What if: Mosquito vs P-38

[Jabberwocky]

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.

According o the pilots that flew them, Mosquito B Mk XVIs with the 4000 lbs cookie bombload were able to do a maximum of 408 mph with a full bombload, but 416 mph with bombs gone and half load of fuel.

B Mk XVI speeds also varied due to the different engines fitted, Merlin 72/73 in the first 80, Merlin 77/76 in subsequent deliveries.

 

[wuzak]

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.

There were many different versions of Mosquito with different types of engine.

The Mosquito B.XVI had a top speed with full bomb load of 408mph. The B.IV with ejector exhausts 380mph, B.IV with saxaphone exhausts (early models) around 365mph. The FB.VI around 370mph, IIRC, and the NF.30 424mph.

The RAE and AE&EE also did a lot of testing with different surface finishes to see how that affect speed.

 

[parsifal]

Absolutely correct wuzak. Good catch

 

[Arossihman]

P-38 J or L all day long for me!

 

[wuzak]

P-38 J or L all day long for me!

For what role?

Definitely better as a day fighter.

But as a night fighter, bomber or PR aircraft I would say not.

As a fighter bomber that would be the most debatable. The P-38 could carry a heavier bomb load than the FBVI Mossie, but not as far. It was far more capable in air to air combat, but the FBVI had more punch (4 x 20mm + 4 x 0.303" vs 1 x 20mm + 4 x 0.50").

 

[tomo pauk]

Perhaps it was too bad that P-38 was conceived as a twin-boom plane, instead of being a 'classic' twin engined one? The pod was pretty restricting in regard to addition of another crew member, fuel, maybe some small bomb bay (size of Avenger's split longitudinally?) etc.
Of course, a second source of P-38s would've been even nicer, even if that one is producing non-turbo ones

 

[wuzak]

Perhaps it was too bad that P-38 was conceived as a twin-boom plane, instead of being a 'classic' twin engined one? The pod was pretty restricting in regard to addition of another crew member, fuel, maybe some small bomb bay (size of Avenger's split longitudinally?) etc.
Of course, a second source of P-38s would've been even nicer, even if that one is producing non-turbo ones

The twin boom was fine for its original purpose - that of a fighter/interceptor. I'm sure the thought of converting into a night fighter/recon aircraft/bomber wasn't high on teh agenda during the design and development phase.

 

[parsifal]

Id even be careful in claiming the P-38 was a more important day fighter. From memory (and im happy to be corrected by you guys) my understanding is that he m ossie was responsible for shooting down over 600 LW day fighters, whilst the P-38, i seem to remember something like 200. The Mossie, whilst a classic TE fighter was still a formidable opponent under any circumstance. Its ability as a fighter, day or night ought not be under estimated

 

[Arossihman]

For what role?

Definitely better as a day fighter.

But as a night fighter, bomber or PR aircraft I would say not.

As a fighter bomber that would be the most debatable. The P-38 could carry a heavier bomb load than the FBVI Mossie, but not as far. It was far more capable in air to air combat, but the FBVI had more punch (4 x 20mm + 4 x 0.303" vs 1 x 20mm + 4 x 0.50").

Day fighter and fighter bomber for sure...but why not as a night fighter?

 

[tomo pauk]

The twin boom was fine for its original purpose - that of a fighter/interceptor. I'm sure the thought of converting into a night fighter/recon aircraft/bomber wasn't high on teh agenda during the design and development phase.

You're right about the intended purpose.
OTOH, even without the bomb bay, the classic twin offers more useful volume; even the single engined fighters were usually turned into two-seaters without much trouble. And the P-38 in classic layout would've had more space/voulme to offer than those.

Id even be careful in claiming the P-38 was a more important day fighter. From memory (and im happy to be corrected by you guys) my understanding is that he m ossie was responsible for shooting down over 600 LW day fighters, whilst the P-38, i seem to remember something like 200. The Mossie, whilst a classic TE fighter was still a formidable opponent under any circumstance. Its ability as a fighter, day or night ought not be under estimated

Mossie waged the war mostly in ETO, unlike the P-38 that was present in Pacific in good numbers, and was credited for 3785 kills, total.
I agree that it would be good if someone could provide some good numbers of kills for both planes; maybe it was the mistake for not using Mossies as a day fighter in the PTO/CBI? Guess the production was not up for all the tasks Mossie was useful for.

