The P-38J and L in the European theater. (1 Viewer)

[Navalwarrior]

Actually the F-5 suffered the same problems as the P-38
Dr Alfred Price from "Spitfire in Combat"
"Initially the 7th Photo Group flew the F-5, the reconnaissance version of the P-38 Lightning fighter. This aircraft was vulnerable to interception during deep penetrations into enemy territory, however, and it has serviceability problems. One squadron in the group was therefore equipped with Spitfire PR XIs, and operated the type for the rest of the conflict."
Roger Freeman from "The Mighty Eighth War Manual"
"Even before the first 8th Air force F-5As became operational, some disquiet was expressed in USAAF circles as to their suitability for the task."
"Short comings of the F-5A and F-5B were principally insufficient ceiling and range for the type of operations conducted. Further, it could not accommodate cameras of 36-inch focal length which were desirable to obtain more detailed images."
"On 14 December 1943 General Eaker informed the RAF that the current model P-38 used for photographic reconnaissance by 7th group was not to the standard required. As improved models would not be available for a few months, he inquired if it would be possible to obtain the use of 12 Spitfire XI's to tide them over."
"The Spitfires were used almost exclusively for the deepest penetrations of enemy airspace or to areas where the risk of interception was the greatest. Pilots with F-5 experience found the Spitfire cockpit cramped and noisy by comparison, plus a degree of vibration not evident with the smoother running Allisons. Performance was another matter for the Spitfire provided speed, range and altitude that could not be achieved with the Lightning models on hand in the winter of 1943-44. Few technical problems arose with the Spitfire in 7th Group service, although there was some trouble with the fuel system vapour lock during July/August 1944 caused by hot weather at ground level. The Group's Spitfires had only a 5 per cent mechanical failure rate over their operational period. It was estimated that the Spitfire took but one third of the maintenance time required for the F-5 and had a 70 per cent availability, which 7th Group stated would have been even higher if the supply of spare parts had been simplified."
"The F-5A suffered the same operating problems as contemporary P-38s operating at high altitudes, cutting out and pre-detonation, which sometimes prevented operation above 22,000 feet – although the minimum safe altitude for photo reconnaissance was advised as 24,000 feet. Little could be done about this problem."
"Both versions (talking about the F-5B & C(my note)) were prone to the same engine troubles experienced with the fighter P-38Js. In March 1944 the position was critical with aircraft grounded through engine failures."

Tom Ivie in "Aerial Reconnaissance – the 10th Photo Recon Group in World War II"
"The F-5s normally ranged 100-150miles from their bases, but at times they were as deep as 250-275 miles."

Patricia Fussell Keen in "Eyes of the Eighth – A Story of the 7th Photographic Reconnaissance Group"
"About the time the 14th pilots arrived at Mount Farm the USAAF confirmed disturbing evidence of major flaws in its primary photo reconnaissance plane. The Eighth Air Force knew that its primary camera platform could not perform satisfactorily at high altitudes"
"By the middle of July 1943 it became apparent to headquarters that the limitations of the P-38G (F-5A) had probably cost lives. As well as altitude problems, the unarmed F-5A, which used speed to evade pursuit, had problems escaping enemy aircraft when carrying drop tanks on long flights. The high loss of pilots under these conditions prompted the USAAF to issue an order on 15 July 1943 restricting aircraft of Station 231 to a 300 mile radius on operational missions. As a result of this order, the newly formed 7th Group had to turn the jobs over to the RAF."
"Spitfires allowed the 14th Squadron to fly longer missions and deeper missions into Germany. One major target remained primary in everyone's mind, Berlin. When the big raid came, Headquarters would want damage assessment photos. Group Operations considered only 14th Squadron Spitfires capable of the range needed." ((Captain Walter Weitner photographed the first USAAF raid on Berlin on March 6, 1944. Lt Charles Parker photographed the second raid on March 8. Both in Spitfire XIs) my note)
"In December, the Group began received 10 F-5Bs, a photographic version of the P-38J-5. Unfortunately this aircraft and the F-5C, a converted and modified version of the same P-38J, suffered the same engine problems endemic in the early aircraft."

Professor John F. Guilmartin, Jr. in his 2001 lecture to the United States Air Force Academy "The Aircraft that Decided World War II: Aeronautical Engineering and Grand Strategy, 1933-1945, the American Dimension."

