buffnut453
Captain
But the P-39 was the answer?
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Not in 1943.
Well yes, that is why the USA had pilots with a minimum of 200 hours on type advanced training, and also gave them a P-51 or a P-47 to fight in.I understand technical advances and limitations. That wasn't my point. Do you not agree that a pilot who knew his Hurricane intimately would have some advantage over a pilot just learning his Me-109E, technical aspects aside?
Knowing what you're doing with the machine you're operating is nothing to sneeze at.
Just read the Flip wiki page. What a guy. Is there a book about him?
Depends on the role it had to play. We have been painfully and sometime realley funny over this. Usaaf: what a ffing brick, Ussr: gimme some more please.But the P-39 was the answer?
But the P-39 was the answer?
That if you want serious this is a bit silly. I know it is easy to make fun of the gritty p-39 supporters but it was there. It did a job, killed a lot of baddies in the east of europe. No love from the west allies though. No super plane but what frame is, as it is throne into combat with newbies and mostly with back dated strategy. We love the b-17 ,but for all its good parts still got its ass handed to it by the luftwaffe untill........ it was even used as a decoy to get the luftwaffe up and fight but mostly die. In my e bay searches i have seen many, many wrecked b-29 that failed take off or landing or went into another row of waiting planes for no apperant reason. Now , i think if there ever was a superplane in the ww2 it has to be the b-29. And it even did not do what it was designed to do. Bombing with big explosives. Not with puny fire bombs. At low level. So. There it is. The p-39 was not silly. Not super. But there. Better then shaking your pale little fist onto the sky filled with what ever enemy planes from what empire, holding a piece of dirt in stead of a stick. On the ground.It dropped the third A-bomb, over Ulan Bator (BTW pioneering the HUD arrangement currently standard in fighters on that mission), and if I remember correctly they also laid the groundwork -- pardon the pun -- for air-to-air rearming (though the .30cal rearm chutes had a tendency to jam, so they, and the .30s, were omitted).
They were also instrumental in developing an ejectable airplane; that is, when the plane was damaged, instead of using dangerous ejection seats, the pilot simply ejected the aircraft itself. Problem solved.
I ask you, and all serious posters: how is that not the answer?!
That if you want serious this is a bit silly. I know it is easy to make fun of the gritty p-39 supporters but it was there. It did a job, killed a lot of baddies in the east of europe. No love from the west allies though. No super plane but what frame is, as it is throne into combat with newbies and mostly with back dated strategy. We love the b-17 ,but for all its good parts still got its ass handed to it by the luftwaffe untill........ it was even used as a decoy to get the luftwaffe up and fight but mostly die. In my e bay searches i have seen many, many wrecked b-29 that failed take off or landing or went into another row of waiting planes for no apperant reason. Now , i think if there ever was a superplane in the ww2 it has to be the b-29. And it even did not do what it was designed to do. Bombing with big explosives. Not with puny fire bombs. At low level. So. There it is. The p-39 was not silly. Not super. But there. Better then shaking your pale little fist onto the sky filled with what ever enemy planes from what empire, holding a piece of dirt in stead of a stick. On the ground.
A little bit of respect for the thing. It in my opinion has rightfully deserved it.
There are many facets to the discussion, both those raids were escorted as far as escorts could go in and out, so the notion that escorts werent needed at all was long gone. The question was were the raids and risks worth it? If you believe that wiping out German ball bearing production will end the war or shorten it by a long time the risks and losses can be justified. If you think that production of bearings will be affected for six weeks and there will be no real effect on German industry and war effort the losses just arent worth it. In fact those responsible were lucky not to preside over a total loss of all aircraft.Unfortunately some of them were still in positions of power - such as Eaker, commander of the 8th Air Force until early 1944.
A common narrative is that the 8th Air Force stopped bombing raids after the the second Schweinfurt mission until escort fighters arrived.
The only problem with that is that Eaker wanted to continue. He didn't have the aircraft and crews directly after, and when he did the weather had closed in and made bombing raids with visual sighting very difficult.
The massacre at the second Schweinfurt raid (and possibly the Schweinfurt-Regensberg raid) convinced some that a long range fighter was required. So an emergency fighter program was started - the XP-75.
The XP-75 program produced nothing useful, while delaying the first flight of the XB-39, the B-29 with Allison V-3420s. Fisher was responsible for the XP-75 and the quick change engine modules for the XB-39.
When the XB-39 did fly, it was determined to not have a sufficient performance increase to warrant production. What if it flew a year earlier, when the R-3350s were still having significant issues?
I do not care about your satire or rubbing me the wrong way. I am not 12. Nor do i take your post serious off course. Planely an efford to make a joke as others have including me, made about the gritty supporter of this airframe. And that was called for. I read the thread, head to tow.The joke is just a joke. It references how the Groundhog shows up in so many threads.
