Western wings under the Red Star

[robfitz70]

Wow! I share with you this fantastic and extensive report bringing a super collection of incredible, stunning and rare photos showing various types of American and British fighters in service with the Soviet Air Force during World War II. Many of the images and planes shown in the article were unknown to me and did not even know they had flown with the legendary Red Star. Be sure to visit the link below, you will also be amazed by the images:


http://aviacaoemfloripa.blogspot.com.br/2011/01/asas-ocidentais-sob-estrela-vermelha.html

Best Regards!

 

[bendizoid]

I notice the soviets shot down lots of there own planes, or they just don't like putting little swastikas on there planes.

 

[Paul M. Weir]

One of the things about Lend Lease aircraft that always got my attention is that they made very good use of the Bell P-39, they seemed to love it. The P-39 was originally designed as a high altitude bomber interceptor but early on in the design/development stage the turbo-supercharger was dropped and the resultant aircraft turned into a feebly powered lead brick much above 4000 m or 13000 ft.

The P-39 was so badly regarded by US pilots that on one occasion a local P-39 squadron was ordered away from base upon warning of a Japanese raid and told to let a P-40 unit deal with them. The a batch of LL intended for British use and with British radios, etc and a 20mm cannon replacing the 37mm was called the P-400. The joke that went the rounds was that a P-400 was a P-40 with a Zero (A6M) on its tail. Below 4000 m it could do a very decent job but above that it was a dog and too much Pacific and Mediterranian combat was above that altitude.

On the Eastern Front, most combat was at low level and the P-39 shined. Despite a myth that the 37mm armed P-39 was used for tank busting, it was not. The US supplied HE but almost no AP for the 37mm and anyway with the low velocity of the 37mm the AP round would have not been up to snuff. Against soft targets it was devastating. Against aircraft, despite its low muzzle velocity (2000 ft/s, 600 m/s), low rate of fire (150 r/m) and low ammo load (30 rounds) the 37mm could take out any aircraft with a single hit. Indeed Alexander Pokryshkin, a Soviet 59 kill plus 6 shared ace, did his best to avoid converting from the P-39 to later Soviet aircraft, he liked it so much. The Soviet judgement was that it was the equal to the Bf 109 and superior to the Fw 190 at low altitude.

Allowing for the limitations of any flight simulation, I have flown many Soviet aircraft in the IL-2 Sturmovik game. Like the I-16 the P-39 has a nasty habit of spinning but was very manoeuvrable at low to medium level. I still much prefer the Yak 3, an aircraft I would happily tackle a Zero with in a turning dogfight .

 

[soggycrow]

One of the things about Lend Lease aircraft that always got my attention is that they made very good use of the Bell P-39, they seemed to love it. The P-39 was originally designed as a high altitude bomber interceptor but early on in the design/development stage the turbo-supercharger was dropped and the resultant aircraft turned into a feebly powered lead brick much above 4000 m or 13000 ft.

The P-39 was so badly regarded by US pilots that on one occasion a local P-39 squadron was ordered away from base upon warning of a Japanese raid and told to let a P-40 unit deal with them. The a batch of LL intended for British use and with British radios, etc and a 20mm cannon replacing the 37mm was called the P-400. The joke that went the rounds was that a P-400 was a P-40 with a Zero (A6M) on its tail. Below 4000 m it could do a very decent job but above that it was a dog and too much Pacific and Mediterranian combat was above that altitude.

On the Eastern Front, most combat was at low level and the P-39 shined. Despite a myth that the 37mm armed P-39 was used for tank busting, it was not. The US supplied HE but almost no AP for the 37mm and anyway with the low velocity of the 37mm the AP round would have not been up to snuff. Against soft targets it was devastating. Against aircraft, despite its low muzzle velocity (2000 ft/s, 600 m/s), low rate of fire (150 r/m) and low ammo load (30 rounds) the 37mm could take out any aircraft with a single hit. Indeed Alexander Pokryshkin, a Soviet 59 kill plus 6 shared ace, did his best to avoid converting from the P-39 to later Soviet aircraft, he liked it so much. The Soviet judgement was that it was the equal to the Bf 109 and superior to the Fw 190 at low altitude.

