MIflyer
1st Lieutenant
You don't understand! Something is because it is, it is, it is!
Or so say the 6 year olds.
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Your ability to repeat something, while faced with information that refutes it, is truly something to see.
I have flown both taildraggers and nosegear airplanes and I can say with great confidence that the P-39 was vastly superior on the ground to the 109. According to reports, the 109 was one of the worst airplanes ever built for handling on the ground.
And the attitude the P-39 was sitting at on the ground meant it could still shoot targets. Supposedly there was a P-38 pilot who actually used to land, drive around, and shoot up Japanese airbases on the ground in the Pacific, but I never heard of any P-39's doing that.
This why it is a groundhog thread, weight influences climb when you cant change anything else, neither a Jumbo Jet nor a Saturn V rocket had any trouble getting to 40,000 ft faster than a P-39 and they were a little heavier as far as I remember.P39 Expert said:
Weight influences climb more than any other factor.
Negative! Run the numbers. A 10% change in Thrust Available will have a greater effect on RoC than 10% change in weight. They advocated weight reduction because thrust was already maxed out in practical terms.
P39 Expert,
Your ability to repeat something, while faced with information that refutes it, is truly something to see.
Good luck,
Biff
All but one, maybe.I think this is the only thing we can all agree on, well almost all of us.
I think this is the only thing we can all agree on, well almost all of us.
All those differences were internal. They had no aerodynamic effect whatsoever. The only difference in the two planes was weight.
Same engine, same power below 10000'. Above 10000' the P-39C horsepower was actually slightly less.
Hi Stig1207. What book did Claringbould write? I ask becasue:
1) I have the Statistical Digest of World War II. The total victorie are shown, but not by model of aircraft.
2) I have Naval Aviation Combat Statistics for WWII. The Navy didn't fly P-39s, so it is of no help.
3) I have many WWII aviation books, including Frank Olynyk's Stars and Bars. It is ovr 650 pages, but the data are there. It is just a bear trying to get through it. I may well make the dffort, but finding such a treasure for other nations is impossible to date.
4) I have a file with more than 68,000 German claims, but the claim file doesn't tell you the aircraft being flown. It shows the pilot name, unit, victim, and location and date, but not the airplane being flown. I don't know how to find out what dates the various units were flying what aircraft.
So, I'm curious, but not curious enough to buya book to settle a P-39 question. It wsa not a very good airplanes during the war and is of interest, but ot to the point of spending much money on it, specifically. I might change my mind if I OWNED a P-39, but I don't. It would be quite nice to fly one.
Wherever did you find THAT, Miflyer? Never saw that one before!
Those sure are BIG cannons in the wings! What are they, 15" inch Bazookas?
And it still has a big pushbutton on the nose, too! Or it that a nipple and it needs a bra?
Hi Stig1207. What book did Claringbould write? I ask becasue:
1) I have the Statistical Digest of World War II. The total victories are shown, but not by model of aircraft.
2) I have Naval Aviation Combat Statistics for WWII. The Navy didn't fly P-39s, so it is of no help.
3) I have many WWII aviation books, including Frank Olynyk's Stars and Bars. It is ovr 650 pages, but the data are there. It is just a bear trying to get through it. I may well make the effort, but finding such a treasure for other nations is impossible to date.
4) I have a file with more than 68,000 German claims, but the claim file doesn't tell you the aircraft being flown. It shows the pilot name, unit, victim, and location and date, but not the airplane being flown. I don't know how to find out what dates the various units were flying what aircraft.
So, I'm curious, but not curious enough to buy a book to settle a P-39 question. It was not a very good airplane during the war and is of interest, but not to the point of spending much money on it, specifically. I might change my mind if I OWNED a P-39, but I don't. It would be quite nice to fly one.