Path: news.nzbot.com!not-for-mail
From: Stormin' Norman <norman@schwarzkopf.invalid>
Newsgroups: alt.binaries.pictures.aviation
Subject: Re: Bell P-63 Kingcobra pics [1/9] - 37mm cannon.png (1/7)
Message-ID: <6t9add5klo4qvvt2l7pq2bpr6okdosoo1h@4ax.com>
References: <pb261r01s71@drn.newsguy.com> <64q9dd98hg6phk9u3h56v7pvbj4o257csh@4ax.com> <pb3250050k@drn.newsguy.com>
User-Agent: ForteAgent/8.00.32.1272
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 52
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Easynews - www.easynews.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 22:46:52 +0000
X-Received-Bytes: 3393
X-Received-Body-CRC: 3367315005
Xref: news.nzbot.com alt.binaries.pictures.aviation:7394
On 16 Apr 2018 13:47:28 -0700, Miloch <Miloch_member@newsguy.com>
wrote:
>In article <64q9dd98hg6phk9u3h56v7pvbj4o257csh@4ax.com>, Stormin' Norman says...
>>
>>On 16 Apr 2018 05:47:55 -0700, Miloch <Miloch_member@newsguy.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>I seem to remember the Russians used the P-39 and P-63 with tremendous
>>effectiveness as an anti-armor, ground attack aircraft. Anyone else
>>recall this?
>>
>>
>
>It was a myth due to mistranslation as per
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_P-63_Kingcobra
>
>"In general, official Soviet histories played down the role of Lend-Lease
>supplied aircraft in favor of local designs, but it is known that the P-63 was a
>successful fighter aircraft in Soviet service. A common Western misconception is
>that the Bell fighters were used as ground attack aircraft.
>
>"One of the enduring myths regarding the P-39/P-63 in Soviet use is that because
>of its armament, in particular the 37mm nose cannon, it excelled as a
>ground-attack aircraft, even a 'tank buster'. In translating and preparing this
>manuscript for publication, I have had the opportunity to peruse several
>Russian-language sources. Mentions of the employment of this aircraft in the
>ground-attack role are so rare in these sources as to be exceptional ...
>
>"The 'tank buster' myth has its roots in the misunderstanding of the general
>wartime role of the Red Air Force and in the imprecise translation of specific
>Russian-Language terms that describe this role. The specific Russian-Language
>term most often used to describe the mission and role of the Airacobra-equipped
>Red Air Force fighter units, in this manuscript and other Russian-language
>sources , is prikrytiye sukhoputnykh voysk [coverage of ground forces]...
>Frequent misunderstanding in this country as to the combat role of the P-39 in
>Soviet use is based in part on imprecise translation of the term prikrytiye
>sukhoputnykh voysk to 'ground support'. The latter term as it is understood by
>many Western military historians and readers, suggests the attacking of ground
>targets in support of ground troops, also called 'close air support'. Did a
>Soviet Airacobra pilot ever strafe a German tank? Undoubtedly. But this was
>never a primary mission or strong suit for this aircraft.
>
Extremely interesting, thanks for posting that information!
--
The problem is Donald Trump. The solution is impeachment or, the otherwise legal
removal, from office, of the greatest threat to peace the world has ever known.
|
|
')){kind=link}