WW2 Aircraft more successful in secondary role

wuzak said:

Well, there you go....

Only thing, the radar seems to be pointing in the wrong direction - forwards, not downwards.

Click to expand...

I was wondering about the installation as well. I am guessing but think both installs have the actual radar pointing down at an angle, most likely the same regardless of being nose or belly mounted. Does anyone know if this system had a crew adjustable tilt?

Cheers,
Biff

stona said:

The invasion coast runs across the image. The bright spot at about 7 o'clock is Caen.

Cheers

Steve

Click to expand...

Yeh we all knew that.

Ug - ok then, I'll rephrase the question:
Was that photo from a X band 3 cm "centimetric" wavelength (10 GHz frequency) unit or the S band 9.1 cm (3 GHz) units?

The point is that these images show the limitations of H2S/H2X as a means of aiming bombs. It was intended originally as, and was best as, a navigation aid, in conjunction with other navigational methods carried out at the same time. Whilst it could show a city the idea that it could reveal a target within that city is ridiculous. There is no way, for example, bombing through 10/10 cloud, that the USAAF could attack a factory or marshaling yard using H2X, any more than the RAF could using H2S by night. If they were lucky and the pathfinder sets were working (in the early days Bomber Command found that 55% of sets that were working on take off had ceased to do so by the time the target area was reached) they might bomb the right city, but the concentrations required to do any real damage were almost impossible to achieve.

The British were determined to make H2S a target finding device, but never really succeeded. Best results were achieved when H2S equipped aircraft illuminated the target area for aircraft to mark visually. This method still only achieved, on average, 44% of bombing photographs within 3 miles of the aiming point, still better than the 11% when the H2S aircraft themselves carried out the marking. Other systems and marking methods were devised and strenuous efforts were made to increase the quality and training of crews in the PFF to better use the equipment. Some improvements were made but the essential problem of seeing in the dark (or through solid cloud) was never overcome.

Cheers

Steve

gjs238 said:

Ug - ok then, I'll rephrase the question:
Was that photo from a X band 3 cm "centimetric" wavelength (10 GHz frequency) unit or the S band 9.1 cm (3 GHz) units?

Click to expand...

The Caen photo is from a 3cm X band H2X unit. You would have got a very similar image from a British H2S Mk III unit which operated at a similar wavelength and frequency (and thus resolution).

You have to be careful with frequency band designations as there seem to have been various standards at different times

Cheers

Steve

IdahoRenegade said:

For it's success in not one, but multiple secondary roles, it's hard to beat the P-38. While designed as an "interceptor" it performed a wide variety of roles.
Long range escort fighter
Ground support/fighter bomber role
Dive bomber
Skip bomber
4000 lb bomb load capability
Tested as a torpedo bomber, carrying (2) 2000 lb torpedos
Photo-recon aircraft-one of the most successful of the war
High altitude level bomber with "droop snoot" variants equipped with Norden bombsites
Radar equipped Pathfinder
Night fighter

Click to expand...

Going back to this post, the P-38 was a rather confusing airplane due to the changes made to it and the time it served.
However few of it's additional "roles" were any more successful if as successful as it's original role/s.

While designed as an "interceptor" it performed a wide variety of roles.
it was desinged as a high endurance "intercepter" with twice the endurance of the other specification that was put out at teh same time. that one lead to the P-39. which leads to.

Long range escort fighter
It wasn't modified into a long range escort fighter. It was already a long range fighter compared to most other fighters in the world. A P-38 could go about 700 miles on 250 gal of internal fuel at a bit over 200mph, Slow it down to US Navy cruise speeds and it would go about 840 miles. Figure around 50 gals for warm up and take off. Adding the drop tanks just kicked the range out.

Ground support/fighter bomber role
It did it but it wasn't often until replaced as a primary air superiority fighter. And it is debatable as to if was better as a fighter/bomber than as an air superiority fighter.

Dive bomber
Depends on defintion of dive bomber, P-38 had no dive brakes (dive brakes later fitted were for recovery from high speed dives from altitude, not speed restricters for accurate bomb placement).

Skip bomber
A different method of bomb delivery but not a different "role".

4000 lb bomb load capability
A capability that was rarely used. A quick look at the numbers would show why. Basic weight of a P-38J/L was 14,100lbs. Basic weight is also empty equipped, that is guns, armor, and other equipment. Pilot, oil and full internal fuel pushes the weight to 16,985lbs. and that is with no ammo for the guns. hanging a pair of 2000lbs on the plane would put you within 55lbs of the gross weight of a ferry mission (pair of 300-310 gallon drop tanks). Since flying bombing missions without at least some ammo for the guns wasn't going to be done that means not filling all the internal tanks.

