P-38 or Mosquito?
- Thread starter cheddar cheese
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
ccheese
Member In Perpetuity
I like the P-38 better. The lightening was designed as an interceptor. I think, in that role, it excelled. The later variants did their jobs, too, I do not believe the "mossie" was designed as an interceptor. To me it's like comparing apples to kumquats...
Charles
Charles
Readie
Chief Master Sergeant
The Lightning is a beautiful plane but, the Mossie could do more...
When the Mosquito entered production in 1941, it was one of the fastest operational aircraft in the world.[6] Entering widespread service in 1942, the Mosquito first operated as a high-speed, high-altitude photo-reconnaissance aircraft, and continued to operate in this role throughout the war. From mid-1942 to mid-1943 Mosquito bombers were used in high-speed, medium- or low-altitude missions, attacking factories, railways and other pinpoint targets within Germany and German-occupied Europe. From late 1943, Mosquito bomber units were formed into the Light Night Strike Force and used as pathfinders for RAF Bomber Command's heavy-bomber raids. They were also used as "nuisance" bombers, often dropping 4,000 lb (1,812 kg) "Cookies", in high-altitude, high-speed raids that German night fighters were almost powerless to intercept.
As a night fighter, from mid-1942, the Mosquito was used to intercept Luftwaffe raids on the United Kingdom, most notably defeating the German aerial offensive, Operation Steinbock, in 1944. Offensively, starting in late 1942, some Mosquito night-fighter units conducted intruder raids over Luftwaffe airfields and, as part of 100 Group, the Mosquito was used as a night fighter and intruder in support of RAF Bomber Command's heavy bombers, and played an important role in reducing bomber losses during 1944 and 1945.[7][nb 1] As a fighter-bomber in the Second Tactical Air Force, the Mosquito took part in "special raids", such as the attack on Amiens Prison in early 1944, and in other precision attacks against Gestapo or German intelligence and security forces. 2 TAF Mosquitos also played an important role operating in tactical support of the British Army during the 1944 Normandy Campaign. From 1943 Mosquitos were used by RAF Coastal Command strike squadrons, attacking Kriegsmarine U-boats (particularly in the 1943 Bay of Biscay offensive, where significant numbers of U-boats were sunk or damaged) and intercepting transport ship concentrations.
The Mosquito saw service with the Royal Air Force (RAF) and many other air forces in the European theatre, and the Mediterranean and Italian theatres. The Mosquito was also used by the RAF in the South East Asian theatre, and by the Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) based in the Halmaheras and Borneo during the Pacific War.
Operation Carthage - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
30 January 1943 Mosquito daylight attack on Berlin - to disrupt the Nazi Party's tenth anniversary celebrations. Wouldn't you have loved to see Hitlers face....
Cheers
John
When the Mosquito entered production in 1941, it was one of the fastest operational aircraft in the world.[6] Entering widespread service in 1942, the Mosquito first operated as a high-speed, high-altitude photo-reconnaissance aircraft, and continued to operate in this role throughout the war. From mid-1942 to mid-1943 Mosquito bombers were used in high-speed, medium- or low-altitude missions, attacking factories, railways and other pinpoint targets within Germany and German-occupied Europe. From late 1943, Mosquito bomber units were formed into the Light Night Strike Force and used as pathfinders for RAF Bomber Command's heavy-bomber raids. They were also used as "nuisance" bombers, often dropping 4,000 lb (1,812 kg) "Cookies", in high-altitude, high-speed raids that German night fighters were almost powerless to intercept.
As a night fighter, from mid-1942, the Mosquito was used to intercept Luftwaffe raids on the United Kingdom, most notably defeating the German aerial offensive, Operation Steinbock, in 1944. Offensively, starting in late 1942, some Mosquito night-fighter units conducted intruder raids over Luftwaffe airfields and, as part of 100 Group, the Mosquito was used as a night fighter and intruder in support of RAF Bomber Command's heavy bombers, and played an important role in reducing bomber losses during 1944 and 1945.[7][nb 1] As a fighter-bomber in the Second Tactical Air Force, the Mosquito took part in "special raids", such as the attack on Amiens Prison in early 1944, and in other precision attacks against Gestapo or German intelligence and security forces. 2 TAF Mosquitos also played an important role operating in tactical support of the British Army during the 1944 Normandy Campaign. From 1943 Mosquitos were used by RAF Coastal Command strike squadrons, attacking Kriegsmarine U-boats (particularly in the 1943 Bay of Biscay offensive, where significant numbers of U-boats were sunk or damaged) and intercepting transport ship concentrations.
