MOST UNDERRATED AIRCRAFT OF WWII?

[XBe02Drvr]

IMHO the P-38 didn't achieve the ultimate fame of the Mustang and the Hellcat because it didn't rate it. Yes it was an impressive aircraft for its time, but it was a design generation older than the other two, and due to its protracted development, its time was almost over by the time it saw combat. It's main asset was range, but like any heavy, complex twin, it suffered a nimbleness deficit in the air superiority arena against single engine fighters. In both the ETO and the PTO, it was the first Army fighter on the scene with the range to do the job right, but its effectiveness was limited by teething problems and training issues. Consequently, its head start over its more renowned contemporaries turned out to be rather short.
The attrition of veteran pilots issue was a structural problem with our opponents in both theaters and would have occurred regardless of what we flew against them. (Except maybe P-shooters.)
So in a nutshell, the Lightning got what it deserved: some good press and praise for its strengths, but not the acclaim EARNED by its contemporaries. A great plane, but not the world-beater claimed by a certain fanboy around here.
Cheers.
Wes

 

[Dimlee]

My shortlist :F2A, Bf-110, I-153, I-16, Il-4, Ki-43, P-39, C-47.
Of these, I would choose the I-153, Il-4(DB-3F ) being the close second.

Speaking about VVS, I'd suggest Li-2 (DC-3 licensed and heavily modified) as a bomber. It was certainly "overshadowed" as per Glider's definition. Li-2 played significant role in ADD (long range aviation) and in its successor 18th VA (air force army) up to raids on Koenigsberg in April 1945. Little known fact: Li-2 was the most numerous long range bomber ("long range" in VVS terms) in USSR in 1945.

 

[Shortround6]

IMHO the P-38 didn't achieve the ultimate fame of the Mustang and the Hellcat because it didn't rate it. Yes it was an impressive aircraft for its time, but it was a design generation older than the other two, and due to its protracted development, its time was almost over by the time it saw combat. It's main asset was range, but like any heavy, complex twin, it suffered a nimbleness deficit in the air superiority arena against single engine fighters. In both the ETO and the PTO, it was the first Army fighter on the scene with the range to do the job right, but its effectiveness was limited by teething problems and training issues. Consequently, its head start over its more renowned contemporaries turned out to be rather short.
The attrition of veteran pilots issue was a structural problem with our opponents in both theaters and would have occurred regardless of what we flew against them. (Except maybe P-shooters.)
So in a nutshell, the Lightning got what it deserved: some good press and praise for its strengths, but not the acclaim EARNED by its contemporaries. A great plane, but not the world-beater claimed by a certain fanboy around here.
Cheers.
Wes

I agree with most of the post in General. In regards to the bolded part, it's time stretched for almost a year and half. From some point in 1942 up to about January of 1944, give or take a few weeks. Due to the small numbers it never dominated any theater it was in during that time but in several theaters it allowed other US fighters to do their lower altitude "thing" (and or shorter range"thing") with less interference and thus allowed a greater total effort to be made.

Once you get into 1944 I think they were trying to dream up new roles for the P-38. Formation bombing, ground attack with rockets, etc. Which tends to show they were no longer needed as long range high altitude fighters.

 

[XBe02Drvr]

The reason for the "time almost over" comment was that the design contemporaries of the P-38, the Zero, P-39, P-40, FW-190, etc, were in service well before it, and already in danger of being overshadowed by newer designs by the time the Lightning was sorted out and becoming effective. As happened to it in short order, with their groups moving on to Mustangs.
Cheers,
Wes

 

[Hairog]

The P-38 began escorting 8th AAF bombers just 6-7 weeks before the P-51 entered service in the ETO. There only one group, the 55th, flying those early escort missions, so it seems rather unlikely that the Lightning would have had a significant impact before the Mustangs show up.

Emphasis and underlining added by me:

"it is worth noting that cumulative deployments of the Merlin powered P-51 matched the P-38 only as late as the end of 1944

, which is clearly at odds with the established mythology. With the 8th AF, the long range escort load was shared equally by the P-38 and P-51 throughout the decisive first half of 1944."

Worth repeating apparently..."it is worth noting that cumulative deployments of the Merlin powered P-51 matched the P-38 only as late as the end of 1944,

 

[MiTasol]

Speaking about VVS, I'd suggest Li-2 (DC-3 licensed and heavily modified) as a bomber. It was certainly "overshadowed" as per Glider's definition. Li-2 played significant role in ADD (long range aviation) and in its successor 18th VA (air force army) up to raids on Koenigsberg in April 1945. Little known fact: Li-2 was the most numerous long range bomber ("long range" in VVS terms) in USSR in 1945.