Allowing for the limitations of any flight simulation, I have flown many Soviet aircraft in the IL-2 Sturmovik game. Like the I-16 the P-39 has a nasty habit of spinning but was very manoeuvrable at low to medium level. I still much prefer the Yak 3, an aircraft I would happily tackle a Zero with in a turning dogfight .

You shouldn't equate game performance with reality. You know better than that.

 

[Paul M. Weir]

You shouldn't equate game performance with reality. You know better than that.

I always treat games with a handful of historical salt. However IL-2 is still the best flight simulator among combat flight simulators. While its flight engine undoubtedly has some weakness, I found that comparing one aircraft to another in IL-2 seems to fit historical comparisons reasonably well. Though out for some dozen years, new (free) updates are still put out and many tweaks to the various aircraft flight models have been made. In the end, I feel that some very useful 'feels' can be got from same.

 

[Thunderchief]

There are some good videos on the Airacobra:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t125_D5MoSY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sf9mfAnkUxE

And for a good book about flying one: Nanette by Edwards Park. Much more about the sensation of flying than we did X and the next day we did Y kind of book.

 

[Yuri0352]

One of the things about Lend Lease aircraft that always got my attention is that they made very good use of the Bell P-39, they seemed to love it. The P-39 was originally designed as a high altitude bomber interceptor but early on in the design/development stage the turbo-supercharger was dropped and the resultant aircraft turned into a feebly powered lead brick much above 4000 m or 13000 ft.

The P-39 was so badly regarded by US pilots that on one occasion a local P-39 squadron was ordered away from base upon warning of a Japanese raid and told to let a P-40 unit deal with them. The a batch of LL intended for British use and with British radios, etc and a 20mm cannon replacing the 37mm was called the P-400. The joke that went the rounds was that a P-400 was a P-40 with a Zero (A6M) on its tail. Below 4000 m it could do a very decent job but above that it was a dog and too much Pacific and Mediterranian combat was above that altitude.

On the Eastern Front, most combat was at low level and the P-39 shined. Despite a myth that the 37mm armed P-39 was used for tank busting, it was not. The US supplied HE but almost no AP for the 37mm and anyway with the low velocity of the 37mm the AP round would have not been up to snuff. Against soft targets it was devastating. Against aircraft, despite its low muzzle velocity (2000 ft/s, 600 m/s), low rate of fire (150 r/m) and low ammo load (30 rounds) the 37mm could take out any aircraft with a single hit. Indeed Alexander Pokryshkin, a Soviet 59 kill plus 6 shared ace, did his best to avoid converting from the P-39 to later Soviet aircraft, he liked it so much. The Soviet judgement was that it was the equal to the Bf 109 and superior to the Fw 190 at low altitu

Allowing for the limitations of any flight simulation, I have flown many Soviet aircraft in the IL-2 Sturmovik game. Like the I-16 the P-39 has a nasty habit of spinning but was very manoeuvrable at low to medium level. I still much prefer the Yak 3, an aircraft I would happily tackle a Zero with in a turning dogfight .

I have to agree with Paul on the IL2 series of flight Sims, especially regarding the P-39. The game does a decent job of simulating the challenges of trying to regain control from a spin with a plane that has a rear mounted engine. Some serious CG issues for sure. In the game at least, the P-39 is certainly more of an energy fighter than a maneuver fighter.

 

[Brian W]

I have to agree with Paul on the IL2 series of flight Sims

I pulled out my copy and installed it on my new tower. Anyone have a recommendation of patch + mod pack before I patch it to the latest version? I plan on mostly (solely?) playing off line, so a campaign is more important to me than new skins. The number of combinations is a bit mind boggling and apparently it's not easy to mix and match patches and mods after they are installed.

After watching some youtube video of Cliffs of Dover, I bought it off amazon and just finished installing the mods. Looks more complicated than I can handle, but the cockpits and graphics are astounding.

