Best Aircraft in Many Different Roles Part II

Discussion in 'Aviation' started by cheddar cheese, Jan 25, 2005.

  1. cheddar cheese

    cheddar cheese Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    20,349
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    Student
    Location:
    WSM, England
    Continued from old topic. Rest of thread in Archive forum.
     
  2. mosquitoman

    mosquitoman Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2005
    Messages:
    2,990
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Occupation:
    student
    Location:
    Saffron Walden/Sheffield
    Home Page:
    For me it has to be the deHavilland Mosquito, name a job it couldn't do
    (BTW, I'm a bit biased as it's my favourite plane)
     
  3. the lancaster kicks ass

    the lancaster kicks ass Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2003
    Messages:
    19,980
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    38
    :lol:

    don't worry i totally agree with you but many here will not...............
     
  4. cheddar cheese

    cheddar cheese Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    20,349
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    Student
    Location:
    WSM, England
    I am one of those many. P-38 for me :D

    Name a job it couldnt do? Ok, Any single mark couldnt do the same wide variety of jobs that any single P-38 could do. Also, I havent seen anything where a squadron was equipped with Mossie's for pure day fighting.
     
  5. mosquitoman

    mosquitoman Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2005
    Messages:
    2,990
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Occupation:
    student
    Location:
    Saffron Walden/Sheffield
    Home Page:
    Could a P-38 make 2 trips to Berlin in one night with a cookie?
    Could a P-38 have carried the variety of guns, bombs and rockets that a Mossie could?
     
  6. cheddar cheese

    cheddar cheese Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    20,349
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    Student
    Location:
    WSM, England
    Because the P-38 was a fighter, first and foremost, carrying bombs wasnt its primary task. Therefore it is remarkable that it could carry a 5,200lb load. In theory the P-38 could carry a cookie, but as the P-38 was not widely used for bombing the the ETO it would never have been adapted to do this.
    And hell, the P-38 could carry a large range of ordinance. Normally it carried 10 or 12 rockets, but models were built with 14 rockets. Bombwise it could carry a large range of bombs summing up to 5,200lbs. The normal payload for a P-38 was 4000lbs, but several instances where they carried 5,200lbs on missions were recorded. Sketches were drawn up of a Lightning with a 75mm cannon housed within the gondola, with the cockpit moved forward. (I didnt know about this until Lightning Guy informed me, theres pictures of this in the Pictures forum.)
     
  7. evangilder

    evangilder "Shooter"
    Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2004
    Messages:
    19,419
    Likes Received:
    137
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Occupation:
    Network Engineer/Photographer
    Location:
    Moorpark, CA
    Home Page:
    I know something the Mossie could do that the P-38 couldn't...get termites! ;)
     
  8. JCS

    JCS Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2004
    Messages:
    672
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Occupation:
    United States Marine
    Location:
    Nicholson, PA
    Any other time I would say the Ju-88, but the other day I developed a sudden liking for the Mosquito...
     
  9. wmaxt

    wmaxt Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2004
    Messages:
    1,208
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Occupation:
    Engineer/Retired
    Location:
    Boise, Idaho
    LG also put up pictures showing alternate bomb hanging layout.

    Two other things the P-38 was checked out for:

    1. Smoke laying
    2. Towing Gliders - the attempt to tow 2 gliders was not successful and it was determined the P-38 was to valuable as a fighter anyway so it wasn't persued.
     
  10. Udet

    Udet Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2004
    Messages:
    1,258
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I am not sure if the approach you are giving to the topic is the most adequate.

    Name a job the mosquito couldn´t do?
    If the answer to this would be "NONE", it wouldn´t be telling us the whole picture.

    What are you referring to?
    The capability of the plane to be fitted with various kinds of weaponry?
    The performance? (speed, climbing, ceiling, etc.)

    Perhaps it does not matter that much how many things a given aircraft was capable of doing but rather the performance level achieved on the several tasks the machine would carry out.

