Bell P-39

[plan_D]

The VVS loved the P-39 because it was a plane perfectly suited to their cause; low level dogfights. The dogfights over Northern Europe were high altitude; where the P-39 could not perform.

[fat flyer]

Also for the western allies in the ETO in WWII, there were not many opportunities for the P-39 to be used in a ground attack role.

[Jabberwocky]

The VVS rarely used the P-39 in the ground attack role, although it could perform as a fighter bomber (usually with 2 x 100 kg bombs or a single 250 kg bomb)

It was predominantly used as a low altitude escort for Il-2s and Pe-2s, as well as a mid-altitude air superiority fighter.

The 'Soviet tank buster P-39s' are something of a myth. The VVS was never supplied with AP ammunition for the M4 37mm cannon. The Soviet NS-37 37mm cannon, as fitted to Yak-9 and Il-2 variants, was more effective (heavier shell at a higher M/V and higher RoF) than the P-39s M4 at anti armour work.

[superpumper]

That's something I wanted to ask. What was the big deal with the 37 mm in the P-39? Like I read in here and other places this 37mm was a poor weapon. Was this the first production a/c to use a weapon of this size? Can someone explan.

[FLYBOYJ]

It was a poor weapon - subject to jamming and it didn't function well when being fired with any g loads on it - but one round could take down just about anything. The P-400 had a 20mm which I believe worked a lot better.

[Marshall_Stack]

I think the problem with jamming was due to the way the discharged shells were being handled, so this was a Bell design flaw, not the fault of the cannon. Once this was remedied they had no more problems.

One of the problems is that it had a low muzzle velocity. Chuck Yeager said that it was like firing pineapples. Doesn't sound like a positive comment....

[CharlesBronson]

The VVS loved the P-39 because it was a plane perfectly suited to their cause; low level dogfights. The dogfights over Northern Europe were high altitude; where the P-39 could not perform.

Yeap, but it must be something more, for example according to "occidental" sources the plane had a bad tendency to make a flat spin in high G maneuvres, the russian aces seems to be insensitive at that fact ( or at list I cant found a reference )

That's something I wanted to ask. What was the big deal with the 37 mm in the P-39? Like I read in here and other places this 37mm was a poor weapon. Was this the first production a/c to use a weapon of this size? Can someone explan

The big differences are in the cartrigde case.

Teorically the AP M4 round (37x145R) could penetrate 25 mm vertical plate at 300 meters. That makes an antitank ?

Maybe yes maybe not:

Just some examples of armor:

Pz II ausf f : 35 mm front 15 mm side.

Pz III ausf H/J 50 mm front 30 mm sides.

Pz IV ausf G 80 mm front, 30 mm sides.

Pz V panther 80/100 mm front, 40 mm sides.

Pz VI B Tiger 1, 100 mm front 80 mm sides.


That demonstrate that it have some posibilities against the thinner armor in the lighter vehicles but the the M-80 round was a very simple one, a solid piece of steel with tracer, no explosive charge or balistic cap. the initial speed was about 609 m/s....compare that with the larger NS-37 round, 900 m/s.

M4 ammo, note the M-80 AP.




Now the longer bottlenecked russian round, 37x195 mm.




The NS-37 was put in some single engines aircraft like the Yak-9, Lagg-3 and Yak-3 that made those double use aircraft (air-to-air and air-to-ground) but because the soviet aicraft were made mostly of wood they have not the strenght and durability of the cobra, also cannot carry as much armor protection and the radio equipmente was inferior, maybe that make the Airacobra so loved in the USSR.

[Juha]

Hello CharlesBronson
did the Soviet got the M80 AP ammo? IIRC I read a long time ago that they got only HE ammo for their P-39s. But I cannot remember from what source so I don't know how reliable that info is. Do you have positive info on the delivery of M80 ammo to SU?
Anyway, M4 was such a low velocity weapon that IMHO its forte was its rather powerful HE.

Juha

[CharlesBronson]

Sorry but no....I dont have that info, I am just speculating what would be the real armor penetration IF the M80 was used.

Bell P-400.

[Juha]

Ok
thanks for sharing the drawings of M4 ammo.

Juha

[CharlesBronson]

You re welcome.

Interesting reading I ve extracted from "Operation Pinball, the USAAFs secret aerial gunnery program in WW2" from Motorbooks International.

[CharlesBronson]

P-39Q and P-39F.








I am not sure about this last one, it would be interesting to know the real performance of the airacobra against the german and Vichy French fighters.

[Trautloft]

does anyone know the losses of lend-lease equipment(if ac or tanks) delivered to the Soviet Union? i mean the sunken ships loaded with war material ,aircraft as deck cargo etc. i know how many been sent away,but not all of them arrived obviously.im also curious of the Kingcobra,i read everywhere about the p-39 but not the p-63..its supposed to be faster and better, but in my book of all ac of ww2 i found the highest speed less as the airacobras *confused*. if im right,almost the whole production of 2000+ kingcobras been shipped to the SU, (among with estimated 5000 p-39's),some used as trainers or target ac by the USSAF tho but never seen combat on allied side beside the eastern front. anyway...how many p-39,p-40,hurricanes,spits,bostons etc. layin in a sea grave?

[JoeB]

Originally Posted by Trautloft

does anyone know the losses of lend-lease equipment(if ac or tanks) delivered to the Soviet Union?

From table on p.182 of Geust and Petrov "Red Stars 4" (for US a/c):
14,985 delivered from US factories for Soviet account
150 lost in the US and Canada (mainly on ferry flights to USSR)
586 lost "after departure" (mainly at sea on ships).

Slightly over half, and later in the war most, of lend lease US a/c for the Soviets were delivered by the ALSIB route, ie. flown from Lower 48 through Canada to Alaska, then across the Bering Sea to airfields in the Soviet far east. P-63's were almost all delivered that way, and almost half of P39's were. As implied by above figures, the ALSIB loss rate was pretty low. Also remember most sea deliveries were to Abadan in Iran (some bigger planes were flown there too, across the S. Atlantic, Africa and Mideast). Those deliveries suffered low losses as well. Only ~8% of the deliveries were to North Russia by sea, which were the only ones to incur substantial % losses on the way, though the book does not break out those details unfortunately.

P-63's saw brief action on the Eastern Front but no air combat (per the same book). Most were retained in the Far East and saw more extensive use in the Soviet war against Japan in August 1945, although didn't see much air combat there either because there was little Japanese opposition. Only one air combat mentioned in Soviet accounts, AFAIK was 17th Fighter Regiment P-63 claim to have downed a Japanese Ki-27 (Nate) or Ki-43 (Oscar, apparently Soviet records differ) of several attempting to attack Soviet A-20's, on the last official day of the war, August 15, 1945. I know of no specific Japanese account, Japanese Monograph No. 151 (account of the air campaign compiled for the US occupations postwar) gives claims for several Soviet a/c that day and losses of "about 10" Japanese a/c to various combat causes in the whole campaign.

Joe

[Trautloft]

thanks alot JoeB ,great info!!
if i got it right, this data excludes the British Empire's deliveries.