Japanese Zero vs Spitfire vs FW 190

FLYBOYJ · Oct 21, 2021

Schweik said:
I'm just saying Bong and Maguire were outliers, they (and arguably) Gerald Johnson were the guys who really learned to make the P-38 sing, and live up to it's true potential even while it still had so many teething problems. The other P-38 pilots did well but so did the P-40 pilots in 49th FG.

Agree, but also look at the timelines when they were in theater. Bong even went on leave for a bit before he was finally ordered home. Agree about the pilots in the 49th but none of them reached the same scores as the P-38 drivers, but then again they were flying a different mission.

Schweik said:
Well I'd say the Aussies and N-Zeds were also a critical factor. They were comparable to the 49th in impact

Agree

Schweik said:
Yeah we aren't that far apart, I'm just squeezing in a little more nuance here. People tend to forget that the aircraft which were being used in early 1942 did get improved, as did tactics and conditions etc.. 49th FG got the P-40K and later N, and also even got some P-40Fs (they were the only unit in the PTO to get any). I think even the P-39s in Theater improved, the early ones were P-39D and those P-400s that they couldn't hook up oxygen for, later they got at least slightly more capable models.

IIRC the main P-38 models first used in the SWP was the G and H. If I'm not mistaken, as soon as the J came along, the older models were replaced pretty quickly. I believe by mid/late 1944 all earlier P-38 models were replaced by the J.

Schweik · Oct 21, 2021

My point about the victories was if you look at the two units, 8th did almost as well as the 9th even counting their three top aces. 8th FS had 14 aces including three double aces, 9th had 15. According to Osprey, 9th FS claimed 254 victories, 8th FS - 207, and 7th FS - 178.

That's better, but it's not wildly better, and MacGuire and Bong by themselves can make up that difference. Those two guys alone probably put a serious dent in the local IJA air forces. They may not have gotten as many as they claimed but it's a sure bet they waxed more than a few of the experienced Japanese fighter pilots and left some units hollowed out.

IIRC the main P-38 models first used in the SWP was the G and H. If I'm not mistaken, as soon as the J came along, the older models were replaced pretty quickly. I believe by mid/late 1944 all earlier P-38 models were replaced by the J.

Yes but 1944, as we tend to forget, is well past the tipping point for the Japanese. Not that the fighting was over by any means, but the ratio of experienced crew was way down and the numerical superiority and other advantages were all on the Allied side. And while P-38G and H were also good weapons, they sill had some serious issues. Even the J still did IIRC.

Also think of the level of training of the early pilots. Most of those guys had mastered say, a Steerman but were not up to a high performance fighter that complex, probably not really up to flying twin engined aircraft period. They crashed half of their P-40s before they even got to the combat area. Robert DeHaven said he had 14 hours on a P-40 when he went into combat the first time. It was really an unusual character who could step up that steep learning curve for something like a P-38 in 1942.

Does anyone know precisely when Spitfire Mk VIII were active in Theater?

FLYBOYJ · Oct 21, 2021

Schweik said:
My point about the victories was if you look at the two units, 8th did almost as well as the 9th even counting their three top aces. 8th FS had 14 aces including three double aces, 9th had 15. According to Osprey, 9th FS claimed 254 victories, 8th FS - 207, and 7th FS - 178.

That's better, but it's not wildly better, and MacGuire and Bong by themselves can make up that difference. Those two guys alone probably put a serious dent in the local IJA air forces. They may not have gotten as many as they claimed but it's a sure bet they waxed more than a few of the experienced Japanese fighter pilots and left some units hollowed out.

But aside from the victories, its a matter of controlling the skies over the SWP, and the units in New Guinea started making that happen in late 42/ early 43. As far as over claiming by Bong or Maguire, I've never seen any evidence to support this, not to say it wasn't possible. I know there was one mission where Bong and Lynch shot up a base and fifth Air Force brass wanted him to take an aerial kill for a ground target, he refused to do so

Schweik said:
Yes but 1944, as we tend to forget, is well past the tipping point for the Japanese. Not that the fighting was over by any means, but the ratio of experienced crew was way down and the numerical superiority and other advantages were all on the Allied side. And while P-38G and H were also good weapons, they sill had some serious issues. Even the J still did IIRC.

