And of those used in training in USA a total of 865 P-39 airframes were lost in 1,934 accidents.
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
And of those used in training in USA a total of 865 P-39 airframes were lost in 1,934 accidents.P-38, produced 1941 - 1945: 10,037
P-39, produced 1940 - 1944: 9,588
P-40, produced 1939 - 1944: 13,738
P-47, produced 1941 - 1945: 15,636
P-51, produced 1941 - 1945: 15,586
Hurricane, produced 1937 - 1944: 14,487
Spitfire, produced 1938 - 1948: 20,350
Typhoon, produced 1941 - 1945: 3,317
Of those 9,588 P-39s built, 4,719 went to the Soviet Union.
Especially if you throw in nearly 3000 Seafires.Spitfire doesn't seem so overrated by that metric.
I have always been proud that the last official RAF Spitfire flight took off from my local aerodrome RAF Woodvale. PS915 a Spitfire XIX of the Temperature and Humidity Monitoring flight took off on the morning of 11th July 1957 flew her mission then in the afternoon flew in formation with her sister PRXIXs PS853 and PM631 to RAF Biggin Hill to join the Battle of Britain Memorial Flight.
Many of which were fatal.And of those used in training in USA a total of 865 P-39 airframes were lost in 1,934 accidents.
There were 395 fatalities in USA in the P-39, the real shocker is the A-36, training for dive bombing is a dangerous activity.Many of which were fatal.
Some time back, I went through Joe Baugher's P-39 listings and was appalled at how many pilots were killed in it.
If memory serves right, of the first production block, 5 pilots were killed in accidents.
The sound of the Chipmunks Gipsy engine puttering overhead was the sound of summer to me and my friends.Always loved the THUM Spitfires. My first flight in a RAF aircraft was in a 10 AEF Chipmunk at Woodvale. Many fond memories of that place!
There were 395 fatalities in USA in the P-39, the real shocker is the A-36, training for dive bombing is a dangerous activity.
I found this below. It think it is quite easy to overstress a fighters wings doing repeated dive bombing attacks, it happened to Spitfires.They eventually retired the A-36 due to wing damage (including sometimes catastrophic) during pullout from dives. I used to assume this was partly due to metal fatigue (dive bombing can wear out wings pretty quickly) but I wonder if they lost some earlier due to this kind of thing.
Once you have a factory (or two) tooled up and cranking out several hundred planes a month it is hard to turn off the system. Often things like landing gear and air frame forgings are ordered months in advance.
It can take months or nearly a year from first production to the 500th example.
Switching production from a not so great plane to the latest and greatest can mean hundreds of planes not built in a given year.
Spitfire doesn't seem so overrated by that metric.
I don't think that explains the Spitfire's large numbers sufficiently, or its construction and retention in service after the war.
Numbers don't mean much.
Highly interesting. Specially regarding the B-26. The accident rate was very small for a "widow maker", much lower than the A-20 for example.There were 395 fatalities in USA in the P-39, the real shocker is the A-36, training for dive bombing is a dangerous activity.
I'm not an expert on it but the stats are for USA training. I think the problem with the B-26 was the landing speed. Experienced pilots werent used to the high landing speed and accidents happened just because they came in too slow. So accidents were more likely abroad with operational units making a transition. There never was a problem with the plane itself, and its landing speed was the new normal in aviation anyway.Highly interesting. Specially regarding the B-26. The accident rate was very small for a "widow maker", much lower than the A-20 for example.
I could be very interesting to compare with those operational loses.So accidents were more likely abroad with operational units making a transition.
Initial operations just add to the legend, one of the first operations was an unescorted low level attack on a power station in the Netherlands where all planes were lost to ground fire or the LW. Make the same type of attack with any twin engined bomber and they would probably suffer the same losses, something else that was nothing to do with the plane itself but the way it was used.I could be very interesting to compare with those operational loses.
Sure, plenty of examples about that: Operation Oyster, low level attack on Aalborg airfield by Blenheims, the Augsburg Raid and some more.Initial operations just add to the legend, one of the first operations was an unescorted low level attack on a power station in the Netherlands where all planes were lost to ground fire or the LW. Make the same type of attack with any twin engined bomber and they would probably suffer the same losses.
Are we looking at the same A-36 numbers? I see two (2) fatalities in 1942, twenty (20) in 1943 and two (2) again in 1944 for a total of 24.There were 395 fatalities in USA in the P-39, the real shocker is the A-36, training for dive bombing is a dangerous activity.
There were only about 500 made, look at the accident rate. and compare to the P-51(and others). per 100,000hrs flying 274 for the A-36 and 105 for the P-51.Are we looking at the same A-36 numbers? I see two (2) fatalities in 1942, twenty (20) in 1943 and two (2) again in 1944 for a total of 24.
Or...
A). I'm reading the chart wrong
B). You're be facetious