My Dad flew P-39's in the 67th fighter squadron in the South Pacific. I have his military log book. the 67th was only at gradual canal for about 30 days. He claimed the 39 saved his life more than 3 times. Also he was trained in nothing but taildraggers and when they first saw the 39, All the pilots where shacking there heads and scratching their Butts! He would have been 101 this year had he lived, sadly he passed away at the young age of 50 in 1971. Great video!

Contemporary joke: “A P-400 is a P-40 with a Zero on its tail!”

No matter her bad reputation, she's just such a beautiful plane. It's nice to hear she actually isn't as bad as some people would believe.

My Father flew the P-40, P-47 (three 109 kills), and the P-39 (after his combat tour) during WW2. He said he loved the P-39 due to the tricycle landing gear and “the cockpit door like a car”.

My mother worked at Bell building P-39s during the war, so I've always been interested in the plane. This is a very interesting and informative video about it.

Thank you so much for the great content CONRATS ONE 100K!!!

Great job on this program. Another advantage of the P-39 was not just the cannon, but the fact that the twin .50's were mounted just above it, so there were none of the ranging problems associated with wing armament. Most Soviet fighters of the era were set up the same way.

Really enjoyed this one, I often wondered why the P39 was so denigrated in American service compared to other planes, I will say though I've always thought this plane had an awesome shape, looks like it's made for speed.

Your technical approach opens up so much of the realities of front line combat we end up with a knowledge of the personal experiences of the pilots involved at a time when they have mostly lost their voice. Well done Greg.

Chuck Yeager, in his book, flew P-39's early, trained on them and liked them, having no problems, including the flat spin, he also flew one at an airshow after the war. In the Osprey book on P-39 aces, is recounted a tale by an American pilot in the Mediterranean theatre (probably southern Italy over the Balkans) encountered a Bf 109, which he shot down, stating as he had flow a 109 (captured of course) and he knew once that they engaged in turning contest he would have no trouble is disposing of it.

Great job! Specifications not speculations. My speculation: The Luftwaffe had eliminated any marginal pilots from the Soviet Air Force before the Airacobra arrived.

Always loved that P-39's small side door, like a car

The P47 series was brilliant. This research is just as good. When a blogger lays down the facts and changes the narrative, it’s noteworthy.

Absolutely loved this one! Not gonna lie, it made me feel good mostly because I think the P-39 is one of the prettiest warbirds of WWII.

My Uncle flew both and was sent to Ft. Myers, FL training schools and show them how to fly it. He was a Squadron Commander of 39's guarding the Canal and Doing Sub Patrol on both sides. After that he would fly B-26's for cadets in Tampa. It is all his fault that i live in Fort Myers, Fl.

Spitfires were also used post war to train mig 15 pilots, giving high flight up to 40,000 ft. Still used until 1953 at least

