Jump to content

Stalingrad


Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, bojan said:

P-39 was not really "second rate", but it's abilities and strengths did not really fit with either US nor British doctrine.

And the bold is why it was 2cd rate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, bojan said:

P-39 was not really "second rate", but it's abilities and strengths did not really fit with either US nor British doctrine. Soviets did not like P-40, absolutely hated Hurricane (well, in 1942 that one was 2nd rate), were indifferent at best toward Spitfire (those had reputation for being a bit of "hangar queen" and unsuitable for very rough forward airfield conditions).

Plus most air combat on the eastern front was at 15000 ft or below, which suited the P-39 fine. In the western theatre, combat was much higher and that was where the P-39 did not perform well. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, bojan said:

P-39 was not really "second rate", but it's abilities and strengths did not really fit with either US nor British doctrine. Soviets did not like P-40, absolutely hated Hurricane (well, in 1942 that one was 2nd rate), were indifferent at best toward Spitfire (those had reputation for being a bit of "hangar queen" and unsuitable for very rough forward airfield conditions).

Merlin was not really very big success in the Eastern Front. In Finnish experience, it was bit of rubbish compared to most American engines, or DB 605.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Yama said:

Merlin was not really very big success in the Eastern Front. In Finnish experience, it was bit of rubbish compared to most American engines, or DB 605.

Was it due to reliability/maintenance issues? Soviets also had long arguments with British government because a significant percentage of Spitfires were overhauled and not brand new. British claimed that performance was the same and Soviets argued that it was not the case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, R011 said:

The Soviet trucks at the time that were based on American designs were based on ones from the twenties and early thirties.  The Lend-Lease trucks were state-of-the-art for the early forties.

It would be good if someone could go into more detail, as these supplies tend to get overlooked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, bojan said:

P-39 was not really "second rate", but it's abilities and strengths did not really fit with either US nor British doctrine. Soviets did not like P-40, absolutely hated Hurricane (well, in 1942 that one was 2nd rate), were indifferent at best toward Spitfire (those had reputation for being a bit of "hangar queen" and unsuitable for very rough forward airfield conditions).

Reason for the dislike of the P40?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Rick said:

Reason for the dislike of the P40?

Could not turn with 109, could not outrun it. Only way to fight was to make a dive, shoot and try to use speed gained to get away. Also took a while to get a speed in the dive, so that tactic only worked if they have surprised Germans, and not if they were surprised themselves. They did like them for ground attack through later in the war, with 1 x 250kg + 2 x 100kg routinely carried. which was a very decent bomb load for a fighter-bomber at that time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yet against the 109s in NA, the P-40s did quite well.

Despite these problems, active combat continued. In January some 198 aircraft sorties were flown (334 flying hours) and 11 aerial engagements were conducted, in which 5 Bf-109s, 1 Ju-88, and 1 He-111 were shot down [6]. These statistics reveal a surprising fact – it turns out that the Tomahawk was fully capable of successful air combat with a Bf-109.

The P-40 in Soviet Aviation – Lend-Lease

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, MiloMorai said:

Yet against the 109s in NA, the P-40s did quite well.

Despite these problems, active combat continued. In January some 198 aircraft sorties were flown (334 flying hours) and 11 aerial engagements were conducted, in which 5 Bf-109s, 1 Ju-88, and 1 He-111 were shot down [6]. These statistics reveal a surprising fact – it turns out that the Tomahawk was fully capable of successful air combat with a Bf-109.

The P-40 in Soviet Aviation – Lend-Lease

 

Same versions of Bf-109s? Because of not then it’s completely irrelevant I am afraid.  Unless the Western allies were completely morons to drop them as soon as they could.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mistral said:

Same versions of Bf-109s? Because of not then it’s completely irrelevant I am afraid.  Unless the Western allies were completely morons to drop them as soon as they could.

Yes the same versions of 109s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, alejandro_ said:

Was it due to reliability/maintenance issues? Soviets also had long arguments with British government because a significant percentage of Spitfires were overhauled and not brand new. British claimed that performance was the same and Soviets argued that it was not the case.

They didn't handle dust as well, and in general didn't stand up various abuse and maximum power as well as Allison. Dust was actually bigger problem in Eastern Front than in the desert, as basically every airfield was gravel or dirt - grass fields were impossibility in most of the theatre. Finns had only small number of them ofc, but the experience was that they were 'very delicate' when compared to, say, Wright Cyclone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Weird things with shotguns, in post war MDAP however - Yugoslavia got some amount (IIRC about 120 examples) of Stevens 20g pump-action shotguns (620A IIRC) as "airfield equipment" in the early '50s. Those were intended for bird control around military airfields as jets were much more vulnerable to birds ingestion than props were before. Goes under "weird but important things"...

.

Edited by bojan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Mistral said:

Same versions of Bf-109s? Because of not then it’s completely irrelevant I am afraid.  Unless the Western allies were completely morons to drop them as soon as they could.

Bf-109F mostly.  At the time, it was the latest model.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...