Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
This should be the epigraph to the whole discussion.Maybe the pilots just needed better training.
View attachment 764731
Toyota Hilux CHAMP. $20,000 and up (Australian dollars I think so less in US money). Hand wound windows in base model !!!
Only 2 speakers and so on.
Tray allows other configs such as camper, delivery van etc.
Toyota is only to going to market these in Asia as they will not be sophisticated enough for the rest of us.
Probably some issues with safety rules as well which is ridiculous considering you can ride a bicycle or
motor cycle on the road anyway.
This should be the epigraph to the whole discussion.
I suspect, that the Soviet "сobras" could be selectively transferred to the distinguished fighter regiments. This is an unconfirmed hypothesis, but some correlations can be revealed. As a result, the average efficiency of this airplane could drastically increase. Again, this is just my speculation, but the quota of Guards regiments on "cobras" is disproportionately high, and many of them were awarded the Guards rank either before receiving "cobras" or too shortly after. Unfortunately I cannot check the validity of this hypothesis by myself - the available literature sources are insufficient, and I have no access to any Russian archives.
All I'm going to say is that I doubt the possibility of a correct comparison of aircraft performance based on aircraft operational results, which are rather a complex convolution of a large number of factors.
I deal with statistics (including ML, etc.) everyday. I analyze big amounts of various process data in order to make it suitable for AI applications. And I swear: a large data volume provides no guarantee that the data will be interpreted correctly and the revealed correlations are not random if you data was collected improperly.That starts to tumble into a hall of mirrors ala "how can we really know anything"
Statistics do work though. It's ultimately impossible to eliminate all of the extraneous factors, and with a very small sample you can't necessarily detect a trend in a reliable way. But with enough iterations and a wide enough data set, patterns do emerge. Eventually these become pretty clear.
And yet there will always be wiggle room, so that arguments can go on and on forever. For example, some enthusiasts will find it heartbreaking, and therefore impossible, to ever acknowledge that the Soviets ever made or had an aircraft which was better than their German opposition. And yet, somehow the Soviets won the war.
We can help to resolve these perplexing mysteries by looking at the data set.
The commanders and administrative managers of the armed forces had to make evaluations on this kind of data. That's how they decided which aircraft to keep, which to phase out and which to immediately get rid of. Which to invest in make (or ask for) more of, which to improve and in what respects (engine, armament, agility, range?).
The Soviets tended to promote successful units in the VVS to "Guards" status. Guards air units either got their choice of planes or were assigned what were believed to be the best available aircraft types. This was part of the whole strategy of 'reinforcing success' that the Soviets relied on up to the division and corps level in the land armies as well as with air units.
For a while the P-39 was definitely one of the favorite types, and for some units and individual pilots, it remained so through the end of the war. Many others however switched over to Yak-3, Yak 9 or La 7 etc. Normandie Niemen is a classic case. They had their choice of any Soviet, US, or British type (including P-39, P-63, P-47, and Spitfire IX). They chose the Yak 3, which was probably very wise.
A few pilots got the P-63, though it's operations remain somewhat mysterious due to the agreement between the US and Soviets to restrict it's use (which the Soviets seem to have ignored, more or less, but it cut down on the available unit data.
I deal with statistics (including ML, etc.) everyday. I analyze big amounts of various process data in order to make it suitable for AI applications. And I swear: a large data volume provides no guarantee that the data will be interpreted correctly and the revealed correlations are not random if you data was collected improperly.
No Soviet air regiments - neither Guards nor regular - were allowed to choose their type of airplane. The only exception was the 16th Guards Regiment (the "ace regiment" or "Pokryshkin's regiment") - they were allowed to keep their Cobras after Klubov crashed in the La-7 (Pokryshkin had refused the Yaks despite of a personal request from Yakovlev before).
But possibly - I am not absolutely sure - pilot training was taken into account by the command when distributing new airplanes in reserve aviation regiments. In the Soviet system, the impact of the pilot training factor was more significant, since the average level was extremely low. This is a fact not questioned by those who have any real understanding of the subject.. American and British pilots were on average better trained (as well as German pilots in the early to mid war), so the role of aircraft performance could be better deconvoluted.