When you say serious, what do you mean? Operational? Maintenance? In the Pacific issues with these aircraft were addressed by training. The P 38 was not an easy aircraft to maintain but the attrition and mission capable rate of the aircraft was way higher than what was found in Europe

FLYBOYJ · Oct 21, 2021

Schweik said:
My point about the victories was if you look at the two units, 8th did almost as well as the 9th even counting their three top aces. 8th FS had 14 aces including three double aces, 9th had 15. According to Osprey, 9th FS claimed 254 victories, 8th FS - 207, and 7th FS - 178.

That's better, but it's not wildly better, and MacGuire and Bong by themselves can make up that difference. Those two guys alone probably put a serious dent in the local IJA air forces. They may not have gotten as many as they claimed but it's a sure bet they waxed more than a few of the experienced Japanese fighter pilots and left some units hollowed out.

Also think of the level of training of the early pilots. Most of those guys had mastered say, a Steerman but were not up to a high performance fighter that complex, probably not really up to flying twin engined aircraft period. They crashed half of their P-40s before they even got to the combat area. Robert DeHaven said he had 14 hours on a P-40 when he went into combat the first time. It was really an unusual character who could step up that steep learning curve for something like a P-38 in 1942.

We have discussed the lack of multi engine training on here many times, at the beginning of World War II it was just about nonexistent. Most of the better P 38 pilots either were brought up on the aircraft (and survived training) or they had plenty of multi engine time or before they jumped into the P 38, or they managed to get some multi engine time as they were getting trained up to fly the P 38. A favorite aircraft to do this in was the B 25.

nuuumannn · Oct 21, 2021

Schweik said:
Does anyone know precisely when Spitfire Mk VIII were active in Theater?

The first Mark VIIIs arrived in Australia in October 1943, the first squadrons began equipping with them in April 1944.

Schweik · Oct 21, 2021

FLYBOYJ said:
But aside from the victories, its a matter of controlling the skies over the SWP, and the units in New Guinea started making that happen in late 42/ early 43.

And I don't think there were enough P-38s active at that time to really account for the difference. Part of it sure, but I think a lot of it was the other P-40 units and the Navy and Marine F4Fs out in the Solomon Islands. And the Beaufighters and even the P-39s.

FLYBOYJ said:
As far as over claiming by Bong or Maguire, I've never seen any evidence to support this, not to say it wasn't possible. I know there was one mission where Bong and Lynch shot up a base and fifth Air Force brass wanted him to take an aerial kill for a ground target, he refused to do so

I don't know the ratios of overclaiming on those guys but it's pretty much inevitable to some extent, with a few very rare exceptions. Not due to fraud or anything, but because say you see an aircraft on fire (but the fire goes out), or you see one blow up (but two people claimed the same one) or you see black smoke and it's going down (but it recovers and limps home) and etc.

FLYBOYJ said:
When you say serious, what do you mean? Operational? Maintenance? In the Pacific issues with these aircraft were addressed by training. The P 38 was not an easy aircraft to maintain but the attrition and mission capable rate of the aircraft was way higher than what was found in Europe

I don't know precise timeline, but specific issues with early P-38s were of course the diving / compressibility problem (I gather not completely fixed until P-38L?), problems with the turbos and / or intercoolers, the slow ailerons (fixed by boosted ailerons in P-38J I believe), engine overheating at altitude (fixed in P-38H I think), the electrical generators (I believe a second generator was added mid run in the J series?) pilot heaters (not sure when that was fixed),

FLYBOYJ · Oct 21, 2021

Schweik said:
And I don't think there were enough P-38s active at that time to really account for the difference. Part of it sure, but I think a lot of it was the other P-40 units and the Navy and Marine F4Fs out in the Islands.

Sorry but history dictates otherwise. Read the book "Peter 38" and other sources about the P 38 operations over New Guinea. We were not making any progress to hold down air superiority until the P 38 came on scene. From one of its first combat operations in December 1942, things started to change, And I am just talking about US Army Air Force operations over New guinea

Schweik said:
I don't know the ratios of overclaiming on those guys but it's pretty much inevitable to some extent, with a few very rare exceptions. Not due to fraud or anything, but because say you see an aircraft on fire (but the fire goes out), or you see one blow up (but two people claimed the same one) or you see black smoke and it's going down (but it recovers and limps home) and etc.

