BATTLE OF THE NIGHT FIGHTERS

[Howard Gibson]

Old issue of Airpower/Wings. I probably have it somewhere.

I am looking through my collection of Wings magazines and I do not see it. My collection is very incomplete. There is an American Wings magazine, from Signal Publishing, and a British Wing magazine from Orbis Publishing. The title fonts are quite different.

Lindell Hendrix in Requiem for a Heavyweight (Wings (Signal), February 1978), claimed that a lightly loaded Liberator could out-turn a P-38. These heavy bombers had huge wings which make for low wing loading, ideal for flat turns. Hendrix did not claim he could out-dogfight the Lightning. Manoeuvrability is not just flat turns.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

In general it's probably fair to claim that any adequate single will beat a twin unless the twin has a speed advantage. Twins are probably easier to see, easier to hit and less maneuverable. Maybe the P-61 coulda woulda. But it didn't.

Not really. First describe "adequate." A Spit Mk VIII? P-51D? FW190D? Then what type of fight are you talking about? Horizontal classic dog fight? Brief turning encounter or fighting in the vertical? Both Mosquito and P-38 were pretty maneuverable for their size, later model P-38s were able to out-climb many "adequate single" engine aircraft. Also consider altitudes for this encounter. Speed to be a top consideration but there's a lot more to the equation.

 

[MIflyer]

Except the P-61 could outturn anything this side of a Zero and had turret to deal with threats as well. It is true that it is hard to see how a Beaufighter, a BF-110, a BF-410, or a KI-45 could ever survive if the opposition is up to the P-40 level, but none of those had much defensive armament.

 

[Howard Gibson]

Not really. First describe "adequate." A Spit Mk VIII? P-51D? FW190D? Then what type of fight are you talking about? Horizontal classic dog fight? Brief turning encounter or fighting in the vertical? Both Mosquito and P-38 were pretty maneuverable for their size, later model P-38s were able to out-climb many "adequate single" engine aircraft. Also consider altitudes for this encounter. Speed to be a top consideration but there's a lot more to the equation.

I have not checked out the climb rate of P-38s. I would expect it to be pretty good, given the power loading. The problem here is that the P-38 is a single-seat fighter. Most twins were not single-seat fighters, and they had size, and add-ons that enabled them to fly their missions, and that reduced their climb rate and acceleration.

 

[wuzak]

And, and given a target-rich environment the P-61 could have been a contender. But the US never faced anyone who could generate 300,000 sorties by night, so it remains irrelevant though it may have been superior to Bf110 in every way.. Good radar though.

300,000 sorties per night?

 

[FLYBOYJ]

I have not checked out the climb rate of P-38s. I would expect it to be pretty good, given the power loading. The problem here is that the P-38 is a single-seat fighter. Most twins were not single-seat fighters, and they had size, and add-ons that enabled them to fly their missions, and that reduced their climb rate and acceleration.

Add-ons? Like what and on what twin?

 

[Howard Gibson]

Add-ons? Like what and on what twin?

4000lb cookie in your Mosquito?

 

[GrauGeist]

300,000 sorties per night?

I read that "by night" to mean "at night" or night missions.

In regards to the P-61, it may have appeared a bit late to make a difference, but it had it's successes - plus it turned out to be devestating to enemy troops when pressed into service in the ground attack role.

 

[BlackSheep]

Old issue of Airpower/Wings. I probably have it somewhere.

Didn't that pilot claim to be able to go against multiple Skyraiders and Tigercats and was always ,with the assistance of the turret, able to successfully take them on. I remember reading the article, but the details escape me. Hopefully, it isn't like the picture of a Thunderbird and the men who killed it. Everyone remembers it, but no one has a copy of it. Lol

 

[BlackSheep]

I read that "by night" to mean "at night" or night missions.

In regards to the P-61, it may have appeared a bit late to make a difference, but it had it's successes - plus it turned out to be devestating to enemy troops when pressed into service in the ground attack role.

When the weather began to lift at the end of the Battle of the Bulge, P-61s were some of the first out there for the troops.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

4000lb cookie in your Mosquito?

As you mentioned single seat twin. P-38 or Whirlwind.

I think a Mosquito with a 4,000 pound bomb is not going to operate in an air to air combat role.

 

[Howard Gibson]

As you mentioned single seat twin. P-38 or Whirlwind.

I think a Mosquito with a 4,000 pound bomb is not going to operate in an air to air combat role.

