The P-38J and L in the European theater.

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

Tony was 360mph, still slower than the P-38F/G at 400mph and P-38 climbed better. How many Ki-84s did they see?
I'll stick with the competition being a good deal better in the ETO.
Agree fully with you on the training, could have been lots better for the P-38 since it was a turbocharged twin, but would have taken about twice as long.
Great plane, had all the measureables, but a real handful for the pilots.
 
P-39 Expert said:
It was not as successful in the ETO because it did not have a speed/climb advantage, it was not as maneuverable and couldn't dive due to it's low Mach number.
P-38J-25/L cured the dive problem.
Click to expand...

The dive brakes fitted to late model P-38s did not fix the critical Mach number, nor could they.

Simply helped with controlability issues and allowed slightly steeper dives.
 
I personally think it was the altitude requirement in the ETO that gave the P-38 the most trouble during the war. In the MTO and the PTO combat occurred much lower down so there was less chance of compressibility occurring in a dive, and the warmer temperatures allowed the Lightning to operate more efficiently with less mechanical issues and pilot comfort was far better as well. The Lightning had a very good record in this type of environment. Afterall, it was the highest scoring USAAF fighter in those particular theaters with 3,131 victory credits between the two.
 
Last edited:
If may very well be this lack of feedback from the summer of 1942 to the fall of 1943 where there were fewer troubles with the P-38 (not none and mostly different) that lead to the P-38 having so much trouble in the ETO over the winter of 43/44. In Oct of 1943 there were 7 fighter groups in England using P-47s and the first one had gone operational 8 months before the P-38 went operational in the ETO. Initial operations (fighter sweeps over the channel) had not gone well, with crashes, dead stick landings, mid-air fires and landing gear collapses on the runway. There are at least 2 months of radio problems. edit> all this for P-47 but seemingly forgotten due to later service.<
Had one group of P-38s stayed in England over the winter of 42/43 some of the issues (like cockpit heat) might have been addressed.
The fuel issue was anticipated, perhaps not to the extent that it turned out to be, but it was feared that the change in allowable aromatics to stretch production would lead to some problems.
 
Last edited:
There were many Japanese aircraft that easily exceeded 360 mph although I would agree that allied forces in Europe faced better enemy aircraft. Also consider that most of ETO combat took place over land, more times than none P-38s were flying and fighting over vast oceans bringing another dynamic into the combat scenario.
 
Resp:
I do recall reading about the problems P-47s had early in their use with the 8th AF. It also arrived in theater as non drop tank capable, having kits retro-fitted to carry one 'belly' tank in late Aug/Sept 1943. It would be several months into 1944 before it arrived fitted with wing pylons designed to carry two additional drop tanks (first wing pylon models could only carry bombs). I, like you, often wonder if the P-38 had remained in England . . . would improvements to it have run parallel with those of the P-47; thereby enabling the P-38 to become a primary escort fighter in the ETO. Perhaps not, but it is fun to contemplate.
 
I've often wondered also why p38s didn't seem to run into trouble with dives in other theaters that they did in Europe but something just occurred to me. Temperature affects the speed of sound. I knew it did but never made the connection before now. I couldn't remember how much so I looked it up it's 346 meters per sec at 72 degrees and 331 at 32 degrees. That's about a 5 % difference which would be about 28 mph at mach .68 at 25,000 feet if I've figured this right.
That seems like easily enough to explain why the early model p38s without the the dive flaps to keep them out of the domain of compresability seemed to have so much more trouble in colder climates but did fine in warmer ones.
I might be missing something but this would seem to explain it at least in part.
 
wuzak said:
Pressure affects it too, and in the ETO the fights usually started at higher altitudes, which means lower pressure.
Click to expand...
10-4. On a hunch I checked and humidity affects it also. Only a fraction of a percent but add that on to our 28 mph and now you have maybe a 30 mph difference in what mach .68 will be on the extreme ends of the posible spectrum plus whatever pressure as you say would do.
This does seem to explain alot.
 

Temperature and air density must have played some role in it, but I also believe the higher altitudes flown in the ETO allowed for a much greater terminal speed to be reached when engaged in an extended power dive. Add in the fact that the Bf 109 and FW 190 could dive far better than a Zeke, and it's easy to see why the problems with compressibility were much more prevalent in the skies over Europe.
 
