Matrix Games Forums

An interesting quote found on a website...sources are documented at the bottom of the site.

In the laconic words of the official AAF history: "The Airacobra, even in a good state of repair, was unable to meet the Japanese fighters on equal terms." Experienced Japanese pilots such as Saburo Sakai regarded the Airacobra as a relatively easy "kill". The P-39s were not as manauverable as the lighter and more nimble Japanese fighters, and enemy fighters could often avoid combat with the P-39s by outclimbing them. Nevertheless, the Airacobra was quite tough and was able to absorbing a great deal of battle damage and still keep on flying, and its armament was able to deliver lethal blows to many a lightly-armored Zero

Here is the webpage. http://home.att.net/~jbaugher1/p39_17.html

Well, when it's all you have.....

I would still wager that bird strikes downed more Zeros than P-39s[:'(]

My P-39's flew in combat once and faired only so-so.

P-39s are great at:

1. Ground attack
2. Naval attack

They can be useful at:

3. Escort, if your bombers are flying at 6K feet. They'll get chewed up but they'll generally get the bombers through.
4. CAP outside of zero range. (They deter or make painful raids by unescorted Betties.)

At times of desperation they can be used at:

5. CAP within zero range. The squadron will be toast but they might take a few planes down with them.

Mine got routinely slaughtered by zeros (granted my pilots also were inferior)...not as bad as a P-36, but almost...their one saving grace is the cannon. IF (big if) they can catch bombers they are deadly.

Edit: Once when completely bored out of my mind and given the choice of watching my toenails grow and playing the AI, I played some rounds of the GC campaign. I flew some about 50 Bettys into a large P-39 CAP...almost none came home.

All thanks to one testicularly anesthetized colonel (I believe) who decided that a two stage blower was not necessary. Guy should have received a Darwin award.

ORIGINAL: RevRick

All thanks to one testicularly anesthetized colonel (I believe) who decided that a two stage blower was not necessary. Guy should have received a Darwin award.

He should have been forced to fly the plane in combat...at altitude.

Even with the turbo-charger the P-39 would have been a slow and not as maneuverable, but at least it would have made a much better interceptor than it was.

What have you guys got against this great piece of aerial machinery?
Can you think of another Allied plane which is
1.So mass-produced
2. So prolific in the early game
3. So diverse in perpetuation of the species by having different models of basically the same piece "o" machinery

which must surely be touted for forcing the Japanese to expend so many bullets and thereby assist in Japanese degradation by attrition?

(Yeah......sometimes I feel guilty just loading the things on the ships in Frisco, actually..Makes me hope they had a nice time at the local U.S.O. first.)

ORIGINAL: m10bob

What have you guys got against this great piece of aerial machinery?
Can you think of another Allied plane which is
1.So mass-produced
2. So prolific in the early game
3. So diverse in perpetuation of the species by having different models of basically the same piece "o" machinery

which must surely be touted for forcing the Japanese to expend so many bullets and thereby assist in Japanese degradation by attrition?

(Yeah......sometimes I feel guilty just loading the things on the ships in Frisco, actually..Makes me hope they had a nice time at the local U.S.O. first.)

Below 15,000 ft the P-40 was not that awful. I am not saying it was good, just not awful. when there were enough of them they can disrupt attacks and there are enough of them. I am in late 42 in my campaign and they do not do badly against land based Zeroes. I think this is mostly because the quality of the land based zero pilots are lower and my p-40 squadrons are been till recently in the high 70s and low 80s in experience. I am in an intense campaign for buna right now and morale and fatigue is taking a toll now. Carrier based Zeroes pulverize my P-40s. I think the point I am trying to make is yes they are inferior, but not so inferior as to be useless.

They are fantastic ship-busters.  That cannon does some real damage to anything with little or no armor - I've managed to disrupt more than one early war landing in the Phillipines. 

ORIGINAL: grumpyman


Below 15,000 ft the P-40 was not that awful. I am not saying it was good, just not awful. when there were enough of them they can disrupt attacks and there are enough of them. I am in late 42 in my campaign and they do not do badly against land based Zeroes. I think this is mostly because the quality of the land based zero pilots are lower and my p-40 squadrons are been till recently in the high 70s and low 80s in experience. I am in an intense campaign for buna right now and morale and fatigue is taking a toll now. Carrier based Zeroes pulverize my P-40s. I think the point I am trying to make is yes they are inferior, but not so inferior as to be useless.

oops we're talking about P-39s. I'll just have another beer.

