View Single Post
  #67  
Old 05-14-2013, 02:36 PM
majorfailure majorfailure is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 320
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EJGr.Ost_Caspar View Post
Not at the altitudes, where they fought (high up with the bombers). Not suited for carriers use and not having the necessary range for default PTO operations, it was best used in ground attack and low alt fight - as especially the russians use to do it.
And there was the Issue of the reacquired P-400s that did have British oxygen supply - and couldn't go higher than the pilot could endure the thin air. Add pilots not well versed with the type and its temperamental low speed handling - at a time when fighter doctrine was still to dogfight. And to some there was too much innovation in it, car doors, engine behind the pilot, sitting on the prop shaft, tricycle landing gear -bah that has to be bad. The 37mm cannon was not liked in the beginning, too - as its trajectory needed well trained marksmen. And then add psychology, a pilot not confident with his plane will not perform as well as one convinced of its superiority.

Quote:
Originally Posted by EJGr.Ost_Caspar View Post
If it had got the turbocharger, that prototypes had, then the picture would have been different maybe.
That would have been a hell of an interceptor. But the rather short range was still there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EJGr.Ost_Caspar View Post
Later in the war, after D-Day, when ground attacks in Europe became more important, there were already better types available, like P-47 and P-51 (which could as well fly all the way with the buffs too).
Don't forget Northern Africa and Italy. There were some P-39s present.
And the Cobra could not have been that bad even in US service -of the ~10000 produced, only half went to the VVS. Okay some were used as trainers, but that still leaves a few thousand used in combat.
Reply With Quote