What if the P-38 was made of plywood a la Mosquito?

Shortround6 · Jul 20, 2019

The whole point of the P-38 design was that at the time of it's design NO single engine could supply enough power to meet the performance specification (weapons load, speed and endurance) which forced the twin engine solution.

If Kelly had had a 1500-1600hp reliable engine available in 1937-38-39 when design and development work was going on for the P-38 the P-38 might very well have been a single fighter.
The US Army had not requested a twin. With no such engine available (or projected in a reasonable timeline at the time , the only solution was to use a pair of 1000-1100 hp engines and use the extra power to counter the greater weight and drag of a twin engine design in order to give the US Army the endurance they requested.

P-38 development lagged, in part due the crash of the sole prototype and engine development may have been faster than anticipated by Kelly. In part due to the development of higher performance number fuel/s.

Kevin J · Jul 21, 2019

PAT303 said:
Don't flame me for saying this but I believe planes like the P-38 only survived because so much time an effort was put into their design it made it impossible to cancel them and start over. If we compared the P-38 to the P-47 and P-51, the later two started out as diamonds in the rough but the underlying designs were sound and both became excellent aircraft from the D series with the P-47 and the A/B series P-51, the P-38 on the other hand was a continuous re-design throughout its life as each new problem presented itself. The P-51, Spitfire, FW190 and Me109 as examples all had teething problems but nothing that could not be quickly overcome which shows in their production cost around the $50,000 mark and massive involvement in the air war, the P-47 became an expensive plane at double the price but it's contribution in breaking the Luftwaffe's back cannot be dismissed, the P-38 I believe is not in the same league. Lastly, is it worth using two Merlins in a P-38 instead of say a Mosquito, or two Merlins in two Spitfires or Mustang's?, I don't think it is.

The P-38 was indispensable over all areas where you had lots of water. Definitely effective against both the Japanese and Italians single seat fighters. A plywood Lightning, I don't think so. Better a Beaufighter than a Mosquito in the tropics at least you're plane doesn't fall apart. Just think about it, the humble Beaufighter gave the RAF 70 aces. Even in 1945 it could still successfully operate in daylight against the Japanese.

Red 3 · Jul 21, 2019

Milosh said:
So if that is true why didn't the B-26 get canned?

I don't know about the B26 issue, but if you read the items that I linked to you can read for yourself about the USAAF experience with Mosquitos. My comment wasn't meant as a slander, good men died or were injured from other countries as well as our own flying this airplane.

pbehn · Jul 21, 2019

Red 3 said:
I don't know about the B26 issue, but if you read the items that I linked to you can read for yourself about the USAAF experience with Mosquitos. My comment wasn't meant as a slander, good men died or were injured from other countries as well as our own flying this airplane.

All your link pointed towards was inadequate training. possibly because a weather recon plane isn't considered to be a combat plane. The PR versions swapped fuel for a bomb load, any pilot taking off in such a plane has to be trained in how to do it properly. As with the B-26 the issue wasn't with the plane itself but the training the pilots received. Some of the comments are comic. Are there acts that are natural or un natural to people born in North America as opposed to other parts of the globe? I thought the object of repetition in training was to make things become natural, even if at first they are not familiar or what you are used to.

Red 3 · Jul 21, 2019

pbehn said:
All your link pointed towards was inadequate training. possibly because a weather recon plane isn't considered to be a combat plane. The PR versions swapped fuel for a bomb load, any pilot taking off in such a plane has to be trained in how to do it properly. As with the B-26 the issue wasn't with the plane itself but the training the pilots received. Some of the comments are comic. Are there acts that are natural or un natural to people born in North America as opposed to other parts of the globe? I thought the object of repetition in training was to make things become natural, even if at first they are not familiar or what you are used to.

