Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
How about looking to sources of 8th AF missions, followed by RAF, beginning May 12, 1944. You should acquire Mighty Eighth War Diary by Freeman, Actual knowledge based on facts should help remove the many misconceptions you bring here. Oh, that is the 'official start date of the 'Oil Plan' execution.
Agree - I knew one former F-104 driver who knew him during the 60s, said he was a great pilot but not a pleasant person at times.He was not. The thought that the german claiming systeem was airtight has been proven wrong many times. Plse read the link. It is no wonder Hartmann was not popular during ww2 and after 45 in his new job. There is a reason he was not made a general post war i think.
They weren't - there are several researchers (who have no agendas) who put his actual score between 120 and 130. As stated, 45% accurate!If those were his only overclaims that is much less than the average.
Well I'll tell you there's no resentment from this P-38 fan, the P-51B was the better weapon for the job, period! If there was no P-51, could latter model P-47s and P-38s fulfilled the role? IMO yes but at a greater cost in manpower, time and equipment. A big "what if." I think the only thing I resent were the "twin engine fighter haters" who didn't understand, want to deal with or accept the complexity of the P-38 or the extra time it took for training and made unjustified excusesI don't know why it is hard for P-38 fans to accept the fact that, though the P-38 thrived in the Pacific and in North Africa/Mediterranean, it did not thrive with the 8th Air Force over Western Europe. They also seem to resent that it just so happens that the P-51B was perfectly suited for the escort role the P-38H&J weren't.
I don't know why it is hard for P-38 fans to accept the fact that, though the P-38 thrived in the Pacific and in North Africa/Mediterranean, it did not thrive with the 8th Air Force over Western Europe. They also seem to resent that it just so happens that the P-51B was perfectly suited for the escort role the P-38H&J weren't.
They may have had the "Z" team, part of the problems with P-38Js in early operations was that the intercooler worked too good.It also doesn't seem that the 8th Air Force had their "A-team" working to solve the engine performance and cabin heating problems that marred early P-38 operations in the theater.
They may have had the "Z" team, part of the problems with P-38Js in early operations was that the intercooler worked too good.
That was combined with the pilots being instructed to "cruise" in a manor that was at odds with the way both Allison and Lockheed said the plane should be flown.
The Army was telling the pilots to cruise at high rpm and low boost (small throttle opening) so the engine would already be turning high rpm if the plane/formation was "bounced" and they could get to full power quicker. This was wrong on several points.
1. With the new "J" intercoolers the intake charge was over-cooled. With this throttle opening and propeller governor setting/s the turbo was closer to idle than full speed and turbo did not heat the intake charge much before it went through the intercooler. Result was fuel puddling in the intake manifolds and some of the heavy aromatics separating out. This caused all kinds of trouble when the throttles were slammed open to engage the enemy.
2. This technique didn't help throttle response all that much. It took a while for the turbo to reach full speed. The throttle/s may have been wide open but with the turbos still building up speed the manifold pressure was not what was wanted or needed.
3. This technique used more fuel for the same amount of power to the prop than running low rpm and high boost. Higher engine rpm means higher losses to internal friction for the same power to the prop.
The P-38 should have been "cruised" at low RPM and high boost. The Turbo would have been turning at closer to combat rpm and when the throttles were opened high manifold pressure (and high power for a given rpm) would have been available. The engines would have used less power to friction and used less fuel per hour giving longer range.
The intake charge would have been hotter and caused fewer problems with the fuel/air mixture being too cold.
This was part of what Tony Levier instructed P-38 pilots on when he went to Europe in 1944.
Wouldn't have solved the cockpit heat problem though.
That could have been solved by taking a few bean counters out behind the garden shed and whacking them upside the head with a large tree limb.
Saving the cost of a 2nd generator on a 100,000 dollar airplane that used as much electricity as the P-38 was pretty stupid. If the engine with the generator on the single generator versions went down the pilot was racing the depleting battery to get home and in a plane with electric propellers that is not a good thing.
'm sure glad the -51 matured into such a great plane. I don't see that as a slag against the Lightning.
Spot on about the bean counters and the lack of a 2nd generator.That could have been solved by taking a few bean counters out behind the garden shed and whacking them upside the head with a large tree limb.
Saving the cost of a 2nd generator on a 100,000 dollar airplane that used as much electricity as the P-38 was pretty stupid. If the engine with the generator on the single generator versions went down the pilot was racing the depleting battery to get home and in a plane with electric propellers that is not a good thing.
Same can be said for the F4F, it held the line until newer types became available.
Eggs-actly, as has been said in another thread, just because what's being introduced is better than what went before, it doesn't diminish what went before's impact, regardless of the issues suffered by the P-38. It was the aircraft for the job at the time, along with the P-47, and, dare I say it, like the P-39 in the PTO, despite its shortcomings did the job it had to until something better came along.
I like it... Gonna use it...You dance with the gal you brought
There is a another aspect in why some fighter aircraft thrived in other theatres, other than different operating conditions and procedures. The rate of overclaiming was not the same across different theatres and different periods of the war. Higher in the MTO / PTO (and ETO pre '44), than ETO '44 where and when it became much more accurate for the Western Allies.I don't know why it is hard for P-38 fans to accept the fact that, though the P-38 thrived in the Pacific and in North Africa/Mediterranean, it did not thrive with the 8th Air Force over Western Europe.
In the 60s, we ice trialers, autocrossers, and hillclimbers had the same mantra.In the 80's, we street racers had a similar saying:
"Run whatcha brung"
I don't think anybody involved in the design and manufacture of the P38 ever truly anticipated the conditions it would encounter in the winter at 30,000 feet over northern Europe for 6-8 hours per sortie.I don't know why it is hard for P-38 fans to accept the fact that, though the P-38 thrived in the Pacific and in North Africa/Mediterranean, it did not thrive with the 8th Air Force over Western Europe.