Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Early ones did not have much range, because they had planned to use 50 gal drop tanks mounted close to the inner wing, like everybody else did. Not only did the drop tanks not have enough fuel, but they contributed a lot of drag. Using the much larger 160 gal tanks on long pylons solved that.
You could not see the ground from altitude, which made lining up for a photo run a challenge. The engines and nose kept the pilot from seeing the target and they could never figure out how to install a sight to enable the pilot to look down because the NLG was in the way. They even tried making a slant angle camera so take pictures from a distance. Note that Lockheed put a Drift Sight in the U-2 so the pilot could look down and see the ground.
I'm no P-38 expert by any stretch, but as I recall diving was NOT the Lightnings strong suit. I also question it clocking 526MPH and still keeping some empennages.The P-38 can dive as well as it needs to. Just throttle back as you nose over, then hose the crap outa them and pull up! 440 Knots was the safety limit imposed by HQ, but the plane could safely go to 460 Knots! Thats 506 MPH to 529 MPH Given the extremely long effective range of the plane's guns, it should never be a problem!
Looking at this picture, it seems that there was some elbow room for the pilot to look over the LE of the wing.Recon Mustangs were used for TAC-R, shooting pictures sideways. With Spits you could look over the front edge of the wing, which was not possible with the P-38.
I'm no P-38 expert by any stretch, but as I recall diving was NOT the Lightnings strong suit. I also question it clocking 526MPH and still keeping some empennages.
However I am open to enlightenment.
I'm no P-38 expert by any stretch, but as I recall diving was NOT the Lightnings strong suit. I also question it clocking 526MPH and still keeping some empennages.
However I am open to enlightenment.
I'd say that you have your stuff right. See this 10 year old thread, for example.
Mr. Stewart has a lot of homework to do (= provide sources) to back up his claims. Not that I'm holding my breath.
What they like to do is approach the target with it off to one side, at a near 90 degree angle, and then roll onto a heading that will take them over it, exactly like I did this morning when I turned onto base leg and then onto final. The P-38's engines kept them from being able to do that.it seems that there was some elbow room for the pilot to look over the LE of the wing.
Respectfully, the only part of the flight regime (P-38L) that seems close to P-51D w/1650-7 is at Max Continuous 20000 feet. At 25K the 51D at Max Continuous exceeds the L at Combat power,and opens the gap at 30000. My sources for the moment are the flight tests on Spitfireperformance.comBoosted Ailerons give the P-38 the highest Rate of Roll of All common combat aircraft of WW-II. In spite of the highest Polar Moment of Rotation! You are absolutely correct when you state 60 Degrees left to 60 Degree right is important, it is the single most important part of dog fighting! But Maximum Continuous Throttle speed is more important, and no other plane can match the P-38 at altitude! None! The P-51 is close at 25K' and the P-47 is close at 30-33K', but no other plane is close! Speed is life! (A Famous fighter pilot statement!)
Secondly, it was far and away the single best gun platform of all fighters in the war! (Caused by the complete absence of "P" effect caused by those counter rotating props and CL mounted guns with high RoF and MV/BC!) PBR =800 Yards and maximum effective Range 1,800 Meters!
The P-38 was never fitted with dive brakes.
When the dive flaps were deployed, they hinged down from the front and forced the airflow under the wing to deflect downward in front of the center of lift, thereby imparting a nose-up pitching moment to the airplane even if the elevators were blanked by the shock wave.
The primary benefit to the dive flap was to generate an instantaneous pitch up Moment, followed by increase in CL and change in lift distribution as the shock wave dissipates.Absolutely. Bad mistake on my part to call the dive flaps dive brakes.
Interesting interpretation of how the dive flaps worked aerodynamically. Where does it come from? The only one I'm familiar with so far is the one from NACA report 767 (Which references the P-38 dive flap solution in NACA report WR A 66) which uses the same terminology as I did, i.e. that the cause of the pull out difficulties in the P-38 is due to a loss of lift and the resulting loss of downwash on the stabilizer.
The primary benefit to the dive flap was to generate an instantaneous pitch up Moment, followed by increase in CL and change in lift distribution as the shock wave dissipates.
In my opinion financial costs were the least of the issues, compared to all other costs. The requirement for fighter escort created the need for an additional air force, that was around the size of RAF fighter command in around a year and in spite of all other expansion plans for all other types. The P-51B/C didnt take any engines from any US type, and the Packard Merlin was already a massive expansion, it may have meant fewer engines for Lancasters but Packard production under lend lease was much higher than the original ordered quantities. The P-51B didnt have a "day job" in mid 1943 because it was still in transport. The P-38 and P47 were already in service with assigned tasks, even if all three types were the same in performance it would still make sense to use the P-51 for escort work, because that avoids switching the others, re training and transporting planes and pilots etc.No, I think you have a very valid point: Some time ago I saw a compilation of production costs and as I recall it the P-38 was darn close to being twice as costly as a P-51 IIRC. Can't swear to the exact numbers but they did not come cheap. Then there are the added maintenance and operational costs for a twin as well of course. OTOH, twin safety when flying long range missions over water like in the Pacific is of course a plus and given the square-cube law it's always easier to design in long range into a large plane compared to a small one.
Along with Packard Merlins, all Continental produced V-1650-7 Merlins served as P-51s engines.In my opinion financial costs were the least of the issues, compared to all other costs. The requirement for fighter escort created the need for an additional air force, that was around the size of RAF fighter command in around a year and in spite of all other expansion plans for all other types. The P-51B/C didnt take any engines from any US type, and the Packard Merlin was already a massive expansion, it may have meant fewer engines for Lancasters but Packard production under lend lease was much higher than the original ordered quantities. The P-51B didnt have a "day job" in mid 1943 because it was still in transport. The P-38 and P47 were already in service with assigned tasks, even if all three types were the same in performance it would still make sense to use the P-51 for escort work, because that avoids switching the others, re training and transporting planes and pilots etc.