Who's excited about the P-39L-1?

[=IL2AU=ToknMurican]

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/P-39/P-39K-1_L1_Operating_Instructions.pdf

 

http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/weapons_P-39_Airacobra_Soviet.html

 

 

http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php/159314-Whats-with-the-p39-Forums

 

The link to the ubisoft forums I'm pointing to the post from horseback in particular who gave a lengthy excerpt from Wings of Fame Vol. 10

 

quoting a smaller portion of that here 

 

"Meanwhile, new models of the Airacobra were tested at NII VVS. In July 1943, engineer P.S. Opoprienko and test pilot V.Ye. Golofastov put P-39L-1 42-4666 through its paces. They reported that the aircraft was well equipped for bad-weather flying – it was fitted with the MN-26 DF set and had wing, tailplane, and propeller blade de-icing.

 The P-39L had other improvements too. Combat reports had led to changes in armour protection (armour plate was added to the cockpit and removed from unimportant areas) and the introduction of a stiffened nosewheel fork. The cockpit, oil tank, and armament bay were heated by air from the engine. The 1,150 hp (858 kW) Allison V-1710-35 (E4) powering early P-39 models was replaced by a V-1710-63 (E6) rated at 1,325 hp (988-kW) for take-off. As with most Airacobras delivered in 1943, the P-39L-1 had a 37-mm M-4 cannon firing through the propeller hub, two 12.7-mm Colt-Browning machine-guns in the nose and four 7.62-mm Colt-Browning machine-guns in the wings.
 

 Unlike earlier and later Cobra tests at NII VVS, the aircraft was filled with US 100-octane avgas and the performance in the take-off mode (i.e., at full military power with turbo pressure increased from 1,070 to 1,150 mm Hg) was also recorded. This boosted speed from 490 km/h (304mph) to 530 km/h (329 mph) at ground level and from 554 km/h (344 mph) to 591 km/h (366 mph) at 3000 m (9,840 ft). At the time, high octane fuel was nowhere to be found in front-line units, so pilots were advised against using full military power. In general, the test reports were deemed satisfactory; the report indicated that at low and medium altitude, the P-39L-1 was almost equal in performance to the current Bf 109G-2 and Fw 190A-4."

 

 

So.. will we be without high octane fuel?   Regardless, I think the first time I unleash that 37mm cannon on a bomber or fighter successfully it will be very very satisifying. 

Edited March 13, 2017 by headwarp

[-=PHX=-SuperEtendard]

I'm really looking forwards to the P-39! Always a plane I liked not only for it's curious history (underdog in some scenarios yet ace maker in others) but also for how it looks.

 

Interesting to see those performance numbers, I looked for some and found this test with the P-39K (essentially the same plane but different propeller), and it gives the similar numbers to the previous Soviet testing without the 100 octane fuel (495 kmh at ground level and 569 kmh at 3000m), so I guess this test was carried over with the regular fuel. I wonder how the difference in propellers were. And btw 1150 mmHg translates to around 45.3 "Hg in the American system... so maybe if allowed to let's say 56" it could have even a bit more performance (However that remains to be seen, which engine limitations the V-1710-63 will have)

Edited March 2, 2017 by SuperEtendard

[=IL2AU=ToknMurican]

I'm really hoping for the P-39! Always a plane I liked not only for it's curious history (underdog in some scenarios yet ace maker in others) but also for how it looks.   Interesting to see those performance numbers, I looked for some and found this test with the P-39K (essentially the same plane but different propeller), and it gives the similar numbers to the previous Soviet testing without the 100 octane fuel (495 kmh at ground level and 569 kmh at 3000m), so I guess this test was carried over with the regular fuel. I wonder how the difference in propellers were.

 

No need to hope.. it's listed in the planes coming with BoK.

 

I'm not some great historian, or a great aviator or anything but I hope the future also provides the P-39Q-5 and maybe even some of the 37mm toting Yaks.. all that mid altitude yumminess with a big ol' 37mm round to give to German planes as presents. 

Edited March 2, 2017 by headwarp

[Gambit21]

I'm really hoping for the P-39!

 

Hoping?

[Fortis_Leader]

In all honesty I'm not sure if I am, because I don't know much about it.

 

How will it stack against other fighters in terms of speed, maneuverability, energy, etc.?

[-=PHX=-SuperEtendard]

No need to hope.. it's listed in the planes coming with BoK.

Hoping?

 

Broken english at it's best Sorry I meant "looking forwards"

[Gambit21]

Ahh...no worries.