I watched a documentary on YouTube which included a veteran pilot talking to a new pilot, only six hours on the Mosquito, and he specifically warned him about this and some other dangerous characteristics of the aircraft so it wasn't specific to the PR variants. One of the articles, I think maybe the second, was quite detailed on these issues and how many crews and aircraft were lost to take off accidents including RAF and Chinese personnel. I think it was indeed possibly linked to inadequate training. My original remark mentioned the US experience particularly as the question I was answering had specifically asked wether or not the US had used the Mosquito. To be quite clear, I had no intention of slighting the US aircrews

Below is the link to the article that best details the issues and it is quite clear that the Mosquito could be difficult. I apologize for any perceived negative opinions of US aircrews and their skills.

https://www.historynet.com/the-miraculous-mosquito.htm

pbehn · Jul 21, 2019

Red 3 said:
I watched a documentary on YouTube which included a veteran pilot talking to a new pilot, only six hours on the Mosquito, and he specifically warned him about this and some other dangerous characteristics of the aircraft so it wasn't specific to the PR variants. One of the articles, I think maybe the second, was quite detailed on these issues and how many crews and aircraft were lost to take off accidents including RAF and Chinese personnel. I think it was indeed possibly linked to inadequate training. My original remark mentioned the US experience particularly as the question I was answering had specifically asked wether or not the US had used the Mosquito. To be quite clear, I had no intention of slighting the US aircrews

Below is the link to the article that best details the issues and it is quite clear that the Mosquito could be difficult. I apologize for any perceived negative opinions of US aircrews and their skills.

https://www.historynet.com/the-miraculous-mosquito.htm

That was the link I was referring to. Particularly this remark "So a pilot had to use differential braking to catch takeoff swings, and in typical Brit fashion, a Mosquito's pneumatic brakes were actuated by the rudder pedals but modulated by air pressure controlled via a bicycle-brake-like lever on the control column. Not a natural process." All of these aircraft could be difficult, the article explains why the Mosquito could be difficult. A P-51 with 100 gal external tanks was also difficult, and downright dangerous if you did things you were told not to.

Milosh · Jul 21, 2019

Red 3 said:
I don't know about the B26 issue, but if you read the items that I linked to you can read for yourself about the USAAF experience with Mosquitos. My comment wasn't meant as a slander, good men died or were injured from other countries as well as our own flying this airplane.

The B-26 is mentioned in the article you linked to.

Red 3 · Jul 22, 2019

Milosh said:
The B-26 is mentioned in the article you linked to.

Lol, guess I didn't absorb that bit!

nuuumannn · Jul 23, 2019

Red 3 said:
Apparently many were crashed on takeoff due to torque swing and the air corps decided Mossies were to dangerous and that was that.

Hmm, a little simplistic. In fact, the Mosquito was liked by the Americans and requested in increasing numbers throughout the war. You need to read the book Mosquito by C Martin Sharp and Mike Bowyer. There's a chapter on its US use and the decisions behind its acquisition by the USAAF. There is a sometime contributor (an American) to this forum who supplied information on the US use of the Mossie for the book - can't remember his handle. He's writing a book on the subject.

From the book: "A postgram from Washington, received by the Air Ministry on 23 February 1943, brought the first official request from the Americans for Mosquitoes. it read as follows: 'We desire to re-equip photo reconnaissance squadrons in, or destined for, the European theatre at 65 UE and North Africa at 26 UE with the PRU version of your Mosquito aircraft modified for American cameras. When we compare our aircraft in production anfd the tactical operational range of your Mosquito with our F-5/P-38, there seems no doubt the purposes of our combined air forces will be best served if the AAF curtail their conversion of P-38 and rely on your Mosquito production."

"There was a further aspect to America's wish to have Mosquitoes, for the US Navy had acquired a Canadian Mosquito and examined it from the night fighting aspect for which the USAAF and Navy had no suitable aircraft in prospect."