"In addition, specially modified Spitfires were the most important Allied strategic photo-reconnaissance aircraft at the outbreak of hostilities in 1939—and the only ones capable of deep penetrations of Axis territory—and so remained until the debut of reconnaissance versions of the Mosquito in the autumn of 1941."
"The Griffon-powered Spitfire PR XIX (PR for photo-reconnaissance), which entered service in the spring of 1944, provides a final commentary on the Spitfire's importance. The Griffon's superior high altitude performance and a pressurized cockpit combined with the Spitfire's refined aerodynamics to give the PR XIX a service ceiling of no less than 48,000 feet—the highest of any operational piston-engined aircraft—rendering it effectively immune from interception. At that point photo-reconnaissance versions of the P-38 were horribly vulnerable to interception by later versions of the Bf 109 and the PR XIX, though produced only in small numbers, satisfied a vital strategic requirement at a critical time. The aerial edge in battle early shifted between allied air forces and the Luftwaffe as the Spitfire underwent growth in engine power, aeronautical performance and increased firepower."
Here is the link to the complete paper:
http://www.usafa.af.mil/df/dfh/docs/Harmon44.doc

Reap:
The British are known for their superior intelligence ability. I suspect that this effort influenced their desire for dedicated designed photo recon aircraft for the role, rather than taking an existing aircraft, as the Americans often did.

 

[wuzak]

Reap:
The British are known for their superior intelligence ability. I suspect that this effort influenced their desire for dedicated designed photo recon aircraft for the role, rather than taking an existing aircraft, as the Americans often did.

Like the Spitfire and Mosquito?

Aircraft that were adapted from their original designed purpose to do PR work.

 

[Navalwarrior]

Like the Spitfire and Mosquito?

Aircraft that were adapted from their original designed purpose to do PR work.

Resp:
Sure, but the British built them specific, often with significant changes. If we take the P-51 Mustang as an example, NAA simply took aircraft coming off the standard Production line, fitting them with cameras. If you look at the 'baby blue' high altitude Spitifre, the engine received a significant amount of specialization as did the wings.

 

[wuzak]

Resp:
Sure, but the British built them specific, often with significant changes. If we take the P-51 Mustang as an example, NAA simply took aircraft coming off the standard Production line, fitting them with cameras. If you look at the 'baby blue' high altitude Spitifre, the engine received a significant amount of specialization as did the wings.

The early PR Spitfires also were modified from production aircraft.

As a result of a meeting with Air Chief Marshal Hugh Dowding, Air Officer Commanding RAF Fighter Command, two Spitfires N3069 and N3071 were released by RAF Fighter Command and sent to the "Heston Flight", a highly secret reconnaissance unit under the command of Acting Wing Commander Cotton.

These two Spitfires were "Cottonised" by stripping out the armament and radio-transmitter, then, after filling the empty gun ports and all panel lines, the airframe was rubbed down to remove any imperfections. Coats of a special very pale blue-green called Camoutint were applied and polished. Two F24 cameras with five-inch (127 mm) focal length lenses, which could photograph a rectangular area below the aircraft, were installed in the wing space vacated by the inboard guns and their ammunition containers as a stop-gap measure. Heating equipment was installed on all PR Spitfires to stop the cameras from freezing and the lenses from frosting over at altitude. These Spitfires, which later officially became the Spitfire Mk I PR Type A, had a maximum speed of 390 mph. Several of the sub-types which followed were conversions of existing fighter airframes, carried out by the Heston Aircraft Company. The Type D, which was the first specialised ultra long-range version, was the first to require that the work be carried out by Supermarine.

The Mk I PR Type D (also called the Extra Super Long Range Spitfire) was the first PR variant that was not a conversion of existing fighter airframes. The Type D carried so much fuel that it was nicknamed "the bowser." The D shaped wing leading edges, ahead of the main spar, proved to be an ideal location for an integral tank. Accordingly, in early 1940, work started on converting the leading edges, between rib four through to rib 21, by sealing off the spar, outer ribs and all skin joins allowing 57 gal (259 l) of fuel to be carried in each wing. Because the work was of low priority, and with the urgent need for fighters the first two, hand-built prototypes of the PR Type Ds were not available until October. In addition to the leading edge tanks these prototypes also had a 29 gal (132 l) tank in the rear fuselage. An additional 14 gal (63 l) oil tank was fitted in the port wing. The cameras, two vertically mounted F24s with 8 inch (20.3 cm) or 20 inch (50.8 cm) lens or two vertically mounted F8s with 20-inch (510 mm) lens, were located in the rear fuselage. With the full fuel load the center of gravity was so far back the aircraft was difficult to fly until the rear fuselage tank had been emptied. Despite these difficulties the type quickly proved its worth, photographing such long distance targets as Stettin, Marseilles, Trondheim and Toulon.