You have fine English. 

[BlitzPig_EL]

I am cautiously ambivalent now about the P39.

 

If it has the same nonsensical engine limitations as the P40E, it wont' be worth a hill of beans.

 

Ditto the A20.

[Thad]

Salutations,

 

Superficially, I am biased and am looking forward to the P-39 because I like the look of it and because it was American made. I truly hope it proves effective in some roles within our WWII Flight Simulation. If not, what's the point?

[=IL2AU=ToknMurican]

More reading on the Airacobra - I'll add it to the OP as well.

 

http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/weapons_P-39_Airacobra_Soviet.html

[CUJO_1970]

Yes, and I would be happy if everything that flew in WW2 was eventually added if that was possible.

[=IL2AU=ToknMurican]

Yes, and I would be happy if everything that flew in WW2 was eventually added if that was possible.

 

I think we can all agree with that hehe.   Just a little patiennnce... yeaaaahhh. 

 

The dev's are attempting to do a lot already however, and are keeping us updated as they provide us with updates so this thread is no attempt at rushing them.  

 

There is a thread started by a dev showing they're interested in (not promising) a pacific theater in the future if I am remembering things correctly that looked like it was intended to inspire some historical conversation or thoughts.  So there is hope.  Seeds are planted.. give it time to grow. 

Edited March 2, 2017 by headwarp

[ShamrockOneFive]

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/P-39/P-39K-1_L1_Operating_Instructions.pdf

 

http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/weapons_P-39_Airacobra_Soviet.html

 

 

http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php/159314-Whats-with-the-p39-Forums

 

The link to the ubisoft forums I'm pointing to the post from horseback in particular who gave a lengthy excerpt from Wings of Fame Vol. 10

 

quoting that here 

 

"Meanwhile, new models of the Airacobra were tested at NII VVS. In July 1943, engineer P.S. Opoprienko and test pilot V.Ye. Golofastov put P-39L-1 42-4666 through its paces. They reported that the aircraft was well equipped for bad-weather flying – it was fitted with the MN-26 DF set and had wing, tailplane, and propeller blade de-icing.

 The P-39L had other improvements too. Combat reports had led to changes in armour protection (armour plate was added to the cockpit and removed from unimportant areas) and the introduction of a stiffened nosewheel fork. The cockpit, oil tank, and armament bay were heated by air from the engine. The 1,150 hp (858 kW) Allison V-1710-35 (E4) powering early P-39 models was replaced by a V-1710-63 (E6) rated at 1,325 hp (988-kW) for take-off. As with most Airacobras delivered in 1943, the P-39L-1 had a 37-mm M-4 cannon firing through the propeller hub, two 12.7-mm Colt-Browning machine-guns in the nose and four 7.62-mm Colt-Browning machine-guns in the wings.

 

 Unlike earlier and later Cobra tests at NII VVS, the aircraft was filled with US 100-octane avgas and the performance in the take-off mode (i.e., at full military power with turbo pressure increased from 1,070 to 1,150 mm Hg) was also recorded. This boosted speed from 490 km/h (304mph) to 530 km/h (329 mph) at ground level and from 554 km/h (344 mph) to 591 km/h (366 mph) at 3000 m (9,840 ft). At the time, high octane fuel was nowhere to be found in front-line units, so pilots were advised against using full military power. In general, the test reports were deemed satisfactory; the report indicated that at low and medium altitude, the P-39L-1 was almost equal in performance to the current Bf 109G-2 and Fw 190A-4."

 

 

So.. will we be without high octane fuel?   Regardless, I think the first time I unleash that 37mm cannon on a bomber or fighter successfully it will be very very satisifying. 

 

Great reading! I'm very much looking forward to flying the P-39 again. Interesting choice with the P-39L-1 as well... I've never really paid attention to that sub version but it seems ideally setup for Kuban battles and I'm glad to hear that the engine is capable of some higher level boost. With or without high octane fuel I'm anticipating it will be a better fighter than the P-40 in a number of ways. I'm hoping it represents a pretty sold 1943 contender! Seems like it was certainly possible.

 

I'm also guessing that the removal of the .30cals from the wings is probably a feature. I'm anticipating many pilots flying that way though I sometimes like having the extra firepower even if its psychological.

 

Yes, and I would be happy if everything that flew in WW2 was eventually added if that was possible.

 

I'd like a Tempest Mark V Series II and a F4U-1D Corsair with a pack of HVAR rockets please

[curiousGamblerr]

 

 

Who's excited about the P-39L-1?

