Overall they were a substandard aircraft and their overall poor pilot visibility was a big reason US pilots didn’t like them as fighters. The instrument panel was high, effecting forward view and the canopy design was impeded by the air intake configured immediately behind the cockpit which also effected rearward view should the pilot need to get eyes-on at his 6 O’Clock. Although “bubble” in its general silhouette, the canopy needed a pretty comprehensive support frame structure and pilot ingress/egress was done by doors not far removed from a conventional car door. All this reduced clear visibility. The engine was also behind the pilot and this location along with the resulting center of gravity shift rearward required the wings to be a bit more forward than typical low wing single seaters of the day. The 39 was very underpowered and near useless at higher altitudes against planes like the Zero or the BF-109. The 63 improved upon performance but the physical design limitations were never addressed.
Russians took what they could get and most US combat aircraft worth a damn were banned from export to the USSR. The 39 was an early war fighter and much more capable fighters were being fielded soon after Pearl Harbor that quickly eclipsed the P-39. So the Russians got the unwanted 39s and eventually the 63 in high numbers, in addition to the P-40 and some Spitfires. I’m sure they made the most of their 39’s and 63’s but they were simply inferior fighters. They could contend with early war BF-109’s but later variants and FW-190 flew circles around them. Russian aircraft in general were nothing to boast about comparatively back then. Fortunately for them the air war over Russia was generally fought at lower altitudes so their Bells were in their operational realm. I’d imagine successful Russian squadrons development very sophisticated tactics as well.
The Luftwaffe reeked havoc on the Soviet Air Force for most of the war and this is the reason German aces racked up the highest kill counts of all WW2 combatants. They pretty much all tallied these massive scores solely in Russia. Once they were reassigned to the west, the odds shifted against them due to the abundance of both superior Allied fighter aircraft and higher numbers of well trained pilots. Not to say German fighter pilots were comparatively sub par on average, they were in fact some of the most outstanding pilots of their day, but the western Allies, especially the US, had a better training program in place strategically. The US fielded a larger number of thoroughly trained pilots instructed by our most successful combat pilots who were rotated home after a year or so in action for a tour as instructors. The Axis, and the Russians, didn’t really do this. They were reluctant to take their “top guns” away from the front. Toward the war’s end we were basically just killing off their good pilots to the point where they had more aircraft than crews, which by the Autumn of ‘44 wasn’t saying much..
Anyhoo, I digress. You guys got me all fired up on military aviation. Like I said, I’m going to bet this accident was significantly caused by pilot error on the part of the 63 for the reasons I stated. He simply didn’t see the bomber and his altitude basically put him right on top of the 17. To me, it seemed like he came in way too fast too but that’s just my opinion. The 17 was flying with a smaller crew, obviously without gunners who back in the day also doubled as observers that would inform the cockpit of what’s going on outside. I wonder if those extra eyes could’ve made that split second difference? I discussed all this with a retired Strike Eagle pilot I know and he agrees this is probable error on the part of the Bell.
I’m by no stretch a sh*t-hot pilot but I do have a few hundred hours single piston engine(haven’t flown in years). I also worked in aircrash recovery for some years. I can say with a degree of certainty that FAA and NTSB accident inspectors only really care when incidents are high profile like this one. When it’s a simple crash out in the middle of nowhere, even one involving a death or two, they don’t give a toss. They show up, check a few boxes, and are back at their hotel in time for happy hour. I’ve even seen them leave body parts out on site and chuckle about it. Inversely when you have a crash like this one in TX, they become overly bureaucratic tyrants spewing reels and reels of maddening red tape. Even when they make their ruling there could still be things remaining to raise suspicion.
A pilot medical emergency however unlikely is a consideration in these incidents. As grisly as it sounds, of crew remains, intact hearts and brains are very instrumental in determining this. Recovering and carefully preserving this anatomy would be a big focus of my team on a crash site. Unfortunately in cataclysmic situations such as this these organs are often obliterated. Personally, I do not think the 63 pilot blacked out from excessive G’s.
