davebender
1st Lieutenant
Historical Do-335 prototypes were light bombers complete with a bomb bay. IMO they don't belong in a discusion of twin engine day fighter aircraft anymore then the Me-410 dive bomber.
Twin Engine Day Fighters Europe/Africa Theaters (the bests).
- Thread starter Vincenzo
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
- Thread starter
- #42
- Thread starter
- #43
just give some opinion
110G-2 Wing Load (Weight/WA): 40 lbs/sqft, Power Load (Weight/power (fth)): 6.7 lbs/hp
P-38G WL: 48.3 lbs/sqft, PL: 6.4 lbs/hp
With a good advantage in horizontal speed, but not in climb for the P-38 it's not so easy tell what'is the best in ACM. The P-38 has also the advantage to be smaller.
As long range fighters the 110 win has a significantly longer range. probably for escort mission with long time in low regime the advantage could go away.
As interceptor both had heavy weapons (2-20 and 4 lmg the 110, 1-20 and 4 hmg the 38 ) the 110 can add an other 2 cannon give a terrifyng firepower; the time to climb give the advantage to 110.
adding: the possibility the higher boost to low altitude give up the power for P-38 so best PL so il low level free fighter P-38 wins
110G-2 Wing Load (Weight/WA): 40 lbs/sqft, Power Load (Weight/power (fth)): 6.7 lbs/hp
P-38G WL: 48.3 lbs/sqft, PL: 6.4 lbs/hp
With a good advantage in horizontal speed, but not in climb for the P-38 it's not so easy tell what'is the best in ACM. The P-38 has also the advantage to be smaller.
As long range fighters the 110 win has a significantly longer range. probably for escort mission with long time in low regime the advantage could go away.
As interceptor both had heavy weapons (2-20 and 4 lmg the 110, 1-20 and 4 hmg the 38 ) the 110 can add an other 2 cannon give a terrifyng firepower; the time to climb give the advantage to 110.
adding: the possibility the higher boost to low altitude give up the power for P-38 so best PL so il low level free fighter P-38 wins
Last edited:
60 SAAF was a photo recce unit.
davebender
1st Lieutenant
What about the seven squadrons of Beaufighters? Surely they could have protected the British amphibious force from German dive bombers.
parsifal
Colonel
Probably not. the overwhelming majority of assets were neded to support operations in Italy and Sicily. Here too, the Americans were displaying a marked reluctance to commit the necessary forces. They believed Italy to be a sideshow, and wanted resources to be pooled and concentrated for the second front in NW Europe. As I recall, it was only by the direct intervention by Roosevelt (maybe Marshall, I forget) that led to a very limited committment by the Americans to this TO. Eventually large numbers of "foreign" troops, like the Brazilians, Poles, free French and the like made significant contributiions, but in September 1943, these formations were not available. Same deal applied in the air, so the RAF and the remaining CW forces (by this stage most Australian and NZ formations had been pulled out of the TO....either the England or the Far East.
So, esentially Britiain was trying to do more, with less at this time. We will never know if the US had committed greater forces to the Theatre, if a "third front" in the Balkans could have been opened up. Personally...I think maybe, but unlikely. At the very least, however, the capture of Rhodes would have exposed Ploesti to a much more serious threat.
So, esentially Britiain was trying to do more, with less at this time. We will never know if the US had committed greater forces to the Theatre, if a "third front" in the Balkans could have been opened up. Personally...I think maybe, but unlikely. At the very least, however, the capture of Rhodes would have exposed Ploesti to a much more serious threat.
Beaus were not very effective because they had to operate near limit of their operative range. Only effective air cover was given by USAAF P-38s but they were withdrawn soon after the beginning of the Op. Accolade as US had told to British beforehand. The Spits operating from Cos were very vulnerable because of poor advance warning of LW raids, poor AA protection for the temporary field on Cos (few 20mm cannon of RAF Rgt, was that 8, I cannot recall for sure) and primitive conditions on the field.
Juha
davebender
1st Lieutenant
Why should the USA get involved at all? Britain had all the assets necessary to make Operation Accolade work. They just need the right assets in the right place rather then sending an inadequate force and expecting the USA to bail them out.
The point was that only US and Japan had that time effective LR day fighters. Beau had a bit too little range for Oper Accolade and anyway 109Gs were too much for it. Mossie FB 6 would have the range but even it would not match 109G in air combat, so P-38 was the only fighter available for the LR job.