 

[Paul M. Weir]

It's been a few years since I played it, just went off computer gaming. I am likely to take it up again, just have periods when I am really into stuff then off and back on again. I only used the official patches. Though, from not being played, I am a bit behind in installed patches, I download all new official patches, up to 4.13.2 so far. I would strongly advise patching with all official patches before even thinking about 'fan' patches. After the official ones then check the 'fan' ones for compatibility with your current official version. I also played entirely solo. My interest is more combat techniques/manoeuvres and comparisons between different opposing aircraft.

Because IL-2 1946 fulfilled my needs I have not been tempted by the later 2 re-writes. The early versions of CoD supposedly had a lot of problems, the next one, Stalingrad, was supposed to be better and they now have a Moscow one out.

As my motivation was curiosity, the range of aircraft in IL-2 1946 is right down my alley, the re-writes don't have the same range. Being able to fly an I-153 against a Ki-27 "Nate" or Yak-3 against anything is more my thing. I do admit that the successors' graphics are superb. My first PC game was "Aces of the Pacific" on a 20 MHz 286 with 8 Mb of memory and 512 Mb (1/2 Gb) hard drive, followed by "Aces over Europe" and "Secret Weapons of the Luftwaffe".

 

[Brian W]

My first PC game was "Aces of the Pacific" on a 20 MHz 286 with 8 Mb of memory and 512 Mb (1/2 Gb) hard drive, followed by "Aces over Europe" and "Secret Weapons of the Luftwaffe".

SWOTL predated Aces, but BoB and it's predecessor PTO game (cant' rem the title) predated SWOTL. SWOTL was great fun, more so than any other flight game out before h2h play.

There are IL2 mods that bring in WW1 and Jet era planes, too. I would really like to fly the Korean War jets, especially the F-86.

 

[Paul M. Weir]

You are likely to be right regarding which came first, it's some 20 years ago. The first flight sim that I got was the F-16 Fighting Falcon one on Atari ST. A late workmate and I linked up our STs (by serial cable borrowed from work) one Xmas and played against each other. As neither of us then had much of a grasp of air tactics, too often we ended up circling around on opposite sides of the same circle .

 

[c600g]

The first flight simulator I encountered SubLogic's Flight Simulator II on the Apple ][. I also fondly recall Chuck Yeager's Air Combat on my old 386 DX. Later on, I got heavily involved in Air Warrior, a multiplayer on-line air combat game focusing on WWII air combat (bought the flight stick, throttle, and rudder pedals). There were squadrons, free for all arenas, and the occasional campaign game/scenario that would really get your blood pumping.

... and then I had kids! *poof!* ;>

Alan

 

[Brian W]

There are IL2 mods that bring in WW1 and Jet era planes, too. I would really like to fly the Korean War jets, especially the F-86.

Sorry to quote myself, but I spent an hour trying to figure out how to install the mods needed for the Jet era planes and just gave up. The documentation is classic example of a labor of love by people that don't know how to write documentation. There's a half an hour video on how to install the mods that is completely useless--the guy is reading the directions and arguing with them during the video and then ten minutes in he says, and don't forget you need to have mod z (whatever) installed before you start this. They have mods that are required that don't even tell you what the mods do! If I had had to pay for any of it, I'd be really angry; as it is, I cannot do anything to get the hour of my life back, but sure am glad I didn't waste more of my time.

I am not very good at flight sims, so I don't play online. But flying against the computer AI isn't as embarrassing, and doesn't matter if I quit in the middle of a fight. And sometimes just flying around is cool.

 

[Yuri0352]

SWOTL predated Aces, but BoB and it's predecessor PTO game (cant' rem the title) predated SWOTL. SWOTL was great fun, more so than any other flight game out before h2h play.

There are IL2 mods that bring in WW1 and Jet era planes, too. I would really like to fly the Korean War jets, especially the F-86.

Brian,
Have you ever played 'Mig Alley'? It came out in the late '90's, and portrays air to air combat in the Korean War, including some of the piston-engined fighters of that era. Graphics are decent for its time and the game looks and plays very much like IL2.

