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

[davparlr]

Every since I built my first P-38 it seemed to me that it was not as streamlined as it could have been. Four radiators could not have been as clean as the two wing mounted radiators in the Mosquito, and the complex horizontal tail had to have some needless interference drag as compared to the P-61 design. Add to that the various inlets and pipes and the exposed turbocharger and it just seems it could have been better.

 

[fubar57]

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.

Ans:

The Mk.Xl had a range of over 1300 miles....short legs? A total of 471 Mark XIs were built between April 1943 and January 1946. Great Britain and its allies flew various photo-reconnaissance versions of the Spitfire with great success in all theaters during World War II. The U.S. Army Air Forces' 14th Photographic Squadron of the 8th Air Force operated Spitfire Mark XIs from November 1943 to April 1945

 

[Shortround6]

Every since I built my first P-38 it seemed to me that it was not as streamlined as it could have been. Four radiators could not have been as clean as the two wing mounted radiators in the Mosquito, and the complex horizontal tail had to have some needless interference drag as compared to the P-61 design. Add to that the various inlets and pipes and the exposed turbocharger and it just seems it could have been better.

what it was conceived as and what it went into service as are rather different, let alone what it wound up as.

XP-38

The growth of the engines from around 1000hp during the planning staged to 1150hp as first flown was one thing, going to 1600hp required some major changes to intercoolers, radiators and oil coolers.

 

[Navalwarrior]

Ans:

The Mk.Xl had a range of over 1300 miles....short legs? A total of 471 Mark XIs were built between April 1943 and January 1946. Great Britain and its allies flew various photo-reconnaissance versions of the Spitfire with great success in all theaters during World War II. The U.S. Army Air Forces' 14th Photographic Squadron of the 8th Air Force operated Spitfire Mark XIs from November 1943 to April 1945

Resp:
Yes, but did they have them in North Africa in early to mid-1943?

 

[fubar57]

Resp:
Yes, but did they have them in North Africa in early to mid-1943?

Repl:

"The first PR.XIs entered service in the Mediterranean Feb./Mar '43" Source: Classic Warbirds - Merlin PR Spitfires. Looking for squadrons now......

 

[Navalwarrior]

Repl:

"The first PR.XIs entered service in the Mediterranean Feb./Mar '43" Source: Classic Warbirds - Merlin PR Spitfires. Looking for squadrons now......

Resp:
No need. Doesn't answer why the RAF asked for an Allison Mustang from the local USAAF. They kept it so long that they painted roundels on it.

 

[fubar57]

Resp:
No need. Doesn't answer why the RAF asked for an Allison Mustang from the local USAAF. They kept it so long that they painted roundels on it.

Rej:

Did address the "short legs" comment though

 

[wuzak]

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.

Q:

Do you have a reference for that?

And please define "recon fighter". Is it an armed reconnaissance aircraft, used for tactical reconnaissance, which would not necessarily require long range. If it was for tactical reconnaissance, it would also be used at low level, which would also explain the use of a P-51/A-36 aircraft.

 

[Navalwarrior]

Q:

Do you have a reference for that?

And please define "recon fighter". Is it an armed reconnaissance aircraft, used for tactical reconnaissance, which would not necessarily require long range. If it was for tactical reconnaissance, it would also be used at low level, which would also explain the use of a P-51/A-36 aircraft.

Resp:
I cannot clarify, as it was taken from an article on Allison engined Mustangs. It stated merely that an RAF unit in North Africa asked, and received a Mustang from a local USAAF unit, which they outfitted with cameras. They kept it so long that they painted RAF roundels on it.

 

[Navalwarrior]

Rej:

Did address the "short legs" comment though

Follow up: Northwest Africa Tactical Air Force, July 1943 spreadsheet shows only one Recon Unit under Air Vice Marshall Broadhurst, flying Spitfires; No 40 Squ, SAAF.

 

[fubar57]

Follow up: Northwest Africa Tactical Air Force, July 1943 spreadsheet shows only one Recon Unit under Air Vice Marshall Broadhurst, flying Spitfires; No 40 Squ, SAAF.

