Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
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.Old issue of Airpower/Wings. I probably have it somewhere.
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.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.
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.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.
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.
Add-ons? Like what and on what twin?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.
4000lb cookie in your Mosquito?Add-ons? Like what and on what twin?
I read that "by night" to mean "at night" or night missions.300,000 sorties per night?
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. LolOld issue of Airpower/Wings. I probably have it somewhere.
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.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.
As you mentioned single seat twin. P-38 or Whirlwind.4000lb cookie in your Mosquito?
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.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.
OK - then you're proving my point. The original comment: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.
it's probably fair to claim that any adequate single will beat a twin unless the twin has a speed advantage.
The Mosquito had a bomb bay, and room for a second crew member who is able to move around inside the aircraft.
P-38 had boosted controls and one of the best roll rates of all WW2 fighters. Everything else you mention is part of the equationFLYBOY 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.
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 SWPMy 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.
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.I am confused, I though we were talking fighters/night fighters?
Providing you include pilot skill in the equation.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.
I'd be really interested to know what four engined bombers could perform that feat.Note however that some large aircraft, even four engined, probably could equal the level turns of some WWII fighters.