Thank You for covering the P-39. The P-39 is my favorite WW2 fighter. Some points... 1) The British pilots were horrified with the rear engined aircraft and were certain crash landing would result in death or critical injury from the engine flying forward or the driveshaft running under the seat. Neither proved true with the Soviets. The Brits also claimed firing the cowling guns filled the cockpit with so much smoke the pilots had to wear a oxygen mask. The Brits also claimed the Caribou I (British name for P-39) was no where close to the performance promised by Bell (That parts was true regarding high altitude performance). Thus the UK canceled their order and shipped all their P-39's to Soviets. I have not seen any mention by Soviets about smoke filling the cockpits when firing cowling guns. 2) When US entered WW2, the balance of British spec P-39's that had not shipped were requisitioned by the US Army. These were labeled P-400's by the US Army. The P-400 had centerline 20mm Hispano Suiza cannon, same one used in the P-38, 2 x 12.7mm .50cal HMG's, 4 x .303in wing mounted guns. The Soviets considered the US .30cal and Brit .303in guns a waste and removed them. Greg mentioned removal of the IFF gear, but the P-400's also came with a British oxygen system but no British oxygen masks. With the British oxygen system not compatible with US or Soviet systems the system was removed and replaced with US systems as they became available or were cannibalized from wrecked aircraft. So another limiting factor on US and Soviets high altitude ops in P-400's was a lack of a oxygen system. 3) I'm sure a lot of people know about the P-39's tumbling problem. If the P-39/P-400 got low on fuel and expended most or all of the nose ammo, a tight turn could cause the P-39 to tumble end over end. The Soviets also encountered this and after stripping all the weight they could from their P-39's they added roughly 500lbs of ballast to the nose. 4) In the Pacific, to try and improve the performance of their aircraft, US P-39/P-400 pilots started stripping everything not essential. In many cases this included the .30cal wings guns and all associated equipment. Since the P-400's were equipped with the British oxygen equipment and no masks the unusable system was removed and the P-400's operated without a oxygen system. I have read of one report where the P-400's were left at just under max limit for no O2 and could only watch as the P-40's engaged Bombers and fighters incoming in at over 20,000ft where the P-400's couldn't go. In a more amusing story, the P-400's used the same model 20mm Hispano Suiza cannon the P-38's used. When P-38's were operating off the same fields as P-400's, there was a critical shortage of spare parts for the Hispano Suiza cannons so any crash landed or otherwise disabled aircraft that could not taxi back to their repair area had to station guards at the aircraft to keep the 20mm cannons from disappearing.

Crazy how the Soviets have lots of Airacobra aces and they actually like the plane

It was my uncle's first Fighter. Drafted from Air Transport Command when the Flying Tigers joined the USAAC. Went to Panama to guard the canal. Big change from C-46 loaded with gas an bombs over the hump. thanks

Another great video with good research as usual. A P-39Q won the first post war (1946) Thompson Trophy Air Race so the "39" was no slouch down low on speed. I wonder if the tricycle gear of the P-39 was a factor in the Soviet's admiration for the airplane. Operating on slick snowy or muddy fields I'd think it would make the airplane easier to handle.

Considering manifold pressure, I've came along soviet engineers memories (yeah, not that reliable source, but with wide numbers of statements from many people) that increasing it above restricted limit was a common thing from the very arrival of the aircraft. And Considering p40, they were issued to the navy squadrons, usually in the northern sectors, and were respected from their durability, there is a documented sorty when a pilot performed two airborn rams (probably against vertical stabilizer on a tail) and managed to land his p40 of the aircraft

Survival of the fittest is a phrase that makes teachers of evolution wince. Charles Darwin borrowed the phrase from Herbert Spencer, hoping a simple summary would get his idea across. Unfortunately, too many people think it means the biggest and strongest is the best, e.g. a tiger is the most fit cat. Lost is Darwin's point that fitness applies to an organism's place in the "economy of nature," what we now call an ecological niche. A cerval or ocelot is just as fit as a tiger. What I'm getting to is that too many students of warplanes don't take into account the ecological niche in which a fighter exists. Or they do, but only shallowly. Your exposition on the P-39 is one of the very best examples of how many and varied are the factors that make up the environment a fighter exists in. There are complex layers and you lay them out well. Thanks for that.

I’ve recently fallen in love with the P-63 and P-39s, I don’t know why, but I have this inert interest that I can’t explain.

This was good, while recalling what my Dad had to say about all these USAAF fighters. He started in P-40s and went to (& stayed with) P-47s. One comment I recall about the P-39 was "...the Russians like them, send them there. They don't fight like us." Your video points that out clearly. Thanks. Fond memories of talking with Dad about the War, after Mom died and after Saving Private Ryan where they flew P-51s instead of Jugs.

I read that the P-400s also suffered from a lack of oxygen for the pilots. Since they were originally built to British specs, they were built to use British built O2 canisters and the Americans didn't have any of those which fit them. So the P-400s couldn't cruise at high altitude where O2 was needed, and often ended up getting jumped by Japanese fighters from on high. i.e. Usually at a notable disadvantage in Pacific engagements.

The P-400 was nicknamed "A P-40 with a Zero on it's tail." Whether or not it's fair, it's still my favorite nickname!