Ret:

Same book..."In the summer of 1943 more than 20 PR.XIs were delivered to the Mediterranean. After the North African campaign, Sicily invasion and finally the invasion of Italy....". 682 and 683 squadrons had 10 each and "C" Flight of 680 Sqn was also equipt with PR.XIs

 

[DarrenW]

How many Ki-84s did they see?

Excellent question. Of the four most highly regarded late-war Japanese fighters, the Hayate was by far the most numerous, with some 3,500 copies being produced (roughly a thousand more than that of the J2M, N1K, and Ki-100 combined). They entered combat with the IJAF in the Fall of 1944, the US Navy first encountering them during the Battle of Leyte Gulf. Judging from the claims/loss ratio (144/16) Hellcat and Corsair pilots must have locked horns with them frequently enough. They were employed in many locations in and around the Philippines, Formosa, Okinawa, and the home islands. Unlike it's late-war counterparts that were primarily utilized as area-defense fighters, the Frank was a versatile aircraft often being tasked with duties as a dive-bomber and ground-support aircraft.

Knowing of it's extensive use in areas where the Ki-84 operated, it's not a stretch to believe that US Army Lightnings of the 5th and 13th Air Forces made similar contact with the aircraft to that of the US Navy. However, I'm not in possession of Lightning claims data so maybe someone else here is and can shed some more light on the subject???

 

[Navalwarrior]

Resp:
I cannot clarify, as it was taken from an article on Allison engined Mustangs. It stated merely that an RAF unit in North Africa asked, and received a Mustang from a local USAAF unit, which they outfitted with cameras. They kept it so long that they painted RAF roundels on it.

Update/Correction:
The 12th AF (USAAF) lent 6 A-36A to RAF No. 1437 Flight based in Matariya, Egypt. The A-36As were given RAF identification numbers, along with a single white letter immediately behind the British roundel (A thru F) on the fuselage. These numbers were HK944 'C' (42-84018), HK945 'B' (42-83898), HK946 'F' (42-84117), HK947 'A' (42-84107), HK955 'D' (42-83906) and HK956 'E' (42-83829). All planes retained their USAAF colors of upper Green and underside Gray. They began their missions from Luga, Malta on July 12, 1943. Two A-36A were shot down by flak on July 31, with Flight Sgt K.C.E. Stanley being rescued. On August 17, Flying Officers J.L. Griffith and W.H. Gilliland were on a reconnaissance mission when they were surprised by an attack by RAF 43 Squadron Spitfires, which confused them for ME-109s. In the fray, the two pilots of No. 1437 Flight did not recognize their attackers immediately, and started combat. Griffith takes after the top Spitfire, causing the pilot to ditch. The two A-36A pilots continue their mission, but Griffith bails out above the water after being hit by flak while flying over an enemy armored column, but is picked up by a Walrus of No. 284 Squadron.
The Flight was disbanded on Oct 17, 1943, with only A-36A HK944 (white letter C) surviving. HK944 was used by No. 112 Squadron as a pilot training aircraft as the Squadron began to receive the Merlin Mustang MkIII.
NOTE: I could find nothing stating they were actually fitted with cameras, but do believe they were so outfitted. I hope this info helps.

 

[Navalwarrior]

Control forces were studied in NACA Report No 755 Requirements For Satisfactory Flying Qualities of Airplanes. See attached file.

The target for maximum aileron control force at below 80% of maximum speed was:
a. Wheel-type controls: +/- 80 pounds applied at the rim of the wheel.
b. Stick-type controls: +/- 30 pounds applied at the grip of the stick.
This was determined by the limitations of pilots in applying forces to the lateral controls.

This explains why the P-38 had a wheel.

Resp:
I always wondered why it had a wheel vs a stick. I assumed it was carried over from Lockheed's other twin engined aircraft.

 

[GregP]

Regarding post 445, Flyboyj said that the Allies in the ETO faced better enemy aircraft. Not too sure about that one.

