Dogfighting in a P 38

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

Thanks Biff. I remember the "race" almost second by second, but the exact year didn't seem to stick out. It was only 21 years ago ... I had a hand-held at the race and was listening in on place-to-plane. They were taking turns leading. It wasn't really a race ... it was more like "rally 'round the race course and let them see what an air race might be like." I suppose there wasn't really enough money there to stage a real race. Seems a shame to lose the Super Corsair in a demonstration run, doesn't it?

Don't recall the other P-38's monicker because I was mostly over at Lefty's plane. Too bad the main sponsor, "Incredible Universe," went bankrupt a couple of years later and the "race" went away. An acquaintance of mine still has one of their old delivery trucks. It wasn't bad as a show, but definitely wasn't a race. They had the monster truck "Grave Digger" there to do some wheelies and jump a car, and did a biplane - jet car drag race. Since it was an ex-military field, the drag race truck got up to some 300 mph before he popped his chutes!

Unless I mis-remember (could be) the aerobatic acts were Leo Loudenslager in the Bud Light Special and Bob Hoover. Could be wrong because there were 2 or 3 "Phoenix 500s" before it died off.

Good times well past, but not forgotten.

We all miss Leo and Wes Winter.

I'm glad I wasn't in Texas when Wes pulled the wings off of his Partenavia P-68. I have seen that footage as reported on Japanese TV and the posters think it happened in Japan rather than in Texas due to the language being spoken! Go figure. I could post it here, but it's not the sort of thing I like to remember an old friend by.

Cheers. Keep 'em flying.
 
Last edited:

Greg, we may have met and not known it... I spent a lot of time at Lefty's P-38 in Reno ('86-88). I've got a couple of cousins that live in Stead and one can watch the races from their driveway.
 
Since this was touched on the first page, few posts under OP, then I thought bringing US Army Air Force information would add to the discussion as well. Following is based on US Army Air Force Informational Intelligence Summary from May 10th, 1944. It provides a decent perspective on Type I Model I Japanese fighter (Oscar) and P-38 and how they compare.
Not that P-38 exact model is to me unknown, tests were carried in SWPA and at given time it could be anything from late G model to whatever else was being supplied, also Oscar was not in amazing condition and based on numbers pilots gave, it was flown below recommended combat power, since pilot used 30"Hg MAP and 2100 RPM on all maneuvers, while recommended is +130 mmHg MAP (35"Hg) at 2600 RPM. It was even below normal power (I'm not going into terms right now, Japanese had many intermediate terms for various engine settings ranging from economical cruising up to overboost, depending on throttle position) which is +40 mmHg (31.5"Hg) and 2480 RPM. P-38 on the other hand operated without radio, but carried full combat load of ammunition. For climbs pilot used 40"Hg-45"Hg MAP at 2600-3000 RPM and according to quote: "climbed 3,500 to 4,000 feet per minute to 20,000 feet."

So wasting no more time here is the quote, based on Jim Long (j-aircraft.com) excerpt from AAF Intelligence Summary:

Based on this I find it hard to believe that P-38 could keep with Oscar, maybe with a damaged one but data above makes it rather one sided for any maneuvers involving turning. Also it seems that Oscar suffered a lot less than Zero with high stick forces on ailerons and could keep up in rolls with P-38 at least to a certain degree. P-38 on the other hand possessed a clear and obvious speed and climb advantage, albeit it still has to be remembered that Oscar was not in perfect condition here.
 
Hi Soulezoo,

Maybe so. It was a good time at any rate. Lefty flew the crap out of that P-38 and did what I'd call "minimal" maintenance. It wasn't until it was a bit "tired" that many items would get addressed and corrected. Despite that, he always put on a great show.

I'd hesitate to make any combat conclusion against a plane not being flown at combat power or by a pilot not familiar with the aircraft. I doubt seriously if the P-38 / Oscar comparison means much when compared with a combat encounter with an early-war, well-trained Japanese veteran combat pilot in the Oscar. But it does make an interesting read.
 
Last edited:
At the end of the day you're leaving out one important aspect - pilot skill.

I agree. While we make many threads about the advantages/disadvantages of differing aircraft discussing ad infinitum (and it can be fun doing so, that's why we are here) in the end, it is about the ability of one pilot to be able to harness the ability of his craft and impose his will on the opponent. Finnish Buffaloes anyone?
 
I'm not leaving it Flyboyj, I am fully aware that good pilot will bring best of his aircraft and bad pilot will struggle with basics. But pilot skill is something hard to measure and harder to put into equation, thus a standard tests carried on captured equipment are a decent way to judge things. No perfect by all means, but they give perspective.

