P 40 on the eastern front.

This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

Just Schmidt

Airman 1st Class
Jul 19, 2010
This is partly about the P-39, as one of my 'problems' always was that the soviets preferred the P-39 over the P-40. Well known is Stalins outspoken preferrence for it, though one should be careful to take Stalins word as gospel. But in accounts I've seen mostly on this forum during the years, it does appear that also lower down in the system, the P-39 was better liked.

So i always asked myself why, as better production quality, heavier armament, better instrumentation and an engine optimized for low level, and of course the stuff being free, all should recommend the P-40 equally well as the P-39. And yet, in as far as we have precise information from the USSR during the war, it didn't.

Therefore I find this video interesteng:

The relevant part starts at about 19 minutes, and goes some way to explain why the P-40 wasn't an instant hit. I like the author of the video, he strikes me as fairly well researched. At least on the counts where I can check him, fx I haven't got the slightest idea how reliable his kill to loss ratios are, but it does seem that how to get that right is still a slightly contentious subject. The whole video, and part one as well, is worth watching.

Just for the record, I do think I rate the P-39 higher than many here, but then again, it dosn't take a lot. Not that I feel like starting to argue about it, I think we covered that in other threads. I hope some of you find this interesting.


Airman 1st Class
Feb 19, 2019

Originally delivered to the RCAF. This photo was taken by me in the mid-1980s in southern California. The registry identifies it as an 'M' model. Most 'M' models were supplied to Allied countries (mainly UK and USSR), while some others remained in the US for advanced training. It was also supplied to the Commonwealth air forces as the Kittyhawk Mk. III.



Tech Sergeant
Mar 18, 2022
"Speed and maneuverability over sturdiness firepower and range"

This guy is ill-informed. Most of what he posts about the P-40 here is from an old article posted on the old lend-lease.Ru website, back during the brief era of detante between the US and Russia. You could interpret the data differently. I don't think this guy actually knows much about the type, a lot of the stats he quotes are wrong and he's just regurgitating what you can find around the web, basically.

Users who are viewing this thread