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

[michael rauls]

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.

I verry much agree. I think many(including myself here)often focus to much on early war Japanese types when thinking of what allied planes were up against against when it comes to Japanese aircraft in relation to German types.
I may get some disagreement on this but I think if you compare contemporary aircraft that is 1940 German and Japanese types or 1944 German and Japanese types they are pretty close in performance(with the exception of the Me262).
I would still give an edge to German types overall but don't think there's really that big a margin.

 

[Clayton Magnet]

I think if a Ki-84 or N1K2 had proper fuel and maintenance, they would have matched anything in the sky.

 

[pbehn]

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.

No they didn't, how many aircraft in the Luftwaffe inventory could take off and land from a carrier. How many single engine fighters had the range and performance of a Zero in the LW 1941/42? Is your opinion based on facts or eye shape?

 

[Clayton Magnet]

well, to be fair, in 1941-42, nothing in the world matched the 109F and 190A. A Friedrich or Anton could not take off from a carrier, but a A6M2 and Ki-43 could not match them in performance.

Is your opinion based on facts or eye shape?

jeez, that seems unnecessary

 

[Shortround6]

I think if a Ki-84 or N1K2 had proper fuel and maintenance, they would have matched anything in the sky.

I think you are giving a bit to much credit to the Homare engine.

There are reasons the Wright R-1820 went from about 1200lbs when it made 930-1000hp on 91/96 octane fuel to weighing 1470lbs when it made 1525hp on 115/145 fuel. Part of it was the beefing up required to run at 2800rpm instead of 2200rpm and part of it was the beefing up required to go from BMEP of 184 to a BMEP of 237. The Homare was already running at high rpm and it weighed less than a Wright R-2600 that made 1900hp, Getting hundreds more HP out of the Homare without either cooking it (overheating) or breaking it doesn't seem likely.
Air-cooled engines were much more limited in their ability to be over boosted than liquid cooled engines.
Better fuel may have helped the Ki-84 and N1K2 (especially over the front line fuel vs test fuel) but P-47Ns, P-51Hs and F4U-4s were becoming the order of the day in the Summer of 1945.

 

[Navalwarrior]

I think you are giving a bit to much credit to the Homare engine.

There are reasons the Wright R-1820 went from about 1200lbs when it made 930-1000hp on 91/96 octane fuel to weighing 1470lbs when it made 1525hp on 115/145 fuel. Part of it was the beefing up required to run at 2800rpm instead of 2200rpm and part of it was the beefing up required to go from BMEP of 184 to a BMEP of 237. The Homare was already running at high rpm and it weighed less than a Wright R-2600 that made 1900hp, Getting hundreds more HP out of the Homare without either cooking it (overheating) or breaking it doesn't seem likely.
Air-cooled engines were much more limited in their ability to be over boosted than liquid cooled engines.
Better fuel may have helped the Ki-84 and N1K2 (especially over the front line fuel vs test fuel) but P-47Ns, P-51Hs and F4U-4s were becoming the order of the day in the Summer of 1945.

Resp:
Not to mention, Japanese aircraft (there were a few, and I mean a few exceptions) could not make more than one pass at B-29s due to their altitude and speed. To make a single pass they had to be in the right place which gave them a narrow window to do so. German aircraft advanced at a greater rate (speed) as the war progressed. If the B-29 had served in the ETO many would have been lost due to jet interceptors.

 

[Navalwarrior]

No they didn't, how many aircraft in the Luftwaffe inventory could take off and land from a carrier. How many single engine fighters had the range and performance of a Zero in the LW 1941/42? Is your opinion based on facts or eye shape?

Resp:
Germany didn't need any aircraft carriers to dominate Europe, so your statement is moot. Their Navy did just fine in choking off allied support from the US to England for many years.
It is true that the A6 Zero had tremendous range for a single engine fighter. Chennault in 1940/early 1941 sent a full report to both the RAF in England and the USAAF in the US. I can't speak for the British but the USAAF higher ups never took Chennalt's report on the Zero seriously, so it was not shared/disseminated. Maybe allied manufacturers would have incorporated greater range sooner.

