What if: Mosquito vs P-38

[pbfoot]

He probably complained about the heater as well...

the guy flew years in the north, he became pretty much an authority on "cold soaking" shutting downn an aircraft in very cold temps and making it easy to start next day . Good book called "Altimeter Rising " by Al Macnutt my copy is floating around somewhere on a A340

 

[NiceShotAustin]

In all honesty, I do believe the P-38's multi-role abilities have been under-rated in this thread. There's no doubt in my mind that the Mossie was a better bomber with its larger bomb load. Not to mention it was a better night fighter than the P-38M. But, considering that, the P-38 had a number of performance advantages. It was a smaller aircraft, was quieter, had a longer range (Mosquito NF Mk 30: 1299 miles P-38J: 2237 miles), was more maneuverable, as far as I know the P-38 was faster (Mosquito NF Mk 30: 407 mph P-38J: 414 mph), and had a higher service ceiling (Mosquito NF Mk 30: 38,025 ft P-38J: 43963 ft). That said, you'd never freeze to death in the Mossie and, as far as I know, it never had compressibility issues.

 

[tomo pauk]

I've encountered a range figure of 1650 miles (internal bombload of ??? weight, Fb. VI), and even 3500 miles (PR.34, fuel in bulged bomb bay + 2 x 200 imp gal drop tanks).
Any plane that had good range, good performance in most altitudes, and great punch, was a great asset for any airf orce. Both P-38 Mossie were blessed with such important properties and we can be grateful that those planes were flying for Allied side back in WW2.

 

[Kryten]

really comparing apples and pears here, the P38 was a fighter that could be used as a strike aircraft, the mossie was a strike aircraft that could be used as a fighter, the mossie was an outstanding success from the start, the P38 took several less than stellar marks to mature into the P38L, the P38 was surpassed by superior aircraft in it's role, yet the Mossie was not really surpassed in it's roles by any allied aircraft, I dont think they are comparable really!

 

[wuzak]

In all honesty, I do believe the P-38's multi-role abilities have been under-rated in this thread. There's no doubt in my mind that the Mossie was a better bomber with its larger bomb load. Not to mention it was a better night fighter than the P-38M. But, considering that, the P-38 had a number of performance advantages. It was a smaller aircraft, was quieter, had a longer range (Mosquito NF Mk 30: 1299 miles P-38J: 2237 miles), was more maneuverable, as far as I know the P-38 was faster (Mosquito NF Mk 30: 407 mph P-38J: 414 mph), and had a higher service ceiling (Mosquito NF Mk 30: 38,025 ft P-38J: 43963 ft). That said, you'd never freeze to death in the Mossie and, as far as I know, it never had compressibility issues.

Would not 2237 miles be the ferry range of a P-38J?

1299 miles for a NF30 looks a lot like internal fuel only.

The P-38J was faster than 414mph (around 440mph IIRC). The NF30 was also faster than 407mph (424mph).

 

[wuzak]

I KNEW I'd get some replies to the post above. Thanks!

The cruise speeds I see listed for the bombers are in the 250 mph range, with absolute maximum speeds in the 388 - 415 mph range, except for one PR version listed as 436 mph at height. The PR wasn't a bomber, and the fastest bomber I can find is listed at 408 mph top speed, which is hardly an operational speed on a mission. It MIGHT get that fast if desperately trying to run away from attacking fighters, but would never get that fast otherwise. The Mosquito pilots we have had give talks at our museum usually quote the high-speed ingress as about 350 - 360 mph unless they needed to go a bit faster for evasion. True, the Mosquito carried its armament internally and that is, indeed, a plus in the bomber mode.

Of course, the P-38 was never built as a bomber. It was a fighter and was superior to the Mopsquito as a fighter in every respect.

No question that turbochargers were higher maintenance than superchargers. The exhaust heat was the issue, and it still is today.

I'll concede the Mosquito makes a better bomber.

Thee wasn't much difference between a PR and bomber version of the Mosquito.

350-360mph would be their cruise speed on the way to target.

408mph for the XVI was, I believe, the top speed with cookie. So it could go faster on the return journey.

 

[wuzak]

What the P38 couldn't do was carry 3000lb of bombs nearly as far as the Mosquito, or nearly as fast. A Mossie carrying 4,000lb could top 400mph and the Mossie could carry that payload to Berlin. As a bomber the Mossie has it.

As PR machine its worth remembering that the 8th Air Force wanted PR Mossies or PR Spits in preference to the F5 P38. They received The Spit XI which was used on the more dangerous PR missions, the F5 being used for the other tasks. The loss rate of the F5 was much higher.

As a NF there is no question that the Mossie has it, equally as a day fighter the P38 rules.

I would think that the Mosquito would be able to carry more and larger cameras - the F5's being stuck in the not huge nose.

 

[NiceShotAustin]

Would not 2237 miles be the ferry range of a P-38J?

1299 miles for a NF30 looks a lot like internal fuel only.

The P-38J was faster than 414mph (around 440mph IIRC). The NF30 was also faster than 407mph (424mph).

I'm sorry, I'm not following you on "ferry range"

I'd imagine that is internal fuel capacity of the Mossie

I thought the same regarding top speeds also. I'm quoting off militaryfactory.com, so maybe it was the altitude the speed was being measured at that lowballed the results?