I got my first computer in 2008. Sometimes I would try not to weep and I would say, to the spirit of the airplane, "Oh, Juggernaut, when will they acknowledge you?" - "Patience, fool, patience...". If I can talk to trees I can talk to airplanes.

The Cobra has perfect proportions for a RC model. Stable and aerobatic,, I even let others fly mine which I never do with other warbirds. Cheers!

So much relevant detail. The Soviets may have not been impressed by the Spitfire's lack of robustness compared to the P-39. The Spitfires on carriers (Seafires) suffered from an environment for which they were not suited. The P-39 had the tricycle undercarriage to deal with Soviet forward airfields. I am familiar with Soviet small arms - tough as nails.

Thank you for clearing up a lot of the questions I've wondered about over the years regarding the P39. Also the little dig at modern German design/engineering was spot on. I've bought my last German anything with wheels.

I’ve liked the p-39 since I first saw it at the Dayton Air Force Museum (it’s an amazing museum)

My highschool friend's father Bill Allen, was a design engineer for Bell and worked on the P-39. He said the super charger and air scoop were too small. The turbo/supercharger on the P-38 Lightening Allison would have substantially increased the P-39 high altitude performance.

Another excellent video, thanks Greg. I've always thought of the P-39 as a remarkably ingenious design that should have had far more impact than it seemed to have had. I knew about the Allison V1710's supercharger issues but poor reputation the P39 had in the west seemed a bit of a mystery. Well I reckon you've made a pretty compelling argument as to how that came about as well as with the VVS loved it. I learned a great deal from this discussion and enjoyed it immensely.

My instructor used to fly Aircobra in Soviet AF and did shot down six FW-190. He also was shot down in 1945 and spent 2 months in POW camp.

Outstanding presentation, as usual. Thank you, Greg!

Wonderful Video Greg! Thanks for all the hard work you put into these! Worth the wait!

Erik Winkl Brown after the war interviewed German and Soviet pilots who said the gunsight on the P39 was superior to the Soviet and some german planes. The gunsight on Soviet fighters many times electrical tape oñ the windscreen. Many P39s were canabalized for their gunsight which was copied for use on later planes.

I wish you could include French and Italian experiences with the '39. They used late mark Airacobras, and I'd like to hear your thoughts on their use.

Another video from you which gives me a deeper insight into WW2 aviation technology than I ever dreamed to gain, when I first got interested in the subject as a child. Thank you very much, Greg.

Another wonderful video full of great information. I love the details you go into. Thanks!

Greg, thank you. You have answered the questions I have had about the P-39 that have bugged me for a very long time. Thank you for the excellent analysis.

Absolutely excellent analysis. I vaguely knew 'it wasn't good at high altitudes, and the Eastern front was fought at low altitudes' but you didn't leave a stone unturned here. Love it!

Awesome Video! Thank You Greg! Keep the great videos coming!

Great job with this video. Looking forward to your next clip.

I have always had a soft spot for the P-39 since building the old Airfix 1:72 scale kit, many,many years ago. Really appreciate the time and effort you have put into correcting many of the misconceptions and myths about the Airacobra.

Great video, Gregg. So happy to see your new video on the P 39. Your research and, more importantly, your insights, create amazing content. One of the great things about your videos is i know i can watch them over and over and learn something every time. Your technical approach sets a standard for all other content creators. Just outstanding. Thanks!

Another great job of research on an aircraft that I previously had little interest in. And another example of how reputations (of aircraft) really need to be taken in context of the bigger situation. Thanks Greg!

Another excellent analysis. Thanks, Greg!

Excellent video greg. completely changed alot of my preexisting notions about the p39 and its wartime performance.

Another fascinating Greg Deep Dive of the kind that apparently brings 100k subscribers. Congrats for that.

Really an interesting post. Thank you for this.

You are the Man my friend. I love these videos and never knew I was so interested in aircraft engines, things like superchargers and how aircraft operate at different altitudes. Thank you for your work

Ah perfect for me to watch while I work through the night.

