Best Aircraft in Many Different Roles Part II

[Hunter368]

A Mosquito could and did take off from the UK, fly to Berlin, drop a 4000 lb bomb and return to base, a 550 mile round trip. This is what is known as strategic bombing.

 

[Parmigiano]

I don't know about the range of the 190 with 1800kg bomb, but for sure several 190 were built to carry the 1400kg torpedo and assigned to an operative group (can't remember the details, must check one of my books).

The unit was not used in combat and later the ac redeployed to fighter-bomber roles, but all this clearly indicate that the 190 could lift and carry a 1400kg load with a more than decent range (you don't organize a torpedo group if you have aircafts with 50km of useful range...)

 

[mkloby]

A Mosquito could and did take off from the UK, fly to Berlin, drop a 4000 lb bomb and return to base, a 550 mile round trip. This is what is known as strategic bombing. The other aircraft may have been capable of lifting 4000 lb of bombs, but about the only thing they could bomb was their own airfield.

So your definition of strategic bombing is being able to T/O with a bombload, drop it on an enemy nation, and RTB? Seriously???

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

The point is that the abilty to carry 4000 lb of bombs does not make a FW-190 or a P-38 a multirole aircraft. They are fighter bombers filling the same roles as a P51 or even an ME-109 or, god forbid, a Spifire.

No actually the Fw-190 is a multi role aircraft. It could perform more roles than just fighter-bomber and was used in many different roles. In fact it could be used in many more roles than a P-51, Spitfire or Bf-109 as a matter of fact. I dont think there is a single engined aircraft of WW2 that could be used in more roles than the Fw-190.

I could list the roles but I have allready done that about a 100 times in this thread. You can go back and read them, I am not going to post them again.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Does Reluctant poster seem to think that the only roles the Fw-190 and the P-38 was were fighter bomber?

 

[Hunter368]

Perhaps. I love the quote I used from him. That one made me laugh.

Chris here is a jem for you:

Originally Posted by Reluctant Poster View Post
A Mosquito could and did take off from the UK, fly to Berlin, drop a 4000 lb bomb and return to base, a 550 mile round trip. This is what is known as strategic bombing.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Okay....

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

i agree with him though, not so much on the Fw-190 as i'm staying out of this one, but some people seem to think that any plane, but namely the P-38, that could carry a reasonable payload is the world's greatest strategic bomber when they can't even pull off a strategic raid, the ability to carry bombs doesn't make an aircraft a bomber............

 

[mkloby]

i agree with him though, not so much on the Fw-190 as i'm staying out of this one, but some people seem to think that any plane, but namely the P-38, that could carry a reasonable payload is the world's greatest strategic bomber when they can't even pull off a strategic raid, the ability to carry bombs doesn't make an aircraft a bomber............

This is true. But who really thinks that all you need to be a bomber is to be able to hang a bomb on a rack? Nobody will argue the P-38 was a stat bomber...

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Exactly I dont know anyone here that thinks teh Fw-190 and the P-38 were strategic bombers. They were not. That has never been an arguement here.

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

havce you guys not been reading wmaxt's posts

 

[Reluctant Poster]

No actually the Fw-190 is a multi role aircraft. It could perform more roles than just fighter-bomber and was used in many different roles. In fact it could be used in many more roles than a P-51, Spitfire or Bf-109 as a matter of fact. I dont think there is a single engined aircraft of WW2 that could be used in more roles than the Fw-190.

I could list the roles but I have allready done that about a 100 times in this thread. You can go back and read them, I am not going to post them again.

Fw-190
Fighter
Fighter-Bomber
Dive Bomber
Torpedo Bomber
Anti Shipping
2 Seat Trainer
Carrier launched fighter (there were test versions built and it would have worked)
Photo Recon
Interceptor
Anti Tank/Ground Support

I never said the FW 190 was restricted to the fighter and fighter - bomber roles. However the P-51 performed all the roles you have listed above with the exception of torpedo bomber, which as far I as know was limited to a few experimental aircraft, and the the anti - tank role. In the P-51's favour, it could perform the role of long range escort.
What I am trying to point out is that converted fighters generally lacked the capabilties of aircraft such as the JU88 and Mosquito, which were the true multi-role champions of WWII

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

What I am trying to point out is that converted fighters generally lacked the capabilties of aircraft such as the JU88 and Mosquito, which were the true multi-role champions of WWII

That has never been an arguement either. All I am saying is the Fw-190 was the most versatile of the single engine aircraft.

