Alternatives to the historical P-38 Lightning? (1 Viewer)

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

There was nothing "complex" about the Whirlwind (or any other high performance twin) that adequate training couldn't take care of, just two of everything.

Part of the problem with the Whirlwind was that it was late. Its' designer Petter over-promised in order to win the contract and under delivered in execution and time. Westland was at the time of the order in 1937 a middle size manufacturer of staid biplanes of very conventional construction, and the Lysander, which wasn't much different structure-wise, and its overly ambitious and prickly designer conceived the Whirlwind, which for its time was a thoroughly modern design incorporating what Petter believed were advanced features. Westland's workforce needed to learn new skills in mass producing all-metal stressed skin aircraft, which the company had not production-line manufactured before, so the thing was late and deliveries were slow since it took the company time to build it. That was even before it didn't live up to expectations.
 
Agree to a point - it was probably accepted to initially save weight (and $). As combat experience was gained it became evident this was a major mistake.

I had thought of asking in that post what was the weight of one generator, and would skipping one provide so much better performance? It seems to me like the customer was wrong on that one, but what do I know? It strikes me as a serious oversight.
 
I had thought of asking in that post what was the weight of one generator, and would skipping one provide so much better performance? It seems to me like the customer was wrong on that one, but what do I know? It strikes me as a serious oversight.
Ya know, it's amazing the thought process when decisions like this are made. I would think the generator would weigh about 40 pounds and cost about $150.00 in 1941 dollars. When you're trying to get the maximum amount of performance out of an aircraft, you'll have folks looking at doing anything to reduce weight. 40 pounds can be huge, especially when developing a fighter. Multiply that $150 generator cost by say 1000 units and you're looking at $150,000 in 1941 dollars which equates to $2.7 million in today's dollars. During a time when you're trying to build a high performance aircraft almost by committee and having to deal with a budget office that is still watching depression era dollars, I could see how this decision could be made. It would take operational experience as well as open purse strings to rectify this.
 
Now, talking about P-38 alternatives, I'm surprised this hasn't been brought up to begin with.

1644800460638.png
 
The Whirlwind was not a high altitude performer, was designed as a fighter bomber and was not "over powered" like the P-38. From what I understand the pilots who flew it liked it. There was nothing "complex" about the Whirlwind (or any other high performance twin) that adequate training couldn't take care of, just two of everything.
It was not designed as a fighter bomber. The bomb racks didn't show up until around a year (or more? spring/summer of 1942?)) after the first planes were introduced to squadron service.
It was more an instance of they had two squadrons of planes they didn't know quite what do with and there weren't enough Hurricane IIs to perform fighter bomber duties over the channel and they didn't have enough high performance twin engine bombers either (trying to lure the Luftwaffe up to fight).
Considering the plane had two 885 hp engines on a plane with a smaller wing than a Hurricane one does wonder where the cross-over to "over-powered" occurred. ;)

Yes the intake duct was a problem and the exhaust system helped kill a lot of the exhaust thrust and there is one theory about the propeller blades not working well at the higher altitudes so there were several strikes against it for even medium altitude work, but plane was never designed as a fighter bomber any more than the Spitfire was designed as a fighter bomber in 1936-1940.
 
It was not designed as a fighter bomber. The bomb racks didn't show up until around a year (or more? spring/summer of 1942?)) after the first planes were introduced to squadron service.
It was more an instance of they had two squadrons of planes they didn't know quite what do with and there weren't enough Hurricane IIs to perform fighter bomber duties over the channel and they didn't have enough high performance twin engine bombers either (trying to lure the Luftwaffe up to fight).
I stand corrected - looked up specification F.5/34

Considering the plane had two 885 hp engines on a plane with a smaller wing than a Hurricane one does wonder where the cross-over to "over-powered" occurred. ;)
Engine out during take-off, when you have to power back on "the good engine" before you shut down and feather "the bad engine". ;)
 
I would note that the idea of trying to use Wright R-2600 engines in a high altitude fighter might have looked good in theory but in practice it might have meant NO P-38 in combat service.
The R-2600 engines used in the Boeing 314 Flying Boats ran out of oomph pretty quickly with altitude.
Of the 100 or so A-20s ordered with turbo charged R-2600 engines only one was completed with them and the plane was used as a test bed with numerous changes to the nacelles and air flow to try to solve the over heating problem.

a7gmsh5xztv51.jpg

One picture shows a number of holes cut into the nacelle just forward of the wing to try to improve airflow.
Lets also remember that the R-2600 was a 14 cylinder radial and was actually just bit larger than than a P & W R-2800.

