People tend to have rather opposing opinions about the P-38. Ones, mostly located at the one side of the pond, adore it, while other, mostly at the other side, think of it as fighter that was either not needed, and/or as a constant source of trouble for the pilots ground crews.
So why not propose something better, or at least something more easily 'producible': a heavy fighter that USA was capable to build from 1940/41 on, using two, historically available, engines, aerodynamics of the era, while having historically available armament. As any decent heavy fighter, the combination of performance (both speed and climb), punch and range need to eclipse any single engined fighter of the era. Your fighter will be later tasked to do the reconnaissance, bombing, maybe even some night fighting. For the sake of discussion, we can also contemplate that Lockheed still builds the P-38s, your fighter being needed as the insurance, in case the P-38 encounters issues that would hamper/delay it's combat deployment use.
If the debate can stay away from the P-38 vs. P-51 match, that would be great; we have another thread covering that.
So why not propose something better, or at least something more easily 'producible': a heavy fighter that USA was capable to build from 1940/41 on, using two, historically available, engines, aerodynamics of the era, while having historically available armament. As any decent heavy fighter, the combination of performance (both speed and climb), punch and range need to eclipse any single engined fighter of the era. Your fighter will be later tasked to do the reconnaissance, bombing, maybe even some night fighting. For the sake of discussion, we can also contemplate that Lockheed still builds the P-38s, your fighter being needed as the insurance, in case the P-38 encounters issues that would hamper/delay it's combat deployment use.
If the debate can stay away from the P-38 vs. P-51 match, that would be great; we have another thread covering that.