I was not aware that the Li-2 was used by a bomber by the USSR. This further supports the my suggestion in post 410 on page 21 that the DC3 and its derivatives was the most under-rated aircraft in WW2.

• In the USA transport, glider, glider tug, paratroop transport, supply dropper and general multi-purpose aircraft.
• Stayed in US military inventory past the end of the Vietnam war where it was still a potent weapon in roles the designers never contemplated
  
• Russian long range bomber.
• Licenced production in Japan of the Daks older/smaller brother, the DC-2
• Also used by many other forces and roles

 

[swampyankee]

Could the Griffon be used in a future mark of the P51, after the H?

I believe it could be done in a service aircraft. It was done in Precious Metal

 

[wuzak]

I believe it could be done in a service aircraft. It was done in Precious Metal

At the time of the development of the Mustang X and the XP-51B, there were discussions between Rolls-Royce and NAA about adapting the Griffon 60 series into the Mustang airframe.

NAA felt there would be too much rework for it to be worthwhile.

I'm guessing that work would revolve around the strengthening of the fuselage (as was required of the Spitfire) and the increase in cooling requirements.

 

[Hairog]

IMHO the P-38 didn't achieve the ultimate fame of the Mustang and the Hellcat because it didn't rate it. Yes it was an impressive aircraft for its time, but it was a design generation older than the other two, and due to its protracted development,

The L model was arguably the best piston engine fighter of WWII. With all the fixes in, the true design genius of the Lightning came to the fore. Imagine a two engine ( how may pilots did that save) plane that could out turn and out maneuver the 109 and 190 as well as the vaunted Zero and Spitfire.

its time was almost over by the time it saw combat.

Even during the war, the P-38, P-47 and P-51 each had adherents who argued the
favorable points of each, sometimes quite vehemently, and, obviously, the
arguments continue today. Capt. Jim Tapp was training supervisor of the 78FS
of the 21FG temporarily based at Bellows while it transitioned from P-47s to
P-51s. One day, he was flying a P-47 in company with two P-51s when they were
bounced by two P-38s. "They ended up chasing each other in a circle with the
performance pretty equal. I had the P-47 wide open and was turning inside all
of them, but they seemed to be making two circles to my one. The P-47 would
have done better high up, but even at altitude the 47 wasn't a match for the 51
or 38."
Later, the P-47 adherents challenged the P-51 buffs to a race. A P-47D-26
belonging to the group CO, Col. Beckworth, was stripped of bomb racks, gone
over with extra care by the ground crew and waxed till it shone. Capt. Tapp
grabbed the first available P-51D he could sign out. The duo met up over Kaena
Point at 30,000 and headed for Bellows. When the P-47 was at full throttle and
full rpm, Tapp asked, "Is that all you've got?" When he received an
affirmative, he opened the Mustang's throttle to "full goose bozo" position and
simply ran away from the Jug. Tapp was back on the ground sipping a Coke when
the Col's. P-47 touched down.
In a mock dogfight between the Mustang and the Lightning, the skilled P-38
driver would fight in the vertical, taking advantage of his superior climb
speed and aerobatic ability. The skilled Mustang pilot would attempt to extend
away and come back unobserved. Once either locked onto the tail of the other,
it would be very difficult to shake. The P-38 driver in such a situation would
want to work the speed of the engagement down into the stall area where the
Mustang couldn't follow him. He could also split-S, dive and zoom, probably
losing the P-51. The Mustang pilot with a P-38 on his tail had fewer options.
At high altitude, he could point the nose at the ground and keep it there till
the the Lightning dwindled, then zoom climb into a fast, shallow climb to
extend away.

It's main asset was range, but like any heavy, complex twin, it suffered a nimbleness deficit in the air superiority arena against single engine fighters. In both the ETO and the PTO, it was the first Army fighter on the scene with the range to do the job right, but its effectiveness was limited by teething problems and training issues. Consequently, its head start over its more renowned contemporaries turned out to be rather short.
The attrition of veteran pilots issue was a structural problem with our opponents in both theaters and would have occurred regardless of what we flew against them. (Except maybe P-shooters.)

The Lightning was very nimble and could easily out turn/out maneuver the 109, 190 as well as most Japanese aircraft.
It was certainly a better dog fighter than the Jug and Mustang.

