Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Since this thread is titled "P-39 vs. German Fighters" I have attached a graph of P-39 vs. Zero performance.On paper, P-39 exchange rates in the air with A6M looks quite favourable. Unfortunately most accounts are based on post war claims data by the US forces, which ended up being summarised in the USSBS. Problem is, the claims, like all claims data is generally wildly inaccurate. As an example, the first raid in which P-39s rose to fight A6Ms over Moresby occurred May 9 1942. I don't think there was a combat between A6Ms and P-39s before that date in this TO. Allies claimed three A6Ms downed for no losses in the air. problem is, there were no losses to the A6Ms, not even a scratch. this kind of inaccurate reporting continued for the entire first deployment of the 8FG to the end of July.
To be fair, I don't think it was the aircraft mismatch alone. Average approach altitude for the IJA bombers was 24000 feet, coming in over the owen Stanleys. Because of those mountains, early warning until the end of 1942 in this TO was limited to about 40miles. there wasn't time for the P-39s to reach them, and even them at 24k the p-39s handled like pigs, hence their nickname. Most days the p-39s just took off in the opposite direction....better to be airborne and out of harms way than airborne targets I guess.
The second unique factor to consider at this time was the quality of the pilots. it was the tainan air gp, including the famous lae wing. Lae Wing included such greats as Sakai and nishizawa. In the whole of 1942, only two pilots of this super elite group were lost in the air (according to one source at least...put it this way, there were just 15 a/c and about 39 pilots, and nearly all of these guys fought on in later campaigns. in 1943-4, where the wing member did suffer a lot more fatalities. .For 1942, there were other losses over moresby which I haven't tallied from Rabaul.
For me guys, claiming the p-39 was fully the equal to the A6M over port morersby does not hold up to scrutiny.
Since this thread is titled "P-39 vs. German Fighters" I have attached a graph of P-39 vs. Zero performance.Graph is for a P-39K but is almost exactly the same as for the D model. Zero performance is noted by the small black circles.
As the graph shows, the P-39 had a fairly significant speed advantage but the Zero climbed better. Of course the AAF pilots did not know the performance of the Zero until results of tests of the Alaskan Zero were distributed in the fall of '42.
The little curved line in the climb section between 12500' and 15000' denotes the reduction from 3000rpm (combat) to 2600rpm (max continuous) at the 5 minute mark. The Allison engine was rated at military (combat) power for 5 minutes, so after that time the power was reduced to max continuous for the remainder of the test climb.
Of particular interest is the P-39 climb rate at 1000fpm with drop tank. As we can see this occurred at about 19000'. The 1000fpm is significant because most observers consider this the operational or combat ceiling since climbing at less than 1000fpm was both dangerous and hard on the engine as it was operating at almost full power.
The Japanese Bettys came in between 18000' and 22000', sometimes a little higher but I have a hard time believing they ever got to 30000'.
So, virtually every combat involved the Japanese having the altitude advantage and the AAF in a defensive posture.
The P-39s (with drop tank) on patrol (since there was little early warning) could (and did) get to 23000' and intercept but it was very difficult.
After sighting the enemy and dropping their tank, climb was much easier. Plus combat climb at 3000rpm was normal since if you were in combat at 3000rpm and you needed to climb you didn't reduce power to 2600rpm, you had 5 minutes to do what you needed. The reduction to 2600rpm was for the performance test. Climb at 3000rpm was pretty close to the zero climb rate.
In summary, the P-39 was about 40mph faster than the Zero above 15000' and could climb almost as fast at combat power. Disadvantage was maneuverability and range, with the big disadvantage being the highest cruising altitude with drop tank being below the Bettys and their Zero escort.
The 5 minute combat power restriction was increased to 15 minutes at mid year '42 along with finally discarding the power robbing port backfire screens. Then by December '42 the P-39N was available which would substantially outclimb the Zero at all altitudes. Just my 2 cents worth.
View attachment 494504
There was no belly armor on the P-39.
In order to compensate for lighter front end, remove the rearmost armor plate (the one behind the oil tank) and replace it with aluminium type. Keep the number of radios to one. Less gun & spent cartridge openings = less drag, so indeed remove the wing guns. Keep the fuel tankage, radius is is already short for Pacific.
Wing gus are as close to the centre of lift as possible.
yes there was. i have a pressed inch think belly armor plate off one of my planes
See post #62 this thread.the P-39 was not suited to png because of the hot climate and high mountains, but at low level it will run rings around anything except an a6m
parsifal - Once again, many thanks, you've (again) given me some reading material to fill out my knowledge.
*EDIT*
OK, so I'm going through the Pacific Wrecks timeline but it seems I can't get a handle on actual losses from it. I see where sometimes an A6M2 is claimed to be seen trailing smoke in a dive but there isn't corresponding data from the Japanese side for actual losses, although it seems at times there is.
Yeah, I might have to rethink what I wanted to do with this.