I mean they were usually carried in such a way that pilots flew aircraft, tested them and compared and then swapped places to see how it looks from different perspective and only then they would form conclusions. Those were given to combat pilots to gain advantage over the enemy. If you ask me, thats pretty huge responsibility given to those men since others would possibly follow their correct or incorrect advises.
 
And all true, but again consider the total picture when hearing about someone like John Tilley who did turn inside an Oscar at 90 knts, shoot down the aircraft and live to tell about, and I know he wasn't the only one who managed to do this.
 
I consider that as well. The problem is my nature, I just like to know both sides of the coin. And in this case we only know what Mr. John Tilley said, we dont know the point of view of that poor guy who got shot down. Maybe he was wounded ? Maybe his aircraft was damaged or exhibited unexpected problems ? Any of this could happen and be the reason why good pilot such as Mr John Tilley managed to get a firing solution.

Anyway, thats about the rant. I also have a question in regard to P-38, F model specifically. Do anyone know when last of them were replaced on the frontlines ? When going through Pacific Wrecks I was able to find F models in combat all the way to 1944.
 
How about considering the Japanese pilot lacked either skill or training?!?!

I also have a question in regard to P-38, F model specifically. Do anyone know when last of them were replaced on the frontlines ? When going through Pacific Wrecks I was able to find F models in combat all the way to 1944.
From what I could see it seemed like some units had earlier model P-38s well into 1944. This may be due to "attrition replacement' where individual tail numbers may not be replaced with a newer aircraft until it has flown a certain amount of hours or until the airframe is lost or "beyond economical repair." Although later model P-38s offered great improvements over earlier models, the specific theater combined with operational results might not have warranted the rapid replacement of these aircraft.
 
Last edited:

1. Yes, by doing that you can tighten your radius of turn and gain a momentary advantage and, as has been said, it was only used sparingly and by the best pilots. I remember reading a detailed explanation by a P-38 pilot in a book years ago.

2. Not the dive brake; the maneuvering flap was the first 8-degree position of the Fowler landing flaps.
 
If I remember correctly, the P-38F's flew their last combat missions with the 82nd FG the end of May 1944, though the first J's were used in early 1944.

Up in the Aleutians, P-38G's were used along with newer versions of the P-38 into 1945.

Eagledad
 
A big deal on the P-38 was when they added the hydraulic boost for the ailerons on the L models. But this boost was not like that on more modern aircraft there was no proportional "partial" use or "Q feel" system that automatically adjusted the amount of back pressure to the pilot to account for differing speed and altitude. When you slow an airplane you need to move the controls a lot more than when you are going faster. I even recall a period where my airplane had been down for months for a engine top overhaul; when I flew it and then slowed it before turning base leg I thought, "What's wrong with this things? The roll rate has gotten terrible!" Then I realized I was only doing 60 MPH and all was normal. The jets had the ability to get a little bit of boost by moving the stick not too far and the Century series fighters had Q feel systems designed to let you move the stick with the same amount of effort at low or high speed and get the same results. The only such system I have had some experience with was that for the F-106; it used very high pressure bottled air to power the system and if a certain thing went wrong the pilot had 3000 PSI on the rudder pedals.

But with the hydraulically boosted ailerons on the P-38L you got it all and you got it right now! In a hard maneuvering dogfight that was fine - if you expected it. When a group of P-38 pilots from Gerry Johnson's unit in the PI went to pick up some new P-38L's, flying on the way home they were horrified. The airplanes were all but uncontrollable! Level flight seemed to be almost impossible; a slow drunken roll from side to side was all they could manage. They realized that landing with that control problem was going to be a nightmare. One pilot even said he planned to just point the airplane over a big lake and bail out when they got to home base.

Then one pilot noticed a valve labeled "Aileron Boost" and tried turning it off. Then all was back to normal. No one had even told the pilots about the new aileron boost feature! Furthermore, it was NEVER supposed to be used for takeoff, landing, cruise, or formation flight! Someone at the depot had turned the boost system on, presumably to test it, and then not bothered to turn it off. They were all lucky they did not crash on takeoff.

Capt Eric Brown of the Fleet Air Arm said that while he found the roll rate of the stock P-38 to be unimpressive that the models with the hydraulic boost system "rolled like a dingbat." And apparently they did. On one mission Gerry Johnson decided to show his men how it was done, said, "Watch this!" and outmaneuvered a Japanese fighter, using a combination of the hair curling roll rate and the P-38L's famous zoom climb capability to essentially out turn the enemy fighter in what I guess was a form of High Speed Yo Yo. A P-38 pilot's son I know said his Dad put it this way, "When we got that aileron boost that's when we really became the Fork Tailed Devils."