 

[taly01]

The Japanese shot down plenty of P-38 in the Pacific mostly due to some P-38 pilots been overconfident, in the Battle of the Bismark sea off New Guinea three "ace" P-38's were shot down when their flight leader decided to jump into the middle of a big dogfight at lowish level over a convoy.

The Ki-84 was not that maneouverable, but damn fast <20,000ft, the Japanese tested a P-51C captured in China and the test pilot says manoeuverability is the same as Ki-84, interestingly he said the Fw190A out accelerates both ( the Japanese had a test Fw190A-5).

 

[Navalwarrior]

The Japanese shot down plenty of P-38 in the Pacific mostly due to some P-38 pilots been overconfident, in the Battle of the Bismark sea off New Guinea three "ace" P-38's were shot down when their flight leader decided to jump into the middle of a big dogfight at lowish level over a convoy.

The Ki-84 was not that maneouverable, but damn fast <20,000ft, the Japanese tested a P-51C captured in China and the test pilot says manoeuverability is the same as Ki-84, interestingly he said the Fw190A out accelerates both ( the Japanese had a test Fw190A-5).

Resp:
I wonder what type of fuel was used in the Japanese test. I don't doubt that some of their aircraft was very advanced, just believe they couldn't produce them in numbers needed. History shows that the first few years of WWII the Japanese military was a serious threat. Just ask the USMC. In just less than 24 hrs, two USN Admirals were killed at Guadalcanal during a night surface engagement, so the threat was REAL.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

The Japanese shot down plenty of P-38 in the Pacific mostly due to some P-38 pilots been overconfident, in the Battle of the Bismark sea off New Guinea three "ace" P-38's were shot down when their flight leader decided to jump into the middle of a big dogfight at lowish level over a convoy.

You reference basically one battle, you name no names, could you be talking about Tommy McGuire? Do you have numbers and documented evidence to support your statement? Look at the PTO claims ratio for P-38s and then let's talk

 

[pbehn]

Resp:
Germany didn't need any aircraft carriers to dominate Europe, so your statement is moot. Their Navy did just fine in choking off allied support from the US to England for many years.
It is true that the A6 Zero had tremendous range for a single engine fighter. Chennault in 1940/early 1941 sent a full report to both the RAF in England and the USAAF in the US. I can't speak for the British but the USAAF higher ups never took Chennalt's report on the Zero seriously, so it was not shared/disseminated. Maybe allied manufacturers would have incorporated greater range sooner.

Germany did need aircraft carriers it just didn't have the industrial capacity to build and man them. Their navy did quite well in the early years choking off the route from North America not the USA there is another country called Canada which you may have heard of, or maybe not, they would not have done so well if the US Navy had not been led by people who were anti British and did actually know what they were doing.

 

[pbehn]

jeez, that seems unnecessary

Well someone should point out that this guys opinion is not based in any way on facts but on the USA being the top dog and every other nation below, he spent an inordinate amount of time trying to prove that the USA was responsible for the Spitfires performance, no real mention of the UKs role in the P-51s performance. The only protagonist in WW2 he respects is Germany apart from the USA of course, you draw your conclusions and I draw mine. I spent years working with the Japanese in Japan and elsewhere, I recognise the anti Japanese sentiment in the posts, as I do the USA flag waving.

 

[Navalwarrior]

Well someone should point out that this guys opinion is not based in any way on facts but on the USA being the top dog and every other nation below, he spent an inordinate amount of time trying to prove that the USA was responsible for the Spitfires performance, no real mention of the UKs role in the P-51s performance. The only protagonist in WW2 he respects is Germany apart from the USA of course, you draw your conclusions and I draw mine. I spent years working with the Japanese in Japan and elsewhere, I recognise the anti Japanese sentiment in the posts, as I do the USA flag waving.

