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

[fubar57]

I think that aircraft has an American engine installed

 

[Clayton Magnet]

This was the reason Chennault taught his P-40 pilots to dive into them and keep going; hit and run tactics.

Did the AVG ever encounter Zero's? I thought they were engaged with Ki-43's in Burma

 

[fubar57]

Ki-43-I or A6M2 as AVG opponent

 

[Navalwarrior]

I think that aircraft has an American engine installed

Resp:
Their website states it uses a DC-3 engine, and I believe that part of the landing gear has been changed.

 

[fubar57]

Please don't "Resp:" me any more: way too pretentious for this motley crew. I won't answer again if I see it

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Did the AVG ever encounter Zero's? I thought they were engaged with Ki-43's in Burma

The AVG never fought against the Zero. The AVG misidentified Oscars as Zeros. The IJN moved all their Zeros out of southern China and Vietnam several months prior to Pearl Harbor.

 

[Navalwarrior]

The AVG never fought against the Zero. The AVG misidentified Oscars as Zeros. The IJN moved all their Zeros out of southern China and Vietnam several months prior to Pearl Harbor.

Resp:
Roger. Thanks.

 

[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:
Does anyone have any info on the type/capacity of the drop tanks used on the P-38 for the Yamamoto 'shoot down?' It was my understanding the they were quickly flown in from Australia. Thanks.

 

[taly01]

Does anyone have any info on the type/capacity of the drop tanks used on the P-38 for the Yamamoto 'shoot down?

Very Interesting question! 5th Air Force got Ford Australia to make drop tanks locally but I suspect the P-38 ones in early 1943 were US made.

"....Operation Vengeance on April 18, 1943, involving the use of 18 Lightnings on a flight of over 1,000 miles on a mission to eliminate Japanese Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto. This required the maximum possible underslung quantity of fuel, and each of the aircraft carried one 330 and one 165 gallon fuel tank (for a total of 1820 litres of fuel in external tanks)...."

http://www.avia-it.com/act/cera_una_volta/echi/CUV_Echi_2016/Seg_art_giu_16/Drop_Tanks_USAAF.pdf

 

[Navalwarrior]

Very Interesting question! 5th Air Force got Ford Australia to make drop tanks locally but I suspect the P-38 ones in early 1943 were US made.

"....Operation Vengeance on April 18, 1943, involving the use of 18 Lightnings on a flight of over 1,000 miles on a mission to eliminate Japanese Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto. This required the maximum possible underslung quantity of fuel, and each of the aircraft carried one 330 and one 165 gallon fuel tank (for a total of 1820 litres of fuel in external tanks)...."

http://www.avia-it.com/act/cera_una_volta/echi/CUV_Echi_2016/Seg_art_giu_16/Drop_Tanks_USAAF.pdf

Resp:
Thanks much!

 

[IdahoRenegade]

What would be the "equally effective, less expensive aircraft", and when to do the re-tooling? ...The P-47 is equaly effective, but it is not less expensive (10% cheaper?). That leaves us with P-51, that AAF didn't think much of before late 1942....

The main shortcoming of the P-38 was that it was not produced in double the numbers, so all theaters can have it already by mid-1942, while easing the introduction of needed modifications.

Thing is, the '47 was not "equally effective", at least until very late in the war. The whole reason that '38s were finally rushed to the 8th in late '43 was that the '47 didn't have the range to provide a long range escort (or any form of long-range combat). Republic was very late in sorting out drop tank issues and adding internal fuel. And as good as the '51-B proved to be, even it didn't see combat until December, and was an unknown quantity until then. Throughout '42 and until DE '43, the '38 as the only long range fighter we had with performance to even come close to matching the performance of German fighters. Thing is, they (and the 47 and 51) managed to do so in spite of the huge advantage that German fighters had-the fact that they didn't have to be built with significant fuel capacity and were operating in a defensive mode. That says a lot for all 3 aircraft-that they had both the range to take the fight to the enemy, and the performance to at worst, hold their own, when they got there.

The other factor to consider is that long range escort is only one of the roles these planes were utilized for. The '38 could carry 4000lbs of bombs/rockets, vs ~1000lbs for the Mustang. You'd need 4 planes, and 4 pilots to do the work of 1 (yes, this is dramatically simplifying things).