I have nothing but respect for the guys who flew and maintained it.
I don't really care for the airplane itself, nor the accolades it seems to get.
Sorry my satire rubbed you the wrong way, but in the end, it's only a joke, so don't trip.
I do not care about your satire or rubbing me the wrong way. I am not 12. Nor do i take your post serious off course. Planely an efford to make a joke as others have including me, made about the gritty supporter of this airframe. And that was called for. I read the thread, head to tow.
But all said and read, i do think the plane should get some credits.Certainly here.
There were two aspects to withdrawal escort, one is the main bomber force and the other is those that have dropped or dropping out of the formation. I read abot two RAF Spitfires escorting a B-17 across France which must have been before or just after D-Day because they were shot at by German Flak on the Channel coast. Most discussions focus on operations from UK. According to The Spitfire site the USA themselves were using Spitfires until early 1944 in Italy. Uncle Sam's Spitfires — Articles | 1942 | 1943 | 1944 | history | Spitfire Mk. V | Spitfire Mk. VIIIThey often participated as the first leg of the escort relay on the outbound journey, and the last leg for the inbound journey.
Not sure when, or if, that stopped.
Unfortunately some of them were still in positions of power - such as Eaker, commander of the 8th Air Force until early 1944.
A common narrative is that the 8th Air Force stopped bombing raids after the the second Schweinfurt mission until escort fighters arrived.
Somewhat true but as you note below, an over simple explanation. Facts included inadequate blind bombing techniques and training to be effective November through January except for odd clear days during winter over UK and Europe. Facts included necessity to train the recently arrived P-38 equipped FG's (55th ad 20th) as well as the new but as yet un-equipped first P-51B FG - the 354th FG. Facts included restoring and training the depleted 8th AF Bomb Groups with new replacements. One Fact that is also clear - is the 8th AF was going to start deep strikes into Germany with or without adequate LR escort.
That said - as of November 1943 the 357th, 363rd, and 339th were all tasked for Mustang ops in ETO. The 364th was tasked for Lightning Ops an orders cut to deploy to ETO.
The only problem with that is that Eaker wanted to continue. He didn't have the aircraft and crews directly after, and when he did the weather had closed in and made bombing raids with visual sighting very difficult.
True but the latter reason was primary for escort range targets into western Germany - to locations near water shore/river bend, etc., for radar signature.
The massacre at the second Schweinfurt raid (and possibly the Schweinfurt-Regensberg raid) convinced some that a long range fighter was required. So an emergency fighter program was started - the XP-75.
Arnold realized VERY early that interceptors would dominate daylight incursions - as early as war in Spain, but certainly BoB. He personally intervened in the Emmons Board final recommendations to move escort fighter with 1500 mile range to top of priority (from #4). The primary issue was that the entire USAAC/AAF strategic doctrine was framed around high altitude daylight strategic operations and Nobody believed that a single engine fighter with matching performance to Spitfire, Bf 109 and then Fw 190 was feasible. The XP-75 was as flawed a concept, performance wise - but basically a single engine YB-40 with heavy firepower - designed to fly at bomber speeds for escort.
The XP-75 program produced nothing useful, while delaying the first flight of the XB-39, the B-29 with Allison V-3420s. Fisher was responsible for the XP-75 and the quick change engine modules for the XB-39.
When the XB-39 did fly, it was determined to not have a sufficient performance increase to warrant production. What if it flew a year earlier, when the R-3350s were still having significant issues?
Depends on the role it had to play. We have been painfully and sometime realley funny over this. Usaaf: what a ffing brick, Ussr: gimme some more please.
It is impossible to read this Luftwaffe versus USAAF 8th Air Force. Vol. 1 and have the idea that anyone thought that B-17 and B-24s didnt need an escort, from the earliest days in 1942 they had them and when the escort didnt work losses were suffered, the issue was how to do it over long distances.
And the P-39 was there (in Europe) as the Airacobra in RAF service, but the British only operated it a short time with 601 Sqdrn late in 1941.To summarize the points made by previous posters:
P-39 Expert: I vote P-47 as most overrated. Fast, tough and heavily armed. But if you need escort in 1943 and early 1944 the Thunderbolt was not the answer.
Milosh: It was miles ahead of the P-39.
P-39 Expert: Not in 1943.
My point is that if the P-39 was better than the P-47 in 1943, why did we not see squadrons of P-39s operating as part of 8th AF on escort missions (which was clearly the context within which the prior comments were made)?
And the P-39 was there (in Europe) as the Airacobra in RAF service, but the British only operated it a short time with 601 Sqdrn late in 1941.
They loved it so much that by spring of '42, they dumped all of them on the Soviets.