P-38 Lightning vs P-51 Mustang: Which was the Better Fighter? (1 Viewer)

[pbehn]

Ignoring of course the historical facts.

1 Americans flew Spitfires on occasions.
2 Goering would have flown a Bf109 but he was too freakin' fat.
3 Since even today a pilot is worth more than the aircraft he flies two P51s are not cheaper than one P38, unless the sole object is to count them up parked on the ground.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

This jerk-off is from Sheffield - can some of our friends in the UK pay a visit to this moron and give him a sulfuric acid enema?!?

 

[GrauGeist]

 

[pbehn]

This jerk-off is from Sheffield - can some of our friends in the UK pay a visit to this moron and give him a sulfuric acid enema?!?

It must be Nick Clegg, everything is clear.

 

[Glider]

This jerk-off is from Sheffield - can some of our friends in the UK pay a visit to this moron and give him a sulfuric acid enema?!?

Waste of good acid

 

[Guv]

The B-25 was a relative bargain compared to the likes of the B-26! The B-26 was one pretty pricey twin engine bomber.
Oh, and I voted for neither, both were awesome fighters and had their strong points in my opinion. The concentrated guns on the P-38 kind of appeal to me.

 

[Neal]

As much as I love the P51, and is a running joke in the family that I like the P38 so much, that I make everyone in my family know they use twin Allison V1710 engines, I will grudgingly say that the P51 is a better fighter. As far as a better aircraft overall, I'd have to give it to the P51 because of cost only. If cost wasn't a concern, then I'd say the P38 was the better choice overall.

There were several reasons they weren't used in the European theater, mostly due to bad circumstance. First, If you remember, the first batches of the P38's sent to England were early models, and they were not given superchargers. At that time, superchargers were a top secret thing, and they were afraid that the technology would be captured by the Germans if Germany invaded England. Because of that, they severely lacked power. England rejected them because they just didn't have enough power at altitude for that reason. Second, The British demanded they make several changes, like not wanting the propellers to rotate the same direction for commonality of parts. and as a third strike against them being used in the European theater was the fact they didn't have dive flaps. We all know about the compressibility issues with the P38. In a dive, the P38 would reach subsonic speeds, the tail would flutter, and the P38 would go into a dive with all control stuck. The retrofit flaps were sent out, but the ones sent to England were shot down by an RAF pilot due to mistaken identity. So, many of the early P38's in the European theater were not quite up to spec. By the time the P51's came, the P38's already had a bad reputation and were slowly phased out.

Now, in the Pacific theater, they worked just great. The twin engines helped bring many pilots home, the flaps worked fine, and they had superchargers. The P38 made for a fine interceptor. By that time, air tactics worked well. Although the Japanese Zero could out turn it during a dogfight, the P38 opened up other tactical options that other planes just could not do. In North Africa, they fared better, and withstood the sandy environment very well compared to other planes.

To directly compare the two.... both were quite fast. I believe the P38 could out climb a P51, they both dove well, The P38 was a better weapons platform overall since there are no convergence points on a P38. The P38 had more pilot workload than the P51. If there was a hypothetical dogfight between 50 of each planes, I think it would be a coin toss as to who would come out the winner. If there was a hypothetical bombing runs, Again it would be 50/50. For long range, they both could go pretty far.. P38's also have always had a type of "bubble canopy" which didn't come until later versions of the P51. But, when you factor in cost, It would be P51 hands down.

Which wold I want fly? I'd prefer the P-38J-25-LO (with dive flaps). If I was deciding which plane to be in my inventory for a war, it would be the P51. Which plane is better? Well, that's like asking which car is better... neither of those two planes are a Yugo.

 

[swampyankee]

Leaving aside the P-38's design defects, some of which made it nearly unusable for the 8th Air Force's escort needs, its performance was, overall, not superior to the P-51 and it had roughly twice the maintenance and supply needs. On these factors, alone, the P-51 should be considered superior. When you add that the P-38 was a more complicated aircraft to fly, requiring more training, the P-51 gets another point in its. favor.

 

[CORSNING]

Leaving aside the P-38's design defects, some of which made it nearly unusable for the 8th Air Force's escort needs, its performance was, overall, not superior to the P-51 and it had roughly twice the maintenance and supply needs.

I'll grant that the P-38 had more than its share of problems in 1943. The fuel wasn't quite right
for it and poor cabin heating...etc. I think I would have a problem maneuvering a twin aircraft
with ice cycles on my twinkies. The P-51 was the obvious choice from a cost stand point. I
personally would opt for a P-47 for the protection it gave its pilot. When the P-38J-25 came
into operational service in June 1944 the Mustang from an operational standpoint had no overall
advantages other than cost. Purchase cost, maintenance cost, pilot training cost...etc.
From a performance stand point they were pretty even, give and taking all down the line.
Starting in June 1944 from a qualified pilots standpoint there was little to chose between
the two in Europe. However, the die had been cast and the decision made by that time.[/QUOTE]

 

[pbehn]

With aircraft types I think a large credit should be given for being in existence. The P 38 first flew in 1939 and was in service in 1941, you cannot discount its service from 1941 to mid 1943 unless you say what plane could do the same job. Whatever its faults the P38 was there like the Hurricane.