The total number of Airacobras on the Eastern Front was significantly lower than Soviet fighter types, so deviations from the typical distribution of training levels may have a much greater impact on the overall assessment of the effectiveness of that particular aircraft.
I have a list of air regiments on "cobras" with the dates of the re-training on "cobras" and awarding the Guards rank with indication of all aircraft types on which the regiment fought. Unfortunately, these data are absolutely insufficient to draw conclusions. The data on deliveries of Soviet fighters from the factories and their distribution among the regiments that were withdrawn to the reserve for replenishment or retraining on new aircraft types is necessary.
About Normandie-Niemen. The choice of the French was mainly politically motivated, they immediately asked for "the best Soviet fighter" in an effort to make the Soviets feel good (according to the French N-N historian C.-J. Ehrengardt).
No other offers were made to them, although the British were surprised (perhaps they had considered Hurricanes and early Spitfires as a better choice in early 1943, but then I am surprised at their surprise). Americans in Moscow asked the French to explain their choice, as they believed it might affect U.S. aircraft deliveries under Lend-Lease and to Algeria.
The French gave quite reasonable arguments, and there were no further discussions. The French were happy with the Yak-1, moreover, it was equipped with an HS descendant engine. I cannot except that their results would be worse on Cobras. Most Soviet pilots switched to Cobras having combat experience on difficult to pilot airplanes (I-16, MiG-3, LaGG-3).
It is not the same as statistical analysis of data.And? I wrote database software for 25 years,
Sure. But this analysis is much more complicated and comprehensive that suggested here.Of course a large data volume alone doesn't guarantee anything, but if you have the sufficient quality of data and the means to analyze it, you can certainly determine likely outcomes. This is done all day long in dozens of industries, and by military forces all over the world.
You can deny anything you want. It doesn't mean that you're right. The correctness of the deconvolution procedure should be proved.Again, I deny the suggestion that you can't distinguish the merits of one aircraft over another based on their operational history, especially where there is a large volume of data and where aircraft are fighting side by side in the same Theater.
I do not claim that it is impossible. I just doubt that it can be made here in a proper way.The claim that it's impossible is ridiculous.
References would be much appreciated.Not according to books I've read on this subject. But it would be a major derail to get into that.
There was no analogy between the use of Spitfires and Cobras. Spitfire Mk V were deployed from the beginning of 1943, at the front from May 1943 (only two regiments - 57th Guards and 821st), from the end of August 1943 the remaining Spitfires were transferred to PVO, their application at the front was very short. The Mk.IX began to arrive only in 1944, most of them were immediately sent to PVO, as their performance at the front was found insufficient. By the end of the war, 26 out of 81 PVO regiments were equipped with Spitfires. Cobras were used since May 1942, and by the middle of 1943 they were found almost all over the Eastern Front. The largest numbers were in the southern and northern sections due to logistics.Well then you know that the Soviets did a three month workup before their initial deployment of the P-39, and they did much the same thing with the Spitfire Mk V around the same time (early 1943 if I remember correctly). You'll also know that not all of the P-39 units were guards units, and not all of them were promoted, as not all did well. Nor did the Spitfire units, which is why they were relegated to PVO where they were believed to be better suited.
What exactly is my agenda?As for the rest of it, I believe this is opinion. You clearly have an agenda.
He worked in French archives and published a book at least («Normandie-Niemen», Cayeux, Heimdal, 1989). I would appreciate any reference on a source of a comparable quality.That may be the opinion of one monsieur Ehrengardt but he's not the only historian of that very famous unit and that is not the consensus on this particular subject.
Source?As far as I have read their decision was made on the basis of what aircraft could best save their life in combat.
Perhaps they feared any reputational damage - rather for the planned deliveries of fighters to Algeria. But Capt. Mirlesse was invited to the American Embassy, where he answered questions from the American and British military attachés concerning the choice of aircraft.I really don't see why the choice of one unit, however famous, would impact US Lend Lease deliveries or why they would be worried about it.
So you're not going by actual records?And according to my estimates
What do you mean by actual records?So you're not going by actual records?
It is not the same as statistical analysis of data.