I'm sure you right. Probably a bit of both. I've read several accounts of p38s going after tonys from the low to mid 20,000s and not running into trouble and believe the ki 61 was a pretty decent diver so I'm thinking the temperatures affect on the speed of sound must have been a pretty substantial part of this even at higher altitudes but then again do temperatures verry that much that high up. Im not sure.
 
wuzak said:
Pressure affects it too, and in the ETO the fights usually started at higher altitudes, which means lower pressure.
Click to expand...

Air is very close to a perfect gas; any effect by pressure is probably infinitesimal (see, for example Speed of Sound in Air)

On the other hand, until quite high altitudes, air temperature usually decreases with altitude, so the speed of sound will decrease.
 
I looked it up and the troposphere extends 9 km at the poles but 15 km at the equator and since temps apparently drop quickly upon entering the stratosphere this would suggest that yes indeed even that high up there can be substantial variations in temperature between warmer and colder climates.
 
[QUOTE="michael rauls, post: 1424325, member: 69991.... I've read several accounts of p38s going after tonys from the low to mid 20,000s and not running into trouble and believe the ki 61 was a pretty decent diver so I'm thinking the temperatures affect on the speed of sound must have been a pretty substantial part of this even at higher altitude....[/QUOTE]

Interesting...something to consider for sure!
 
wuzak said:
Pressure affects it too, and in the ETO the fights usually started at higher altitudes, which means lower pressure.
Click to expand...
No, pressure affects it only in that pressure and temperature are related. For an idealised gas, the speed of sound is proportional to the square root of the absolute temperature. YMMV for real gasses, but not to a huge extent.
 
Gentlemen,

Just a couple of items of interest,

The 1st FG flew 3 bomber escort missions with the 8th AF the last week of September and the first 2 weeks of October 1942, before transferring to North Africa. Perhaps this was too few missions to get a feel of the problems of the P-38?

However, based on experiences of the 7th Photo Recon Group with the F-5A (Photo recon version of the P-38G), HQ was aware of the cockpit and mechanical problems of the aircraft at high altitude by the middle of July, 1943. (See "Eyes of the Eighth" page 21).

So the question I have, was the time between the discoveries of the cockpit and mechanical problems in the ETO at high altitude (with the F-5A), and the fixes by Allison and Lockheed excessive? Or, was the P-38 so important at that time for the war effort, that disruptions in production could not be tolerated?

Just thinking in print.

Eagledad
 
Resp:
Good question. Likely seen as an isolated incident, since few Lightnings were in use in the ETO. And with the allies in North Africa in full swing, where this problem likely didn't exist for the vast majority of P-38 usage, it was likely relegated to the back burner. Ditto for the PTO.
 
Navalwarrior,

Perhaps you are correct. However, 1 squadron of Spitfire Mk XI's was obtained and used by the 7th PRG and operated along F-5's starting in Nov 1943.
(First spread among the squadrons and then consolidated into the 14th PRS,)
So, I take that to mean that the problem was considered relatively serious by the Photo Recon Group and HQ (I imagine that some one high up had to approve this reverse Lend-Lease).

Eagledad
 
There were some problems with P-38/F-5 recon planes in the Med. However some of them were different. One was that an oil vent tube was poorly shaped and would syphon engine oil out at certain speeds/altitudes causing engines to fail.
Lockheed may have been working on a list of problems during 1943. And again, if the USAAF was operating the engines contrary to what Allison and Lockheed were recommending there may have been room for finger pointing.
 
Resp:
I was not suggesting that the problem was not serious, only that they may have, as you stated . . . looked for an alternate solution. The Spitfire Mk XI became the solution, although likely believed it was only short term. In Africa, the RAF had no long range Recon fighter, which resulted in the USAAF in Theater furnishing an Allison engine Mustang (an A-36 of all things, as it could carry wing drop tanks) that they outfitted with cameras. Their Spitfires/Hurricane had short legs, so we're not suited for the task.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

Effectiveness of the P-38
6 7 8
Replies
145
Views
8K
Thumpalumpacus
Why did the US ww2 fighters have 50 cals instead of 20mms like their european cousins
2 3 4
Replies
73
Views
6K
BarnOwlLover
The poor performance of the 343 Kokutai against USAAF fighters
2 3 4
Replies
60
Views
4K
GrauGeist
B-17E in Europe
Replies
17
Views
1K
Big Jake
B
P-51 escort operations in the PTO prior to the capture of Iwo Jima and Okinawa?
Replies
2
Views
952
BarnOwlLover
Menu
Log in
Register