 

[Dave Woods]

well, even the books that i read which state that the Mustang was the best say that the P-38 was unfairly overshadowed, from reading the other posts it says that more P-51s were lost in training accidents than P-38s, P-38s were also (i think) in service way before the P-51

the P-51 was used in the Pacific, my grandfather told me numerous stories of P-51s strading nearby airfields in the Philippines, and has also seen a long dogfight between a P-51 and a Zero, and guess what, the Mustang came home, with Damage while the Zero escaped

If the Mustang DOES win so easily, why bother putting up a poll here?

and btw, P-38s werent inferior to German planes

 

[pbehn]

Dave, welcome to the forum, Looma hasn't posted here for 6 years

 

[Dave Woods]

d_bader remarks the P-38 was inferior to German planes and I think a lot of experts would disagree. While it was probably inferior to the P-51 as a pure dog fighter it was superior in many ways to the best American and German planes. If memory serves me correctly Richard Bong was one of the highest ranking AmericanAces of WWII and he flew P-38s almost exclusively. Most of our enemies feared the plane and had several nick names for it such as "two planes, one pilot", "fork tailed devil" and others. It had about the same top speed as the P-51 and by the end of the war when fitted with drop tanks had a 2500 mile range. It was less vulnerable to ground fire than the P-51 and a very forgiving plane to fly. Many consider the FW 190 the best German fighter it had slower top speed, slower acceleration, larger turning radius, much slower climb rates etc etc than the P-38 so the hard numbers factually are in favor of the P-38..

 

[pbehn]

d_bader remarks the P-38 was inferior to German planes and I think a lot of experts would disagree. While it was probably inferior to the P-51 as a pure dog fighter it was superior in many ways to the best American and German planes. If memory serves me correctly Richard Bong was one of the highest ranking AmericanAces of WWII and he flew P-38s almost exclusively. Most of our enemies feared the plane and had several nick names for it such as "two planes, one pilot", "fork tailed devil" and others. It had about the same top speed as the P-51 and by the end of the war when fitted with drop tanks had a 2500 mile range. It was less vulnerable to ground fire than the P-51 and a very forgiving plane to fly. Many consider the FW 190 the best German fighter it had slower top speed, slower acceleration, larger turning radius, much slower climb rates etc etc than the P-38 so the hard numbers factually are in favor of the P-38..

Dave, d_bader hasn't posted here for 9 years.

 

[swampyankee]

Ignoring of course the historical facts.

1 Americans flew Spitfires on occasions.
2 Goering would have flown a Bf109 but he was too freakin' fat.
3 Since even today a pilot is worth more than the aircraft he flies two P51s are not cheaper than one P38, unless the sole object is to count them up parked on the ground.

1: Yes; ask Bob Hoover
2: So what? Did Hap Arnold ever fly combat in WW2? Both had other responsibilities that most service pilots could not perform. (although I do think Goering crashing and burning, preferably with adolph in the plane, in 1939 would have been a wonderful thing...)
3: Well, you'll still need the same number of pilots to do the same tasks. The P-38, even by the most absurdly optimistic estimate wasn't enough better than the P-51 to replace them on a one-for-two basis. Since I don't think it was significantly, if any better, than the P-51, the USAAF would still need an equal number of P-38s as P-51s. Since they're likely to have lower dispatch rates and higher abort rates, more would be needed.

 

[pbehn]

1: Yes; ask Bob Hoover
2: So what? Did Hap Arnold ever fly combat in WW2? Both had other responsibilities that most service pilots could not perform.
3: Well, you'll still need the same number of pilots to do the same tasks.

LOL swampy, my post was to a guy who actually got banned before I hit "post reply"

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

d_bader remarks the P-38 was inferior to German planes and I think a lot of experts would disagree. While it was probably inferior to the P-51 as a pure dog fighter it was superior in many ways to the best American and German planes. If memory serves me correctly Richard Bong was one of the highest ranking AmericanAces of WWII and he flew P-38s almost exclusively. Most of our enemies feared the plane and had several nick names for it such as "two planes, one pilot", "fork tailed devil" and others. It had about the same top speed as the P-51 and by the end of the war when fitted with drop tanks had a 2500 mile range. It was less vulnerable to ground fire than the P-51 and a very forgiving plane to fly. Many consider the FW 190 the best German fighter it had slower top speed, slower acceleration, larger turning radius, much slower climb rates etc etc than the P-38 so the hard numbers factually are in favor of the P-38..

I am not an anti-Lightning person, but the fork tailed devil nickname is a propoganda myth. The Germans never actually nicknamed it that.

 

[pbehn]

I am not an anti-Lightning person, but the fork tailed devil nickname is a propoganda myth. The Germans never actually nicknamed it that.

I believe the "two planes one pilot" is supposed to have come from the far east, such things can easily happen translating from one language to another. We all know what a bi-plane is, but it isn't two planes. Two planes, one pilot is no more or less valid than "single seater, twin boom". Often in Chinese and Japanese they use a single character to represent many concepts.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

I believe the "two planes one pilot" is supposed to have come from the far east, such things can easily happen translating from one language to another. We all know what a bi-plane is, but it isn't two planes. Two planes, one pilot is no more or less valid than "single seater, twin boom". Often in Chinese and Japanese they use a single character to represent many concepts.

That I can believe, but the fork tailed devil has been debunked.

 

[pbehn]

That I can believe, but the fork tailed devil has been debunked.

Adler, if a plane has wings because it flies like a bird, and has a tail because it flies like bird why does it have a nose and not a beak?

Aviation grew very quickly and had to find new words. Fuselage means spindle shaped, empennage means the feathering of an arrow, a pilot was a local expert mariner who guided ships in dangerous waters while "cockpit" came from where a naval man o war was steered, shaped like a pit that birds were put in to fight. Against that "One pilot, two planes" doesn't seem strange at all.

Terms like "fork tailed devil" and "whispering death" have been largely debunked, but since the RAF pilots called Bf109s "snappers" if they were to call an enemy plane like the P-38 anything it would be "fork tailed f@ckers" and that wouldn't have been written into history.