They certainly faced enemy aircraft that had potentially higher top speed, but Japanese fighters were pretty darned good in their best-maneuvering range. Early on, they also had some seasoned combat veterans as leaders. By the time late-war was upon them, the aircraft were very good, even if not quite as fast as the German aircraft, but a large percentage of their seasoned combat veterans had been lost.

The Ki-84, Ki-44, Ki-100, J2M, and N1K series of aircraft were all excellent ... in the hands of a good pilot, with decent speed, if not exactly fast, and decent armament.

Not a strong disagreement here with Flyboyj because circumstances above consipred to make the late-war Japanese fighter force less effective overall than the Luftwaffe was when they were late-war, but the aircraft themselves were pretty good when properly employed.

It would be an interesting "what if" to have swapped some good aircraft between Germany and Japan to see what developed in the way of tactics and results but, of course, it never happened.

 

[Navalwarrior]

Regarding post 445, Flyboyj said that the Allies in the ETO faced better enemy aircraft. Not too sure about that one.

They certainly faced enemy aircraft that had potentially higher top speed, but Japanese fighters were pretty darned good in their best-maneuvering range. Early on, they also had some seasoned combat veterans as leaders. By the time late-war was upon them, the aircraft were very good, even if not quite as fast as the German aircraft, but a large percentage of their seasoned combat veterans had been lost.

The Ki-84, Ki-44, Ki-100, J2M, and N1K series of aircraft were all excellent ... in the hands of a good pilot, with decent speed, if not exactly fast, and decent armament.

Not a strong disagreement here with Flyboyj because circumstances above consipred to make the late-war Japanese fighter force less effective overall than the Luftwaffe was when they were late-war, but teh aircraft themselves wewre pretty good when properly employed.

It would be an interesting "what if" to have swapped some good aircraft between Germany and Japan to see what developed in the way of tactics and results but, of course, it never happened.

Resp:
I would think there would be a few pilots, Clive Caldwell, Maj Howard, etc. who flew air combat against the Japanese AND Germans, that could shed some light on threat/skill levels.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Resp:
I always wondered why it had a wheel vs a stick. I assumed it was carried over from Lockheed's other twin engined aircraft.

During a Lockheed Management Club meeting I attended around 1982/ 83, Kelly Johnson was a guest speaker. I distinctly remember him saying that he wanted to put a stick in the P-38 as well as several other mods. You'll find that a lot of items installed on aircraft aren't always decided by the manufacturer.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Regarding post 445, Flyboyj said that the Allies in the ETO faced better enemy aircraft. Not too sure about that one.

The Japanese built great aircraft but operationally there were many challenges that go back to how they were built, interchangeability and field logistics was always an issue. IMO if you do a side-to-side comparison of Japanese vs German aircraft to include how they performed in the field, I think you'll find the German aircraft had the edge in overall performance.

I also believe the Luftwaffe operated way more efficiently than the both the JAAF and JNAF

Perhaps a subject for another thread.

 

[Navalwarrior]

During a Lockheed Management Club meeting I attended around 1982/ 83, Kelly Johnson was a guest speaker. I distinctly remember him saying that he wanted to put a stick in the P-38 as well as several other mods. You'll find that a lot of items installed on aircraft aren't always decided by the manufacturer.

Resp:
I guess I could have stated that better, as the manufacturer must satisfy the customer. Just thought that it originated with Lockheed.

 

[Navalwarrior]

The Japanese built great aircraft but operationally there were many challenges that go back to how they were built, interchangeability and field logistics was always an issue. IMO if you do a side-to-side comparison of Japanese vs German aircraft to include how they performed in the field, I think you'll find the German aircraft had the edge in overall performance.

I also believe the Luftwaffe operated way more efficiently than the both the JAAF and JNAF

Perhaps a subject for another thread.

Resp:
Agree that German aircraft held an edge in overall performance over Japanese aircraft, but that an outstanding pilot often made a less than ideal fighter into a viable opponent.