Sure. But this analysis is much more complicated and comprehensive that suggested here.
You can deny anything you want. It doesn't mean that you're right. The correctness of the deconvolution procedure should be proved.
I do not claim that it is impossible. I just doubt that it can be made here in a proper way.
References would be much appreciated.
There was no analogy between the use of Spitfires and Cobras. Spitfire Mk V were deployed from the beginning of 1943, at the front from May 1943 (only two regiments - 57th Guards and 821st), from the end of August 1943 the remaining Spitfires were transferred to PVO, their application at the front was very short. The Mk.IX began to arrive only in 1944, most of them were immediately sent to PVO, as their performance at the front was found insufficient. By the end of the war, 26 out of 81 PVO regiments were equipped with Spitfires. Cobras were used since May 1942, and by the middle of 1943 they were found almost all over the Eastern Front. The largest numbers were in the southern and northern sections due to logistics.
Not all Cobra regiments were Guard regiments, but their fraction was disproportionately large. And according to my estimates, most of them either received or were preparing to receive the Guard rank BEFORE they were retrained on Cobras.
What exactly is my agenda?
He worked in French archives and published a book at least («Normandie-Niemen», Cayeux, Heimdal, 1989). I would appreciate any reference on a source of a comparable quality.
Source?
Perhaps they feared any reputational damage - rather for the planned deliveries of fighters to Algeria. But Capt. Mirlesse was invited to the American Embassy, where he answered questions from the American and British military attachés concerning the choice of aircraft.
Hi to another statistics person. I was on the Motorola Six Sigma team when we used SPC to almost eliminate customer returns ... using statistical correlation. The main root cause was found to be ESD (electrostatic discharge damage)! Go figure.I deal with statistics (including ML, etc.) everyday. I analyze big amounts of various process data in order to make it suitable for AI applications. And I swear: a large data volume provides no guarantee that the data will be interpreted correctly and the revealed correlations are not random if you data was collected improperly.
No Soviet air regiments - neither Guards nor regular - were allowed to choose their type of airplane. The only exception was the 16th Guards Regiment (the "ace regiment" or "Pokryshkin's regiment") - they were allowed to keep their Cobras after Klubov crashed in the La-7 (Pokryshkin had refused the Yaks despite of a personal request from Yakovlev before). But possibly - I am not absolutely sure - pilot training was taken into account by the command when distributing new airplanes in reserve aviation regiments. In the Soviet system, the impact of the pilot training factor was more significant, since the average level was extremely low. This is a fact not questioned by those who have any real understanding of the subject.. American and British pilots were on average better trained (as well as German pilots in the early to mid war), so the role of aircraft performance could be better deconvoluted.
The total number of Airacobras on the Eastern Front was significantly lower than Soviet fighter types, so deviations from the typical distribution of training levels may have a much greater impact on the overall assessment of the efficiency of that particular aircraft.
I have a list of air regiments on "cobras" with the dates of the re-training on "cobras" and awarding the Guards rank with indication of all aircraft types on which the regiment fought. Unfortunately, these data are absolutely insufficient to draw conclusions. The data on deliveries of Soviet fighters from the factories and their distribution among the regiments that were withdrawn to the reserve for replenishment or retraining on new aircraft types is necessary.
About Normandie-Niemen. The choice of the French was mainly politically motivated, they immediately asked for "the best Soviet fighter" in an effort to make the Soviets feel good (according to the French N-N historian C.-J. Ehrengardt). No other offers were made to them, although the British were surprised (perhaps they had considered Hurricanes and early Spitfires as a better choice in early 1943, but then I am surprised at their surprise). Americans in Moscow asked the French to explain their choice, as they believed it might affect U.S. aircraft deliveries under Lend-Lease and to Algeria. The French gave quite reasonable arguments, and there were no further discussions. The French were happy with the Yak-1, moreover, it was equipped with an HS descendant engine. I cannot except that their results would be worse on Cobras. Most Soviet pilots switched to Cobras having combat experience on difficult to pilot airplanes (I-16, MiG-3, LaGG-3).
I can only smile broadly in response.I guess you aren't very familiar with database software.
