FM-2 Wildcat 1350 HP and a taller tail...still a stubby wildcat...but the extra 150 HP helped them fly off the jeep or escort carriers short decks. However in the South Pacific, the normally aspirated allison or packard engine kept the P39 at low altitudes so it was the 1200 HP supercharged Wildcats that got the job of attacking the Japanese fighters. P-63 looked similar but was a big improvement over the P-39...but by then the Army Air corp had P-51 Mustangs and P47's in Europe and P-38 Lightnings, Hellcats, and Corsairs in the Pacific, so the majority of P-39 and P-63 went to Russia where the centerline nose cannon was useful for busting German armor. However, the Bell aircraft experience with tricycle gear and engines behind the pilot probably gave it the edge in developing the first jet...the Bell P-59
All American combat aircraft in WWII were supercharged. The P-39 had a single stage, single speed supercharger. By the time the Wildcat was deployed it had a single stage but two speed supercharger giving it better altitude performance than the P-39. The P-63 was lengthened compared to the P-39 and had two superchargers in series. It had comparable performance to most high altitude fighters.
My father got to the So. Pacific when the P39s were being phased out for the P 38s . He said that the pilots hated the P39 but loved the P 38s. No real reason except that the P39 was to vulnerable.
@@tracylemme1375 the difference in reputation can be explained by the soviet Polikarpov I-16 fighter. Although it was relatively fast for its time and very nimble, it was a bit too short, so the centre of gravity was far off, thus I-16 was very prone to flat spinning. Soviet fighter pilots actually said that "If you have learnt to fly I-16 you'll learn to fly anything", same with the P-39. It may have been not as forgiving as most fighters of that era, but it was more than manageable in the right hands
..yes, I have always thought a straight-pipe(not muffled by turbos like in a B-17)Wright R-1820 sounded like a Harley..more like 3 or 4 Harleys, actually...
I love the WWII gun camera footage of those crazy, brave, very young men flying even lower than these pilots full out strafing targets. Then I get the true sense of speed and how fast things were actually happening!
"Received Wisdom" is almost always wrong. Watching both of these planes, one can easily see how they would be lethal in the right hands and why the second highest scoring Allied Ace, Pokryshkin, scored the majority of his kills in the Super Cobra's baby brother.
Not really dogfighting. The airframes are really old and may have micro-cracks; you don't want to stress them. The Kingcobra has a supercharger and should be able to leave the Wildcat behind. The P-39 and it's improvement, the P-63 were lend lease give away fighters. It was said that the American pilots didn't like them but the Russians loved them. The FM-2 was the main Naval fighter in the beginning of the war. It was replaced on the Fleet Carriers by the Hellcat but found another niche as it was the only fighter that could take off and land on the smaller Escort Carriers so it ended up being used until the end of the war.
I think you could say that the Russian pilots actually 'fixed' the P39 by taking out wing mg. which were small caliber anyway and basically excess weight. Slimmed down like this the p39 had a turn rate comparable to the Spitfire V and good speed.
Well, the Kingcobra does have a two stage supercharger, but that only helps at higher altitudes. The 'cat has a single stage, which was perfectly adequate in the Pacific where combat rarely took place at high altitudes.
@@manuelvillamil9809 : I remember reading that the Bearcat was Neil Armstrong’s favorite plane...it had an in credible climb rate for a prop plane, out climbing some early jets...
@@hertzair1186 Yes! It was designed as an interceptor to counter the kamikaze threat in the Pacific. I know you will love this video... ruclips.net/video/xK2DGlvrGiQ/видео.html
..NOOO...a Merlin isn't the cure for everything...what it SHOULD have had was what it was originally planned to have..the Allison V-1710 Turbo-Compound...produced well over 2,000 H.P.,3000 HP war emergency power(brief bursts).. worked well but development was stopped because of the jet engine and the end of the war...it should have SMOKED every prop-driven fighter in production with that engine...everyone seems to think the Merlin is the answer for everything, but in reality the Allison was/is a sturdier, beefier engine..had a roller-tappet cam, also, which the Merlin did not..it just never was developed during the was as it should have been...the Allison V-3420 was another good one...essentially two V-1710's mated on a common crankcase...they were installed on a B-29(XB-39), and performance was much better than with the R-3350...again, why they didn't switch from the then-troublesome R-3350 to the V-3420 on the B-29 is beyond me??....
Both great fighters, but if I had my druthers, I'd pick a P-47 Thunderbolt. Not the greatest in climbing ability, but it packed a wallop and could take a beating, too, just like the F4F, another favorite of mine.
![Lil Uzi Vert - Chill Bae [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/D7F42F_JM3U/mqdefault.jpg)
FM-2 Wildcat 1350 HP and a taller tail...still a stubby wildcat...but the extra 150 HP helped them fly off the jeep or escort carriers short decks. However in the South Pacific, the normally aspirated allison or packard engine kept the P39 at low altitudes so it was the 1200 HP supercharged Wildcats that got the job of attacking the Japanese fighters. P-63 looked similar but was a big improvement over the P-39...but by then the Army Air corp had P-51 Mustangs and P47's in Europe and P-38 Lightnings, Hellcats, and Corsairs in the Pacific, so the majority of P-39 and P-63 went to Russia where the centerline nose cannon was useful for busting German armor. However, the Bell aircraft experience with tricycle gear and engines behind the pilot probably gave it the edge in developing the first jet...the Bell P-59
P-63 was also more reliable in cold weather..Electric...