The Mosquito had a bomb bay, and room for a second crew member who is able to move around inside the aircraft. There is something in the bomb bay for at least half the mission. Even the pure fighter versions had the second crewman and substantial more frontal area than the Lightning or Whirlwind.

The Mosquito actually is pretty extreme. A Vickers Wellington with Hercules engines has about the same power as a Mosquito or Lightning. There are defensive guns fore and aft, a bomb bay, and a crew of five. The Wellington has larger wings to manage the extra weight. An empty Wellington may well be able to beat single engined fighters in a flat turn.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

The Mosquito had a bomb bay, and room for a second crew member who is able to move around inside the aircraft. There is something in the bomb bay for at least half the mission. Even the pure fighter versions had the second crewman and substantial more frontal area than the Lightning or Whirlwind.

The Mosquito actually is pretty extreme. A Vickers Wellington with Hercules engines has about the same power as a Mosquito or Lightning. There are defensive guns fore and aft, a bomb bay, and a crew of five. The Wellington has larger wings to manage the extra weight. An empty Wellington may well be able to beat single engined fighters in a flat turn.

OK - then you're proving my point. The original comment:

it's probably fair to claim that any adequate single will beat a twin unless the twin has a speed advantage.

 

[Howard Gibson]

FLYBOY J,

I am not so sure. The Whirlwind, Lightning, de Havilland Hornet and possibly the Grumman F7F were twin engined, and designed as single seat fighters. They will have higher moments of polar inertia, so they will not roll as fast. Otherwise, they can turn, be fast, and have high rates of climb and accelration.
My point is that if the aircraft is not a pure dogfighter, there will be all sorts of stuff attached to it that, among other things, does not enhance dogfighting. Think of the Fairey Fulmar and Firefly.

 

[wuzak]

The Mosquito had a bomb bay, and room for a second crew member who is able to move around inside the aircraft.

I am confused, I though we were talking fighters/night fighters?

Mosquito fighters had 4 x 20mm cannon in the lower fuselage, protruding into the forward section of the bomb bay. So no 4,000lb "cookie" for your F, FB, NF Mosquito.

In Bomber and Photo Reconnaissance Mosquioes the navigator/radio operator/bomb aimer could move into the nose.

In the FB.VI and F.II/ NF.II the nose was full of 0.303" machine guns and their ammo. In most NF versions the nose was full of radar equipment. The naigator/radar operator was not moving around very much.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

FLYBOY J,

I am not so sure. The Whirlwind, Lightning, de Havilland Hornet and possibly the Grumman F7F were twin engined, and designed as single seat fighters. They will have higher moments of polar inertia, so they will not roll as fast. Otherwise, they can turn, be fast, and have high rates of climb and accelration.

P-38 had boosted controls and one of the best roll rates of all WW2 fighters. Everything else you mention is part of the equation

My point is that if the aircraft is not a pure dogfighter, there will be all sorts of stuff attached to it that, among other things, does not enhance dogfighting. Think of the Fairey Fulmar and Firefly.

OK - the P-38 did not have "all sorts of stuff attached to it" unless you want to count the pylons for the drop tanks. But then again the best pilots who flew the P-38 didn't really dogfight, at least in the SWP

 

[Howard Gibson]

I am confused, I though we were talking fighters/night fighters?

We were. We started comparing the performance of large twin engined aircraft versus other aircraft. The P-61 was a relatively big aeroplane, with three crew and a top turret. A single seat fighter would have been all over it in a dogfight.

Note however that some large aircraft, even four engined, probably could equal the level turns of some WWII fighters.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

We were. We started comparing the performance of large twin engined aircraft versus other aircraft. The P-61 was a relatively big aeroplane, with three crew and a top turret. A single seat fighter would have been all over it in a dogfight.

Providing you include pilot skill in the equation.

In the bigger picture I never bought the propaganda about the the P-61 out-turning a Zero

 

[GrauGeist]

Note however that some large aircraft, even four engined, probably could equal the level turns of some WWII fighters.

I'd be really interested to know what four engined bombers could perform that feat.

 

[Snautzer01]

How was the usaaf nightfighters organised and what was the stategie? Ground Radar guided to target? I can imgine that for intercepting raiders you need speed above all. Or did the usaaf do what raf did. Lurk around the basis and get them there?

Howcwas communication ?

eBay: Radar systems: Würzburg, Allied etc.

:thumbright:

ww2aircraft.net