Agree

Schweik said:
I don't know precise timeline, but specific issues with early P-38s were of course the diving / compressibility problem (I gather not completely fixed until P-38L?), problems with the turbos and / or intercoolers, the slow ailerons (fixed by boosted ailerons in P-38J I believe), engine overheating at altitude (fixed in P-38H I think), the electrical generators (I believe a second generator was added mid run in the J series?) pilot heaters (not sure when that was fixed),

You're quoting issues that were mainly encountered in Europe. Earlier J models had their dive flaps installed so that issue was fixed, as far as avoiding compressibility, it seems like the PTO pilots were better trained on the aircraft.

Wildcat · Oct 21, 2021

Schweik said:
Does anyone know precisely when Spitfire Mk VIII were active in Theater?

First MkVIII operational sorties were flown on the following:-
79 sqn RAAF - 18 Feb 45 from Morotai (Sweep of the North coast of Halmahera Is).
452 sqn RAAF - 22 Dec 44 from Morotai (11 aircraft night patrol over Pitoe airstrip for Japanese intruders).
457 sqn RAAF - 11 Oct 44 from Darwin (Scramble - identified as a friendly aircraft).
54 sqn RAF - 21 Apr 44 from Darwin (Scramble - identified as friendly).
548 sqn RAF - 5 Sep 44 from Darwin (Strafing attack against Japanese held Lingat village on Selaru Is)
549 sqn RAF - 16 Jul 44 from Darwin (Scramble - identified as friendly).

FLYBOYJ · Oct 21, 2021

Schweik said:
And I don't think there were enough P-38s active at that time to really account for the difference. Part of it sure, but I think a lot of it was the other P-40 units and the Navy and Marine F4Fs out in the Solomon Islands. And the Beaufighters and even the P-39s.

Now that I'm at my desk - referencing "P-38 Lightning at War" (Christy/ Ethell) in Jan 43' the 5th AF fighter command had 330 fighters on hand; 80 P-38s, 72 P-400s, 178 P-40s. May 1943 115 P-38Gs arrived in Australia and they made up the 475th FG, the first all P-38 fighter group in theater. I don't know what the attrition rate was for the 80 P-38s on hand in January, but it would seem those numbers were comparative with other aircraft being operated in theater at the same time. The Japanese attempted to regain air superiority over eastern New Guinea with operation "I-go" (April 43) which failed. According to the referenced book the Japanese lost 32 bombers and 23 fighters mainly to P-38s. On April 18, 1943 Yamamoto was killed by 347th FS P-38s.

GrauGeist · Oct 21, 2021

Schweik said:
The biggest difference the P-38 did make was as you said, the longer range escort ability, though Japanese fighters weren't super effective against B-25s and B-24s even unescorted

Unescorted bombers (regardless of type) were dead meat without escort unless they were operating above the operational ceiling of the A6M (or KI-43).

Schweik · Oct 21, 2021

Wildcat said:
First MkVIII operational sorties were flown on the following:-
79 sqn RAAF - 18 Feb 45 from Morotai (Sweep of the North coast of Halmahera Is).
452 sqn RAAF - 22 Dec 44 from Morotai (11 aircraft night patrol over Pitoe airstrip for Japanese intruders).
457 sqn RAAF - 11 Oct 44 from Darwin (Scramble - identified as a friendly aircraft).
54 sqn RAF - 21 Apr 44 from Darwin (Scramble - identified as friendly).
548 sqn RAF - 5 Sep 44 from Darwin (Strafing attack against Japanese held Lingat village on Selaru Is)
549 sqn RAF - 16 Jul 44 from Darwin (Scramble - identified as friendly).

When did the Mk V Spitfires in Theater lose or replace their Vokes filters?

Schweik · Oct 21, 2021

You're quoting issues that were mainly encountered in Europe. Earlier J models had their dive flaps installed so that issue was fixed, as far as avoiding compressibility, it seems like the PTO pilots were better trained on the aircraft.

I believe all of those were issues in the MTO and PTO as well, just not as severe in the PTO because the P-38s could more easily outpace the Japanese fighters and could evade them in a high-speed limb. They didn't have to do the Split-S to vertical dive escape maneuver that the other fighters used.

FLYBOYJ said:
Now that I'm at my desk - referencing "P-38 Lightning at War" (Christy/ Ethell) in Jan 43' the 5th AF fighter command had 330 fighters on hand; 80 P-38s, 72 P-400s, 178 P-40s.