Interesting that the twin-engine fighter would have the advantage in a slow
turning contest, or in the vertical--loops, split-Ses.
What would typically happen if a Mustang bounced a Lightning would be that the
P-38 would split-S, the Mustang would follow through the roll but keep on
diving for some distance before pulling out, then circle around for another try
at a bounce. The Lightning pilot would continue the split-S up into a loop and
scan the sky for the Mustang. Typically, he would spot him some distance below
beginning a pull out. The Lightning driver would finish the loop and fall on
the climbing Mustang, locking onto his tail. The smart Mustang pilot would
reduce the chance of this by rolling out of h is escape dive into a climb in a
different direction. He might do a corkscrew climb. The "winner" of the
dogfight would be the pilot who better kept sight of his foe, who better
anticipated what his foe would do next, and who knew what to do with his own
airplane to counter that anticipated move; in other words, the better pilot
won--not the airplane.

So in a nutshell, the Lightning got what it deserved: some good press and praise for its strengths, but not the acclaim EARNED by its contemporaries. A great plane, but not the world-beater claimed by a certain fanboy around here.
Cheers.
Wes

I find that people who resort to name calling and trying to label others in a debate, consciously or, in most cases, unconscious know they are losing the discussion. It's kind of ...I'm losing so I'm going to take my ball and go home.

And I obviously disagree with your last statement.

 

[wuzak]

The L model was arguably the best piston engine fighter of WWII. With all the fixes in, the true design genius of the Lightning came to the fore. Imagine a two engine ( how may pilots did that save) plane that could out turn and out maneuver the 109 and 190 as well as the vaunted Zero and Spitfire.

I doubt that very much.

 

[XBe02Drvr]

easily out turn/out maneuver the 109, 190 as well as most Japanese aircraft.
It was certainly a better dog fighter than the Jug and Mustang.

EVENTUALLY it could do all those things, by the time it gained more horsepower, boosted ailerons, combat flaps, paddle props, etc. But by then its time was up and it was being superseded by newer designs that could do the same job at less logistical, organizational, and economic cost.
Well, it's clear no one is going to shake you loose from your obsession, and equally clear you're not going to convince me of it, so in the interests of domestic tranquility, I think I'll just "take my ball and go home". Y'all have fun now, hear?
Cheers,
Wes

 

[Stig1207]

"it is worth noting that cumulative deployments of the Merlin powered P-51 matched the P-38 only as late as the end of 1944,

In all theatres? That may be right; but in the ETO by the end of '44, P-38's in the 8th AAF had been replaced by Mustangs.

 

[wuzak]

EVENTUALLY it could do all those things, by the time it gained more horsepower, boosted ailerons, combat flaps, paddle props, etc. But by then its time was up and it was being superseded by newer designs that could do the same job at less logistical, organizational, and economic cost.
Well, it's clear no one is going to shake you loose from your obsession, and equally clear you're not going to convince me of it, so in the interests of domestic tranquility, I think I'll just "take my ball and go home". Y'all have fun now, hear?
Cheers,
Wes

I don't think it could do all of those things.

 

[tomo pauk]

The L model was arguably the best piston engine fighter of WWII.
...

Perhaps you'd be so kind to back up your opinion with facts?

 

[pbehn]

As the war ended the USA ordered long range P-47s and the P51-H, when a twin seat fighter was needed they chose a twin Mustang

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

This conversation should be good...

 

[vikingBerserker]

I was not aware that the Li-2 was used by a bomber by the USSR. This further supports the my suggestion in post 410 on page 21 that the DC3 and its derivatives was the most under-rated aircraft in WW2.

• In the USA transport, glider, glider tug, paratroop transport, supply dropper and general multi-purpose aircraft.
• Stayed in US military inventory past the end of the Vietnam war where it was still a potent weapon in roles the designers never contemplated
  
• Russian long range bomber.
• Licenced production in Japan of the Daks older/smaller brother, the DC-2
• Also used by many other forces and roles

I had no idea either, I have to vote for the DC-3 as well.

 

[soulezoo]

I know of a couple DC-3's still flying. One of them for skydiving service.

There's another really sad and pitiful one at the end of the taxiway in Port-au-Prince... not sure if it's still there.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

I know of a couple DC-3's still flying. One of them for skydiving service.

There's another really sad and pitiful one at the end of the taxiway in Port-au-Prince... not sure if it's still there.

There are lots of DC-3/C-47's flying.

We have 3 C-47's built in 1944 right here at my airfield.

 

[soulezoo]

Yes, I know there are (testament to the airframe). I was only speaking to those I see regularly still. My post was lacking of course.