Wasn't the P-51 the best escort fighter of the war?

[Greyman]

There was a post-war study that the US did on aircraft vulnerability and found that only about 10% of Lightnings that lost an engine (in combat?) were able to return to base, and that all things considered, having two engines probably increased vulnerability.

I don't have the actual reference -- does this ring a bell with anyone?

 

[grampi]

How so?

The 51 is more maneuverable than the other two...

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

The 51 is more maneuverable than the other two...

To many variables. Who is on your tail? What is on your tail? Did you even see them?

The other guy can maneuver too right?

 

[Navalwarrior]

There was a post-war study that the US did on aircraft vulnerability and found that only about 10% of Lightnings that lost an engine (in combat?) were able to return to base, and that all things considered, having two engines probably increased vulnerability.

I don't have the actual reference -- does this ring a bell with anyone?

Resp:
10% may not seem like much, unless you are one of those ten percent.

 

[grampi]

To many variables. Who is on your tail? What is on your tail? Did you even see them?

The other guy can maneuver too right?

Obviously this only applies if the pilot sees his enemy and can take evasive action, so nothing is on my tail because I was able to take BETTER evasive action because I was flying a P-51 and not a P-47 or P-38...

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Naw, still too many variables. That should go in the what if threads.

 

[grampi]

Naw, still too many variables. That should go in the what if threads.

Okay, if you say so...

 

[mstennes]

go interview some ETO vets of the 8th AF smart guy. The K variant was excellent. As I said this all is wrapped in what theater. First thing you cannot even compare the two on the ETO front anyway.

We can come up with scales as some posters like to do but until you can interview a vet first hand and get his views on flying both Jug and Mustang variants you will all have your own personal opinions.

v/r E

Wasn't the K just a Dallas built D?

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Okay, if you say so...

Thanks!

 

[P-39 Expert]

The P-38 should never have been produced in that volume. Maybe 500-1000 total as recon planes. This is all hindsight, but the P-38 was twice as expensive as a P-51 but it wasn't twice as capable. Not even AS capable when you throw in more than twice the maintenance, twice the fuel, low mach number, low maneuverability, complexity and need for extra pilot training. I love the P-38, but it never made that much sense to me. Same with the P-47 really. Huge plane with no endurance, climb or maneuverability. Develop the P-51 and maybe one other single engine plane as a backup. Hindsight.

 

[pbehn]

The P-38 should never have been produced in that volume. Maybe 500-1000 total as recon planes. This is all hindsight, but the P-38 was twice as expensive as a P-51 but it wasn't twice as capable. Not even AS capable when you throw in more than twice the maintenance, twice the fuel, low mach number, low maneuverability, complexity and need for extra pilot training. I love the P-38, but it never made that much sense to me. Same with the P-47 really. Huge plane with no endurance, climb or maneuverability. Develop the P-51 and maybe one other single engine plane as a backup. Hindsight.

The P-51 with Merlin didn't appear until 1943 and in 1943-44 the USA and UK had a huge demand for any capable aeroplane. Even with hindsight would you do away with all the P-38 achieved up to 1943 and after 1943 building an extra P-51 factory and telling others to do without 5,000 Merlins?

 

[P-39 Expert]

The P-51 with Merlin didn't appear until 1943 and in 1943-44 the USA and UK had a huge demand for any capable aeroplane. Even with hindsight would you do away with all the P-38 achieved up to 1943 and after 1943 building an extra P-51 factory and telling others to do without 5,000 Merlins?

Certainly not if all you do is stop producing the P-38. Those resources (engines, propellers, armaments etc) would need to be redirected to P-51 production as efficiently as possible.