ORIGINAL: niceguy2005

ORIGINAL: RevRick
All thanks to one testicularly anesthetized colonel (I believe) who decided that a two stage blower was not necessary. Guy should have received a Darwin award.

He should have been forced to fly the plane in combat...at altitude.

Even with the turbo-charger the P-39 would have been a slow and not as maneuverable, but at least it would have made a much better interceptor than it was.

Actually the P-39 was faster than a Wildcat or a Zero even without the blower..., provided they would play at low altitudes. With one, it should have been able to zoom and boom and hold it's own pretty well. Wouldn't have been a world-beater, but neither were the P-40 or the F4f --- and they got the job done. Just as soon as they learned the "Cardinal Rule"..., Don't try to dogfight with a Zero or an Oscar.

Even with the turbo-charger the P-39 would have been a slow and not as maneuverable, but at least it would have made a much better interceptor than it was.

Well, it would not have been as maneuverable at low speed settings, but more maneuverable at high speed. More importantly, it WAS much faster than most Japanese planes, even without the 2-stage supercharger. The Japanese regarded the P-39 as an easy kill IF they could lure one to 20,000 feet. But Japanese pilots were notably reluctant to descend to the P-39's fighting altitude of <14K feet. Probably because the P-39 could make 375 mph roughly in the early, non 2-stage sc'd variants as compared with the A6M's 331 mph.

To get a good idea of what the P-39 *might have been* you need to consider it's close descendant the P-63. It was a complete redesign of the P-39 with the supercharger and a laminar wing. Despite being heavier, it's top speed was 410 mph and service ceiling was 43,000 feet.

Probably this means that the P-39J-Q with a supercharger would have been capable of a top speed around 380 mph with good performance to 35,000 feet. But we can never know.

Ironically, had the United States imagined that it could be bombed, it is likely that the production P-39s would have retained their superchargers, since the a.c. was intended, when originally designed, as an anti-bomber interceptor (hence the 37mm cannon).

What is sad about the P-39 was that the prototype was a worldbeater.&nbsp; It was fast, hard hitting and maneuverable.&nbsp; Unfortunately by the time the US Army Air Corps was done with the plane it was overweight and unreliable.
&nbsp;
The Russians loved it though, that 37mm cannon could cause some serious damage.
&nbsp;
&nbsp;

The Air Force was a branch of the Army throughout World War II.&nbsp; During the war, the USAAF became more independent, but before the war, it's primary mission was ground support.&nbsp; The B-17 program was one of the few projects that was independent of this role.&nbsp; The P-39 wasn't given a super charger because it wasn't deemed to be needed in the ground attack role.&nbsp; The 37mm was primarily intended as a strafing weapon.

When war came, the situation ended up being very different than expected.&nbsp; Once the Allies had air superiority in most areas, the P-39 did soldier on as a ground attack plane.&nbsp;

It's bad performance in combat early in the war left a cloud over it.&nbsp; With high performance fighters also able to serve in the ground attack role, it's mission began to go away.&nbsp; Most were relagated to training duty, but even there it was hated.&nbsp; The P-39 had terrible spin characteristics.&nbsp; Even an experienced pilot had a tough time getting one out of a spin.&nbsp; Inexperienced pilots would either have to bail out or die.

Some USAAF senior officers tried to get all P-39s grounded due to the high attration from training accidents, but I believe some still served until the end of the war as transitional trainers.

In my game against the AI, I found that P-39s were deadly in China.&nbsp; I transferred the 6th Philippine to China and it's now a squadron of aces.&nbsp; They are my best unit by far.&nbsp; They were the first P-39 unit to upgrade to P-38s.

Bill

Hmmm, use them in China. That's an idea worth trying.

ORIGINAL: grumpyman
I think the point I am trying to make is yes they are inferior, but not so inferior as to be useless.

I think the USAAF would have exactly agreed with this statement. i.e. it beat standing on the ground and shouting foul language at the enemy as they dropped bombs. [:D]

They weren't a 1941 design either...You have to think that if they had a clue about the Zero they wouldn't have ruined the engine

ORIGINAL: Procrustes


They are fantastic ship-busters.  That cannon does some real damage to anything with little or no armor - I've managed to disrupt more than one early war landing in the Phillipines. 

How did you get P-39s to the Philipines early in the war??? [&:]