The XP-38 was rather different than the later planes and was a pretty slick airplane even compared to the YP-38 through the P-38G.
1644803384517.jpeg

Props look like a different reduction gear set up?
Fairings over the turbos? radiators were inside the tail booms, the radiator inlets were visible scoops but the radiator outlets were shutters/doors in the top of the boom.

Trying to stick an R-2600 into such a high performance fighter was going to be a real challenge.

One WW II started ( and I am talking about the US selling aircraft to the French and British and Roosevelt calling for a 50,000 plane air force in 1940) ) the Government got into the act and started rationing machine tools and building supplies let alone alloys for airframe construction.
If Lockheed wanted 5,000 tons of I Beams and 10,000 tons of concrete to build a new plant they needed permission from the US government.

Allison had contracts for thousands of engines and had an A1A priority rating and could not purchase all the machine tools it wanted.
 
The XP-38 was rather different than the later planes and was a pretty slick airplane even compared to the YP-38 through the P-38G.
View attachment 657904
Props look like a different reduction gear set up?
Fairings over the turbos? radiators were inside the tail booms, the radiator inlets were visible scoops but the radiator outlets were shutters/doors in the top of the boom.

Trying to stick an R-2600 into such a high performance fighter was going to be a real challenge.
The XP-38 used V-1720-C engine which have an internal gear for the prop reduction (and 10" bearing). (Allison D series is for pusher, E is for remote reduction, i.e. P-39, F series change the prop reduction i.e. similar to Merlin, Griffon, DB 600/601/603/601, 12Y, M-100/103/105) I'll have to check if G series are all 2 stage supercharger.

R-2600 with turbocharger by Republic could look very much like a P-47.

Whirlwind had a great idea with hydraulic throttles - much easier to route a tube from throttle lever to engine. Unfortunately, the oil became very thick when cold. So, even when the lever was pulled back, the message didn't get to the carb and engine failed from running too long at full/high power.
 
Whirlwind had a great idea with hydraulic throttles - much easier to route a tube from throttle lever to engine. Unfortunately, the oil became very thick when cold. So, even when the lever was pulled back, the message didn't get to the carb and engine failed from running too long at full/high power.
Actually I believe this was sought of an "off the shelf" set up made by Extractor Controls. It was a horrible system to use in a fighter where near instantaneous throttle inputs are a necessity and the fact that colder temperatures effected the system makes this even more preposterous. I believe the Sunderland and the Sterling used this set up.
 
A trainer version (and I'm not talking about the "Castrated P-38s) would have helped provided the AAC would have recognized they needed specialized training for twin engine aircraft, especially the "overpowered" P-38

I'd have to say that it is borderline criminal not having a dedicated training program for the Lightning, as well as an appropriate 2-engine trainer to use as an intermediate step for pilots between single-engine fighters and the P-38. Also, a two-seat trainer was needed. I've read of shorter pilots hermit crabbing themselves on the back shoulders of a P-38 newbie. I can only imagine the back pains after flying for an hour like that.

Lastly, does anyone have experience flying both airplanes with yokes and others with sticks? What would you expect from a P-38 equipped with a stick?
 
Actually I believe this was sought of an "off the shelf" set up made by Extractor Controls. It was a horrible system to use in a fighter where near instantaneous throttle inputs are a necessity and the fact that colder temperatures effected the system makes this even more preposterous. I believe the Sunderland and the Sterling used this set up.
Apparently it also leaked?
After a period of time at one throttle setting it was common to cycle the the throttles through the range ( or at least push through to full throttle?) to get any air bubbles out of the system.
 