I'm not qualified to comment on the technical information, but I thought that I'd add that I love the historical photos that you include in your videos.

Interesting & thorough as usual. Thanks Again

Outstanding video as always!!!

Another world-class video. Which shows what is so often missed in all does this discussion. Context Matters and nobody pays attention to, other than Greg! Thank you so much for your awesome work have a nice week.

I love the Iron Dog. Been waiting for this. I love flying it at low altitude in flight sims. It's formidable down low in maneuverability, energy retention, and as a gun platform.

Great photos for this. Well done.

Another great video! Thanks Greg

Superb content Greg. A lot of research went into this video, and it made me rethink my attitude towards the P-39. This video, and your series on the the Thunderbolt, made me reconsider these planes and their contribution to the fighting men in WWII.

If I could build a WWII style warbird replica, the P-39 Airacobra/P-63 King Cobra would be my definite choice to model it after. Such a shame this amazing aircraft gets so little love.

Great video!! Really liked your evidences and data. Terrific research, thanks for showing us all.

I have watched several videos covering this subject. Your video is the most excellent expose on the Ruso vs Allied pilot experience with the P39 to date. Great work!👍

Always liked the P-39 despite its bad rep. Great looks and unique design. This is one of the most informative and surprising video you’ve done. Thanks for your great work Greg.

What I particularly like about the P-39 was weapon positioning. It didn't have any issue with the convergence range we find on most wing mounted weapons. I really enjoy how many variables you take into account. I believe your systemic approach to be the better one I have come upon.

Greg, I greatly appreciate this channel, probably the most authoritative and well researched channels of its kind.

Great video. My neighbor growing up in Massachusetts worked for Bell Aircraft and helped develop this aircraft. He had several models of this plane at his house and his stories about the P-39 got me interested in WWII aircraft and model building. He was a super interesting guy, a watchmaker, ham radio operator and ended up being an engineer at Raytheon for many years. Sure wish I could remember some of our airplane conversations but it was 50 years ago. He would have loved this video that I am sure of!

Part 2. As I said before, Pokryishkin was physically stronger than average and he invented an evasive maneuver which only a P39 was able to perform. I heard this from his subbordinate, another famous ace Tryud, in an interview long after the war. Tryud said he was the only pilot in Pokryishkin's led Air Division, who could stay on his tail in that maneuver (tha't 'cause he was also strong. Actually, they both looked almost the same in the 80's - heavy with big forearms and palms). The idea was to hide under the nose of the plane on your 6 with a high positive G while rapidly moving over to either of his wings and emerging on his tail while he is trying to find you with his nose slightly pointing downwards. I.e. the Airacobra was able to move swiftly in several directions (like a real snake) at the time when the 109 was only pulling his heavy nose down. There was another reason for a P39 to shine - "almost 300 kg" (c). Which is 660 pounds. The Russians were making the Cobra's 650 pds lighter. You mentioned the removal of wing guns and some equipment. The most of the weght lost was because of the armour. If You compare the early 39 to the later models, You will see how much armour the Bell has decreased. That's because there always was a Russian representative in the States working directly with the Bell and telling all the latest news from the frontlines (meaning what exactly the Russians want to see in the next model). The Bell corp. was litterally working for the USSR while officially the USAF was issuing all the thing "they" wanted to change. And since you have some kind of alternative history over there, I will tell You, that the Soviet Union was paying the FULL PRICE for everything he got from a lend-lease. I'll tell You more. We were payng in GOLD. That was your reqirement. Since it was a leasing it took some time to pay off. A lot of time. But we payed for everything we got. You metioned that P39 was the best allied plane in the first part of the war. Again, I'll tell You more. Airacobra was the best fighter plane over here. We held the trials including the 109 (either F or G) in the best shape possible. Cobra was a clear winner there. I know for sure that not all the Russian planes were 100% stock. There was another very famous pilot - Yeremin. He was doing recon missons in fighter planes on extremely low altitude. Anyway, they gave him the exact Yak-1B from those trials. And the plane was "specially prepared" according to the factory official. Yeremin was THAT cool (not in terms of the planes shot down) that later on the factory personnaly gave him a Yak-3 in 1943. That's way before (in war time) those Yaks saw mass production (1944).