 

[pbehn]

I cant help but think when the first of the 1,000 P-38 rec planes arrived in Europe someone high up would say "can we put some MGs in that critter"

 

[Hairog]

Don't know where to start. How about the myth that the P-38 was twice as costly as the Mustang. I would argue that you have to add in the costs of ...
1. cost of retooling for P-51 parts
2. cost of building new factories
3. engineering costs to solve the problem of the tails falling off or the wrong engine etc.
4. cost of training workers to run the new machinery used to build the parts
5. cost of new warehousing
6. cost of training new pilots to replace the ones that didn't come home due to their engine being damaged
7. cost to the morale of those remaining pilots at losing their friends
8. cost to the families who lost sons, brothers, fathers needlessly

Just a few stories and facts from this source... The P-38 (C.C. Jordan; MakinKid; CDB100620)

"During the late winter of 1944 ocurred the famous dual between a
Griffon-engined Spitfire XV and a P-38H of the 364FG. Col. Lowell few the
P-38, engaging the Spitfire at 5,000 ft. in a head-on pass. Lowell was
able to get on the Spitfire's tail and stay there no matter what the
Spitfire pilot did. Although the Spitfire could execute a tighter turning
circle than the P-38, Lowell was able to use the P-38's excellent stall
characteristics to repeatedly pull inside the Spit's turn radius and ride
the stall, then back off outside the Spit's turn, pick up speed and cut
back in again in what he called a "cloverleaf" maneuver. After 20 minutes
of this, at 1,000 ft. altitude, the Spit tried a Spit-S (at a 30-degree
angle, not vertically down). Lowell stayed with the Spit through the
maneuver, although his P-38 almost hit the ground. After that the
Spitfire pilot broke off the engagement and flew home. This contest was
witnessed by 75 pilots on the ground."

"In a mock dogfight between the Mustang and the Lightning, the skilled P-38
driver would fight in the vertical, taking advantage of his superior climb
speed and aerobatic ability. The skilled Mustang pilot would attempt to extend
away and come back unobserved. Once either locked onto the tail of the other,
it would be very difficult to shake. The P-38 driver in such a situation would
want to work the speed of the engagement down into the stall area where the
Mustang couldn't follow him. He could also split-S, dive and zoom, probably
losing the P-51. The Mustang pilot with a P-38 on his tail had fewer options.
At high altitude, he could point the nose at the ground and keep it there till
the the Lightning dwindled, then zoom climb into a fast, shallow climb to
extend away.
Interesting that the twin-engine fighter would have the advantage in a slow
turning contest, or in the vertical--loops, split-Ses.
What would typically happen if a Mustang bounced a Lightning would be that the
P-38 would split-S, the Mustang would follow through the roll but keep on
diving for some distance before pulling out, then circle around for another try
at a bounce. The Lightning pilot would continue the split-S up into a loop and
scan the sky for the Mustang. Typically, he would spot him some distance below
beginning a pull out. The Lightning driver would finish the loop and fall on
the climbing Mustang, locking onto his tail. The smart Mustang pilot would
reduce the chance of this by rolling out of h is escape dive into a climb in a
different direction. He might do a corkscrew climb. The "winner" of the
dogfight would be the pilot who better kept sight of his foe, who better
anticipated what his foe would do next, and who knew what to do with his own
airplane to counter that anticipated move; in other words, the better pilot
won--not the airplane."


"The P-38 was the best climber in active USAAF inventory and could easily
leave a P-51 choking on its heel dust. It also had brute acceleration the P-51
could not match (although the P-51 could accelerate very well indeed, the P-38
was better). The best accelerating P-38 was the H. Later models were
heavier, although the L got some more beans to play with.
The turbo really came into its own on the P-38 in the climb, providing sea
level horsepower to very high altitudes, so climb was smooth and consistent,
with 100 percent power being available at all altitudes. In earlier models,
inadequate intercooling limited the effectiveness of the turbos at high
altitude. This was corrected from the J. The P-51's two-stage, two-speed
mechanical supercharger caused it to lurch upstairs in a series of steps, HP
beginning to fall off immediately after a "gear change." The switch from the
first stage to the second stage of the supercharger occurred at about 17,000
ft. Just before the shift, the P-51 had performance about on par with a P-40N
at the same altitude. Then when the second stage kicked in, it became a tiger."