According to the book, Hap Arnold pressed the British Air Ministry on 1 April 1943 for Mosquitoes, but was met with resistance since the British themselves did not have enough, then on 14 April he again requested Mosquitoes, stating that it was of, "vital importance for the Allied Theatre Command for special mapping projects and that the Moquito can go far byond the F-5 range". A week late the US Navy stated it wanted 150 Mosquitoes from Canadian production."

The USAAF then submitted a request for the aircraft again, breaking down what they wanted in numbers. From the book: "A total of 235 were resquested for use by the end of 1943, by the 13th Photo Squadron in the 8th AF, the 5th and 13th Photo Squadron in the 12th AF, also the 22nd and 23rd Squadrons at Colorado Springs the 27th and one other training squadron. Each needed to be 13 aircraft strong with three reserves and others to cater for attrition."

"October 1943 saw the USAAF pressing for more PR Mosquitoes to equip two squadrons in the Mediterranean area and basing its requirement on 16 aircraft as each unit's strength with another 50 in reserve and 20 per month to cope with wastage."

"Their 1944 requirements would be 125 PR Mosquitoes, delivered at 76 per month from July onwards. If 30 FB.VIs still on offer were accepted they estimated a need for an additional one per month in 1944..."

"The value of the Mosquito as a strategic and target reconnaissance aircraft deeply impressed the USAAF which had nothing remotely comparable. In March 1944 Gen Arnold had filed a request for reconnaissance Mosquitoes for use in the Pacific war."

Doesn't sound to me like 'that was that' at all.

pbehn · Jul 24, 2019

nuuumannn said:
Hmm, a little simplistic. In fact, the Mosquito was liked by the Americans and requested in increasing numbers throughout the war. You need to read the book Mosquito by C Martin Sharp and Mike Bowyer. There's a chapter on its US use and the decisions behind its acquisition by the USAAF. There is a sometime contributor (an American) to this forum who supplied information on the US use of the Mossie for the book - can't remember his handle. He's writing a book on the subject.

From the book: "A postgram from Washington, received by the Air Ministry on 23 February 1943, brought the first official request from the Americans for Mosquitoes. it read as follows: 'We desire to re-equip photo reconnaissance squadrons in, or destined for, the European theatre at 65 UE and North Africa at 26 UE with the PRU version of your Mosquito aircraft modified for American cameras. When we compare our aircraft in production anfd the tactical operational range of your Mosquito with our F-5/P-38, there seems no doubt the purposes of our combined air forces will be best served if the AAF curtail their conversion of P-38 and rely on your Mosquito production."

"There was a further aspect to America's wish to have Mosquitoes, for the US Navy had acquired a Canadian Mosquito and examined it from the night fighting aspect for which the USAAF and Navy had no suitable aircraft in prospect."

According to the book, Hap Arnold pressed the British Air Ministry on 1 April 1943 for Mosquitoes, but was met with resistance since the British themselves did not have enough, then on 14 April he again requested Mosquitoes, stating that it was of, "vital importance for the Allied Theatre Command for special mapping projects and that the Moquito can go far byond the F-5 range". A week late the US Navy stated it wanted 150 Mosquitoes from Canadian production."

The USAAF then submitted a request for the aircraft again, breaking down what they wanted in numbers. From the book: "A total of 235 were resquested for use by the end of 1943, by the 13th Photo Squadron in the 8th AF, the 5th and 13th Photo Squadron in the 12th AF, also the 22nd and 23rd Squadrons at Colorado Springs the 27th and one other training squadron. Each needed to be 13 aircraft strong with three reserves and others to cater for attrition."

"October 1943 saw the USAAF pressing for more PR Mosquitoes to equip two squadrons in the Mediterranean area and basing its requirement on 16 aircraft as each unit's strength with another 50 in reserve and 20 per month to cope with wastage."

"Their 1944 requirements would be 125 PR Mosquitoes, delivered at 76 per month from July onwards. If 30 FB.VIs still on offer were accepted they estimated a need for an additional one per month in 1944..."

