stunthanger.com
General control line discussion => Open Forum => Topic started by: Mike Callas on March 12, 2017, 01:16:27 PM
-
Interesting Spitfire story
http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=ie3SrjLlcUY&sns=em
-
The story that really fascinated...or disgusted...me was about the P-39's prop. The thing was always unimpressive, until after WWII was over, when somebody bolted a P-51 prop on it and totally changed the performance from mediocre to awesome. We'd think that even engineers would be savvy enough to try an assortment of different propellers on their new plane, right? Apparently not. S?P Steve
-
The story that really fascinated...or disgusted...me was about the P-39's prop. The thing was always unimpressive, until after WWII was over, when somebody bolted a P-51 prop on it and totally changed the performance from mediocre to awesome. We'd think that even engineers would be savvy enough to try an assortment of different propellers on their new plane, right? Apparently not. S?P Steve
Wow...a lot American Pilots died in P-39's because of poor performance as compared to the Japanese fighters. We sure could have used high performance P-39's in WWII, but unfortunately, it is a little too late now to worry about that. D>K H^^
-
Interesting Spitfire story
http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=ie3SrjLlcUY&sns=em
Thankyou for posting. that was very good.
-
I am sure that a lot of improvements could have been made however it was all out war and production of war material was at max capacity. There was no time for improvements. I am sure someone was aware that a better prop would be wonderful but they just weren't available! PS what a great story H^^
-
Wow...a lot American Pilots died in P-39's because of poor performance as compared to the Japanese fighters. We sure could have used high performance P-39's in WWII, but unfortunately, it is a little too late now to worry about that. D>K H^^
Fantastic short movie. Thank you.
On the P-39 you can thank those penny crunching bean counters back then. The P-39 was a very good fighter if it was set up right. It was never given the chance it deserved to prove it self. A lot of pilots were worried due to the engine location. The pilots feared the engine would crush them on a bad landing. Also the thought of the prop drive shaft running right underneath the pilot
In the history of the P-39 not one engine mount failure to cause hurt the pilot. The plane had a better center of gravity and handled very well.
But as mentioned above, to little to late. Also a Steve mentioned. the prop was one fix. The engineers knew what the plane was capable of. It was the freaking Gov't bean counters that should take the blame for holding back the 39's performance not Bell Aircraft.
-
" In Russia we dont let pilots over 40 fly the Airacobra !."
Yeager , " Why " .
Russian ," Their balls get caught in the propshaft . "
(http://i.imgur.com/Wl3MAGN.jpg)
Seems the Cold Climate suited them . Use machineguns to check sights , Then use the cannon .
-
Yeager said in his book that he would not have hesitated to fly the P-39 in Europe. That's pretty good testimony in my estimation.
-
The P-39 was better suited to low level ground attack with the cannon and bombs. The Russian front air battles were mostly low level and the cannon was good on tanks. The western front was mostly high level where the P-39 wasn't suited. The Russians didn't baby the engines to get the best performance out of it and to be a match for the Germans. There wasn't enough room for a bigger supercharger and the Russians them badly.