RE: The P-39 was an inferior fighter...as if we didn't all know this already

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: The P-39 was an inferior fighter...as if we didn't all know this already

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> RE: The P-39 was an inferior fighter...as if we didn't all know this already

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: The P-39 was an inferior fighter...as if we didn't ... - 7/13/2007 3:40:07 AM

rtrapasso

Posts: 22653
Joined: 9/3/2002
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mdiehl

When I present the data and the summary, they will be presented in the Steakhouse> Council of War forum I think. The CoW rules don't permit the sort of "Only you could turn Sakai's claims of inherent superiority into a researchable question" type accusations. Also, there is a decent chance that when completed it will be a sticky thread and a permanent resource. Maybe after I'm done, I'll cc the findings here.

Meantime if you doubt my math about closing rates you are free to recalculate them yourself.

You've presented no data (references).

YOU are mistaken

You have not purchased the game

You have no interest in improving the game.

You have no business here.

< Message edited by rtrapasso -- 7/13/2007 4:08:09 AM >

(in reply to mdiehl)

Post #: 61

RE: The P-39 was an inferior fighter...as if we didn't ... - 7/13/2007 3:52:19 AM

ChezDaJez

Posts: 3436
Joined: 11/12/2004
From: Chehalis, WA
Status: offline

quote:

In any case the proof will be in the stats. Interested parties will want to check out the WW2 PTO allied a.c. thread in the Steakhouse>Council of War forum. I'm giving Shores et al. V1 its first run through to get a general sense of the data and the quality of the research. It is disappointing that there are no references to substantiate the claims. That said, things are looking pretty good for American P-40 drivers in the PI based on my reading through February 1942. Most of the P-40s lost in the PI/Borneo/Indonesia/Celebes area were destroyed on the ground, and in A2A the few instances where the P-40s and A6Ms met on roughly equal terms (irrespective of numbers, the Allies were pretty much always outnumbered during this period) the kill ratio for P-40s vs A6Ms is about 1:1.

Of course, I knew you wouldn't publish it here on the WitP forum where you've made your claims. Not where people who have more than just a passing interest in the subject would read it. Make sure that you list only substantiated kills, not just "claims." I'd hate to see you accused of bias!

Oh, well. I don't frequent the Steakhouse. Not my cup of tea. So I guess I'll never see the truth. Too bad...

Chez

_____________________________

Ret Navy AWCS (1972-1998)
VP-5, Jacksonville, Fl 1973-78
ASW Ops Center, Rota, Spain 1978-81
VP-40, Mt View, Ca 1981-87
Patrol Wing 10, Mt View, CA 1987-90
ASW Ops Center, Adak, Ak 1990-92
NRD Seattle 1992-96
VP-46, Whidbey Isl, Wa 1996-98

(in reply to mdiehl)

Post #: 62

RE: The P-39 was an inferior fighter...as if we didn't ... - 7/13/2007 5:27:08 AM

Nikademus

Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mdiehl

quote:

Sakai in his book noted no reluctance to attack a P-39 under any circumstances.

Except that in his book he writes of the frustration of his wingmen that the P-39s refused to climb to the A6Ms altitude to engage. Which is a clever way of avoiding saying that the A6Ms refused to descend to 10,000 feet to engage the P-39s.

I've just finished looking through Sakai's book and regrettably, I find no compelling evidence to support your claim that Sakai was trying to avoid admitting that he and his A6M pilots were avoiding combat with P-39's due to fears of their superiority at low altitude. Of course, if you can point me to the specific reference and page number, I'll be happy to take another look.

quote:

Sakai's book is quite self serving, although perhaps not consciously so. One may of course sympathize with and accept that a pilot's memoirs will have a biased perspective.

Well i certainly don't agree with that opinion. Having read his book, and having it in my hot little hands right now, I found it compelling and straightforward. I found his views and opinions to not be overly self important and unlike other accounts (from both sides), he wasn't overly ungenerous in his comments on "the enemy". It makes for a nice counterweight to the US-centric air books in my library by offering a Japanese perspective to the air-war that the other books often lack. Again however, if you wish to point me to specific incidents of self serving behavior in his book, I'll certainly take a look.

_____________________________

(in reply to mdiehl)

Post #: 63

RE: The P-39 was an inferior fighter...as if we didn't ... - 7/13/2007 5:46:30 AM

mdiehl

Posts: 5998
Joined: 10/21/2000
Status: offline

quote:

You've presented no data (references).