Greg, I just wanted to add the P-400 designation was never used by Bell and wholly created by the USAAF to designate P-39D’s with RAF serial numbers. The serial numbers were non-sequential so the Army created the P-400 designation. Bell referred to them as P-39D-1 and P-39D-2’s. The 20mm cannon is not an indicator either. Bell delivered some 450 P-39’s of various models with 20mm cannons because 37mm cannons were not available to Bell during various times.

Excellent analysis, very informative and fair!

Excellent analysis, which helps in understanding other planes' reputations as well

You could definitely make a similar case for another widely maligned American fighter, the Brewster Buffalo, and its performance with the Finns.

One thing to remember is in both the South Pacific and in Russia were at relatively low altitudes, not like the air battles over Europe. One interesting point made by Bob Hoover was he was able to get the P-39 to tumble nose-over-tail. He convinced Chuck Yeager to try it and he was able to repeat it.

I realy enjoyed your video. I was waiting for this topic for a long time.

I really enjoyed this video. I am a P-39 fan from way back and have studied the aircraft for years, but I learned a very great deal from this video! Extremely well done!

Not sure how or where to request this, but I would also love to see more information about the Il-2! This is amazing stuff, Greg. You are hitting ALL the points I try to talk to people about regarding this stuff, and your work especially in the P-47 series was outstanding! Thanks for all your videos.

Regarding experience level, I'm reminded VERY much of the fighter defense over the USS Laffey (the famous "ship that wouldn't die", and the aircraft defending her played no small part in that). Lt. Carl Rieman's four FM-2 Wildcats from Composite Squadron 94 off the USS Shamrock Bay, flown by veteran pilots (three of four) had been mock-dogfighting almost to an unusual degree, for which Rieman himself was generally responsible. He was sort of a taskmaster, but he had a reason for being one: figuring the more experience he got in the aircraft, ditto his squadronmates, the better chance they had of surviving (he wasn't wrong and also was far from a fool, helping to develop the AH-1J Cobra attack helicopter later on). He broke into two flight groups, taking his least experienced pilot after the kamikazes and bombers while his other two experienced pilots tangled with the fighters. They actually put up a pretty spectacular defense against Ki-43 Oscars and apparently some A6M5 Zeros, given that this was April 16, 1945 (Rieman reported Oscars, the guys who relieved him reported Zeros, the Japanese said they had both types operating in the area since both IJA and IJN were there, but didn't specify who had more of what). Eventually, Rieman and company signaled that they were running out of fuel with one aircraft damaged (that of Richard Collier, leading the other two-aircraft group) and they were relieved by VMF-441 flying F4U Corsairs, so obviously better planes. But much greener pilots; two of the twelve Corsair pilots actually crashed into the Laffey attempting pursuit of what they claimed were Zeros (remarkably, both survived). The pilot experience explanation is an excellent one and one that I've also wondered about myself, specifically AT Guadalcanal. The Free French also had and despised the P-39, but they were trying to use it as an anti-bomber aircraft at higher altitudes, so that's to be expected. Meanwhile, there was ONE air force that did actually plan on using P-39s as fighter-bombers in the west, and that was the Italian Air Force post-Badoglio changing sides. Unfortunately, for some reason, these guys got aircraft that had been terribly maintained and wound up losing 5-6 pilots off the top of my head due to maintenance issues alone, so obviously not a fair comparison.

I must admit I am a PTO consumer of history so only recently "discovered" your amazing (mostly ETO) channel when you analysed Thunderbolt Pacific missions. Yours is an excellent presentation and your context based review of the P39 is simply excellent! I am going to go back across your frankly excellent content. Thanks Greg for your very, very impressive program!

I love this detailed video great job Greg thank you

My grandfather was Australian ground crew in Indonesia. He told me that American pilots hated the P39 because the engine was thrust forward (being amidships) during crash landings and killed them.