"Re climb and altitude performance of the P-38 vs. the P-51:
It has been stated in this thread that the performance of the P-38 declined
rapidly above 20,000 ft. This is not true.
The pre-J models could maintain sea-level power up to 25,000 ft., where
intercooler limitations began to reduce power. The J/L models could maintain
sea level power up to 30,000 ft., where turbo impeller speed limitations began
to reduce power. In neither case was power reduction sudden or dramatic.
(Incidentally, the turbocharged P-47 could also maintain sea level horsepower
up to 30,000 ft.)
This means the P-38H would have close to 2500 horsepower (military power)
available at 25,000 ft and the J almost 2900 horsepower (military) at 30,000
ft. (The P-47 would have 2000 hp [military] at 30,000 ft.) The use of War
Emergency Power would boost those figures.
No WWII fighter--bar none--had as much available horsepower at altitudes of
25,000 ft and above as the P-38.
The P-51D with its multi-stage mechanical supercharger saw horsepower
(military) peak at a bit less than 1700 at 8500 ft. At 13,500 ft., it was a
bit over 1300 hp, then it jumped to about 1375 or so at 21,500 ft., after which
it declined steadily. At 25,000 ft. it was down to 1200 hp and at 30,000 ft.
power was only a little over 700 hp.
(This engine performance deterioration was typical for any mechanically
supercharged aircraft engine, whether the P-51, Spitfire or Me 109.)
The P-51D had only about a third the horsepower available to the P-38H at
30,000 ft. and only about a fourth of that available to the J. Of course, the
P-51 was a lot lighter than the P-38, but still, at a normal gross weight of
17,700 lbs or so for the P-38J/L (about 1,000 lbs less for the H) and 10,200
lbs for the P-51D, the power loading for the P-38J at 30,000 ft. was 6.2
lbs/hp. (For the P-38H it would be a bit less than 6.7 lbs./hp.) For the P-51D
it was 10.6 lbs/hp. Even at 20,000 ft., where the P-51D was at its performance
peak, power loading for the P-51D was about 7.5 lbs per hp, while the J was
still 6.2 lbs./hp [6.7 for the H] (because the turbocharged power was operating
at sea-level efficiency.)
(P-47D power loading (military)at a gross wt. of about 14,500 lbs was 7.2
lbs./hp at all altitudes up to 30,000 ft.)
This means that at 20,000 ft. the P-38--early or late model--could walk away
from the P-51 and at 25,000 ft. and above, it could run away from it.
Because of this power advantage, the P-38, whatever the model, could easily
outclimb the Merlin P-51, hands down, no contest. At military power, the P-38J
could beat the P-51 to 10,000 ft. by about 2 minutes and to 30,000 ft. by about
four minutes. The P-38H figures would be somewhat less but still superior.
In fact, in fun and games stateside, it was not uncommon for a P-38 driver to
challenge a P-51 jockey to a dogfight to begin at brake-release on the runway,
the airplanes side by side. The Lightning would be wheels up before the
Mustang had left the ground. It would climb to 20,000 ft., the Mustang puffing
along farther and farther behind, whereupon the P-38 driver would commence a
relentless series of bounces from above, booming and zooming the Mustang until
he got bored, the Mustang driver never having a chance to do little more than
dodge--if he could spot the Lightning coming out of the sun. The higher up the
fight took place, the greater the advantage to the P-38.
The P-38 could also easily out-accelerate the P-51, thanks to the brute
horsepower it possessed, leaving it behind in a throttle-up contest. At
mid-altitude mid-speed contests, the P-51 would do best against the P-38. But
even then, roll and turn rates would be about the same for the two airplanes,
with the Lightning having the advantage in acceleration, climb and initial
dive. At lower or higher speeds, the P-38 could out-do the P-51, using manuever
flap setting at low speeds, and having greater control authority at high
speeds. Of course, at any time, the P-38 driver could push the contest
into--and through--the accelerated stall, which the P-51 driver dared not do:
the P-51 would depart controlled flight suddenly and violently, while an
accelerated stall in a P-38 was scarcely noticeable--a little mushing and the
nose dropping a bit.