    Theoretically, all planes have diving capability, in one level or another. Still, how many planes could dive like the Stuka the dive angle reaching nearly 90 degrees?

    Frame design also plays its role; if most (or all?) fighters have the capability to see service in many roles, allowance of the frame for fitting it with new gear and equipment is important.

    In theory, perhaps most fighters could be fitted with several bombload configurations, rockets, machine guns, cannons, reconaissance cameras; they could perform as fighters, fighter-bombers, ground attack planes and/or reconaissance, but what of the performance on every task?

    For example, the Me 410 could unleash an authentic hurricane of fire from the nose, being capable of more than pulverizing anything that could get in its sight; however, and while being superior to the Bf110, it came too late and was not very good against the allied fighters of 1944.

    I agree the P-38 was a very capable machine, but against the Fw190s and Bf109s the model took a hell of a pounding. It was in the Pacific where the Lightning saw its more memorable episodes.

    What about the Ju88? Excellent both as medium bomber and (fearsome) nightfighter; an extremely versatile model
     
  11. Lightning Guy

    Lightning Guy Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2004
    Messages:
    2,511
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    The Mossie wasn't a dayfigther and if you consider the P-38 out-matched against 109s and 190s (which it wasn't) the Mossie was certainly worse off. A careful study of the history of the P-38 in Europe reveals that the P-38 gave considerably better than in took against the 190 and 109. The trouble in producing an exact kill ration is that the cause of many P-38 losses were never determined. Still, it probably shot down 2-3 109s and 190s for each P-38 lost in air-combat. Certainly not a bad record considering poor training, poor tactics, and poor British fuels. The Mossie certainly wouldn't have faired any better.

    My vote goes to the P-38, but I decided to put together a list of possible "contenders."

    US: P-38 Lightning
    British: Mosquito
    German: Ju-88
    Japanese: P1Y Ginga "Frances"

    I'm not sure if any of the other countries had anything to compare with these. Any suggestions to this list?
     
  12. MikeMan

    MikeMan Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2005
    Messages:
    34
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    I have to go with the DH.98 here as well.

    Without a doubt in my opinion the best aircraft of WW2.
     
  13. plan_D

    plan_D Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2004
    Messages:
    11,985
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    CC, the single airframe of a Mosquito could perform the task of another. The British marking system creates a new mark every time a new rivet has been put in place. It's always the same airframe, and the P-38 was DRAWN up to be fitted with a 75mm but never was while the Mosquito 'Tse-Tse' was fitted with a 57mm (6 pdr) Moslin cannon. Plus, the Mosquito was a bomber first and foremost. The P-38 was a fighter first and foremost.

    Add the Fw-190 into that list, LG. Since the Fw-190 did a hell of a lot of different jobs.
     
  14. Lightning Guy

    Lightning Guy Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2004
    Messages:
    2,511
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Was the Fw-190 more versatile that the Ju-88?

    The only version of the Mossie that was truly multi-role was the FB.VI. Try dogfighting in a B.IV.
     
  15. the lancaster kicks ass

    the lancaster kicks ass Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2003
    Messages:
    19,980
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    38
    that really bugs me when you say

    because in just the same way the mossie was a bomber first and formost, and how many bombers out there could become the allies' best night fighter??

    ok due to balance and size of the bomb it wouldn't have been able to have been carried under the wings, and this only leaves the fusilage. I severly doubt it would be put under the fusilage
    1) ground clearance
    2) the HUGE air resistance from the bomb
    3) structural strength (i'll put that down as a maybe because i don't down about the P-38's construction and the rack would have to be small putting allot of strain on the fusilage)
    4) The cookie's a big bomb, how would the nose weel retract??

    you say

    however PD is right when he says
    as pretty much every mossie was the same, just with a different role or armourment, and there were many sub-varients of the P-38...............

    i know i've posted this before but here we go, this is wxmaxt's list of the P-38's roles

    and this is a list of some of the roles the mossie opperated in, let alone the mods..........