Great one, Greg! And btw. there is no way one of your videos could ever be too long...!

What an excellent windup to a discussion of a sentimental favorite plane of mine. I just redid a livery of my P-39 (1.2 Meter RC plane) in the first Bud Anderson "Old Crow" livery! I get a kick every time I fly it. Thanks for the full and fascinating discussion on this early and transitional aircraft!

Excellent vid and analysis Greg. Love the channel....

Thankyou for another interesting and informative video. I have always loved the look of the P-39 and I never realised quite how fast or manoeuvrable it was at low level and how that translated into it being so effective against Luftwaffe 109s and 190s. I really enjoyed this presentation.

GREAT video! Once I started researching the P-39 for my books I saw a lot of the same things you mention here. The comparison with the Soviet use of the airplane, as opposed to the USAAF, was particularly illuminating and useful to me in my present work. Keep 'em coming!

Thank you, it was a Real pleasure to watch your video. And what a subject. Thank you again.

Up to your usual high standards again Gregg. The P39 was one of my favourites when I was a child. I learnt a lot from your video and enjoyed the photos. Great work

Great video, thank you. One other aspect of the '39 not appreciated is that many served without ever leaving the continental US. They were advanced trainers/fighter introduction aircraft that pop up in quite a few pilot's memoirs from late-stage training. Not an unimportant role - getting low hour operators used to the airspeed and decision speed of front line aircraft.

Well done! As the world’s biggest Spit fanboy I offer my congrats, you’ve convinced me that I’d have been better off in a 39Q on the eastern front vs a mk9LF. And there’s a case to be made that the 39 is just as pretty as the spit. I agree also about 150 octane not being available in that theater. Everything you said is well researched as usual. Good job!

Good video. Shows how complex combinations of factors dramatically alter how a plane performs and is perceived.

What an excellently researched video! Thank you!

Most interesting and well presented as usual. The more I learn about the P-39 the more fascinated by it I get, mostly thanks to these videos.

My personal favorite of the Airacobra models is probably the “stripped down” N models that removed the wing mounted guns altogether and filled in the empty space. This reduced firepower, but not by much, considering the lacking damage output of the .30 calibers later war, and in exchange, it was somewhat lighter, lower drag, and even _slightly_ better in a roll due to a bit less intertia mid-wing. Plus, on paper, the armament was still roughly on par with the Yakolevs in use at the time True, the Q model would have much more consistent firepower, but those underwing gondolas to hold the .50 cals also meant additional drag. I THINK I’ve heard that the Soviets sometimes removed those gondolas from the King Cobras as well, but I haven’t found a single good source on that yet. It sounds like something they would do, but that’s not particularly strong evidence Edit: Ah, you talked about the modifications Edit 2: iirc, the Tricycle landing gear was also popular, especially given poor Soviet runways when compared to the very smooth runways most US aircraft flew from

Utterly fascinating breakdown on the separate perspectives on this much maligned aircraft. Wonderful video, many thanks!

Great video. I hadn't even thought about relative pilot combat experience.

One point to make, although extensively trained in General Chennault’s tactics and experience as advisor, to the Nationalist Chinese Air Force, the first Combat missions by the AVG (Flying Tigers) occurred in Burma after Pearl Harbor just around Christmas. The two P-40 flown by Welch and Taylor that entered combat at Pearl Harbor at a lower Altitude. The P-36 As also encountered Japanese Imperial Navy as flown by 2nd Lt Philip Rasmussen (in his Pajamas) along with 1st Lt Sterling plus 2 additional P-36A which also fought climbed to 9000 ft and dived on the Val dive bombers escorted by Zeros.

General Chuck Yeager thought very highly of the P-39 as it was the USAAF main frontline fighter at the start of the War. He thought it was underrated. At least according to his autobiography.

I enjoyed this one so much that I watched it all the way through a second time. I am fascinated by the comprehensive research Greg does. I love the approach of not just accepting easy myths.

Great video! Thank you!