The bottom line is that the P-38 was one hell of a fine airplane. It was
complex for its day, and required the pilot to spend some time with it before
he was fully qualified to take advantage of its capabilities. But once he
understood the airplane and how to use it, there was no other fighter in the
air that could match the P-38."

 

[tomo pauk]

<gets popcorn (at least for now)>

 

[pbehn]

<gets popcorn (at least for now)>

Is it still in production? I think it should be.

 

[fubar57]

 

[Navalwarrior]

The P-38 should never have been produced in that volume. Maybe 500-1000 total as recon planes. This is all hindsight, but the P-38 was twice as expensive as a P-51 but it wasn't twice as capable. Not even AS capable when you throw in more than twice the maintenance, twice the fuel, low mach number, low maneuverability, complexity and need for extra pilot training. I love the P-38, but it never made that much sense to me. Same with the P-47 really. Huge plane with no endurance, climb or maneuverability. Develop the P-51 and maybe one other single engine plane as a backup. Hindsight.

Resp:
Expense wasn't the issue for the US after Pearl Harbor. There was no Merlin P-51 when the P-38 was coming off the production line in 1941 as the only high performance drop tank capable fighter. There was no high altitude Merlin P-51 when the high altitude P-47 arrived in England. Pacific and ETO respectively filled the bill . . . UNTIL the Merlin Mustang arrived. The 'World' wasn't automated then, and each aircraft company worked their design. I think Lockheed and Republic did very well ! !

 

[michael rauls]

Don't know where to start. How about the myth that the P-38 was twice as costly as the Mustang. I would argue that you have to add in the costs of ...
1. cost of retooling for P-51 parts
2. cost of building new factories
3. engineering costs to solve the problem of the tails falling off or the wrong engine etc.
4. cost of training workers to run the new machinery used to build the parts
5. cost of new warehousing
6. cost of training new pilots to replace the ones that didn't come home due to their engine being damaged
7. cost to the morale of those remaining pilots at losing their friends
8. cost to the families who lost sons, brothers, fathers needlessly

Just a few stories and facts from this source... The P-38 (C.C. Jordan; MakinKid; CDB100620)

"During the late winter of 1944 ocurred the famous dual between a
Griffon-engined Spitfire XV and a P-38H of the 364FG. Col. Lowell few the
P-38, engaging the Spitfire at 5,000 ft. in a head-on pass. Lowell was
able to get on the Spitfire's tail and stay there no matter what the
Spitfire pilot did. Although the Spitfire could execute a tighter turning
circle than the P-38, Lowell was able to use the P-38's excellent stall
characteristics to repeatedly pull inside the Spit's turn radius and ride
the stall, then back off outside the Spit's turn, pick up speed and cut
back in again in what he called a "cloverleaf" maneuver. After 20 minutes
of this, at 1,000 ft. altitude, the Spit tried a Spit-S (at a 30-degree
angle, not vertically down). Lowell stayed with the Spit through the
maneuver, although his P-38 almost hit the ground. After that the
Spitfire pilot broke off the engagement and flew home. This contest was
witnessed by 75 pilots on the ground."