All American combat aircraft in WWII were supercharged. The P-39 had a single stage, single speed supercharger. By the time the Wildcat was deployed it had a single stage but two speed supercharger giving it better altitude performance than the P-39. The P-63 was lengthened compared to the P-39 and had two superchargers in series. It had comparable performance to most high altitude fighters.
My father got to the So. Pacific when the P39s were being phased out for the P 38s . He said that the pilots hated the P39 but loved the P 38s. No real reason except that the P39 was to vulnerable.
The Russian using the Cobras as tank busters is a myth. They were used as fighters
@@tracylemme1375 the difference in reputation can be explained by the soviet Polikarpov I-16 fighter. Although it was relatively fast for its time and very nimble, it was a bit too short, so the centre of gravity was far off, thus I-16 was very prone to flat spinning.
Soviet fighter pilots actually said that "If you have learnt to fly I-16 you'll learn to fly anything", same with the P-39. It may have been not as forgiving as most fighters of that era, but it was more than manageable in the right hands
Like a drumkit chasing a base guitar 🥁🎸.
This was such a great show in person makes me excited to see if theyll do ww2 weekend this year
I love these ww2 airplanes and I like to see all types still in flying condition
9
The P-63 almost sounds like a P-51, and the FM2 sounds like a Harley...
..yes, I have always thought a straight-pipe(not muffled by turbos like in a B-17)Wright R-1820 sounded like a Harley..more like 3 or 4 Harleys, actually...
I love the WWII gun camera footage of those crazy, brave, very young men flying even lower than these pilots full out strafing targets. Then I get the true sense of speed and how fast things were actually happening!
"Received Wisdom" is almost always wrong. Watching both of these planes, one can easily see how they would be lethal in the right hands and why the second highest scoring Allied Ace, Pokryshkin, scored the majority of his kills in the Super Cobra's baby brother.
Legends.
I like them both. The Wildcat stayed right with the 63.
The top speed of the P-63 was 410 mph while the Wildcat top speed was 330.
Not really dogfighting. The airframes are really old and may have micro-cracks; you don't want to stress them. The Kingcobra has a supercharger and should be able to leave the Wildcat behind.
The P-39 and it's improvement, the P-63 were lend lease give away fighters. It was said that the American pilots didn't like them but the Russians loved them. The FM-2 was the main Naval fighter in the beginning of the war. It was replaced on the Fleet Carriers by the Hellcat but found another niche as it was the only fighter that could take off and land on the smaller Escort Carriers so it ended up being used until the end of the war.
I think you could say that the Russian pilots actually 'fixed' the P39 by taking out wing mg. which were small caliber anyway and basically excess weight. Slimmed down like this the p39 had a turn rate comparable to the Spitfire V and good speed.
Well, the Kingcobra does have a two stage supercharger, but that only helps at higher altitudes. The 'cat has a single stage, which was perfectly adequate in the Pacific where combat rarely took place at high altitudes.
Good stuff!
P-63A sounds almost as good as a P-38
Shuld, same engine, same supercharger
@@edmikula7187
P-38 is turbo-supercharged. P-63 was equipped with a two-stage mechanical supercharger
Sounds better than a P-38, and almost as good as a P-51...the FM2 sounds like a Harley...
the wildcat is more than holding its own against the cobra. impressive.
@Aqua Fyre I know, I know.
Imagine if the P-39 had a Packard-Merlin and the F-4M had a P&W R-2800 .....
Or if they had just the turbo like the Lightning?
@hertzair That’s what Grumman did when they designed the F8F Bearcat!!! Too. Bad it came too late to see combat in WWII...
@@manuelvillamil9809 : I remember reading that the Bearcat was Neil Armstrong’s favorite plane...it had an in credible climb rate for a prop plane, out climbing some early jets...
@@hertzair1186 Yes! It was designed as an interceptor to counter the kamikaze threat in the Pacific. I know you will love this video... ruclips.net/video/xK2DGlvrGiQ/видео.html
..NOOO...a Merlin isn't the cure for everything...what it SHOULD have had was what it was originally planned to have..the Allison V-1710 Turbo-Compound...produced well over 2,000 H.P.,3000 HP war emergency power(brief bursts).. worked well but development was stopped because of the jet engine and the end of the war...it should have SMOKED every prop-driven fighter in production with that engine...everyone seems to think the Merlin is the answer for everything, but in reality the Allison was/is a sturdier, beefier engine..had a roller-tappet cam, also, which the Merlin did not..it just never was developed during the was as it should have been...the Allison V-3420 was another good one...essentially two V-1710's mated on a common crankcase...they were installed on a B-29(XB-39), and performance was much better than with the R-3350...again, why they didn't switch from the then-troublesome R-3350 to the V-3420 on the B-29 is beyond me??....
I was there.
The war birds that won WW2!
I rather be in a Wildcat in combat... those tough little fighters held the Japanese until the Hellcat and Corsairs arrived.
Should handle better as a turn fighter, kcobra has a big punch but the 37mm is not so accurate as it could be.
Both great fighters, but if I had my druthers, I'd pick a P-47 Thunderbolt. Not the greatest in climbing ability, but it packed a wallop and could take a beating, too, just like the F4F, another favorite of mine.
It was difficult to overstress the F4F/FM2 Wildcat. The +/- G limit in the Wildcat is pretty impressive.
@@topturretgunner It was a top-notch fighter. It could withstand a tremendous amount of damage and still destroy its target.
Wind sock?
One sided video, too bad they didn't play fair.