Sgt. Pappy
Airman 1st Class
- 197
- Jun 7, 2006
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
haha, you'll find that opinions of the P-38 are very firmly divided on this site, some will claim she is the greatest aircraft ever and could turn inside every other plane ever made without exception, not only that but she was the best aircraft in every role so it's a wonder any other aircraft were ever used at all! Others will argue she was expensive, hard to fly, hard to maintain, useless without turbos and freakin' freezing to fly in!
The latter statement above covers the majority here at our illustrious site...Others will argue she was expensive, hard to fly, hard to maintain, useless without turbos and freakin' freezing to fly in
In the sources I read, the P-38L-5 could allegedly climb at up to 4,750 fpm under 5,000' for example.
In Aces High, the best it can manage with WEP is 4,200.
There are all sorts of figures floating about for the P-38. Most of the higher ones come from those who worked on the P-38, and are the claimed results of the manufacturer's own tests. The amount of info on these tests (atmospheric conditions, weights, corrections applied etc) is usually lacking.
The highest climb rate I've seen for a P-38 from an actually sourced test is the Wright Field test of a P-38J running at 70" wep on 150 octane fuel. That achieved 4020 ft/min at sea level, up from 3570 ft/min when running at 60" wep. That's at takeoff weight with full ammo and 416 gallons of fuel.
An earlier test, also at Wright Field, found 4,000 ft/min at combat weight with 300 gallons of fuel.
Aces High doesn't model 150 octane fuel for any allied aircraft, so unless the 4,200 ft/min figure for the P-38 in game is achieved at a lower weight, it's overmodelled.
Robin Olds on the P-38 "It was a great fighter, fun to fly. With a decent pilot you could whip anything, down low." On the Bf-109 "we could out turn them at the altitudes we flew."
Hunter, I agree with; "(a) plane should be measured by an average pilot flying it, not a expert with hundreds and hundreds of hours in it". I do not agree that "an air force should be measured by an average pilot flying (in) it, not a expert with hundreds and hundreds of hours in it." I do not agree with "as Germany found out a handful of great pilots do not win a war."
Germany didn't find "a handful of great pilots do not win a war", they found it impossible to keep thoes handfuls of great pilots supplied, thankfully.
Hunter is correct,
Still, that takes all the fun out of the discussion now, doesn't it?