 

[tomo pauk]

Thing is, the '47 was not "equally effective", at least until very late in the war. The whole reason that '38s were finally rushed to the 8th in late '43 was that the '47 didn't have the range to provide a long range escort (or any form of long-range combat). Republic was very late in sorting out drop tank issues and adding internal fuel. And as good as the '51-B proved to be, even it didn't see combat until December, and was an unknown quantity until then. Throughout '42 and until DE '43, the '38 as the only long range fighter we had with performance to even come close to matching the performance of German fighters. Thing is, they (and the 47 and 51) managed to do so in spite of the huge advantage that German fighters had-the fact that they didn't have to be built with significant fuel capacity and were operating in a defensive mode. That says a lot for all 3 aircraft-that they had both the range to take the fight to the enemy, and the performance to at worst, hold their own, when they got there.

Problem with P-38 is that it also became effective against Luftwaffe very late in war. Due to it's plethora of shortcomings, that some were adressed (faulty heating, low rate of roll, just one generator, lousy diving abilities) and some did not (size & shape, blind spots due to shape & layout) it didn't managed to attain more than 1:1 loss/win ratio vs Luftwaffe. We can check out P-38s achievements during one day of Big Week (from Wikipedia):
"Escort for Mission 228 is provided by 69 P-38s, 542 Eighth and Ninth Air Force P-47s and 68 Eighth and Ninth Air Force P-51s; the P-38s claim 0-1-0 Luftwaffe aircraft, 1 P-38 is damaged beyond repair; the P-47s claim 19-3-14 Luftwaffe aircraft, two P-47s are lost, two are damaged beyond repair, three are damaged and two pilots are MIA; the P-51s claim 14-1-4 Luftwaffe aircraft, three P-51s are lost and the pilots are MIA. German losses were 30 Bf 109s and Fw 190s, 24 pilots killed and seven wounded."

The article is not clear on how many LW A/C fell due to defensive MGs.

As for the German A/C having huge advantage due to not being designed for great fuel loads - yes, LW fighters were lighter, but those US fighters were powered by engines with 2 stages of supercharging, while P-51 also brought the next-gen aerodynamics. Better engines meant that, at 25000 ft, it was US aircraft that enjoyed major advantage in engine power.

The other factor to consider is that long range escort is only one of the roles these planes were utilized for. The '38 could carry 4000lbs of bombs/rockets, vs ~1000lbs for the Mustang. You'd need 4 planes, and 4 pilots to do the work of 1 (yes, this is dramatically simplifying things).

P-51D was rated for 2x1000 lb bombs, and has 100 miles greater radius while doing it (350 vs. 250). P-38 is also twice the target size (important when there is Flak expected), and twice as expensive.

 

[IdahoRenegade]

Problem with P-38 is that it also became effective against Luftwaffe very late in war. Due to it's plethora of shortcomings, that some were adressed (faulty heating, low rate of roll, just one generator, lousy diving abilities) and some did not (size & shape, blind spots due to shape & layout) it didn't managed to attain more than 1:1 loss/win ratio vs Luftwaffe. We can check out P-38s achievements during one day of Big Week (from Wikipedia):
"Escort for Mission 228 is provided by 69 P-38s, 542 Eighth and Ninth Air Force P-47s and 68 Eighth and Ninth Air Force P-51s; the P-38s claim 0-1-0 Luftwaffe aircraft, 1 P-38 is damaged beyond repair; the P-47s claim 19-3-14 Luftwaffe aircraft, two P-47s are lost, two are damaged beyond repair, three are damaged and two pilots are MIA; the P-51s claim 14-1-4 Luftwaffe aircraft, three P-51s are lost and the pilots are MIA. German losses were 30 Bf 109s and Fw 190s, 24 pilots killed and seven wounded."

The article is not clear on how many LW A/C fell due to defensive MGs.

As for the German A/C having huge advantage due to not being designed for great fuel loads - yes, LW fighters were lighter, but those US fighters were powered by engines with 2 stages of supercharging, while P-51 also brought the next-gen aerodynamics. Better engines meant that, at 25000 ft, it was US aircraft that enjoyed major advantage in engine power.



P-51D was rated for 2x1000 lb bombs, and has 100 miles greater radius while doing it (350 vs. 250). P-38 is also twice the target size (important when there is Flak expected), and twice as expensive.

Thanks for the correction on the bomb load of the '51. I should KNOW better than to ever trust Wikipedia even for a quick reference.

 

[fubar57]

Nothing wrong with Wiki. I use it mostly to scroll down to the Notes, Citations, External Links etc. and go from there though occasionally I will quote Wiki but I make damn sure I include that the source was Wiki

 

[Kevin J]

Thanks for the correction on the bomb load of the '51. I should KNOW better than to ever trust Wikipedia even for a quick reference.