That is on the whole incorrect. It is however correct for this thread. I'm going to assume that you can recalculate the math (on closing rates) on your own. As to the A6M and P-39s top airspeeds, I have to work with the assumption that anyone offering an opinion here is capable of verifying same at any old time. Nevertheless, FOR YOU, here are:

Wilson, Stewart
1998 Aircraft of WW2. Aerospace Publications Pty Ltd, Fishwyck, Australia.

A6M types (p.125-127)
A6M2: max (sea level) 282 mph, 331 at 14,930.
A6M3: max (sea level) 279 mph, 328 mph t 19,685 ft
A6M5: max (19,685 ft) 351 mph. "Modified flaps and ailerons were fitted and the wing skinning was of a heavier gauge to allowed increased diving speeds, an important tactical consideration given the superiority of the American opposition" (which I read as "superiority in diving and roll rates at high speed" -- otherwise why modify the ailerons eh?)
A6M6-8: max speed 340 mph at 21,000 ft. (Note, this plane lost many of the better characteristics of the zeke in an attempt to fit it with self-sealing fuel tanks... which added weight).
A6M2-k/5-K: max speed 296 moh at 13,125. This was a 2 seat training variety that only saw combat service as a kamikaze.

A6M2 time to 19000 feet, 7.5 minutes

QUA

Bell P-39 airacobra (p.20):
P-39D: max 368 mph at 13,800 feet, time to 15,00 feet, 5.7 minutes.
P-39Q: max 385 mph at 11,000 feet, time to 15,000 feet, 4.5minutes.

Thus the P-39 can be said to be faster than any variant of the Zeke at the P-39s best operational altitudes. Were it a race to 15,000 feet, the P-39 would win if both airplanes were already moving fast. If it was a race from a runway ramp, I suspect that the A6M would reach 15K feet faster than a P-39, but I would bet that the climb vs airspeed vs altitude graphs of both planes would indicate ranges where first one then the other excelled at climb.

If you want the data summaries from Lundstrom and Shores et al. you will have to visit the steakhouse, although if Matrix folks find it desirable I will cross post the results here somewhere when I'm done.

quote:

YOU are mistaken

So you claim.

quote:

You have not purchased the game

That is correct.

quote:

You have no interest in improving the game.

That is not correct.

quote:

You have no business here.

If Matrix mokes find my posts inconvenient I am sure they will let me know.

quote:

Of course, I knew you wouldn't publish it here on the WitP forum where you've made your claims. Not where people who have more than just a passing interest in the subject would read it. Make sure that you list only substantiated kills, not just "claims." I'd hate to see you accused of bias!

You obviously don;t know the Steakhouse very well. The Council of War forum is a good place for grognards, but the CoW forum does not suffer, well, grandiose distortions of others' claims particularly well. It would explain your reluctance to visit.

NO worries about claims. I've stated for years the general uselessness of pilots' claims AND, for that matter, "confirmed kills" awarded to pilots after they were debriefed. That is after all what makes doing the sort of counts I'm doing so interesting. When you see the distorted claims made about Zeros successes or the "aura of invincibility" you find out that neithe claim is substantiated by facts. Thach & Flatley both wrote that they never felt particularly intimidated. And it's not looking like the P-40 drivers in the PI felt that way either.

So where YOU, Chez, derive your 'the Zero bonus is appropriate because of the shock and awe and demoralization experienced by pilots who faced the Zero' rationale (most recently expressed in the form of your suggestion that early war Allied pilots simply have lower EXP ratings, rather than a Zero bonus) is anyone's guess. The only way I can imagine anyone clinging to that idea is if the ONLY source they had about Allied plane losses and allied a.c. performance was Zero Pilot.

_____________________________

Show me a fellow who rejects statistical analysis a priori and I'll show you a fellow who has no knowledge of statistics.

Didn't we have this conversation already?

(in reply to ChezDaJez)

Post #: 64

RE: The P-39 was an inferior fighter...as if we didn't ... - 7/13/2007 5:47:40 AM

jwilkerson

Posts: 10525
Joined: 9/15/2002
From: Kansas
Status: offline

Well let's thank the participates for this excellent round #2 and invite them all to return to their corners. Stay tuned for the next round!

_____________________________

AE Project Lead
New Game Project Lead

(in reply to Nikademus)

Post #: 65