Ok, you know data cubes and BI reports. That's great!Among other things I wrote BI reports for a living which were ... statistical analysis of data, via data cubes.
I agree with the latter statement. Not that it matters.Multi-dimensional arrays of data which could be accessed through a wide range of complex queries, and presented as visual data. Not that it matters.
Many things seem self-evident before you start to analyze them more deeply. So far I find your reasoning rather superficial. Appealing to the majority is a sign of weakness in argumentation.I'm really Ok with that, don't think it needs to be proven as I believe it is self-evident (within certain obvious limitations) and you don't strike me as being on the level, so I believe debating it at length would be futile. I think most people reading the thread can grasp the concept.
The major factor was the insufficient performance of the Mk.IX for the Eastern Front demands in 1944. No one needed high altitude performance in air combat there. Both high climb rate and altitude performance were a virtue for PVO, but it wasn't the deciding factor - Cobras were also massively transferred to PVO in 1944.The Spit V had a short combat debut because it wasn't considered ideal for frontal (VVS) units, but IIRC the Spit IX was sent strait to PVO due to it's excellent performance at altitude and very high rate of climb, which made it ideal for that job.
I think you're just trying to denigrate me having no any serious arguments in the discussion.I think your handle here is a dead giveaway
Why do I have no troubles finding the relevant citations?I'm not prepared to cite chapter and verse, but I have the memoir (in French) of Roland de la Poype, who was one of the pilots, an ace and HSU, who also flew with the RAF. My father, a journalist with an interest in aviation, interviewed him back in the 1970s.
Memoirs are much less reliable source of information than a research based on archival data. de la Poype could not know exactly how the selection of the airplane took place.Nous sommes unanimes pour trouver notre nouvelle monture épatante. Le commandant Tulasne a eu mille fois raison de préférer le Yak à ses concurrents américains (Bell P39 Air Cobra) et anglais (Hurricane, Spitfire). Sans s'encombrer de considérations diplomatiques, le patron du «Normandie» n'a fait que suivre les recommandations du général de Gaulle: choisir le meilleur appareil sans se soucier de la nationalité de son constructeur. Et tant pis si ce choix a fait grincer des dents du côté des ambassades des deux pays recalés. Car le Yak se montre l'avion le plus approprié aux missions et au théâtre d'opérations qui nous attendent.
From "L'ÉPOPÉE DU NORMANDIE-NIÉMEN" (Mémoires) by Roland de la Poype (avec la collaboration de Jean-Charles Stasi), Perrin, 2007
Why de la Poype "was about as far from being a communist"? Just because he was from a noble family and Mirlesse was from a Jewish family? I know a person of Earl rank who was a convinced communist.I fail to see where the US or British are alarmed, they were probably trying to determine if Mirlesse was a communist. Roland del a Poype by the way, was about as far from being a communist as you could get.
I can only smile broadly in response.
Ok, you know data cubes and BI reports. That's great!
I agree with the latter statement. Not that it matters.
Many things seem self-evident before you start to analyze them more deeply. So far I find your reasoning rather superficial. Appealing to the majority is a sign of weakness in argumentation.
The major factor was the insufficient performance of the Mk.IX for the Eastern Front demands in 1944. No one needed high altitude performance in air combat there. Both high climb rate and altitude performance were a virtue for PVO, but it wasn't the deciding factor - Cobras were also massively transferred to PVO in 1944.
I think you're just trying to denigrate me having no any serious arguments in the discussion.
Why do I have no troubles finding the relevant citations?
Memoirs are much less reliable source of information than a research based on archival data. de la Poype could not know exactly how the selection of the airplane took place.
Why de la Poype "was about as far from being a communist"? Just because he was from a noble family and Mirlesse was from a Jewish family? I know a person of Earl rank who was a convinced communist.
That one was new to me.Me509
Interestingly enough, the Japanese Navy had a nearly identical design with the Yokosuka R2Y, which they did follow through with.That one was new to me.
Interestingly enough, the Japanese Navy had a nearly identical design with the Yokosuka R2Y, which they did follow through with.
Anyway, I don't think people read threads like this for the opinions. I know I don't. The data is what matters. We have presented some relevant data.