And by the way, the "dive brakes" were not like flaps at all. They are at the midpoint of the wing, not the trailing edge, and are hinged so that they come down with a V shape, like long inverted pyramids under the wing, to brake up the airflow.

Y'all have a good weekend and Happy Enola Gay Day!
 
Then again....

From Francis Dean, America's Hundred Thousand:

The P-38 was a large and heavy fighter not suited for quick "snap" or "slam-bang" maneuvers, and had a particularly slow initial response to roll due to a a high lateral inertia characteristic. The problem was a slow start into a roll and thus an inability to switch quickly from one attitude to another, as in reversing from a turn in one direction to one in the other. As one pilot said "It was disconcerting to have a fighter barreling in on you, crank the wheel over hard, and just have the P-38 sit there. Then, after it slowly rolled the first five or ten degrees of bank it would turn quickly, but the hesitation was sweat producing". Many combat losses, particularly in North Africa, were attributed to this creaky initial rate of roll. Another pilot noted "The first ten degrees of bank came very slow". Power boosted ailerons, introduced the same time as dive recovery flaps, gave the P-38 pilot a lot more "muscle" to improve roll characteristics at high speeds, but did nothing to improve them at low and moderate speeds where maximum roll performance was dependent only on full aileron deflection instead of pilot effort.

What I understand from that is that at low to moderate speeds the pilot could achieve full deflection of the ailerons without too much effort, meaning that the rate of roll was all down to the great god of aerodynamics and Newton's laws.

Getting the ailerons deflected in half the time or with less physical effort mattered little to the roll rate at low speeds.

At high speeds the ailerons cannot be fully deflected, the roll performance depending on how far they can be, which is dependent on the force applied to them through the stick. With no assistance it wasn't a whole lot, but with assistance it was a great improvement.
 
1. Yes, by doing that you can tighten your radius of turn and gain a momentary advantage and, as has been said, it was only used sparingly and by the best pilots. I remember reading a detailed explanation by a P-38 pilot in a book years ago.

Using asymmetrical thrust in level turn will just create a skidded turn just like using to much rudder to tighten the turn. From what I have read about the P-38, asymmetrical thrust was used in vertical maneuvers like wing-overs and hammer -head type course reversals.
 
thanks for the info guys. i've heard story's about how the 38 was outclassed by single engine aircraft, yet some of our best ace's flew it. what would a P 38 need to do against German planes boom and voom or run for it.
 
Our two top aces flew the P-38. That would be Dick Bong and Tommy McGuire.

In their cases, they were stationed around some quite active Japanese airfields. They probably had a lot more "opportunity" for aerial combat than many other pilots did after V-E day. Not to say anything negative about their skills at all ... I was just pointing out that they actually saw airborne Japanese aircraft and likely had more opportunity to score more than a lot of other pilots did.
 
I started on a Kwacker 500 triple while I was stationed in Ethiopia and it was fast for the time. It would do an honest 125 according to the timer's stop watch. I did not know that it handled like crap until much later when I was stationed in Heidelberg FRG. I lived in Dias Bach and worked in Patton Barracks and commuted over the mountain on the new Kwacker 750 Triple that I brought with me as Household goods. It was the first one in Germany and we destroyed the 750 cc Street stock class, which everyone knew were not stock. But it was probably the only stock bike on the track that first year. I traded up to the 900 four and for the first time I had a bike which handled well, or so I thought until I rode a Norton Commando Caffe Racer! That second season we did well enough to earn a Sponsored ride on a TZ-1 Yamaha water pumper that came in a crate and had to be assembled by the buyer. It had two sets of cylinders and pistons so it could run in either the 250, or 350 cc classes. It did 165 with the 350s in it in the traps at Hockenheim Ring south of Heidelberg, which was my home track. I crashed the bike at speed in front of my wife and kids and 35 of my Platoonies right under the TV camera stand broadcasting to 17 million Germans coming out of the Ost Curve? That was the end of that because until that time my wife did not know how dangerous it was. So when we came home for the first time in almost 7 years, I bought a CanAm dirt bike for all the "slow" dirt sports. Did you know they would go over the tonne right out of the crate?
 
Yep. All the big off road bikes will go fast, assuming they are WRs. They accelerate like a bat outta' hell with motocross gearing, but only in the motocross speed ranges. Give me a WR any day.

My old favorite in the woods was a Husky 390 WR, but any Can Am WR was a serious contender. The primary factor was the person riding it. Disk Burleson was fast in the woods on anything. He could do 75 mph in woods and never hit a tree when most of us were seriously dodging trees at 45 mph.

None of which has anything to do with Luftwaffe aircraft, but IS fun to remember on occasion. Of all the riding I did, Observed Trials was the most fun by long shot.
 

Users who are viewing this thread