[GuerraCivil]

The airwar over South Pacific and German-Soviet front was different. Airacobra was quite decent plane in low and medium altitudes, which were the most common battleground over German-Soviet front whereas over West Europe and Pacific the combat took place at higher altitudes unsuitables for Airacobra. Soviets also removed wing guns from Airacobras making them lighter and more nimble than the planes used by US pilots at Pacific. The main technical problem was the Soviet fuel quality which was unfriendly to Allison engine.

Not all US pilots in South Pacific considered P-39 terrible and many pilots said probably more bad words of the type than it actually deserved. Although personal opinions of different pilots are subjective, Charles Yeager considered the that at low and medium altitudes Airacobra was as good as the pilot who flew it. The main technical problem was the poor performance at high altitudes. Boyd D. Wagner stated that Airacobra was excellent interceptor up to 5400 meters and that P-39 was better than Kittyhawk/Warhawk (opinion shared by Soviet pilots who flew both P-39 and P-40). Charles King stated that skilled Airacobra pilots could hold their own against IJN and IJA pilots and were able to achieve about 1:1 score against them. The problem was that Airacobra was not good enough for clear air and technical superiority like Hellcat, Corsair or P-38 could do vs. Zero/Oscar.

When it comes to IJN/IJA pilots, I´m aware of the dubious nature of Caidin book Samurai! Sakaida book Winged Samurai has been more recommended as more accurate, but it has been out of print long time. However the claim in Samurai! that IJN pilots were better than IJA pilots due to better training might be true to some extent but I do not believe that the difference was big. However Zero was better plane than Oscar (and Nate). Modified land-based version of Zero would have been better standard equipment for IJA fighter units than Oscar.

One could speculate how well AVG with its Tomahawks would have done against Zeros flown by some top IJN unit like Tainan Kokutai. Anyway IJA did not lost as many planes to AVG as AVG pilots claimed - the overclaim ratio of AVG may have been about 3:1 - quite normal overclaim ratio in WW2 - based on good faith and optimistic interpretation of combat results. Japanese (both IJA and IJN) overclaimed often much more. This has been a problem recognized by Japanese airwar historians and they have in many cases dropped the number of confirmed personal and unit air victories to much lower level than the official wartime figures.

At the beginning of Pacific War IJA pilots were pretty well trained and their average skill level probably near of IJN pilots. Sakai (?) claim that IJNAF pilots were better (?) than IJAAF may have something to do with the traditional controversy and competition between Navy and Army - making Navy guys telling that they are better than Army guys.

During the course of war IJA had same problems as IJN - most of skilled pilots had to flew up to the point when they were KIA, MIA or WIA. And as there was not enough trained decent reserve, the average skill level of IJA dropped gradually.