The Mosquito saw service with the Royal Air Force (RAF) and many other air forces in the European theatre, and the Mediterranean and Italian theatres. The Mosquito was also used by the RAF in the South East Asian theatre, and by the Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) based in the Halmaheras and Borneo during the Pacific War.
Operation Carthage - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
30 January 1943 Mosquito daylight attack on Berlin - to disrupt the Nazi Party's tenth anniversary celebrations. Wouldn't you have loved to see Hitlers face....
Cheers
John
J dog
Airman 1st Class
I chose the lightning but there is one major disadvantage of the plane is when it dives it builds so much speed the controls don't work as well. they were both great planes but the differences being the Lightening being better at dog fighting and the Mosquito at bombing.
vinnye
Senior Airman
Got to be the wooden wonder for me.
I think the P38 was a good long range fighter, but the mossie was a fast intruder that had some ability if it were intercepted.
I think the P38 was a good long range fighter, but the mossie was a fast intruder that had some ability if it were intercepted.
aurora-7
Airman
One wooden wonder for me.
I think as a pure fighter, the 38 has the edge but for speed and handling, I'd go for the Mossie.
I think as a pure fighter, the 38 has the edge but for speed and handling, I'd go for the Mossie.
What roles could Mossie do that the P-38 could not?
Obviously the Mossie was a better a bomber, but the P-38 could be used as a bomber as well. Likewise the P-38 was probably a better fighter, but the Mossie could be used as a fighter as well. Both could be recon, both could be night fighters.
But, what could the Mossie do that the P-38 could not do. Not talking about what was better at what role, but what could either one do that the other could not?
I remember me and Lancaster hashing this discussion out years ago.
Carry a 4,000 lb block buster bomb for one thing, a torpedo, unguided rockets under its wings, a passenger in its bomb bay - BOAC used Mosquitos as fast transports during the war, carry a heavier load across a greater distance, operate from aircraft carriers - I'm sure there's more. The Mosquito came in a greater number of variants than the P-38.
Kind of a difficult one to really compare the two adequately, since one was designed as a high speed unarmed bomber, but was used in a multitude of roles and the other as a high altitude fighter. The Mosquito appeared in many different variants each with different characteristics; one that was used as a long range bomber had different performance to low altitude strike version for example. At first glance the Mosquito appears the more versatile airframe than the P-38, but as it's been pointed out, the P-38 made a better fighter vs fighter combat aircraft because that's what it was designed for. That alone makes comparison awkward.
Hard also to argue which was better in similar roles, such at high altitude reconnaissance, which one returned with images more often? How clear were the images? How often did each type escape interception? Apples and oranges...
I think this one boils down to personal opinion, national pride etc, all those things we shouldn't use in these kind of threads!
Last edited:
None of those are roles. We already stated that the Mossie was a better bomber. The P-38 however could be used as a bomber, correct? Absolutely.
Again carrying a 1000lbs of bombs does not make it any less of a bomber than a Mossie carrying 4000lb of bombs. A passenger plane that can only carry 2 passengers is still a passenger plane when compared to a passenger plane that can carry 6 passengers.
Examples of roles are fighter, bomber, ground attack, recon, etc.
As for your other suggestions. Lets see...
The P-38 could carry unguided rockets. Still not a role though? Ground attack would be a role, and both the Mossie and P-38 could do them.
Torpedo bomber. P-38s were modified to carry 2 torpedoes. None were used operationally however. Still could be done.
Carry a passenger. The P-38 did not have a bomb bay to carry a passenger, but could still carry passengers in purposely designed under wing pods. This was done in the Pacific. Mossie could certainly fulfill this role better, but the role could still be done by the Lightning. The Pods could also be used for cargo. Another P-38 was also modified to carry a passenger in a glazed nose.
Carrier operations. Lockheed offered a carrier based Lightning to the US Navy with folding wings and stronger undercarriage. The Navy chose not to, because they considered the Lightning too big, and there was no need for it. Point being? It was a role the Lighting could have fulfilled.
Greater numbers? What kind of role is that?
nuuumannn said:
Now that is something we can agree on.
nuuumannn said:
A fighter which was used in a multitude of roles.
nuuumannn said:
As did the P-38.
Fighter
Fighter Bomber
Ground Attack
Transport
Photo Recon
Dive Bomber
Night Fighter
Long Range Escort
Tested as a float plane
Pathfinder
Glider Tug
nuuumannn said:
That we can agree on.
nuuumannn said:
That is why I also stated in my original post we are not debating which one could do each role the best. The question was still what role the Mossie could do that the P-38 could not.
nuuumannn said:
Only if people let it...
