P-39 Airacobra U.S. vs. Soviet Use

preview_player
Показать описание
Why was the Soviet Union able to do so well with the Bell P-39 Airacobra? Why was its record with the USAAF relatively poor? Most say it's due to the plane's lack of high altitude performance. Does that answer by itself make sense? If so, why didn't we see the same comparative results with the P-40? The P-40 did relatively well for the USAAF and less so for the Soviets and with nearly identical altitude limitations as the Airacobra. The answers are complicated here, thus it's a long video.

The Official auto and Air Fan Store is Here!

Answers to common questions and concerns:
1. Didn't the Soviets like it because of it's centrally mounted weapons? Probably, however this video is about why the plane was successful for the Soviet and less so for the US. As the plane had centrally mounted weapons in both cases, I don't think it had an effect on the comparative results the two air forces had with it.
2. People have pointed out that the Flying Tigers didn't see combat until after Pearl Harbor. That's true, and I worded that part of the video poorly. When you talk for 50 mins straight that can happen. Still what I said isn't technically incorrect. I said that the P-40 scored some kills right from the start at Pearl Harbor. I didn't say that the Flying Tigers flew combat or scored kills before that. I then said that the P-40 was having success in China earlier, that's true, just not combat success, that wouldn't come for another couple weeks after Pearl Harbor. Poorly worded on my part. I should have said Chennault was having success in China before Pearl and thus the Flying Tigers were ready to score kills and first did so shortly after Pearl Harbor. I hope that clears this up.
Рекомендации по теме
Комментарии
Автор

My Dad flew P-39's in the 67th fighter squadron in the South Pacific. I have his military log book. the 67th was only at gradual canal for about 30 days. He claimed the 39 saved his life more than 3 times. Also he was trained in nothing but taildraggers and when they first saw the 39, All the pilots where shacking there heads and scratching their Butts! He would have been 101 this year had he lived, sadly he passed away at the young age of 50 in 1971. Great video!

jhaedtler
Автор

Contemporary joke: “A P-400 is a P-40 with a Zero on its tail!”

stevefreeland
Автор

My Father flew the P-40, P-47 (three 109 kills), and the P-39 (after his combat tour) during WW2. He said he loved the P-39 due to the tricycle landing gear and “the cockpit door like a car”.

leecarroll
Автор

My mother worked at Bell building P-39s during the war, so I've always been interested in the plane. This is a very interesting and informative video about it.

barryervin
Автор

No matter her bad reputation, she's just such a beautiful plane. It's nice to hear she actually isn't as bad as some people would believe.

Talon
Автор

Great job on this program. Another advantage of the P-39 was not just the cannon, but the fact that the twin .50's were mounted just above it, so there were none of the ranging problems associated with wing armament. Most Soviet fighters of the era were set up the same way.

alantoon
Автор

Soviet pilots did not find the P-39 Aero Cobra lacking in any way. Great video Sir. Thanks

jazzman
Автор

Really enjoyed this one, I often wondered why the P39 was so denigrated in American service compared to other planes, I will say though I've always thought this plane had an awesome shape, looks like it's made for speed.

coalhearted
Автор

Absolutely loved this one! Not gonna lie, it made me feel good mostly because I think the P-39 is one of the prettiest warbirds of WWII.

theofthebeast
Автор

Survival of the fittest is a phrase that makes teachers of evolution wince. Charles Darwin borrowed the phrase from Herbert Spencer, hoping a simple summary would get his idea across. Unfortunately, too many people think it means the biggest and strongest is the best, e.g. a tiger is the most fit cat. Lost is Darwin's point that fitness applies to an organism's place in the "economy of nature, " what we now call an ecological niche. A cerval or ocelot is just as fit as a tiger.

What I'm getting to is that too many students of warplanes don't take into account the ecological niche in which a fighter exists. Or they do, but only shallowly. Your exposition on the P-39 is one of the very best examples of how many and varied are the factors that make up the environment a fighter exists in. There are complex layers and you lay them out well. Thanks for that.

donjones
Автор

Your technical approach opens up so much of the realities of front line combat we end up with a knowledge of the personal experiences of the pilots involved at a time when they have mostly lost their voice. Well done Greg.

gooraway
Автор

My first Ace, Aces of the Pacific DOS version, Was flying a P-39. You can skid a 39.

