Groundhog Thread Part Deux - P-39 Fantasy and Fetish - The Never Ending Story (Mods take no responsibility for head against wall injuries sustained) (4 Viewers)

Greg Boeser said:
And with three different weapons having three completely different trajectories, you're bound to hit something.
Click to expand...

And just think of the ease of the logistics in supplying three different types of ammunition! To say nothing of ground crews having to maintain three different weapon systems!
 
Why bother? The 37mm is unreliable. It's just ballast. The synchronized fifties fire too slow. And the wing mounted .30s are too weak to do damage. best remove them and fill the gun bays with beer so you can have a cold one when you land. Or maybe not. They tend to get shaken up when you tumble.
 
wuzak said:
And hope your wingman is out of gun range?
Click to expand...

The groundhog was so good it didn't need no stinkin' wingman!
 
In case anyone is interested, I found this in my files the other day - no idea where I found it originally. I would assume this is the ~basis for the weight of 6690 lbs used in the Wright Field tests. As in most cases with USAAF useful load charts, the radio Command Set is probably included in the Weight Empty.

P-39C usefull load copy.jpg
 
Glad to see the pilot is considered a "useful load"... :lol:
 
Greg Boeser said:
Why bother? The 37mm is unreliable. It's just ballast. The synchronized fifties fire too slow. And the wing mounted .30s are too weak to do damage. best remove them and fill the gun bays with beer so you can have a cold one when you land. Or maybe not. They tend to get shaken up when you tumble.
Click to expand...

I was going to suggest a flamethrower, but upon further reflection, how about a battering ram?
 
DarrenW said:
I always thought 200 lbs was the 'normal' crew weight for an American single-seat fighter. Weren't P-39 pilots allowed parachutes? ;)
Click to expand...
200 or 180 pounds depending if you were on weight watchers
 
wuzak said:
And hope your wingman is out of gun range?
Click to expand...

If he's a GOOD wingman, then he's in a spin right beside you, so you have to let go of the trigger and re-engage it once per revolution to avoid killing your wingman. The timing is sort of to the tune of Foggy Mountain Breakdown or a John Phillip Sousa march. Properly done, you sling bullets everywhere for a very short time since the round per gun weren't all that much ... 200 rpg for the two nose-mounted 50's and 300 rpg for the four wing-mounted 30's. The cannon had a massive 30 rounds. That assumes a P-39N.

Of course, you are then out of ammunition and the CG has migrated aft to the point where it is tough to recover from said spin, especially simultaneously in formation, with both of you headed in the same direction.

That was all made even MORE difficult if there happened to be four P-39s spinning in formation!
 
Last edited:
But, improperly done, it was a sight to warm the Axis heart as the P-39s spun down into the ground. Hopefully, there at least a few parachutes in there somewhere.
 
mail.jpg

​
LIFE Magazine, 30 March, 1942

1651638851454.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 5 (members: 0, guests: 5)

Similar threads

S
The real combat history of the P-39 Airacobra in the Pacific
8 9 10
Replies
199
Views
20K
Greg Boeser
Greg Boeser
A
Bristol Taurus fighter engine mods?
2 3
Replies
51
Views
2K
EwenS
E
_PabloSniper_
Northrop XP-34 / P-34 — The Missing Link Between the P-26 and P-35
Replies
2
Views
670
fannum
fannum
yulzari
Can we compare the Vickers Venom and the Roussel 30?
Replies
17
Views
467
YavorD
Y
M
Are HVAR and RP-3 usable in air to air combat against bomber?
2
Replies
28
Views
5K
Dimlee
Dimlee
Back