 

[Brian W]

Brian,
Have you ever played 'Mig Alley'? It came out in the late '90's, and portrays air to air combat in the Korean War, including some of the piston-engined fighters of that era. Graphics are decent for its time and the game looks and plays very much like IL2.

No, I missed that one. The last one I played with F-86/MiGs was Chuck Yeager's flight sim.

 

[Paul M. Weir]

Brian,
Have you ever played 'Mig Alley'? It came out in the late '90's, and portrays air to air combat in the Korean War, including some of the piston-engined fighters of that era. Graphics are decent for its time and the game looks and plays very much like IL2.

I agree it wasn't too bad. The limited number of aircraft meant that when IL-2 came out I abandoned MA for it. In later years I wondered about MA's damage model. I remember hitting an IL-10 that smoked and flamed but gently curved away to a shallow belly landing despite being hit again and again and again. I know the IL-2 & IL-10 were tough but not that tough!

Another one from that era was Luftwaffe Commander, which was the first to have a flyable Polikarpov I-16. Again quite decent for it's time but too limited a range of aircraft.

The amazing thing about Il-2 is that it is still supported and new aircraft being added 15 years after the first incarnation. I doubt that the developers make much dosh, if any, from it now. For me it's the ASL of combat flight sims.

 

[Brian W]

I was reading some of the Cliffs of Dover posts, and they were discussing the damage modeling of CoD vs that of the newer Stalingrad/Moscow flight sim. The CoD damage model maps the wiring conduits, so only a direct hit on the mapped wire/conduit will actually sever that particular control surface, unlike the modeling of most (all?) other sims. Basically, the guy was saying that CoD was just insanely accurate compared to other flight sims, and that was one reason it failed as it was rushed out the door before the designers could really integrate it all together. Put another way, it was way too ambitious of a project to ever work the way it promised it would work.

However, I have heard that the modern sim (name I cannot remember) that began with A-10 I think is similarly complex. It seems to be the reigning champion of sims, but is expensive and not nearly as expansive as IL-2. And while I like the idea of Korean era jets, anything with A2A missiles doesn't really appeal to me.

 

[Barking Monkey]

...
On the Eastern Front, most combat was at low level and the P-39 shined. Despite a myth that the 37mm armed P-39 was used for tank busting, it was not. The US supplied HE but almost no AP for the 37mm and anyway with the low velocity of the 37mm the AP round would have not been up to snuff. Against soft targets it was devastating. Against aircraft, despite its low muzzle velocity (2000 ft/s, 600 m/s), low rate of fire (150 r/m) and low ammo load (30 rounds) the 37mm could take out any aircraft with a single hit. Indeed Alexander Pokryshkin, a Soviet 59 kill plus 6 shared ace, did his best to avoid converting from the P-39 to later Soviet aircraft, he liked it so much. The Soviet judgement was that it was the equal to the Bf 109 and superior to the Fw 190 at low altitude.
...
The Soviets also thought it was superior to the Spitfire Vs they had. That might have been at least partly a case of comparing 'factory fresh' P-39s to old Spitfires though. Apparently the US tended to send brand new planes and the UK sent aircraft that had been retired from RAF service due to airframe hours. It might also be that the Allison dealt with the lower octane avgas the Soviets used better than the Merlin did. (The VVS used 80 octane gas while the US and UK mostly used 100 octane.)

Supposedly the VVS did a lot of homework before they put the P-39 into combat and had strict maneuver instructions for their pilots to avoid the spin problem that had dogged the airplane in US service. They also made some modifications like yanking out the wing guns (if nothing else this must have simplified logistics,) and putting in an oil heater to help in the cold weather.

 

[HansK]

You are likely to be right regarding which came first, it's some 20 years ago. The first flight sim that I got was the F-16 Fighting Falcon one on Atari ST. A late workmate and I linked up our STs (by serial cable borrowed from work) one Xmas and played against each other. As neither of us then had much of a grasp of air tactics, too often we ended up circling around on opposite sides of the same circle .

I remember playing Falcon on two Atari 1040STFs too! Loads of fun, lots of maneuvring, little kills made...