 

[mhuxt]

My db has 1,353 claims for enemy aircraft destroyed air-to-air by Mosquitos, however of that 89 are Fw 190s and 34 are Bf 109s. The 190s are actually easier to identify, since many of them were claimed by Mossie nightfighters over the UK against 190s on raids.

As for why one would support the Mossie over the 38 as a night-fighter: the Mossie had a proven track record as a night fighter over the last three years of the war, the 38 not so much.

 

[wuzak]

Day fighter and fighter bomber for sure...but why not as a night fighter?

The Mosquito carried a better radar, and the radar operator had better accomodations.

 

[GregP]

As far as I know, the combat records as a fighter are as follows:

Lockheed P-38 Lightning
First combat kill: 14 Aug 1942, Fw 200. The top 28 P-38 Lightning Aces were all in the PTO with a combined 427.5 kills.

Kills in USAAF Service: ETO: 497; MTO: 1,431; PTO: 1,700; CBI: 157; Total: 3,785

De Havilland Mosquito
In USAAF Service:
ETO: 1

In British service:
ETO, Night fighter: about 600 kills

So, in the fighter role, the P-38 was slightly more than 6 times as effective in kills.

Give me a P-38 any day and I'll come out ahead.

 

[Jabberwocky]

What a strange way to use statistics.

As the Mosquito killed ~600 V1s and P-38s killed none, you could use the same logic to claim that the Mosquito was an infinitely better V1 killer that the P-38...

Given that only 6710 Mosquito's were built during the war period (of 7785 total, compared to the 10,037 P-38s), but only ~4100 of those in wartime service had fixed armament, you could also adjust that 6:1 statistic downwards notably.

Statistics for Mosquito claims I've seen online indicate somewhere between 640 and 850 aircraft kills claimed.

Part of the problem is that the Mossie was so widely distributed in such a profusion of roles. The lower number (640) appears to be for ETO night claims only.

I'm unsure whether the upper number includes FC/ADGB, 2TAF and Coastal Command claims in daylight and/or any claims made in the PTO and MTO. There were at least five Mosquito F/B units operational in Italy and the Med and a couple in the PTO (although I know the RAAF didn't make any claims with its Mossies in the PTO), so there may be more. The Banff Strike Wing alone claimed ~20 aircraft with Mossies.

I've got some Mosquito and RAF ETO claims/losses books at home, so I'll do some checking.

 

[GregP]

The P-38 flew for the U.S.A. in ALL roles and did very well in all. It killed more than six times as many enemy aircaft as the Mosquito. It was never employed in the V-1 killer role, but where did you get the Mosquito V-1 kill total? All in all a non-maneuvering target. All you need to do is get behind it and shoot. A tough job, huh? It doesn't shoot back.

Give me a P-38 any time.

 

[mhuxt]

The P-38 flew for the U.S.A. in ALL roles and did very well in all. It killed more than six times as many enemy aircaft as the Mosquito.

As above, the P-38 claimed three times as many enemy aircraft as the Mossie, not six. One can hardly claim the 38 did well as a night fighter, or as a night intruder, come to think of it.

Preferences are personal, no argument there.

 

[GregP]

Opinions work both ways. My numbers are as posted. Give me a P-38 any day.

If you have sources for other numbers, then please post the numbers so I can see them.

WWII kills by types are difficult to get, but you DO run acroos them occasionally, albeit mostly without corroborating sources ... mostly just a short sentence that a particular type shot down so many aircraft.

I go my P-38 numbers from a US Governemt summary report of WWII by theater of operations. The Mosquito numbers come from whatever I could find on the net and may well have left out some kills that simply don't get mentioned very often. Either way, as a fighter, the P-38 was considerably more effective over its service in the war. Since it was designed as a fighter, I'd employ it as such.

The Mosquito was designed as a bomber / recon platform and did well at those tasks, no question. But the P-38 did well in those tasks, too, when called upon to do so.

 

[Milosh]

Kills in USAAF Service: ETO: 497

ETO, Night fighter: about 600 kills

Would say the Mossie is the better fighter in the ETO.

 

[tomo pauk]

What would be the numbers involved, P-38 vs. Mossie, against what targets?

 

[drgondog]

Milosh - what is your source for ETO destroyed credits?

The total 8th AF credits per USAF Study 85 has 281 total air to air victory credits for the P-38's in 20th, 55th, 364th and 479th FG - oct 1943-Sep 1944. I will have to look at 9th AF but probable the 367/369 and 474 contributed another 200+ to get to 497..