Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Jank said:Huh, how do you figure it could fly 1,600 miles, engage enemy planes for about 10 minutes, often at WEP, defeat them, and fly 1,600 miles back?
The P-47N had a maximum range of about 2,350 miles. You're talking about 1,000 miles further. I didn't know the P-38 could fly coast to coast across the U.S.
Can someone explain why a late model P-47D was better able to take on late model German fighters than a P-38?
The two tend to go together. To be a steady gun platform, an aircraft needs strong longitudinal stability. But for agility - which basically means the speed of response to the controls - a plane needs weak stability. You can't have it both ways!FLYBOYJ said:He said the P-38 was far more stable as an aircraft and gun platform when compared to the P-51, but the P-51 was a lot more maneuverable.
That's what Mike Alba told me. He also confirmed the center tank/ CG problem on the P-51 as well. He flew P-51Bs and "Cs" that were converted from "Bs." He said the P-51 C without the small fin in front of the vertical stabilizer made the aircraft real unstable, maybe the basis for his comment on maneuverability. Overall he said the P-38 was a finer combat aircraft and it made him feel comfortable in combat because of the 2 engines.DerAdlerIstGelandet said:Are you sure the P-51 was more maneuverable than the P-38. I have allways heard it was the other way around.
DerAdlerIstGelandet said:Are you sure the P-51 was more maneuverable than the P-38. I have allways heard it was the other way around.
wmaxt said:Flyboy, The 474th FG went to the top brass of the 8th/9th AF to keep their aircraft.
wmaxt
Twitch said:8 fifties with 3,400 rounds of API would have dealt with anything they met.
Reports from combat vets are interesting and valuable, but should not be taken as gospel - for the simple reason that they frequently disagree with each other. If you ask vets 'which weapon was best' (whether army, air force, or whatever) you will get different responses, even from people who have used the same range of weapons.Erich said:My data comes right from the vetrs themselves gents as I have often repeated. Again the P-38 when it was flown by US ETO vets have said nothing could compare to it in the ground attack role except for the Bubble top P-47 models. The P-51 was the supreme high altitude escort fighter plus having the range. the stats during war and after and by test pilots that never served in combat may say otherwise but I have to bow out to the veteran memories and take their word(s) for it. the simple fact is they were there and none of us were and the closest we have gotten to compare manueverabiltiy and firepower over and to a Bf 109G or Fw 190A is through combat reports, fighter group histories and if we are lucky enough to interview at some length still living veterans.
Marshall_Stack said:I vote for the P-38, but it would have been interesting if the USAAF could have put turbocharged Allisons on this plane....
USAF Museum - McDonnell XP-67
Given the fact that both the fighter and the target will be moving, affected by buffeting, aim wander etc, the idea of a "three foot square zone" is fantasy. Just look at gun camera footage of ground or sea strafing attacks - the projectile strikes are spread all over the place. A thirty-foot square zone, peppered with small holes, would be more like it. Please note that in the BoB German bombers (small and lightly protected by later standards) still got back to base with hundreds of bullets holes in them.Twitch said:The firepower of 8 M-2s and the extreme amount of ammo would have been sufficient to kill any bomber the Japanese or Germans fielded or could have fielded. As it was Ju 88s, G3Ms, G4Ms, Do 17s, He 111s and other twins disintegrated into seething balls of wreckage when attacked. Quit arguing for the sake of it. Everyone here knows that 300 rounds of API from a 3 second P-47 burst at gun harmonized optimum distance would produce a 3 foot square zone of destruction on a Mavis, Emily, Condor or Ju 488 or anything else.
V-1710 said:All the P-38's DID have turbocharged Allison V-1710's, except for the model 322 'Castrated Lightning' that was supplied to the R.A.F., and later returned. They were used by the U.S.A.A.C. for training purposes.