"In a mock dogfight between the Mustang and the Lightning, the skilled P-38
driver would fight in the vertical, taking advantage of his superior climb
speed and aerobatic ability. The skilled Mustang pilot would attempt to extend
away and come back unobserved. Once either locked onto the tail of the other,
it would be very difficult to shake. The P-38 driver in such a situation would
want to work the speed of the engagement down into the stall area where the
Mustang couldn't follow him. He could also split-S, dive and zoom, probably
losing the P-51. The Mustang pilot with a P-38 on his tail had fewer options.
At high altitude, he could point the nose at the ground and keep it there till
the the Lightning dwindled, then zoom climb into a fast, shallow climb to
extend away.
Interesting that the twin-engine fighter would have the advantage in a slow
turning contest, or in the vertical--loops, split-Ses.
What would typically happen if a Mustang bounced a Lightning would be that the
P-38 would split-S, the Mustang would follow through the roll but keep on
diving for some distance before pulling out, then circle around for another try
at a bounce. The Lightning pilot would continue the split-S up into a loop and
scan the sky for the Mustang. Typically, he would spot him some distance below
beginning a pull out. The Lightning driver would finish the loop and fall on
the climbing Mustang, locking onto his tail. The smart Mustang pilot would
reduce the chance of this by rolling out of h is escape dive into a climb in a
different direction. He might do a corkscrew climb. The "winner" of the
dogfight would be the pilot who better kept sight of his foe, who better
anticipated what his foe would do next, and who knew what to do with his own
airplane to counter that anticipated move; in other words, the better pilot
won--not the airplane."


"The P-38 was the best climber in active USAAF inventory and could easily
leave a P-51 choking on its heel dust. It also had brute acceleration the P-51
could not match (although the P-51 could accelerate very well indeed, the P-38
was better). The best accelerating P-38 was the H. Later models were
heavier, although the L got some more beans to play with.
The turbo really came into its own on the P-38 in the climb, providing sea
level horsepower to very high altitudes, so climb was smooth and consistent,
with 100 percent power being available at all altitudes. In earlier models,
inadequate intercooling limited the effectiveness of the turbos at high
altitude. This was corrected from the J. The P-51's two-stage, two-speed
mechanical supercharger caused it to lurch upstairs in a series of steps, HP
beginning to fall off immediately after a "gear change." The switch from the
first stage to the second stage of the supercharger occurred at about 17,000
ft. Just before the shift, the P-51 had performance about on par with a P-40N
at the same altitude. Then when the second stage kicked in, it became a tiger."