Supermarine Spitfire (early Merlin-powered variants) - Wikipedia

 

[tomo pauk]

Resp:
Sure, but the British built them specific, often with significant changes. If we take the P-51 Mustang as an example, NAA simply took aircraft coming off the standard Production line, fitting them with cameras. If you look at the 'baby blue' high altitude Spitifre, the engine received a significant amount of specialization as did the wings.

PR Spitfires used same engine that were on fighters' Spitfires.
Wings got modifiations in order to hold more fuel, while loosing the armament.

 

[GregP]

On the surface, the unsuitability of the F-5 sounds bogus. It could get up 39,000 - 40,000 feet and was generally as fast as a Spitfire when it got there.

The P-38J trued out at some 310 - 315 mph at 39,000 - 40,000 feet. That's 11.8 - 12.2 km. The P-38, in any variant, also cruised at high speed with regard to maximum speed. That is, it's speed was very good at reduced power. The same cannot be said for single-engine fighters ... most of the time.

The Fw 190, even an Fw 190D-9, couldn't get up there. About the highest it's charts go is 10 km, and it started to run out of steam before getting to 20 000 feet on the radial (190A or F) and a bit higher on the DB. None show 39,000 feet until the Ta 152 came along ... and it just barely made the war.

The Bf 109G with DB 605A shows on WWIIaircraftperformance that it could hit 350 mph at 10 km, but the graphs don't go up to 11.8 - 12.2 km. The only one I found for the DB 605 up that high shows the Bf 109G getting down to some 140 mph or so at 11 km ... close to the height where the stall speed was approaching the cruise speed. So, it wasn't very fighter-like at that height, IF it could get there. To be fair, neither was the P-38.

This makes me wonder why the F-5 was "not suitable" since it can clearly out run either of the main fighters used way up high by the Luftwaffe. I don't want to say the reports are wrong, but the performance charts certainly show the P-38 to be a great choice for photo-recon. I've heard guys speak who flew the early ones and they had nothing good to say about the Allison, and I understand that. But the later models ran great once they figured out the gremlins and were fast up high.

There has to be some explanation that isn't obvious.

 

[wuzak]

On the surface, the unsuitability of the F-5 sounds bogus. It could get up 39,000 - 40,000 feet and was generally as fast as a Spitfire when it got there.

The P-38J trued out at some 310 - 315 mph at 39,000 - 40,000 feet. That's 11.8 - 12.2 km. The P-38, in any variant, also cruised at high speed with regard to maximum speed. That is, it's speed was very good at reduced power. The same cannot be said for single-engine fighters ... most of the time.

Well, the Spitfire PR.XI top speed (2,950rpm) was 417mph @ 24,200ft. Maximum speed at 38,000ft was 387mph.

Maximum cruise (2,650rpm) speed was 397mph @ 31,000ft, which compares well to the all out maximum speed of 417mph @ 24,200ft.
Maximum cruise at 38,000ft was 378mph.
Maximum cruise at 24,000ft was 369mph.
At around 30,000ft the most economical cruise speed (2,350rpm) was just above 350mph.
Cruise speeds look to be a high proportion of maximum speed.

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/Spitfire_XI_MB789.pdf

Service ceiling was 43,000ft at maximum weight and 44,000ft at mean weight.
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/Spitfire_PRXI_aircraft-data-sheet.jpg

The PR.XI was unpressurised, so long periods at the higher altitudes was a problem.

The PR.X was similar, but had the pressure cabin.

If the F-5 was difficult to intercept, the XI would have been nigh on impossible.

And in late 1944 the X and XI were being replaced by the XIX.

There has to be some explanation that isn't obvious.

Turbos exploded.
Pilots froze.
It was costly to maintain.
Range was not what was required.
The Spitfire was a better performer.

These may have been some of the reasons why the USAAF desperately negotiated the acquisition of Spitfire PR.XIs for long range photo recon.

 

[Shortround6]

Things are relative and as always, timing can play a role.
The first (of almost 500?) MK XI, which came before the MK X, wasn't built until Nov 1942.
They simply weren't available (especially in numbers) when the F-5 started it's photo recon career.
The F-4 Lightning (converted P-38E) was used mostly for training but did see some use in the South Pacific.
The F5A was a converted P-38G and started to be produced in June 1942. 20 F5As were built ahead of the P-38G(181 built by March of 1943)
The F5B used the same engines/airframe as the P-38J-5 (200 built)

SO one has to be careful when comparing actual performance. The F5A was limited by the radiator and intercooler to less than desired performance. No WER at high altitudes and even military power may have been restricted.