I make that mistake too.

 

[Navalwarrior]

Thing is, the '47 was not "equally effective", at least until very late in the war. The whole reason that '38s were finally rushed to the 8th in late '43 was that the '47 didn't have the range to provide a long range escort (or any form of long-range combat). Republic was very late in sorting out drop tank issues and adding internal fuel. And as good as the '51-B proved to be, even it didn't see combat until December, and was an unknown quantity until then. Throughout '42 and until DE '43, the '38 as the only long range fighter we had with performance to even come close to matching the performance of German fighters. Thing is, they (and the 47 and 51) managed to do so in spite of the huge advantage that German fighters had-the fact that they didn't have to be built with significant fuel capacity and were operating in a defensive mode. That says a lot for all 3 aircraft-that they had both the range to take the fight to the enemy, and the performance to at worst, hold their own, when they got there.

The other factor to consider is that long range escort is only one of the roles these planes were utilized for. The '38 could carry 4000lbs of bombs/rockets, vs ~1000lbs for the Mustang. You'd need 4 planes, and 4 pilots to do the work of 1 (yes, this is dramatically simplifying things).

Resp:
Agree. A couple of points:
The pre-WWII UAAAC/USAAF bomber strategy did not include fighter escort, so long range (the need for drop tanks for the P-47) was not really addressed many months into the war.
German fighters often got to 'strikes' against long range bombers; ingress and egress, by landing, refueling and rearming for another attack. Much like the BoB the advantage was with the defenders in air engagements.

 

[Shortround6]

The P-47 "clean" had roughly double the range of a Spitfire or 109 (also clean), it just wasn't enough to escort long range bombers.
But nobody had fighter that would escort a B-17 to it's max radius in 1942 or early 1943.

 

[Navalwarrior]

The P-47 "clean" had roughly double the range of a Spitfire or 109 (also clean), it just wasn't enough to escort long range bombers.
But nobody had fighter that would escort a B-17 to it's max radius in 1942 or early 1943.

Resp:
Correct. But there were many bomber missions of lesser distances that the P-38 could have flown.

 

[fubar57]

http://www.historynet.com/p-38-flunked-europe.htm

 

[michael rauls]

Problem with P-38 is that it also became effective against Luftwaffe very late in war. Due to it's plethora of shortcomings, that some were adressed (faulty heating, low rate of roll, just one generator, lousy diving abilities) and some did not (size & shape, blind spots due to shape & layout) it didn't managed to attain more than 1:1 loss/win ratio vs Luftwaffe. We can check out P-38s achievements during one day of Big Week (from Wikipedia):
"Escort for Mission 228 is provided by 69 P-38s, 542 Eighth and Ninth Air Force P-47s and 68 Eighth and Ninth Air Force P-51s; the P-38s claim 0-1-0 Luftwaffe aircraft, 1 P-38 is damaged beyond repair; the P-47s claim 19-3-14 Luftwaffe aircraft, two P-47s are lost, two are damaged beyond repair, three are damaged and two pilots are MIA; the P-51s claim 14-1-4 Luftwaffe aircraft, three P-51s are lost and the pilots are MIA. German losses were 30 Bf 109s and Fw 190s, 24 pilots killed and seven wounded."

The article is not clear on how many LW A/C fell due to defensive MGs.

As for the German A/C having huge advantage due to not being designed for great fuel loads - yes, LW fighters were lighter, but those US fighters were powered by engines with 2 stages of supercharging, while P-51 also brought the next-gen aerodynamics. Better engines meant that, at 25000 ft, it was US aircraft that enjoyed major advantage in engine power.



P-51D was rated for 2x1000 lb bombs, and has 100 miles greater radius while doing it (350 vs. 250). P-38 is also twice the target size (important when there is Flak expected), and twice as expensive.

Don't know for sure if this is true but I have read several times that the p38s continued to be teathered to the bombers on many missions for some time after the p47s and 51s were freed up to fly ahead of the bomber streems to break up German formations.
If this is true it would seem to account for some of the shortage of kills by p38s on early 44 missions. The pre L model p38s certainly had there shortcomings when it came to high altitude combat but certainly tactics like these didn't help matters.
It seems like of all the aircraft that needed to be able to range out ahead of the bomber streems to be effective it would be the p38 even more than other aircraft. That is to say being teathered to the bombers in an aircraft with dive limitations while German aircraft made firering passes then dive away is a non starter as far as effectiveness.