Hi Adler, looks like I misunderstood the question.
As for the suggestions, okay, the P-38 could carry unguided rockets and could carry torpedoes, but did it do these in any wartime role? Was it assigned within a command specifically with these roles in mind? Not torpedoes, as you've stated. Passenger aircraft? Didn't know about the passenger pods - Mossie still did it as an established role on a frequent basis, the Lightning could hardly be called a transport type - again, not assigned as a passenger carrying aircraft within a command or service. Carrier based, then the Lightning could not as it did not, so any aircraft carrier based role that the Mossie could do the P-38 could not. As a bomber, the Mosquito was a long range bomber serving in Bomber Command; the P-38 could not carry out that role, there's another.
This is where we are splitting hairs, these roles that the Mossie variants carried out, the aircraft served in a command in each role, the aircraft was purpose built for these differing jobs, hence the different variants; the P-38 was a fighter that could carry out other roles, but it was not a "bomber" per se, it was used as one though, successfully. Likewise as a "transport" or even a "torpedo bomber" and "ground attack aircraft". Sure, it could do those things, but it was not those things - if you get what I'm saying. There were never squadrons of P-38 torpedo bombers operating with the navy, there was never an organisation that operated the P-38 purely as a transport, nor purely as a low level strike aircraft, nor as a bomber by bomber squadrons. This is where the Mossie differs with the P-38 in versatility.
As for the rest of what you did with my post - yeah, okay then...
As for the suggestions, okay, the P-38 could carry unguided rockets and could carry torpedoes, but did it do these in any wartime role? Was it assigned within a command specifically with these roles in mind? Not torpedoes, as you've stated. Passenger aircraft? Didn't know about the passenger pods - Mossie still did it as an established role on a frequent basis, the Lightning could hardly be called a transport type - again, not assigned as a passenger carrying aircraft within a command or service. Carrier based, then the Lightning could not as it did not, so any aircraft carrier based role that the Mossie could do the P-38 could not. As a bomber, the Mosquito was a long range bomber serving in Bomber Command; the P-38 could not carry out that role, there's another.
This is where we are splitting hairs, these roles that the Mossie variants carried out, the aircraft served in a command in each role, the aircraft was purpose built for these differing jobs, hence the different variants; the P-38 was a fighter that could carry out other roles, but it was not a "bomber" per se, it was used as one though, successfully. Likewise as a "transport" or even a "torpedo bomber" and "ground attack aircraft". Sure, it could do those things, but it was not those things - if you get what I'm saying. There were never squadrons of P-38 torpedo bombers operating with the navy, there was never an organisation that operated the P-38 purely as a transport, nor purely as a low level strike aircraft, nor as a bomber by bomber squadrons. This is where the Mossie differs with the P-38 in versatility.
As for the rest of what you did with my post - yeah, okay then...
Hi Adler, looks like I misunderstood the question.
As for the suggestions, okay, the P-38 could carry unguided rockets and could carry torpedoes, but did it do these in any wartime role? Was it assigned within a command specifically with these roles in mind? Not torpedoes, as you've stated. Passenger aircraft? Didn't know about the passenger pods - Mossie still did it as an established role on a frequent basis, the Lightning could hardly be called a transport type - again, not assigned as a passenger carrying aircraft within a command or service. Carrier based, then the Lightning could not as it did not, so any aircraft carrier based role that the Mossie could do the P-38 could not. As a bomber, the Mosquito was a long range bomber serving in Bomber Command; the P-38 could not carry out that role, there's another.
This is where we are splitting hairs, these roles that the Mossie variants carried out, the aircraft served in a command in each role, the aircraft was purpose built for these differing jobs, hence the different variants; the P-38 was a fighter that could carry out other roles, but it was not a "bomber" per se, it was used as one though, successfully. Likewise as a "transport" or even a "torpedo bomber" and "ground attack aircraft". Sure, it could do those things, but it was not those things - if you get what I'm saying. There were never squadrons of P-38 torpedo bombers operating with the navy, there was never an organisation that operated the P-38 purely as a transport, nor purely as a low level strike aircraft, nor as a bomber by bomber squadrons. This is where the Mossie differs with the P-38 in versatility.
As for the rest of what you did with my post - yeah, okay then...
Yes the P-38 used rockets operationaly? Why would thst be hard to believe? The task was not limited to the Mossie. German, US, British Acft all did it.