Resp:
Shortly after the Pearl Harbor attack, the President ordered all Japanese living in America to be 'relocated.' In the small town where I live (far away from California) the US Govt somehow found out that there was a single Japanese family living here. As a result, a US Army truck arrived one day to retrieve this Japanese family. However, since they did not have an address, the senior officer (likely a junior off) stopped into a restaurant on the city square to ask directions. No one would tell the soldier where the family lived. A local Judge approached the Army Officer, saying 'these people aren't a threat to anyone.' 'I will take full responsibility for them,' and drew up a letter stating such. The soldiers left w the letter, never to return. The entire family remained in our town through the entire war. My next door neighbor is Japanese. Again you are making assumptions that are incorrect.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Gentlemen, keep this non-political

 

[taly01]

You reference basically one battle, you name no names, .....

Thanks to indexes I found it in "Fire in the Sky", We were talking about books in another thread!
"Bob (Faurot) was shot down in the second day of the Battle of the Bismark Sea (March 1943). On the second day we lost 3 P-38's (39th FS), which was almost unheard of................he was much too low and the enemy present in large numbers..."

I don't deny the P-38's speed and dive made it very tough for Japanese planes....

 

[Clayton Magnet]

I don't deny the P-38's speed and dive made it very tough for Japanese planes....

the P-38's dive made it very tough for the Americans as well

 

[FLYBOYJ]

I don't deny the P-38's speed and dive made it very tough for Japanese planes....

Good to hear!

Now with that said, if you're going to come on this forum and make a statement "The Japanese shot down plenty of P-38 in the Pacific mostly due to some P-38 pilots been overconfident," bring some evidence along to back up your claim.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

the P-38's dive made it very tough for the Americans as well

Not for the 25 PTO aces who had 10 or more victories - 7 of them had 20 or more!!

 

[GregP]

The P-38 was the mount of our (U.S.A.) top two Aces. It cannot have been all that bad.

All fighters have weaknesses, and the P-38 had a couple. But the pilot who can exploit the strengths of his mount and the weaknesses of the enemy planes at the same time will always do well. At least, Bong and McGuire did.

Of course, the Japanese also had their Aces, and they did quite well.

I had the privledge to hear Saburo Sakai speak once back in the 1980s in Arizona, at Falcon Field at the old Doug Chamlpin Fighter Museum. He admitted the Zero was long in the tooth during the last part of the war, but said that many U.S. pilots didn't seem to know that or ignored it and tried to fight him in the Zero's strongest flight envelope area. They mostly didn't fare too well. Between 180 and 280 mph, the A6M was the best fighter airplane in the world ever to take wing.

If I am not mistaken, Eric Brown said nearly the same thing in his books, too.

Cheers.

 

[Navalwarrior]

The P-38 was the mount of our (U.S.A.) top two Aces. It cannot have been all that bad.

All fighters have weaknesses, and the P-38 had a couple. But the pilot who can exploit the strengths of his mount and the weaknesses of the enemy planes at the same time will always do well. At least, Bong and McGuire did.

Of course, the Japanese also had their Aces, and they did quite well.

I had the privledge to hear Saburo Sakai speak once back in the 1980s in Arizona, at Falcon Field at the old Doug Chamlpin Fighter Museum. He admitted the Zero was long in the tooth during the last part of the war, but said that many U.S. pilots didn't seem to know that or ignored it and tried to fight him in the Zero's strongest flight envelope area. They mostly didn't fare too well. Between 180 and 280 mph, the A6M was the best fighter airplane in the world ever to take wing.

If I am not mistaken, Eric Brown said nearly the same thing in his books, too.

Cheers.

Resp:
At a 2015 Airshow, I witnessed Flying Legend's A6M2 perform low speed manuvers at @ 150 ft. I had read about the Zero's ability to manuver at slow speeds but seeing it made me a true believer. It was like watching a glider with an engine, just hanging in the air. I would think any allied fighter would lose at low speed. This was the reason Chennault taught his P-40 pilots to dive into them and keep going; hit and run tactics.