Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
I don't like the P-39 for two reason.
1) Low endurance. A particularly bad feature in the Pacific.
2) Handling issues such as unpredictable stalls.
An aircraft doesn't stall without warning - this is a myth when speaking in terms of the P-39. The degree of stall waring will vary between aircraft. If you're operating the aircraft close to the outside of it's envelope, the right amount of training will ensure that you don't do anything that will kill you. With that said the P-39, because of its C/G location could be unstable, something actually desirable in a fighter. A well trained pilot with exploit this. The P-39 was Chuck Yeager's favorite WW2 fighter.
I think one will find with the right research that most of the P-39 (and P-400) bad reputation was due to tactics and pilot error. Also examine how many were actually lost in air to air combat during the summer of 1942. JoeB posted some good information where it was shown that P-39s and P-40s were holding their own against the Japanese. Of course the tide turned in December 1942 when the first P-38s became operational.
It would have depended on the mission. Lower altitude interception where I had the advantage of getting aircraft in the air ahead of the attack - P-39. Higher altitudes and missions involving range, F4FIf you were running the show at say, Guadalcanal, which figher would you have chosen, P39 or F4F-4?
Against the Japanese I would've preferred the Wildcat. The P-39 was faster, had better maneuverability but its engine was vulnerable to fighter attack thanks to its mid-fuselage layout and poor rate of climb, and the handling issues weren't entirely resolved early on. The 37mm cannon wasn't necessary against lightly armored IJN/IJA aircraft and was unreliable besides.
F4F had reliable armament, good armor, a sturdy if slightly underpowered radial up front and good range, all things a fighter needed to hold the line against the A6M and Ki-43 and it was one of the few fighter types that served from the beginning right up to V-J Day.
Hello Tomo
Here is some of the info JoeB had given over the time:
"No, it only covers to the end of the first set of Japanese offensives in that area around the beginning of March. For New Guinea I'm comparing the Japanese losses given in Sakaida "Winged Samurai" w/ the US claims and losses given in Hess "Pacific Sweep".
The 8th FG (P-39) claimed 45 enemy aircraft April 30-June 1 1942, 37 of them Zeroes, losing 26 P-39's in air combat almost all to Zeroes. They were the only Allied fighter unit at Port Moresby having relieved 75sdn RAAF (P-40) when they arrived. The unit opposing them was the Tainan Air Group, A6M's, with suffered 11 pilots KIA in the same period... it's more like perhaps 1:2 considering in this case some of the combats were over the Japanese airfields and they could have lost some planes w/ surviving pilots, though it's not mentioned in any specific accounts I know of."
and
"stats from Apr 30-June 1 '42, 45 e/a claimed, 37 of them Zeroes, for 26 P-39's (13 pilots) lost in air combat. The Tainan Kokutai lost 11 pilots in this period, w/ the 8th the only Allied fighter unit it faced after May 3..The JNAF didn't use parachutes in this period but still lost more planes than pilots in other known cases; I've never seen a comprehensive accounting of this period though. Anyway ball park of 2:1 against the P-39's in planes..[though] close to even in pilots..."
HTH
Juha
That declaration of the vulnerability due to the rear engine is not serious, right? 1st, the engine was provided with armor plate, 2nd, if one does not have engine behind, the pilot is tho receive the bullets/shells from astern. The P-39 was a better climber, too, when compared with F4F-4.
Stating that F4F was serving up until the VJ day misses the point here - it was the FM that was serving, a lighter variant. It was serving aboard the carriers too small to accept fighters of greater performance, rarely oposing a major adversary attention, while the P-39 was in the combat vs. Luftwaffe all the time. No comparison for the later part of the war IMO.
According to Craven Crate's The AAF In Word War II, the 8th and 35th Fighter Groups lost 25-33 P-39s/P-400s from
April 30th thru July of 1942 with a number of pilot KIAs. The P-39's C/G problem was that it changed with expenditure of ammunition. Yeager's opinion of the P-39 echoed those of other pilots who flew it stateside as a trainer. A nice plane to rat race in lightly loaded but not a combat aircraft.
Duane
Again, compare that with Japanese losses, the P-39 wasn't doing well, but it sure wasn't getting "mauled."
Do you have the comparable losses for the Japanese against this fighter group?
Do you think a well trained group of pilots that used the P39's strengths and knew the Japanese aircrafts weaknesses could have made this plane a winner?
I'd posit that the rear engine vulnerability is pretty serious, even if it's armored a few good 20mm hits tend to equal a knocked out engine, and the P-39 was notoriously hard to bail out of compared to fighters with vertical-opening cockpits. The engine being there may have saved some pilots from getting eviscerated by enemy fire, but after it's been shot out what then? What's more the P-39 may have climbed better than an F4F but it still wasn't equal to Japanese types at the war's onset, especially considering the P-39 was often fighting at altitudes outside its element.
Now on the Eastern Front, you mostly had later P-39 variants with various refinements over the older planes (including more armor and/or fuel, more horsepower, different props for higher climb rate etc.) that closed some performance gaps and allowed it to at least hold its own against LW fighters down low where the fight usually was, the P-63 was obviously even better and could fight the declining LW on their terms. None of this was the case in the PTO circa 1942.