    Air Ambulance
    Day fighter
    Day fighter-bomber
    Day intruder
    Day bomber (which includes dive bombing, skip bombing and level bombing)
    Fighter reconnaissance
    Photo Recon
    Interceptor
    Long range escort
    Tank buster
    Night fighter
    Night intruder
    Night bomber
    Night fighter-bomber
    Target marker
    Target tug
    Anti-shipping
    Anti-Tirpitzing (which is different to anti-shipping)
    Convoy protection
    Dual seat/control trainer
    Mine layer
    Anti-submarine patrol
    High altitude bomber
    High altitude fighter
    High altitude photo recon
    Naval target tug
    Torpedo fighter
    Carrier born torpedo fighter
    Carrier born recon fighter
    Carrier born strike fighter
    High speed mail plane
    Long range civil transport with provision for sleeping
    Radio jamming and countermeasures
     
  16. mosquitoman

    mosquitoman Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2005
    Messages:
    2,990
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Occupation:
    student
    Location:
    Saffron Walden/Sheffield
    Home Page:
    Compromise, the Mosquito was a bomber trying to be a fighter and the P-38 was a fighter trying to be a bomber
     
  17. Lightning Guy

    Lightning Guy Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2004
    Messages:
    2,511
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Well, Lanc has done a lot of duplicating on his list.
    For example he lists day fighter and high altitude fighter. Certainly the P-38 was both of these as well.
    I fail to see the true distinction between a day/night fighter-bomber and a day/night intruder.
    Nor is there any true distinction between a PR plane and a high altitude PR plane.

    Most of the items on his Mossies list the P-38 did do. But he is right that the P-38 couldn't carry the cookie. But the a Mossie couldn't carry two torps.
     
  18. cheddar cheese

    cheddar cheese Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    20,349
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    Student
    Location:
    WSM, England
    lanc, the term bomber is far broader than fighter. The Mossie was a light bomber, so it isnt really all that amazing that it acted well as a night fighter. Remember, the Ju-88 started off in a similar manner. You cant say that it was the allies best NF, most proven is a more suitable term. P-38M's scored well during the small time they saw service and would probably have been damn good competition for the mossie.

    Yes, more roles doesnt make it better. Was the Ju-88 better than the Mossie or P-38? No, it wasnt. Besides, half that stuff is a bit specific. Anti-Tirpitzing? Thats just some shit you made up. wmaxt has also left a couple of things off his list which Ill have to rectify later. You say it was a day fighter, but several times I have asked for evidence of this and I have not been given any, so I do not believe this until I am proven otherwise.

    mosquitoman, your statement is incorrect, as the P-38 wasnt a fighter a trying to be a bomber, it was a fighter that was also used as a bomber. The mossie was a bomber used that was also used as a night fighter.
     
  19. Gemhorse

    Gemhorse Member

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2004
    Messages:
    587
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    LG put up a list of different nations best bombers....which I think was really good, as we've hashed this all out before....

    I felt the best Japanese was a Ki. ''Dinah''...

    I always vote Mosquito, but if we're going to get into what the P-38M Fighter did in the last stages of the War, then we should include the DH Hornet, which was the ' Fighter' version of the Mosquito, as it was essentially similar to the Mosquito, just smaller being a single-seater and with just 4x 20mm's...They were flying and gearing-up for Squadron strength when the ETO War finished.....A comparative study between that and a P-38M would be a read........
     

    Attached Files:

  20. Lightning Guy

    Lightning Guy Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2004
    Messages:
    2,511
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    You are refering to the Ki-46 Dinah. I don't think it was as versatile as the P1Y. The Dinah was a fine recon aircraft. But the only other role they really tried it as was as an interceptor and it did not was not very effective as its climb rate was unimpressive.
     
Loading...

Share This Page