 

"Not me!"

 

-no one, ever

[-=PHX=-SuperEtendard]

If it has the same nonsensical engine limitations as the P40E, it wont' be worth a hill of beans.

According to the P-39 K and L manual headwarp linked, it would be more forgiving than the P-40E:

 

In the of the last pages the manual gives some indications about loading the 20mm cannon, so I guess we could have it as a mod?

[smink1701]

I hope it flys better than the P-40!!!

[=IL2AU=ToknMurican]

 

 

I think my favorite line from this is "You want to treat this airplane like a lady.  Don't try to be fast or rough if you want to get along with it."

 

 

 

Last video is an earlier video, and probably an earlier model of the P-39.. most likely using the V-1710-35 engine rather than the V-1710-63 that the L-1 was using.

Edited March 2, 2017 by headwarp

[Guest deleted@50488]

Well,

 

I must confess I always found the AirCobra one of the hugliest aircraft I've seen in ww2.... but I do look fws to have one of these in IL2, and it'll actually be the first P-39 I'll play with in any combat flight simulator I have ever used ( very few... ).

 

I am a lot more interested in the Spitfire Mk. V

[GrendelsDad]

I am excited to shoot her down!

[Blooddawn1942]

This ugly thing had never much appeal to me. Looking forward to the Spitfire and the A-20.

[Finkeren]

I've always had a soft spot for the P-39. That awkward, strange-looking thing that nobody wanted but which was finally taken in by the Soviets in a time of desperate need and turned out to be quite effective and succesful in the end. How can you not love that story?

[216th_Jordan]

For me it is a beauty. Having its engine close to it's CoG means that mass moment of inertia on vertical pitch movements is fairly low on this airplane, that will mean that it is very agile but also quite unstable if you handle it carelessly. In old sturm this would give you the ability to make last second pitch corrections for snapshots in a very fast way and was what actually made this plane quite dangerous. If you get hit though you can expect your engine to quit soon.

[Finkeren]

If you get hit though you can expect your engine to quit soon.

Why would that be? I've never heard that the Allison was supposed to be particularly fragile. Is there something in the design of the P-39 that makes the engine more vulnerable?

[Riderocket]

i am very much looking forward to the P-39 

[216th_Jordan]

Why would that be? I've never heard that the Allison was supposed to be particularly fragile. Is there something in the design of the P-39 that makes the engine more vulnerable?

Yes, as it sits behind the pilot it is a lot more likely to take hits from behind. Maybe I phrased that a little awkward.

Edited March 2, 2017 by 216th_Jordan

[Dakpilot]

Nice "armour" for the Pilot though 

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[Lusekofte]

Personally I have mixed feelings,

• it did a splendid job in Russia , P 40 did a bad job in Russia.
• US Pilots disliked it in PTO , US Pilots liked the P 4o in PTO
• RAF dismissed it for European service due to performance in high altitude 

This sim is really about , you do not know what you get, it is small borders between useless and fantastic. No, I am looking forward to the A 20 

[unreasonable]

Nice "armour" for the Pilot though 

 

Cheers Dakpilot

 

That is what I was thinking: survivor bias. But then again if you are doing ground attack or attacking a bomber formation I would think it was worse.

 

I wonder how vulnerable the P-39 is to hits from the front. 

[Scojo]

The one campaign in Pacific Fighters that I flew most was the Marine Corps P-39 campaign. I loved it and I can't wait to have the plane in this sim as well!

[Scojo]

The P-39 will definitely fit in well in this theatre, I think, as it also did historically.

 

As far as looks, I don't get why you could hate it. It looks lean and mean to me.

 

One thing I remember not liking about it was having to look around the door bar a lot. Can't be worse than the FW or P-40 though

[Finkeren]

Yes, as it sits behind the pilot it is a lot more likely to take hits from behind. Maybe I phrased that a little awkward.

But IIRC there was a substantial armoured bulkhead right behind the engine.

[Dutchvdm]

But IIRC there was a substantial armoured bulkhead right behind the engine.

 

Yes there was. But it looks like it's still isn't going to hard to still hit the engine.

 

[-=PHX=-SuperEtendard]

Another insight into the plane's protection, from the manual:

 

 

You can see it leaves the engine vulnerable to high bouncing attacks. Also it would work against rifle machine guns (as most plane armor), 20mm and 12.7mm AP wouldn't have much problems against it.

[=IL2AU=ToknMurican]

i am very much looking forward to the P-39 

 

 

You could have just answered with a period and no words. Your sig says it all I believe. 