Add to that 75, 76 and 77 Squadrons RAAF (all flying P-40s, and all as part of No. 9 Operational Group under 5th Airforce) and 79 sqn flying Spitfire Vc, and No.s 14 and 15 RNZAF flying P-40s from Guadalcanal, plus the Marine and Navy Wildcats also at Guadalcanal, and soon after, Marine Corsairs.

FLYBOYJ said:
May 1943 115 P-38Gs arrived in Australia and they made up the 475th FG, the first all P-38 fighter group in theater. I don't know what the attrition rate was for the 80 P-38s on hand in January, but it would seem those numbers were comparative with other aircraft being operated in theater at the same time. The Japanese attempted to regain air superiority over eastern New Guinea with operation "I-go" (April 43) which failed. According to the referenced book the Japanese lost 32 bombers and 23 fighters mainly to P-38s. On April 18, 1943 Yamamoto was killed by 347th FS P-38s.

Point being, they had already lost air superiority by then.

FLYBOYJ · Oct 22, 2021

Schweik said:
I believe all of those were issues in the MTO and PTO as well, just not as severe in the PTO because the P-38s could more easily outpace the Japanese fighters and could evade them in a high-speed limb. They didn't have to do the Split-S to vertical dive escape maneuver that the other fighters used.

Can you show where any unit in the SWP complained about cockpit heat? Turbos blowing up? Chronic engine failures? There were documented problems with intercoolers that were handled at the squadron level, PTO P-38 pilots knew when to avoid compressibility issues and because of tactics didn't complain about not having boosted ailerons (but welcomed them when the J model became available)

Schweik said:
Add to that 75, 76 and 77 Squadrons RAAF (all flying P-40s, and all as part of No. 9 Operational Group under 5th Airforce) and 79 sqn flying Spitfire Vc, and No.s 14 and 15 RNZAF flying P-40s from Guadalcanal, plus the Marine and Navy Wildcats also at Guadalcanal, and soon after, Marine Corsairs.

OK they all contributed but I don't know what your point is.

Schweik said:
Point being, they had already lost air superiority by then.

While there were other contributors to winning air superiority over eastern New Guinea, the P-38 pushed it over the edge (again late 1942, early 1943)

Schweik · Oct 22, 2021

FLYBOYJ said:
Can you show where any unit in the SWP complained about cockpit heat?

I don't think I have to point out, it's cold at 25,000 ft regardless of where you are on the globe.

FLYBOYJ said:
Turbos blowing up? Chronic engine failures? There were documented problems with intercoolers that were handled at the squadron level, PTO P-38 pilots knew when to avoid compressibility issues and because of tactics didn't complain about not having boosted ailerons (but welcomed them when the J model became available)

I don't think all the problems just went away when they arrived in the Pacific Ocean. They were just a bit more severe in Europe because the German and Italian planes were a lot faster, negating the P-38s main advantage. A P-38 couldn't escape from a Bf 109 in a high speed climb like they could from a Ki-43 or a Zero, so the risks associated with diving were more telling.

That said, I didn't say anything about chronic engine failures.

FLYBOYJ said:
OK they all contributed but I don't know what your point is.

There were plenty of other fighters engaging the enemy all through 1942 (and 43) and the P-38s were just a small part of that.

FLYBOYJ said:
While there were other contributors to winning air superiority over eastern New Guinea, the P-38 pushed it over the edge (again late 1942, early 1943)

My point is, I don't think it was down to the P-38s. Not purely, not even mostly. Certainly not in 1942. That is basically a postwar cliche, IMO.

wuzak · Oct 22, 2021

FLYBOYJ said:
PTO P-38 pilots knew when to avoid compressibility issues and because of tactics didn't complain about not having boosted ailerons (but welcomed them when the J model became available)

Did P-38s operate at lower altitudes in the PTO, avoiding the compressibility issues?

Schweik · Oct 22, 2021

From the pilot interview I was just reading, (from a guy stationed at Guadalcanal in early 1943) they were routinely flying at 25,000 ft

GrauGeist · Oct 22, 2021

Schweik said:
I don't think I have to point out, it's cold at 25,000 ft regardless of where you are on the globe.

The PTO saw average operating altitudes lower than 25,000 feet.
The ETO was about the only theater (with certain exceptions for the CBI) where high altitude operations were the norm.