If you read through the posts again I and most people agree (even though the decision between the Ju-88 and the mossie goes back and forth depending on the poster ) that the most verstile aircraft of WW2 were the Ju-88 and the Mossie then followed by the P-38.

I have repeated over and over that my top three (and listed reasons why over and over and over again) are as follows:

1. Ju-88
2. Mossie
3. P-38

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

and the leaders in the single engined role are

1) Fw-190
2) Corsair
3) Hurricane

any arguments there?

 

[Reluctant Poster]

So your definition of strategic bombing is being able to T/O with a bombload, drop it on an enemy nation, and RTB? Seriously???

I'm guessing the bit about long range escaped you.

 

[mkloby]

I'm guessing the bit about long range escaped you.

There's more to it than that my friend.

 

[Reluctant Poster]

Dave,
First it has to be understood that the P-38 arrived in the ETO cold - no support structure, bases, mechanics etc. then add new pilots often with only 20hrs in type, that had never flown above 20,000ft, with no tactics available. They flew in odds of 10 germans to 1 P-38 and the German pilots were tried and true experts that had been fighting as long as the Spanish civil war. Next the 8th AF brass had built their theory, reputations and plans on "Self Escorting Bombers" and had even sent the first P-38 squadrons to the MTO a year earlier. When the bombers losses got so high that the US public started objecting, congress started talking "Investigation", escorts started. The P-38 had done 1,000mi escorts six months earlier and were available so they were put in service, where despite the lack of support, odds, experience, etc they did the job. When the P-51 came along the support structure was in place as was tactics, training and experience. By ignoring the P-38 and its/their contabution and playing up the start-up issues they could say "See we didn't have the right plane, when we did we used it". This scenario becomes clear the more the situation is studied.

wmaxt

More revisionist history from the P-38 defenders. The actual dates of introduction of the P-38 and P51 to the ETO were (first mission to Germany):

55th Fighter Group [P-38] October 20, 1943
354th Fighter Group (P-51) December 11, 1943
20th Fighter Group [P-38] December 30, 1943
3547h Fighter Group (P-51) February 20, 1944 (start of Big Week)
3637h Fighter Group (P-51) February 25, 1944 (end of Big Week)

In other words, the P-51 was a little over a month behind the P-38. The P-38 flew a grand total of 10 missions before enjoying the company of P-51's. In addition these were not deep penetration missions, in fact 7 of them were within P-47 range. The 3 missions to Bremen were the only ones where P-38's were the sole AAF fighters over the target.

P-51's were flying the same missions, with the same weather conditions, the same lack of training (the 354th had never even seen a P-51B before reaching England), the same "bad fuel" (fuel that the Germans, Japanese and Russians could only dream of), the same support structure and they were far more successful. In fact the 354th outscored the 55th and 20th combined in the period leading up to Big Week:

P-38 Sorties 1476 Claims 61 Losses 59
P-51 Sorties 746 Claims 69 Losses 18
(October 20 to February 11)

Big Week was even more lopsided:

P-38 Sorties 373 Claims 10 Losses 5
P-51 Sorties 425 Claims 69 Losses 11
(February 20 to 25)

No wonder the 8th AF decided to standardize on the P-51.

 

[YakFlyer]

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.)

The P38 would be my favourite non-single engine aeroplane, ever, but it can't possibly have exceeded the Mosquito for versatility.
Don't forget, Junkers did produce the model 88, how many medium bombers could drop it's bombload if under attack and simply run away, the 88 could.

 

[Reluctant Poster]

"In theory the P-38 could carry a cookie"

Really, exactly where would it fit? Is there the necessary ground clearance? How does the CofG of the bomb line up with the airplane CofG? Can the wing take a doubling of the weight? Statements like this are meaningless.

"but several instances where they carried 5,200lbs on missions were recorded."

I would love to see ANY record of a P-38 carrying 5200lbs of bombs on a mission.

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

and i'd love to see them carry it further than the airfeild perimeter...