There may have been a considerable period of time when the Spit PR XI was a much better recon platform than the F5A with it's 300 US gallons of internal fuel for two engines. Performance limited by the drop tanks.
By the time the F5B (410 US gallons internal) gets there the Griffon powered Spits are in the works.

 

[wuzak]

Reap:
The British are known for their superior intelligence ability. I suspect that this effort influenced their desire for dedicated designed photo recon aircraft for the role, rather than taking an existing aircraft, as the Americans often did.

Just had another thought on this.

The USAAF initiated the design of two dedicated photo reconnaissance aircraft in WW2 - the Hughes F-11 and the Republic F-12, both of which flew after the war.

These were not designed to do any other roles.

On the other hand, I can't think of a British PR aircraft that was not an adapted airframe.

 

[wuzak]

Things are relative and as always, timing can play a role.
The first (of almost 500?) MK XI, which came before the MK X, wasn't built until Nov 1942.
They simply weren't available (especially in numbers) when the F-5 started it's photo recon career.
The F-4 Lightning (converted P-38E) was used mostly for training but did see some use in the South Pacific.
The F5A was a converted P-38G and started to be produced in June 1942. 20 F5As were built ahead of the P-38G(181 built by March of 1943)
The F5B used the same engines/airframe as the P-38J-5 (200 built)

SO one has to be careful when comparing actual performance. The F5A was limited by the radiator and intercooler to less than desired performance. No WER at high altitudes and even military power may have been restricted.

There may have been a considerable period of time when the Spit PR XI was a much better recon platform than the F5A with it's 300 US gallons of internal fuel for two engines. Performance limited by the drop tanks.
By the time the F5B (410 US gallons internal) gets there the Griffon powered Spits are in the works.

I was comparing PR.XI performance with the numbers Greg gave.

 

[GregP]

Don't give me turbos explode and pilots froze. Those were very early faults (P-38F - G) that were corrected before the P-38J and later got there. The solution to frozen pilots was ... you guessed it ... an electric heater!

I believe the early issues with the early P-38s, but not from the J onward. They were fast, flew high, the engines ran great, and the turbos weren't falling out of the sky. Our guys ALSO had some training by then.

 

[wuzak]

In 1943 in the ETO the USAAF were using F-5As, which were based on the P-38G. And those did have turbo problems, and the pilots freezing issue.

The P-38J started production in August 1943.

In October 1943 P-38Hs were just getting into service in the ETO. It would have been in late 1943 for the service entry of the P-38J.

The initial F-5Bs were converted from production P-38Js. Not really sure when the F-5B went into production or began service.

In any case, it appears that the USAAF were stuck with the F-5A to at least the end of 1943, and they very urgently requested Spitfire PR.XI replacements.

It also appears that the F-5B was not an improvement in performance compared the PR.XI (or pressurised PR.X, of which few were made).

The first PR.XIX was delivered in May 1944, without the pressure cabin.

Interestingly the initial contract for the PR.XIX had a cost of £7,500 each, which was later raised to £8,980 (from Morgan and Shacklady).

 

[Denniss]

All F-5B were direct-production recon aircraft, all later versions were converted from new production P-38s
first batch of 90 F-5B was produced between J-5 and J-10, second batch of 110 between J-10 and J-15 (according to serial number list)

 

[Milosh]

Serials for the F-5A/P-38G production run were as follows:

41-2157 Lockheed F-5A-2-LO Lightning
42-12667/12686 Lockheed F-5A-1-LO Lightning
42-12687/12766 Lockheed P-38G-1-LO Lightning
42-12767/12786 Lockheed F-5A-3-LO Lightning
42-12787/12798 Lockheed P-38G-3-LO Lightning
42-12799/12866 Lockheed P-38G-5-LO Lightning
42-12870/12966 Lockheed P-38G-10-LO Lightning
42-12967/12986 Lockheed F-5A-10-LO Lightning
42-12987/13066 Lockheed P-38G-10-LO Lightning
42-13067/13126 Lockheed F-5A-10-LO Lightning
42-13127/13266 Lockheed P-38G-10-LO Lightning
42-13267/13326 Lockheed F-5A-10-LO Lightning
42-13327/13557 Lockheed P-38G-10-LO Lightning
43-2185/2358 Lockheed P-38G-13-LO Lightning
43-2359/2558 Lockheed P-38G-15-LO Lightning

Serials of the P-38J/F-5B were as follows:

42-12867/12869 Lockheed P-38J-1-LO Lightning
42-13560/13566 Lockheed P-38J-1-LO Lightning
42-67102/67311 Lockheed P-38J-5-LO Lightning
42-67312/67401 Lockheed F-5B-1-LO Lightning
42-67402/68191 Lockheed P-38J-10-LO Lightning
42-68192/68301 Lockheed F-5B-1-LO Lightning
42-103979/104428 Lockheed P-38J-15-LO Lightning
43-28248/29047 Lockheed P-38J-15-LO Lightning
44-23059/23208 Lockheed P-38J-15-LO Lightning
44-23209/23558 Lockheed P-38J-20-LO Lightning
44-23559/23768 Lockheed P-38J-25-LO Lightning

 

[GregP]

The P-38G did have the early faults. The J and on didn't. The first P-38 joined the war on 4 Apr 1942. It was an F-4 / P-38E. The fighter versions started showing up in Aug 1942. The J started hitting combat in September 1944.

So, I suppose it was the case that the P-38 models before the J suffered from a few faults, all but one of which of which were fixable, some even field-fixable. Changing the intake manifolds could be done in the field, training would have helped with flying into a combat area at cruise power, and that could cure the turbo issue, too. But the pilot was going to be cold way up high until they fitted an electric heater (not sure if that was a field-fixable fault), but the critical mach number never changed. The dive flaps made recovery possible, but didn't cure it. Of course, we could cure it now ... it wasn't the wing or the tail, but that never happened during the war. After the war, I doubt anyone would waste the time to attempt a cure, but ti would have validated theories about localized supersonic flow and shock wave formation.

The only question would be exactly when the field fixes were available. I KNOW the lean cylinder-rich cylinders thing with the intake manifolds took about nine months ... until they sent home some British fuel and could duplicate the problem on the test stand. After that, it was a quick-fix. I've seen correspondence to that effect, dated late-May 1943. I have NO IDEA how long it would take to get new manifolds to Europe and installed ... it would depend entirely upon the logistics chain. Of course, the P-38J/L had all the fixes.

I'm sure early P-38J users (P-38L-20-LO and under) wished they had hydraulic ailerons! The P-38 at the Planes of Fame is a P-38J-20-LO ... without the assisted ailerons. The next block had them.

Cheers.

Typical typo for me: Aug - Sep 1943 for the P-38J. I think they started out in Aug and made combat in Sep or so.

 

[wuzak]

If the J went into combat in September 1944, when did the F-5B and/or F-5C start operations?

One squadron's worth of Spitfire PR.XIs was procured by the USAAF in late 1943, and they were used until the war's end.

And my understanding is that the Spitfires did the majority, if not all, the deep penetration reconnaissance for the USAAF.

Now I haven't seen performance numbers for the F-5B or C, but the P-38J's performance was, at best, a match for the PR.XI. Certainly it was not overwhelmingly superior.

And the F5B/C still remained more costly to operate and maintain than the smaller, lighter and single engine Spitfire XI.

Also, the unpressurised Spitfire XIX was starting to be delivered from May 1944. The pressurised version was testing around September 1944. The XIX was a step up in performance from the XI or (any version) the F-5.

But let's not forget that it wasn't anybody in here who declared the F-5 unsuitable for long range photo reconnaissance in the ETO, it was the USAAF in late 1943.

 

[Kevin J]

If the J went into combat in September 1944, when did the F-5B and/or F-5C start operations?

One squadron's worth of Spitfire PR.XIs was procured by the USAAF in late 1943, and they were used until the war's end.

And my understanding is that the Spitfires did the majority, if not all, the deep penetration reconnaissance for the USAAF.

Now I haven't seen performance numbers for the F-5B or C, but the P-38J's performance was, at best, a match for the PR.XI. Certainly it was not overwhelmingly superior.

And the F5B/C still remained more costly to operate and maintain than the smaller, lighter and single engine Spitfire XI.

Also, the unpressurised Spitfire XIX was starting to be delivered from May 1944. The pressurised version was testing around September 1944. The XIX was a step up in performance from the XI or (any version) the F-5.

But let's not forget that it wasn't anybody in here who declared the F-5 unsuitable for long range photo reconnaissance in the ETO, it was the USAAF in late 1943.

You mean the J entered service in September 1943!!!

 

[michael rauls]

Ya I've always read the J-25 with the dive flaps was beginning to trickle in in early 44 so it seems that the earlier Js would certainly have been there before September 44.

 

[wuzak]

You mean the J entered service in September 1943!!!

Just quoting Greg.

Also, first combat is not the same as entering service (which could have happened many months prior to first combat).

And reading Dean's America's Hundred Thousand it looks like the P-38H was only just getting into service around that time.