[kestrel79]

Yes I am.

 

Saw one at EAA this past summer and was amazing to see it in person. 

[Scojo]

I don't think it's much less protected than any other fighter in this game. High bouncing attacks work just as well against the others and the angles shown in SuperEntendard's image make me think that shots from behind will still need roughly the same side deflection as well.

 

If you're concerned about vulnerability in this plane vs others, the concern shouldn't be on angles, it should be on the armor itself and the fact that from 6 o'clock, there's only one to go through instead of 2 in other fighters

If anything, I'll definitely at least enjoy seeing something so different from what's currently in the sim.

 

Tricycle gear, different engine placement, designed outside of the countries in our current theatre.

 

Variety is the spice of life

[=IL2AU=ToknMurican]

I think the p-39 appeals to me much for the same reason a bird like the a-10 appeals to me.   It was designed around a weapon platform (correct me if I'm wrong)...just instead of serving freedom with a bit of brrrrrrrrrrrrrrt  it's more like Ka-TOOSH Ka-TOOSH Ka-TOOSH and you see a wing floating in the air above a smoking ball of fire that might just have been a plane moments earlier. 

 

Don't get me wrong.. RL violence horrifies me but, when it comes to internet airplanes or spaceships.. destruction is the true joy. 

 

I do enjoy the aesthetics of the plane.  I think she's both sleek and mean looking.  For some reason when I look at just the shape of it, I think it looks like something designed to cut through air with grace and ease.  

 

 

The bird lacked a 2 stage supercharger (designed for turbocharger that ended up in p-38s later on if i'm not mistaken) and will have a limited service ceiling due to that.. its major downfall. 

 

At the same time if it performs as described in the Wings of Fame excerpt I c&p'd a small portion of in the OP, I think I may just have to learn to live at 3000m or lower..and hopefully see planes at higher altitudes before they see me so I can run away, and look for someone with an equal or lesser energy state. 

 

Admittedly though I'm a bit of a noob to the simming world (still saying that with about a year or more of various planes/sims under my belt) .. if I'm wrong about anything feel free to mention it.   And hey.. if anybody who's keen on this plane wants to throw together an element and have some fun in MP when the plane hits... I need to stop flying alone.  I die a lot.  I'll probably still die alot with wingmen but it'd probably speed up my learning process heh. 

 

Not sure when the p-39 is in the works.. but I do think it'd be fun to go out with a flight of them. 

Edited March 2, 2017 by headwarp

[Blitzen]

Me!

[Scojo]

I think the p-39 appeals to me much for the same reason a bird like the a-10 appeals to me.   It was designed around a weapon platform (correct me if I'm wrong)...just instead of serving freedom with a bit of brrrrrrrrrrrrrrt  it's more like Ka-TOOSH Ka-TOOSH Ka-TOOSH and you see a wing floating in the air above a smoking ball of fire that might just have been a plane moments earlier. 

 

Don't get me wrong.. RL violence horrifies me but, when it comes to internet airplanes or spaceships.. destruction is the true joy. 

 

I do enjoy the aesthetics of the plane.  I think she's both sleek and mean looking.  For some reason when I look at just the shape of it, I think it looks like something designed to cut through air with grace and ease.  

 

 

The bird lacked a 2 stage supercharger (designed for turbocharger that ended up in p-38s later on if i'm not mistaken) and will have a limited service ceiling due to that.. its major downfall. 

 

At the same time if it performs as described in the Wings of Fame excerpt I c&p'd a small portion of in the OP, I think I may just have to learn to live at 3000m or lower..and hopefully see planes at higher altitudes before they see me so I can run away, and look for someone with an equal or lesser energy state. 

 

Admittedly though I'm a bit of a noob to the simming world (still saying that with about a year or more of various planes/sims under my belt) .. if I'm wrong about anything feel free to mention it.   And hey.. if anybody who's keen on this plane wants to throw together an element and have some fun in MP when the plane hits... I need to stop flying alone.  I die a lot.  I'll probably still die alot with wingmen but it'd probably speed up my learning process heh. 

 

Not sure when the p-39 is in the works.. but I do think it'd be fun to go out with a flight of them. 

Yeah in MP, it will be a bait/escort or objective defense fighter, but in a group, this thing could really shine.

 

If you need people to fly with and see me on, send me a message

[Roo5ter]

Hopefully the 100 octane fuel is an 'unlock' since it wasn't readily available.  That would give the mission creators flexibility to make historical missions and properly limit aircraft that were able to use the fuel.