"Re climb and altitude performance of the P-38 vs. the P-51:
It has been stated in this thread that the performance of the P-38 declined
rapidly above 20,000 ft. This is not true.
The pre-J models could maintain sea-level power up to 25,000 ft., where
intercooler limitations began to reduce power. The J/L models could maintain
sea level power up to 30,000 ft., where turbo impeller speed limitations began
to reduce power. In neither case was power reduction sudden or dramatic.
(Incidentally, the turbocharged P-47 could also maintain sea level horsepower
up to 30,000 ft.)
This means the P-38H would have close to 2500 horsepower (military power)
available at 25,000 ft and the J almost 2900 horsepower (military) at 30,000
ft. (The P-47 would have 2000 hp [military] at 30,000 ft.) The use of War
Emergency Power would boost those figures.
No WWII fighter--bar none--had as much available horsepower at altitudes of
25,000 ft and above as the P-38.
The P-51D with its multi-stage mechanical supercharger saw horsepower
(military) peak at a bit less than 1700 at 8500 ft. At 13,500 ft., it was a
bit over 1300 hp, then it jumped to about 1375 or so at 21,500 ft., after which
it declined steadily. At 25,000 ft. it was down to 1200 hp and at 30,000 ft.
power was only a little over 700 hp.
(This engine performance deterioration was typical for any mechanically
supercharged aircraft engine, whether the P-51, Spitfire or Me 109.)
The P-51D had only about a third the horsepower available to the P-38H at
30,000 ft. and only about a fourth of that available to the J. Of course, the
P-51 was a lot lighter than the P-38, but still, at a normal gross weight of
17,700 lbs or so for the P-38J/L (about 1,000 lbs less for the H) and 10,200
lbs for the P-51D, the power loading for the P-38J at 30,000 ft. was 6.2
lbs/hp. (For the P-38H it would be a bit less than 6.7 lbs./hp.) For the P-51D
it was 10.6 lbs/hp. Even at 20,000 ft., where the P-51D was at its performance
peak, power loading for the P-51D was about 7.5 lbs per hp, while the J was
still 6.2 lbs./hp [6.7 for the H] (because the turbocharged power was operating
at sea-level efficiency.)
(P-47D power loading (military)at a gross wt. of about 14,500 lbs was 7.2
lbs./hp at all altitudes up to 30,000 ft.)
This means that at 20,000 ft. the P-38--early or late model--could walk away
from the P-51 and at 25,000 ft. and above, it could run away from it.
Because of this power advantage, the P-38, whatever the model, could easily
outclimb the Merlin P-51, hands down, no contest. At military power, the P-38J
could beat the P-51 to 10,000 ft. by about 2 minutes and to 30,000 ft. by about
four minutes. The P-38H figures would be somewhat less but still superior.
In fact, in fun and games stateside, it was not uncommon for a P-38 driver to
challenge a P-51 jockey to a dogfight to begin at brake-release on the runway,
the airplanes side by side. The Lightning would be wheels up before the
Mustang had left the ground. It would climb to 20,000 ft., the Mustang puffing
along farther and farther behind, whereupon the P-38 driver would commence a
relentless series of bounces from above, booming and zooming the Mustang until
he got bored, the Mustang driver never having a chance to do little more than
dodge--if he could spot the Lightning coming out of the sun. The higher up the
fight took place, the greater the advantage to the P-38.
The P-38 could also easily out-accelerate the P-51, thanks to the brute
horsepower it possessed, leaving it behind in a throttle-up contest. At
mid-altitude mid-speed contests, the P-51 would do best against the P-38. But
even then, roll and turn rates would be about the same for the two airplanes,
with the Lightning having the advantage in acceleration, climb and initial
dive. At lower or higher speeds, the P-38 could out-do the P-51, using manuever
flap setting at low speeds, and having greater control authority at high
speeds. Of course, at any time, the P-38 driver could push the contest
into--and through--the accelerated stall, which the P-51 driver dared not do:
the P-51 would depart controlled flight suddenly and violently, while an
accelerated stall in a P-38 was scarcely noticeable--a little mushing and the
nose dropping a bit.

The bottom line is that the P-38 was one hell of a fine airplane. It was
complex for its day, and required the pilot to spend some time with it before
he was fully qualified to take advantage of its capabilities. But once he
understood the airplane and how to use it, there was no other fighter in the
air that could match the P-38."

I don't think anyone was saying a p38s performance dropped off abouve 25,000 feet but instead were referring to dive speed limitations due to the lower mach number.
That being said I would agree that the p38 was indeed a great plane overall. Especially the j25 on.

 

[michael rauls]

The P-38 should never have been produced in that volume. Maybe 500-1000 total as recon planes. This is all hindsight, but the P-38 was twice as expensive as a P-51 but it wasn't twice as capable. Not even AS capable when you throw in more than twice the maintenance, twice the fuel, low mach number, low maneuverability, complexity and need for extra pilot training. I love the P-38, but it never made that much sense to me. Same with the P-47 really. Huge plane with no endurance, climb or maneuverability. Develop the P-51 and maybe one other single engine plane as a backup. Hindsight.

The p47 had range to ge all the way to Berlin once they got the drop tank thing squared away. Even before that it had more range than most fighters of the time. Range wasnt static and like most types crept up over time but it was ahead of most over time and behind a few when it came to range. Climb was somewhere between 2700 and 3100 fpm depending on the source once they got paddle blade props which I think was pretty quick. Not a rocket but only a few hundred fpm behind many planes often referred to as having a great climb rate.