As for the rest of your post, you still have not answered it. Again we were not debating best here, all I am asking is what roles could not be performed. I agree we can't compare acft. I agree the Mossie was a more versatile design.
Also a command does not make an acft purpose or versatility. It is just a command.
As for what you started in your post to me...
Disrespect is a two way street...
Shortround6
Major General
The P-38L model was equipped to carry 10 5in rockets, The L model was first delivered from the factory in June of 1944, I am not sure when combat debut was.
June of 1944 also sees 39 P-38s from the 82nd FG bomb the refineries at Ploesti, with 39 P-38s of the 1st fighter group flying top cover.
Mission was not very successful and while these are not bomber "units" it was certainly a bomber mission.
Summer of 1944 also sees "droop snoot" missions. P-38s with guns removed and a clear nose, bomb sight and bombardier carried, several "droop snoot" P-38s are assigned to each formation as master bombers and the formation of p-38s drops when the "droop snoot's" do. Again still fighter groups but definitely bomber missions.
June of 1944 also sees 39 P-38s from the 82nd FG bomb the refineries at Ploesti, with 39 P-38s of the 1st fighter group flying top cover.
Mission was not very successful and while these are not bomber "units" it was certainly a bomber mission.
Summer of 1944 also sees "droop snoot" missions. P-38s with guns removed and a clear nose, bomb sight and bombardier carried, several "droop snoot" P-38s are assigned to each formation as master bombers and the formation of p-38s drops when the "droop snoot's" do. Again still fighter groups but definitely bomber missions.
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
The 28 Photo Squadron operated F-5Es (P-38J) with a passenger pod for a photographer. I do know the same pod was used to move injured soldiers in both the PTO and ETO - documented in the book "P-38 Lightning at War" (Christy Ethell)
4.5 inch M-8 rockets mounted in tubes just below the center fuselage were used by the 459th FS based out of Chittagona.
There were many more units who used these items in all theaters during WW2.
Even Wiki shows the rocket armament of the P-38.
4.5 inch M-8 rockets mounted in tubes just below the center fuselage were used by the 459th FS based out of Chittagona.
There were many more units who used these items in all theaters during WW2.
Even Wiki shows the rocket armament of the P-38.
Hi Adler, I'm curious about your suggestion that I was being disrespectful; from reading my threads I fail to see what I had written to cause disrespect, nevertheless, it most certainly was not my intention, so I unreservedly apologise if it seems implied.
Back to the P-38, yes, read about the rockets - didn't know about the type's use as a bomber against Ploesti - interesting.
As for my comments about the differences in both types use in different roles, they stand because in all the roles we've discussed, only as a pure single seat fighter vs fighter role would I choose the P-38; now, not to be accused of rubbishing the type, since I do think it is rather cool, having seen them flying at airshows, but in the other roles discussed, I would choose the Mosquito.
Putting it simply, the P-38 was a fighter designed as such, and although it was built as a photo recon platform, night fighter, like many other fighters it was used in other roles. The Mosquito was built as a bomber, but was also built as a specialised ground attack aircraft, as a torpedo carrier (although if I had a choice I'd pick the Beaufighter over the Mosquito in this role), as an aircraft carrier based aircraft etc aside from photo recon and night fighter variants. These were far from just modifications to the existing design, but planned specific variants built to carry out these roles. This is of importance because despite the P-38's ability to do these things, which it shared with other fighter types as pointed out elsewhere, the Mossie proved excellent beyond initial anticipation at them and was thus constructed and employed accordingly.
To reinforce my bias, this from a letter sent to the Air Ministry in February 1943 from Washington:
"When we compare our aircraft in production and the tactical operational range of your Mosquito with our F-5/P-38, there seems no doubt the purposes of our combined air forces will best be served if the A.A.F curtail their conversion of P-38 and rely in part on your Mosquito production."
Now, so as not to ruffle any more feathers, what I have done here is produce evidence as to why I choose the Mosquito over the P-38, not to denigrate the latter in any way.
Back to the P-38, yes, read about the rockets - didn't know about the type's use as a bomber against Ploesti - interesting.
As for my comments about the differences in both types use in different roles, they stand because in all the roles we've discussed, only as a pure single seat fighter vs fighter role would I choose the P-38; now, not to be accused of rubbishing the type, since I do think it is rather cool, having seen them flying at airshows, but in the other roles discussed, I would choose the Mosquito.