USAACbrat
Автор

Always loved that P-39's small side door, like a car

MEMKI
Автор

Greg, I really appreciated this run down. Even for non enthusiasts i reckon it would be of benefit simply as an exercise in good analysis. I say that as an Australian who has wondered about why our boys liked these supposedly inferior things so much. Merry Christmas from 2024.

hogey
Автор

Thank You for covering the P-39. The P-39 is my favorite WW2 fighter. Some points...

1) The British pilots were horrified with the rear engined aircraft and were certain crash landing would result in death or critical injury from the engine flying forward or the driveshaft running under the seat. Neither proved true with the Soviets. The Brits also claimed firing the cowling guns filled the cockpit with so much smoke the pilots had to wear a oxygen mask. The Brits also claimed the Caribou I (British name for P-39) was no where close to the performance promised by Bell (That parts was true regarding high altitude performance). Thus the UK canceled their order and shipped all their P-39's to Soviets. I have not seen any mention by Soviets about smoke filling the cockpits when firing cowling guns.

2) When US entered WW2, the balance of British spec P-39's that had not shipped were requisitioned by the US Army. These were labeled P-400's by the US Army. The P-400 had centerline 20mm Hispano Suiza cannon, same one used in the P-38, 2 x 12.7mm .50cal HMG's, 4 x .303in wing mounted guns. The Soviets considered the US .30cal and Brit .303in guns a waste and removed them. Greg mentioned removal of the IFF gear, but the P-400's also came with a British oxygen system but no British oxygen masks. With the British oxygen system not compatible with US or Soviet systems the system was removed and replaced with US systems as they became available or were cannibalized from wrecked aircraft. So another limiting factor on US and Soviets high altitude ops in P-400's was a lack of a oxygen system.

3) I'm sure a lot of people know about the P-39's tumbling problem. If the P-39/P-400 got low on fuel and expended most or all of the nose ammo, a tight turn could cause the P-39 to tumble end over end. The Soviets also encountered this and after stripping all the weight they could from their P-39's they added roughly 500lbs of ballast to the nose.

4) In the Pacific, to try and improve the performance of their aircraft, US P-39/P-400 pilots started stripping everything not essential. In many cases this included the .30cal wings guns and all associated equipment. Since the P-400's were equipped with the British oxygen equipment and no masks the unusable system was removed and the P-400's operated without a oxygen system. I have read of one report where the P-400's were left at just under max limit for no O2 and could only watch as the P-40's engaged Bombers and fighters incoming in at over 20, 000ft where the P-400's couldn't go.

In a more amusing story, the P-400's used the same model 20mm Hispano Suiza cannon the P-38's used. When P-38's were operating off the same fields as P-400's, there was a critical shortage of spare parts for the Hispano Suiza cannons so any crash landed or otherwise disabled aircraft that could not taxi back to their repair area had to station guards at the aircraft to keep the 20mm cannons from disappearing.

Anlushac
Автор

Another great video with good research as usual. A P-39Q won the first post war (1946) Thompson Trophy Air Race so the "39" was no slouch down low on speed. I wonder if the tricycle gear of the P-39 was a factor in the Soviet's admiration for the airplane. Operating on slick snowy or muddy fields I'd think it would make the airplane easier to handle.

ElRancheroDeOro
Автор

The P47 series was brilliant. This research is just as good. When a blogger lays down the facts and changes the narrative, it’s noteworthy.

jedibusiness
Автор

Great job! Specifications not speculations. My speculation: The Luftwaffe had eliminated any marginal pilots from the Soviet Air Force before the Airacobra arrived.

richardschaffer
Автор

Chuck Yeager, in his book, flew P-39's early, trained on them and liked them, having no problems, including the flat spin, he also flew one at an airshow after the war. In the Osprey book on P-39 aces, is recounted a tale by an American pilot in the Mediterranean theatre (probably southern Italy over the Balkans)
encountered a Bf 109, which he shot down, stating as he had flow a 109 (captured of course) and he knew once that they engaged in turning contest he
would have no trouble is disposing of it.

craigauckram
Автор

My Uncle flew both and was sent to Ft. Myers, FL training schools and show them how to fly it. He was a Squadron Commander of 39's guarding the Canal and Doing Sub Patrol on both sides. After that he would fly B-26's for cadets in Tampa. It is all his fault that i live in Fort Myers, Fl.

USAACbrat