"The value of the Mosquito as a strategic and target reconnaissance aircraft deeply impressed the USAAF which had nothing remotely comparable. In March 1944 Gen Arnold had filed a request for reconnaissance Mosquitoes for use in the Pacific war."

Doesn't sound to me like 'that was that' at all.

That's how I have always understood it. The Mosquito filled a niche, doing something nothing else could but it was just a niche, producing Mosquitos in USA wasn't a sensible option for the few hundred aircraft needed. In a way it was serendipity, was any WW2 aircraft designed from the start for recon?

wuzak · Jul 24, 2019

pbehn said:
That's how I have always understood it. The Mosquito filled a niche, doing something nothing else could but it was just a niche, producing Mosquitos in USA wasn't a sensible option for the few hundred aircraft needed. In a way it was serendipity, was any WW2 aircraft designed from the start for recon?

As far as I am aware, no WW2 aircraft was designed as a reconnaissance aircraft, unless you count the Hughes XF-11 and Republic XF-12 which were both started in WW2, but didn't appear until a year or two after the war.

As for being a "niche" aircraft, the Mosquito was used by teh USAAF as more than just a PR platform. They were also used as pathfinders with H2X fitted, and as night fighters.

American production would have resolved the RAF's issues of not having enough of one or other type of Mosquito.

Shortround6 · Jul 24, 2019

wuzak said:
As far as I am aware, no WW2 US or British aircraft was designed as a reconnaissance aircraft, unless you count the Hughes XF-11 and Republic XF-12 which were both started in WW2

Fixed it

the Japanese had designed/built reconnaissance aircraft, The Russias may have (or had variant designs of other aircraft but did not see production?) Germans had the Arado 234 jet and perhaps a few other designs (production is something else).

wuzak · Jul 24, 2019

Shortround6 said:
Fixed it

the Japanese had designed/built reconnaissance aircraft, The Russias may have (or had variant designs of other aircraft but did not see production?) Germans had the Arado 234 jet and perhaps a few other designs (production is something else).

The Arado 234 wasn't actually designed as a reconnaissance aircraft.

But I take your point about the Japanese. I think there were dome designed specifically for the PR role.

Milosh · Jul 24, 2019

In late 1940, the Reich Air Ministry (German: Reichsluftfahrtministerium, abbreviated RLM) offered a tender for a jet-powered high-speed reconnaissance aircraft with a range of 2,156 km (1,340 mi). Arado was the only company to respond, offering their E.370 project, led by Professor Walter Blume.[2] This was a high-wing conventional-looking design with a Junkers Jumo 004 engine under each wing.

Conslaw · Jul 24, 2019

Remember that until the summer of 1943, with the coming of the P-47, the US Army Air Force had no other fighter capable of working at altitude except the P-38. If the P-38 wasn't available, they would have had nothing. A wooden P-38 would have had some advantages, but probably would have been stressed for lower g loading, which means it may not have been able to truly fill a fighter v. fighter role. The US did not have an indiginous engine capable of delivering high altitude fighter performance other than the turbocharged Allison. The P-38, despite its weaknesses, filled an important role, and it was probably the most important Army fighter from the fall of 1942 through the fall of 1943.

pbehn · Jul 24, 2019

wuzak said:
As far as I am aware, no WW2 aircraft was designed as a reconnaissance aircraft, unless you count the Hughes XF-11 and Republic XF-12 which were both started in WW2, but didn't appear until a year or two after the war.

As for being a "niche" aircraft, the Mosquito was used by teh USAAF as more than just a PR platform. They were also used as pathfinders with H2X fitted, and as night fighters.

American production would have resolved the RAF's issues of not having enough of one or other type of Mosquito.

There is no doubt the allies could have used a lot more and possibly it could have justified production in USA but much is from what happened not what could have been foreseen and politics too would have been an issue.