Putting it simply, the P-38 was a fighter designed as such, and although it was built as a photo recon platform, night fighter, like many other fighters it was used in other roles. The Mosquito was built as a bomber, but was also built as a specialised ground attack aircraft, as a torpedo carrier (although if I had a choice I'd pick the Beaufighter over the Mosquito in this role), as an aircraft carrier based aircraft etc aside from photo recon and night fighter variants. These were far from just modifications to the existing design, but planned specific variants built to carry out these roles. This is of importance because despite the P-38's ability to do these things, which it shared with other fighter types as pointed out elsewhere, the Mossie proved excellent beyond initial anticipation at them and was thus constructed and employed accordingly.
To reinforce my bias, this from a letter sent to the Air Ministry in February 1943 from Washington:
"When we compare our aircraft in production and the tactical operational range of your Mosquito with our F-5/P-38, there seems no doubt the purposes of our combined air forces will best be served if the A.A.F curtail their conversion of P-38 and rely in part on your Mosquito production."
Now, so as not to ruffle any more feathers, what I have done here is produce evidence as to why I choose the Mosquito over the P-38, not to denigrate the latter in any way.
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
And this letter was sent by who?
Adler, it's just ocurred to me how I might have caused you to think I was disrespecting you. Was it this?
If so, that was actually a subtle dig at another thread posted elsewhere by another forum member, not intended at you in your role as moderator. Again, I apologise if you have been offended.
I think this one boils down to personal opinion, national pride etc, all those things we shouldn't use in these kind of threads
If so, that was actually a subtle dig at another thread posted elsewhere by another forum member, not intended at you in your role as moderator. Again, I apologise if you have been offended.
Hmm, I knew someone was going to ask - I don't actually know; it's a quote out of a book I have on the Mosquito. Scanning through the pages I can see that Hap Arnold requested Mossies for use in the Middle East, he also pressed for American PR Mossies in North Africa, stating that; "the Mosquito can go beyond the F-5 in range." The British, however, specifically Chief of Air Staff Portal responded to his initial request stating that the Lightning was "...fully satisfactory for PR work; it's as good as the Spitfire."
In March 1944 Arnold also requested Mossies for use by the USAAF in the Pacific, he argued that the P-38s that were in use in that theatre could be sent to Europe and free up Mosquitos, "where their capability could be better utilised."
Here's something else I've just found; "it will be recalled that early in 1943 they [the Americans] approached the British for Mosquito night fighters to equip planned squadrons in Europe. As soon as the supply of PR.XVIs was agreed, the matter was again raised. As part of Plan CCS329/2 of 26 August 1943, the United States committed itself to placing in the US 9th AF and by 1 May 1944, three squadrons each armed twelve Northrop P-61 Black Widow night fighters. Development of that unconventional aircraft was far from straight forward, with speed and handling restrictions applied to the P-61 making it useless for operations. Once more the USAAF turned hopefully towards the Mosquito."
The book is "Mosquito" by C. Martin Sharp and Michael J.F. Bowyer.
Last edited:
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
I'd like to know more "specifics" about these claims - Although Arnold ran the AAF, folks under him dictated what equipment was to be used "where and when." General Kenney just about had full reign of his command in the PTO and the equipment used - I don't think he ever had a problem with the P-38 (except he wanted more of them in 1943) and it wasn't until late in the war where we seen the P-51 start to emerge as the primary fighter in the PTO. Arnold may have felt it "desirable" to see PR Mossies in the PTO, I think General Kenny would have had the final say.
Again I'd like to know more "specifics' about this. Did those who allegedly approached the British about using the Mosquito as night fighters have either the expertise or authority to make such a decision? Despite these "issues" with the P-61, I think history says otherwise to these concerns.
I don't think the book is insinuating that the Americans thought that there was anything wrong with the P-38 at all, but that Arnold commented on the fact that its range was inferior to the Mosquito. After all, why wouldn't you want an aircraft that demonstrated superior qualities to the equipment you were using regardless of how good what you had was. As for the P-61, again, more to demonstrate that the USAAF wanted Mosquitos as night fighters at that time - you are right about history and the P-61, but all this is entirely with hindsight and at the time the P-61's issues had obviously led the USAAF to raise the issue of Mosquito night fighters for them, as the US Navy had previously.
I'll do some more reading/posting later; have to get ready for work.
I'll do some more reading/posting later; have to get ready for work.
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
I don't think that either, but I also would like to know more about the sources for these comments by Arnold. As far as wanting an aircraft that demonstrated superior qualities? I don't think the Mosquito, as good as it was had such superior qualities that it would constitute replacement of the P-38.