It was not designed as a fighter bomber. The bomb racks didn't show up until around a year (or more? spring/summer of 1942?)) after the first planes were introduced to squadron service.
It was more an instance of they had two squadrons of planes they didn't know quite what do with and there weren't enough Hurricane IIs to perform fighter bomber duties over the channel and they didn't have enough high performance twin engine bombers either (trying to lure the Luftwaffe up to fight).
Considering the plane had two 885 hp engines on a plane with a smaller wing than a Hurricane one does wonder where the cross-over to "over-powered" occurred. ;)

Yes the intake duct was a problem and the exhaust system helped kill a lot of the exhaust thrust and there is one theory about the propeller blades not working well at the higher altitudes so there were several strikes against it for even medium altitude work, but plane was never designed as a fighter bomber any more than the Spitfire was designed as a fighter bomber in 1936-1940.
Article here about the Whirlwind, the delays to it (not all down to Westland) and the propellor issue that robbed it of high altitude performance.

And one of the links has some of the maths behind the propellor issue
 
I would note that the idea of trying to use Wright R-2600 engines in a high altitude fighter might have looked good in theory but in practice it might have meant NO P-38 in combat service.
The R-2600 engines used in the Boeing 314 Flying Boats ran out of oomph pretty quickly with altitude.
Of the 100 or so A-20s ordered with turbo charged R-2600 engines only one was completed with them and the plane was used as a test bed with numerous changes to the nacelles and air flow to try to solve the over heating problem.

View attachment 657905
One picture shows a number of holes cut into the nacelle just forward of the wing to try to improve airflow.
Lets also remember that the R-2600 was a 14 cylinder radial and was actually just bit larger than than a P & W R-2800.

The XP-38 was rather different than the later planes and was a pretty slick airplane even compared to the YP-38 through the P-38G.
View attachment 657904
Props look like a different reduction gear set up?
Fairings over the turbos? radiators were inside the tail booms, the radiator inlets were visible scoops but the radiator outlets were shutters/doors in the top of the boom.

Trying to stick an R-2600 into such a high performance fighter was going to be a real challenge.

One WW II started ( and I am talking about the US selling aircraft to the French and British and Roosevelt calling for a 50,000 plane air force in 1940) ) the Government got into the act and started rationing machine tools and building supplies let alone alloys for airframe construction.
If Lockheed wanted 5,000 tons of I Beams and 10,000 tons of concrete to build a new plant they needed permission from the US government.

Allison had contracts for thousands of engines and had an A1A priority rating and could not purchase all the machine tools it wanted.

If the R-2600 is used, it will be just one engine per aiframe. A too temepramental R-2600 (if it happens here) will probably have Lockheed try and install R-2800 in the nose. D@mn...
 
I'd have to say that it is borderline criminal not having a dedicated training program for the Lightning, as well as an appropriate 2-engine trainer to use as an intermediate step for pilots between single-engine fighters and the P-38. Also, a two-seat trainer was needed. I've read of shorter pilots hermit crabbing themselves on the back shoulders of a P-38 newbie. I can only imagine the back pains after flying for an hour like that.
We can call it criminal but I'd chalk it up more with inexperience-ignorance. This was the first high performance twin fighter to be used by the AAC and most single engine drivers didn't know or understand the challenges in flying a high performance twin, especially in emergency situations. Eventually they got it after some smoking holes in the ground.
Lastly, does anyone have experience flying both airplanes with yokes and others with sticks? What would you expect from a P-38 equipped with a stick?
I have - better feel for the aircraft especially on the longitudinal axis
 
The XP-50/XF5F was a great idea, far better than the YFM-1, to be honest.

It might be interesting to know that Vultee's response to the X-608 request, the P-1015, also went through several iterations similar to the P-38's concept process.

Also, going be memory (scary, I know), the Curtiss CW-25 was born from X-608, becoming the AT-9 after Lockheed's submission won.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back