HarryMann · Jul 24, 2019

"I believe the P-38 was already more manoeuvable than the Mosquito, and had superior performance as a fighter. "

The dH Mosquito was designed as a bomber, fighter bomber, PR aircraft and soon became the exemplar for Multi-Role aircraft. But firstly as a fast unarmed bomber. Manoeuvrability, per se, wasn't a leading criterion?
Neither was wood used to save weight, per se. It was to justify their tender to the Air Ministry, who wouldn't countenance an unarmed bomber, the minimal use of wartime resources that other more favoured aircraft manufacturers were being allotted, namely aluminium and steel. Hence 'Freeman's Folly', after the man who took the risk in ordering it 'off the drawing board'.

I heard that Roosevelt's son, in the North Africa desert campaign, was asking Franklin R. to lobby the Brits for one to replace his P-38, and actually did end up about the only active US pilot with one at that time...

In answer to the discussion of US production... that would not have been feasible or practical. The logistics to get Canada producing and then Bankstown in Australia were very challenging..
PS. The Mosquito FB shadow factory at Leavesden, Herts is now the Harry Potter film studio and theme park Hatfield, Herts, the Mosquito's home, and home of the Worlds first jet airliner by many years (1st flight July 1949), is sadly no more an airfield
A truly groundbreaking company with an incredible legacy!

nuuumannn · Jul 24, 2019

The Mosquito was designed as a bomber, but the specification to put it into production was named 'De Havilland Light Reconnaissance Bomber Aeroplane' and dated 1 March 1940, stipulating that it was to carry out 'reconnaissance by day and bombing by day and night'. The multi-role aspect came because the Air Ministry, specifically the likes of Tedder and Sholto-Douglas weren't too happy about the 'unarmed' aspect, and they didn't believe de Havilland's figures. Even then, the prototype was built on the proviso that a turret armed Mosquito bomber follow it into production. De Havilland were not happy about this and Freeman bet that the unarmed prototype would be exceptional, and that if it wasn't, then Sholto-Douglas would have his turret armed bomber.

Building the aircraft as a two seat fighter gave it more credibility however and this came next in terms of specifications to put it into production (F.21/40). The first Mosquitoes built, at Salisbury Hall, were the prototype W4050, then the Photo Reconaissance prototype W4051, which was delayed in completion because W4050 had a landing accident that split its fuselage, which meant W4051 donated its fuselage to W4050's wing. The next to fly after the prototype was W4052, which was a fixed gun (night) fighter, and then W4053, which was the turret armed fighter for a night fighter spec. This became the T.III trainer prototype after the gun turret was found to be unworkable.

HarryMann · Jul 26, 2019

Well Yes, thanks Nuuumannn.
That'd mean W4052 was the one flown straight out of the ploughed farmers field by Geoffrey junior with foreman Fred Plumb allegedly next to him.
This was to save a week or two disassembling and low loadering it the short distance to Hatfield.
Remember, they were setting records for time to first flight then time to first mission... both 11 months I believe.
PS. The farmer was most displeased at having to cut a tree down to make a wide enough gap but the Ministry and maybe a bottle of Scotch prevailed !

Dimlee · Jul 28, 2019

Shortround6 said:
Fixed it

the Japanese had designed/built reconnaissance aircraft, The Russias may have (or had variant designs of other aircraft but did not see production?) Germans had the Arado 234 jet and perhaps a few other designs (production is something else).

Japanese Ki-46 comes to mind, wonderful aircraft.
USSR did have dedicated recon aircraft before WWII: R-5, R-Z, R-10. They were used in various roles, but reconnaissance was the main designation. Also most of Beriev's flying boats as MBR-2 and others were designed as recon aircraft.

What if the P-38 was made of plywood a la Mosquito?

Major General

Banned

Airman

Colonel

Airman

Colonel

Senior Master Sergeant

Airman

Major

Colonel

Captain

Major General

Captain

Senior Master Sergeant

Senior Airman

Colonel

Airman

Major

Airman

Tech Sergeant

Users who are viewing this thread

Similar threads