None of the P-40s have the range to go where the P-38 went; they're a non-starter except for short-range missions.
P-40 was a medium ranged fighter by MTO standards, it had about twice the range of a Spitfire, Hurricane, Bf 109 or MC 202. The P-38 was a long range fighter and that ended up being to a large extent what they used them for.
The P-38 was not in a much more ideal environment in the Pacific. At 20,000 feet the temperature has little to do with the temperature at sea level. But, by the time the P-38 got to the PTO, the crews (flight and maintenance) had some training and experience behind them and the engine issues had been worked out. If the Pacific had ended earlier than Europe and the experienced Pacific P-38 crews had been transferred to Europe, they'de have performed like the veterans they were. It might be useful to recall that the two top-scoring U.S. Aces both flew P-38s.
What I meant was tactical environment. The Japanese fighters were much slower and had relatively poor higher altitude performance.
I don't by any means forget that the top scoring USAAF pilots flew the P-38 in the Pacific. I don't know who the top scoring P-38 pilots in the MTO were or how many claims they had but I would be amazed if they were anywhere near comparable.
The Hurricane wasn't dead meat" against anyone. It did get outperformed sometimes, sure, but also gave pretty well, too. Your statements sound like you almost arrogantly dismiss the Hurricane.
I'm not "arrogantly" dismissing anything - I'm just pointing out the facts based on the operational history. To be honest, I think people rather "arrogantly" dismiss the Italian planes, pilots, and units in WW2. The Hurricane was a good fighter and held the line for a good while in the Western Desert. They could handle Bf 110, MC 200, Fiat G.50, and CR 32 / 42. But Hurricane units suffered grotesque losses against both Bf 109s and MC 202s... which is why the Hurricane was moved out of the fighter role and into pretty much exclusively fighter bomber missions by ~ mid 1943, the period we were discussing. Other allied units did as well frankly, but they found ways to make some other aircraft types work in the fighter / air superiority and / or escort role, while the Hurricane proved not to be as adaptable in that environment (I think partly due to trouble with the tropical filters they were using).
Yes, the M.C. 202 out-performed the Hurricane, but the Hurricane still knocked out an impressive list of ground equipment and still fought the M.C. 202s, and didn't do too badly.
I would say that the Hurricane did poorly against the MC 202, in most of the (many) encounters they had. My point was that heavy firepower of the Hurricane wasn't much help.
Both the Bf 109F and the MC 202 were far less heavily armed than the Hurricane but they definitely had a significant advantage in outcomes, based on the day to day operational histories. I can definitely post some examples if needed. The losses were alarming. Sometimes P-40 and Spitfire units also had severe losses during engagements with MC 202 but less often, and they were able to inflict more losses against them.
My point is that the MC 202 was an excellent fighter and not to be dismissed, it had it's limitations but it definitely put a dent in the Allied forces. The very heavily armed Hurricane MK IIC wasn't much use against it in spite of having much greater firepower.
You might remember that we won the war in North Africa with Hurricanes, P-38s and P-40s, none of which seem to impress you.
I don't know what gives you that impression. Anyway, it's false, I'm well aware and suitably impressed. I am a big fan of the Desert Air Force and I think they prevailed against the Axis air forces due to a combination of improving tactics, better strategy, and learning to make the aircraft they had work. With the Hurricane by early 1942 that increasingly meant relegation to use as a fighter bomber - still a very important role.
I think you are filling in the blanks a little here with some feelings or maybe associations with other posters because I never wrote anything like disparaging Allied efforts over all. I'm just putting things into what is (as far as I am aware), accurate context. I could of course be unaware of some data, wouldn't be the first time. But I have read a lot about this Theater and stand by my statements, until proven otherwise.
At some point, almost all fighters and fighter-pilots get outperformed in an encounter. They don't just give up and die, they do their best to fight back and escape to fight another day. A lot of them succeed and some don't. A pilot in a Fiat CR.42 wasn't automatic dead meat if he encountered a P-51, either. He was a lot more maneuverable and could usually escape and evade.
My point is simply that the Hurricane was a poor match against the MC 202, and to the original offshoot that this sprang from, that the MC 202 was no slouch or easy victim for the P-38, which Shortround6 was implying.
The CR 42 could survive in an emergency, but like the Hurricane by 1943 (in fact earlier) it had been relegated to use as a fighter bomber because it could not contend with front line enemy fighters.