Juha
- Thread starter
- #51
The P-38 is not a true long ranged before of J variant. The fuel load was 300 gals, oh yes can use drop tank but need to combat and back (and reserve) with internal fuel so as not large surplus of range (cyprus rodi are 250 miles) and this early P-38 were a match for the Gustav?
davebender
1st Lieutenant
What happened to Mustangs purchased by the RAF from 1941 onward?
All were in GB as army co-op planes, used as LR tactical FR planes and for LR harasment. RAF thought that because they were limited to low and mid altitude work by Allison engine they were not proper fighters.
Juha
Last edited:
On Bf 110
it got mixed results as a day fighter when combating against other fighters
Bf 110 got worse against Allied TE fighters in MTO up to the end in Tunisia (May 43), this incl North Africa and Malta battles
110 vs Beaufighter 5:4
110 vs P-38 11:7
but because real world is so complicated
39-9-3 – 40-5-9
110 vs other fighter
3:3 against French
5:1 against Hurricanes ie 110 got worse of it
But during the Battle of France (1940) 110 soundly beat both Hurricane (37:63) and Spitfire (6:15) but in Iraq 1941 Gladiators beat it 2:0.
Info is from Nikademus' and JoeB's posts
Juha
it got mixed results as a day fighter when combating against other fighters
Bf 110 got worse against Allied TE fighters in MTO up to the end in Tunisia (May 43), this incl North Africa and Malta battles
110 vs Beaufighter 5:4
110 vs P-38 11:7
but because real world is so complicated
39-9-3 – 40-5-9
110 vs other fighter
3:3 against French
5:1 against Hurricanes ie 110 got worse of it
But during the Battle of France (1940) 110 soundly beat both Hurricane (37:63) and Spitfire (6:15) but in Iraq 1941 Gladiators beat it 2:0.
Info is from Nikademus' and JoeB's posts
Juha
Last edited:
davebender
1st Lieutenant
Exactly where the Aegean air battle was taking place. Surely the RAF wasn't afraid to fight Me-109Gs @ 10,000 feet in the Mustang Uber fighter.
Shortround6
Major General
It would only take weeks if not several months to redeploy Mustang Squadrons from England to the the Aegean area. Squadrons are more than just the aircraft and pilots. You also need the mechanics, parts and any specialized tools for that airframe and engine if you are going to keep the aircraft flying for very long. Most of the squadrons support would travel by sea competing with what ever else was needed for shipping space.
With only internal fuel (410 US gals) the P-38J/L have had combat radius of 275 miles ('yardstick' range being some 1100 miles). My take is that the 300 gal types ('yardstick' range 800-850 miles), each carrying 2 x 150 gals of internal fuel ('yardstick' range 1400 - 1600 miles) were just fine to fly those 250 miles, loiter there, drop tanks, fight, and return home.
Pre-J Lightnings were able to make 410 mph clean, at 25000 ft. Gustav between 390-410 (depending on the model available in 1943, also upon the clearance for Notleistung, from Oct 1943). Climb rates good for both planes, slightly better for Gustav, the P-38 is already on altitude, though. Gustav rolls better, P-38 can turn very tightly by using flaps differential throttle.
Juha covered the RAF mounts.
We can take a look at other types - A-36 was used as escort for B-25s and B-26 in the MTO* (round trip of 800 miles in some instances), strafing the targets of opportunity on the return leg. The P-51A (400 mph at 20000 ft, with racks, fast also at lower altitudes, 310 produced, both for USAAF and for RAF ( 'Mustang II' )), was, unfortunately, deployed in penny packets in 3 war theaters (MTO, India, China). Would make for almost perfect SE fighter at MTO, but it was not meant to be.
*'Mustang', book by Gruenhagen.
renrich
Chief Master Sergeant
In the PTO I seriously doubt that the P38 had a better kill/loss ratio than the Hellcat( which does not necessarily prove a point.)
In the ETO the sortie/loss ration was for the following airplanes:
P47-138
P51-85
P38-74
P40-121
P39-285
Again, not too much is proved by the above. However, it looks like the P38 might have a hard go being the most lethal or cost effective fighter in either the ETO or PTO.
In the ETO the sortie/loss ration was for the following airplanes:
P47-138
P51-85
P38-74
P40-121
P39-285
Again, not too much is proved by the above. However, it looks like the P38 might have a hard go being the most lethal or cost effective fighter in either the ETO or PTO.
Users who are viewing this thread
Similar threads
