height and surprise over the low-level, slow-flying DAF fighters and losses were correspondingly heavy.

n 1942, the DAF reorganized its tactics and upgraded its inventory. Spitfires were eventually assigned in the air superiority role, becoming operational in August 1942, which allowed the DAF to finally turn the tide.

Well from Wiki [:'(]

And maybe your figures are from the time when they converted to Spitfires and also had even higher numerical superiority in this theatre....

Most of the recent research on the DAF has kind of exploded the mythology surrounding the P-40 being an absolute dog of a plane. It's performance against the early marks of the 109 in North Africa (albeit at lower altitudes than was common over Western Europe) was perfectly adequate, and in some cases even impressive. Which also seems to be supported by the experiences of the Soviets on the Eastern front.

[Alpha77]

Well the books I read weren´t that recent, but I don´t want to argue about that In game at least they are not perfectly adequate [:)]

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: Alpha77

Well the US has not much other "better" fighter in 1942, or have they ? They have P40 and P39, some P400. So they need to do their work. Well you get some P38 also but not many........

I was quite amazed that the US used these modells so much, as I know that Luftwaffe pilots held them for easy prey (at least P40s in Africa). [X(] And the Luftwaffe in NA flew mostly standard BF109s no FW190s

EDIT: Now after July/Aug 42 in my game and the Jap airforce in some theaters weakened also my pilots are a bit better now, even these modells do their share of shooting down Japs. However Zeros are still much better. But I even lost some better Hurries in Burma to Oscars, so......

As fighters, P-40Bs, Hurricanes, A6M2s, and F4Fs were about equal.

[LeeChard]

The Russians used the P39 to good effect simply because they were using it within it's design parameters The U.S. envisioned an aircraft to defend the coasts against invasion
at low levels with ground attack capabilities.

[wdolson]

The P-39 was originally a high altitude fighter.  The prototype had a supercharger.  The weight and complexity of the turbo scratched that idea and it was recast as a low altitude fighter.  If they had used Merlins instead of Alisons, it could had fulfilled it's original role as a high altitude bomber interceptor.  The US would have been smart to terminate Alison production and switch all inline production to Merlins. 

At low altitude the performance of the Merlin and Alison were similar, but the Alison needed external help at altitude and the Merlin didn't.  The P-51A was very successful in the CBI because altitude was not an issue.  I have read an account by a P-51 pilot in that theater who claimed there wasn't a fighter in the world that could beat a P-51A under 15,000 feet.  The Merlin was needed in Europe because most of the fighting was at high altitude.

Bill

[Nikademus]

ORIGINAL: Alpha77

In Germany we say "Die Ausnahme bestätigt die Regel", the exception proves the rule

US built P-40 Tomahawk/Kittyhawk also went to the DAF as it was unsuited to European operations which were generally fought at much higher altitudes and against more formidable opposition. The P-40 was used initially as an air superiority fighter but it was also adapted (and found to be ideally suited) to ground attack missions.
The DAF always outnumbered its Axis opponents and concentrated on long-range interdiction and direct tactical Eighth Army support. Unfortunately these tactics meant that the faster Messerschmitt Bf 109s of Jagdgeschwader 27 usually had the advantage of height and surprise over the low-level, slow-flying DAF fighters and losses were correspondingly heavy.

n 1942, the DAF reorganized its tactics and upgraded its inventory. Spitfires were eventually assigned in the air superiority role, becoming operational in August 1942, which allowed the DAF to finally turn the tide.

Well from Wiki [:'(]

And maybe your figures are from the time when they converted to Spitfires and also had even higher numerical superiority in this theatre....

The Germans considered the "Curtiss fighter" (their identifyer for the various P-40's encountered in the desert) to be dangerous opponents at low altitude. They considered the Kittyhawk to be the most favorable but still not quite up to snuff vs. the 109. Above all, they cautioned newbies to never dogfight a "Curitss" Best tactic was vertical maneuvers. The British considered the Tomahawk/Kittyhawk to be an improvement over the Hurricane, replacing it in the air superiority role till replaced itself by the Spitfire. Overall loss exchange in the Desert up to and including Alamein was approximately 2.7:1 (Tomahawk + Kittyhawk) in favor of the 109.

[JeffroK]

As in all of these comparisons, until you get the same pilits into the different aircraft its hard to compare. The Luftwaffe pilts in the Desert were petty good.

Also, a lot of Kittyhawk /Hurricane missions in the DAF were carrying bombs, would the stats even up a bit if these were discounted.

For all this, I'd rather have a P40E than a P39D, and a bf109f over both.

[Nikademus]

any comparison will always have to be taken with a grain of salt given all the variables involved. Its what makes statistical information so fun to banter around [;)] Author Shores did note that the USAAF experience with the same plane type did not prove to be as bruising as it was for their RAF partners. Some RAF veterans were quoted as viewing USAAF training as better due to more time and throughness being spent before shipping them off. There were also issues with pre-war tactics and such. During the DAF too, a reletively small group of Experten were able to run up massive scores but their primary victims were the escorts.....the usual action being small Rotte sized ambushes with the 109's vertical abilities used to maximum effect. Ultimately though, the majority of the bombers were unmolested and the DAF got the job done.

As yet another point of comparison, the USAAF in Tunisia, flying the P40, suffered a smaller ratio deficit. (about 1.8:1 in favor of the 109). RAF Kittyhawks suffered an approximate 2.5:1 ratio loss in favor of the 109.

The Russians appear to have favored the Airacobra over the P-40....of which the latter they were not much impressed with, considering it inferior to the Yak-1. (they did not it's turning ability at low alt...which matches Luftwaffe commentary.) and appreciated most the radios that came with them.

[JeffroK]

From Nikademus
During the DAF too, a reletively small group of Experten were able to run up massive scores but their primary victims were the escorts.....the usual action being small Rotte sized ambushes with the 109's vertical abilities used to maximum effect. Ultimately though, the majority of the bombers were unmolested and the DAF got the job done.

Marseilles, in his claims for 150 in the desert, only claimed 3 Bombers.

[Nikademus]

For the same period up to and including Alamein, my counting shows only 99 out of approximately 961 x 109 victories were bombers. (not counting converted recon plans or Lysanders)

The Luftwaffe were too few in number to really get at the bombers though it was admitted that improvement could still have been made. They did go after the bombers more during the Tunisia campaign.