BiffF15 · Oct 22, 2021

Schweik said:
From the pilot interview I was just reading, (from a guy stationed at Guadalcanal in early 1943) they were routinely flying at 25,000 ft

The standard lapse rate in aviation is that temperature drops 2C per thousand feet. If it's 95F/35C on an island in the SWP, then it's -5C/23F at 20k an -15C/5F at 25k.

Europe at sea level temp of 0C/32F (freezing) is -40C/-40F at 20k and -45C/-49F at 25k.

There is quite a difference in temp between the two, and the ability to warm the cockpit in one does not mean it's a given for the other. Or vice versa.

I consider Rome to be in Southern Europe. It's just over 60 miles south of New York, NY iIRC. When you watch the weather babe this week and she shows the cold air bulges poking down into the US, note how much bigger they are in Canada. Canadas weather is much more like Europes than the US.

Also of note is the contrails level. In Germany they can be down into the low 20s, hence all the photos showing them during raids / air battles. In the US low cons would be in the high 30s. Add about 5k or more for summer.

Cloud thickness is unbelievable in Europe. In the Eagle we had normal fingertip (close formation) with a 3' spacing between wings. Use that formation in Europe and you can't see the other jet. So they made a "weather" close formation for the Eagle where we overlapped wings just so you could see the other guys wingtip. I've been there and could see only his wingtip and not more than 2 feet of wing.

Start noting attire for guys in the SWP during the early part of the war, and guys operating out of Okinawa / Tinian during the latter part or closing days. Summer flying early on, heavier later due to operating over Japan during cold weather. Flight profiles early on were lower than later but on whole much lower than Europe as well. Big picture it's not an apples to apples comparison weather wise between Europe and the SWP.

Cheers,
Biff

Shortround6 · Oct 22, 2021

There are (or were) several 'standards' for temperature at altitude charts/curves.

The one I have in a old book shows that a 40 degree difference at sea level between standard (59 degrees F) and 'hot day' (100 degrees F at sea level and staying 100 degrees F to about 6,000ft) shows a difference of 40 degrees F from 35,000ft and on up. There is about a 60 degree difference at 6,000ft with the extra 20 degrees differecne fading out up to 35,000ft.

Other curves/standards could very well be different but Biff is spot on. Temps at altitude in the SW Pacific are way different than temps at altitude over Europe.
P-38s were also thrown into combat in Europe in the late Fall of the year. No time to figure things out or slowly acquire experience.

edit for typo 30 degree difference at 6000ft should be 60 degrees.

FLYBOYJ · Oct 22, 2021

Schweik said:
I don't think I have to point out, it's cold at 25,000 ft regardless of where you are on the globe.

I don't think all the problems just went away when they arrived in the Pacific Ocean. They were just a bit more severe in Europe because the German and Italian planes were a lot faster, negating the P-38s main advantage. A P-38 couldn't escape from a Bf 109 in a high speed climb like they could from a Ki-43 or a Zero, so the risks associated with diving were more telling.

You did not have PTO pilots experiencing the same issues as in the ETO because there were operating at lower altitudes most of the time.

Read about the lapse rate in the posts above...

As far as your second statement - what model P-38 and -109? The Later model P-38s had great climbing ability

Schweik said:
That said, I didn't say anything about chronic engine failures.

But they were part of the issues in the ETO - you said the P-38 had the same issues in the PTO! So again, show us proof of this!

Schweik said:
There were plenty of other fighters engaging the enemy all through 1942 (and 43) and the P-38s were just a small part of that.

There were plenty of fighters in theater during the period, but where you're wrong is the P-38 had a BIG part of the mission getting accomplished with regards to AAF operations. I'm not saying that it's presence was a war winning factor, bit it made a greater difference than that you're giving it credit for.

Schweik said:
My point is, I don't think it was down to the P-38s. Not purely, not even mostly. Certainly not in 1942. That is basically a postwar cliche, IMO.

Again, you're opinion. If this was down to a "postwar cliche," why did General Kenney make P-38 acquisition one of his top priorities? Yep, just your opinion

Japanese Zero vs Spitfire vs FW 190

"THE GREAT GAZOO"

Banned

"THE GREAT GAZOO"

"THE GREAT GAZOO"

Major

Banned

"THE GREAT GAZOO"

Major

"THE GREAT GAZOO"

Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung

Banned

Banned

"THE GREAT GAZOO"

Banned

Captain

Banned

Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung

Tech Sergeant

Major General

"THE GREAT GAZOO"

Users who are viewing this thread

Similar threads