 

[tomo pauk]

If the P-38 was to top 420 mph in level flight, that was the capability of the XP-38K and, maybe, P-38L with V-1710 over-revved at 3200 rpm (making 1700+ HP). Other P-38s were capable up to 415 mph.
Ferry range would be a distance of a flight from point A to point B; combat radius involves combat return to the originating airstrip. Combat radius is roughly 1/3rd of ferry range, but obliviously it depends on many things that might happen to a plane. Some planes were not able to easily drop the biggest drop tanks, so that should be taken into account.

 

[wuzak]

Ferry range would, I presume, involve maximum fuel with minimum or no ammunition, and running at the best speed for economy for the whole flight.

 

[NiceShotAustin]

Ahhh, ok. I'm not good with terms . Anyways, yes I'm pretty sure that would be ferry range under optimal conditions

 

[Jabberwocky]

Ahhh, ok. I'm not good with terms . Anyways, yes I'm pretty sure that would be ferry range under optimal conditions

Given that the Mk XVI, quite similar to the NF Mk 30, had a range of 1800 miles with wing tanks (but no external tanks) and a 2,000 lbs bomb load, I doubt that the 1300 miles is ferry range.

For absolute distance, the best Mossie would be the PR Mk 34, which had a range of 3755 miles at 290 mph, still air cruising speed. At 330 mph, it could do 2865 miles.

 

[wuzak]

Given that the Mk XVI, quite similar to the NF Mk 30, had a range of 1800 miles with wing tanks (but no external tanks) and a 2,000 lbs bomb load, I doubt that the 1300 miles is ferry range.

For absolute distance, the best Mossie would be the PR Mk 34, which had a range of 3755 miles at 290 mph, still air cruising speed. At 330 mph, it could do 2865 miles.

The ferry range we were talking about was the 2237 miles for a P-38J.

1300 miles for a NF30 would be internal fuel only.

 

[pbfoot]

The Mossie could fly the pond unrefuelled I'm not so sure the P38 could , they were staged across Goose/gander Greenland Iceland and the Mossies flew direct from either Goose Or Gander

 

[NiceShotAustin]

I do believe that 1300 miles is the ferry range as that is what I've been getting from every website. And 3755 miles is VERY impressive. I know the P-38 couldn't reach that without external fuel stores. But, as far as I know, the Mk 34 was specifically just for photo-recon and I'm pretty confident that other war-time Mossies couldn't come close to that figure on internal fuel (correct me if I'm wrong)

And from what I've been reading, the P-38 sounds like it had a longer operation range than the Mossie. Maybe they were staged across Greenland/Iceland because it was a lot less risky to go trans-Atlantic? I'd imagine a decent amount more aircraft could be lost/damaged going trans-Atlantic than having a stop or two to refuel and/or do maintenance

 

[pbfoot]

And from what I've been reading, the P-38 sounds like it had a longer operation range than the Mossie. Maybe they were staged across Greenland/Iceland because it was a lot less risky to go trans-Atlantic? I'd imagine a decent amount more aircraft could be lost/damaged going trans-Atlantic than having a stop or two to refuel and/or do maintenance

One of the reasons for the short P38 hops was a poor navigational skill set of the pilots

 

[GregP]

Now we have people saying the planes were faster than reported!

Sorry guys, they weren't faster. A Mosquito quoted at 408 mph went that fast ± a few mph, not 424 mph. Just like all the other WWII aircraft met their factory specs. Production aircraft varied a few mph, but not by many.

WWII aircraft weregenerally as good as their specifications when relatively new and clean. As they aged or got dirty, they got worse than specification, not better.

Still happens today.

 

[pbfoot]

. As they aged or got dirty, they got worse than specification, not better.

Still happens today.

My Dad who was an AME in 1938 says the exact same thing to make an aircraft perform better clean it , and most forget all the accumulated dirt inside which weighs a few pounds

 

[GregP]

Yeah, the average light plane that stays in a hangar gains about 5 poun ds per year. If left outside, it is bad enough that it has to be cleaned every few years or it really starts to get heavy.

I once flew a new Cessan 172 ... really, it had 25 hours on it and I was the first person to rent it. It climbed at EXACTLY book value for the weight and cruised at EXACTLY book value for the weight, altitude, and power setting. 4 years later the same planes was 3 - 4 mph slower and 80 fpm less climb. Not a bad degradation, but the prop gets nicks, the paint gets rough, and the dirt adds up.

It does the same for fighters that live outside in what is basically a farmer's field in WWII ... probably a bit worse.

 

[Shortround6]

If the P-38 was to top 420 mph in level flight, that was the capability of the XP-38K and, maybe, P-38L with V-1710 over-revved at 3200 rpm (making 1700+ HP). Other P-38s were capable up to 415 mph.
Ferry range would be a distance of a flight from point A to point B; combat radius involves combat return to the originating airstrip. Combat radius is roughly 1/3rd of ferry range, but obliviously it depends on many things that might happen to a plane. Some planes were not able to easily drop the biggest drop tanks, so that should be taken into account.

Some planes are going to have radius of 1/4 or less than their ferry range because in order to carry the fuel for the ferry mission and still stay within weight limits they carried no ammo and in some cases no guns. Practically ANY flight maneuvers were prohibited (even a hard turn) while the tanks were near full.