Tested as a torpedo bomber, carrying (2) 2000 lb torpedos
Test yes, actually used....no. Why???

Photo-recon aircraft-one of the most successful of the war
That it was and bit more.

High altitude level bomber with "droop snoot" variants equipped with Norden bombsites
Less successful than hoped, not terrible or a failure but no real advatage over regular medium bombers. In fact results were usually a bit lower than the medium bombers. BTW most droop snoot missions were flown at altitudes between 10,000 and 20,000ft. Not low altitude but calling them High Altitude is stretching things.

Radar equipped Pathfinder
There weren't many of them and they were actually used for a rather different function. They were often used for weather recconisance and on at least one set of missions (Ploesti July 9-15 1944) a P-38 weather plane arrived over the target and stayed for about an hour directing incoming waves of bombers to one of 5 different targets depending on visiablity just before the bomber wave reached intial points.

Night fighter
Another "what if". Yes about 100 were built but apparently only four(?) actually saw service in a combat zone.

I like the P-38 and for almost a year it was the best US fighter available what ever it's faults may have been. But it didn't really fail at it's primary job. Better aircraft came along later (the P-51) but being replaced by a newer fighter doesn't mean the P-38 was a failure.
And it was rarely dedicated to any secondary roles (except photo recon) until large numbers of P-51s were in theater.
At one point a 15th Air Force report on droop snoots stated. "The Primary function of all fighter aircraft assigned to the 15th AIr Force is to provide escort for heavy bombers. Droop Snoot bombing is considered to be a valuable, though relatively minor, adjunct to the strategic employment of the Air Force. Droopsnoot bombing will be employed .......at every opportunity in the future when P-38 aircraft are not required for use in their primary role as escort and are available for bombing."
This report covered droop snoot operations between Aug 29th 1944 and 21st Jan 1945.

The P-38 wasn't shuffled off to ground support or droop snoot missions because it failed to perform it's primary role like the Typhoon. However it also didn't perform in many of the above listed "roles" in great enough numbers to establish a reputation one way or another.

Shortround6 said:

Going back to this post, the P-38 was a rather confusing airplane due to the changes made to it and the time it served.
However few of it's additional "roles" were any more successful if as successful as it's original role/s.
<SNIP>
Tested as a torpedo bomber, carrying (2) 2000 lb torpedos
Test yes, actually used....no. Why???
<SNIP>

Click to expand...

Another what if: Torpedo wielding P-38's at Midway.

NOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!

Shortround6 said:

Dive bomber
Depends on defintion of dive bomber, P-38 had no dive brakes (dive brakes later fitted were for recovery from high speed dives from altitude, not speed restricters for accurate bomb placement).

Click to expand...

I wouldn't think the P-38 could dive at a sufficient angle to qualify as a dive bomber?

From memory, the dive limitation was 15° without dive flaps and 45° with dive flaps. Not exactly the stuff of dive bombing legend.

54th FS P-38Es arrived in Alaska just too late to defend against the Dutch Harbor attacks. Later were successfully used to intercept Japanese flying boats attacking USN seaplane tenders at Atka. Shot up a lot of Rufes and Jakes at Attu and Kiska. Not really a fair fight.

gjs238 said:

Another what if: Torpedo wielding P-38's at Midway.

Click to expand...

Yep, all they needed was torpedo that actually worked.
BTW, drop speed for the MK 13 Torpedo as used at Midway was 110kts (126mph) from 50ft. A P-38 at that speed and altitude was in trouble even after the torpedoes dropped.

wuzak said:

I wouldn't think the P-38 could dive at a sufficient angle to qualify as a dive bomber?

From memory, the dive limitation was 15° without dive flaps and 45° with dive flaps. Not exactly the stuff of dive bombing legend.

Click to expand...

Not to mention most dive bombers used displacement gear


to help bomb clear the prop in steep dives.

Shortround6 said:

Not to mention most dive bombers used displacement gear


to help bomb clear the prop in steep dives.

Click to expand...

SR6,

Did they use that because they had dive brakes, and as such were going below the terminal velocity of the bomb? It's obviously made to cause the bomb to clear the prop (a good thing in pilots eyes), but didn't think all fighter bombers used them.

Cheers,
Biff

Most fighter bombers didn't need them as the fell clear of the propeller, even the very large propeller of the P-47, without any need.
From the 8th AF's official history.

Cheers
Steve

I think the problems come in with really steep dive angles and dive brakes. The A-36 had dive brakes but the bombs were under wing and clear of the prop disc.
The P-40 carried it's main bomb under fuselage without a crutch but had no dive brakes and didn't normally dive at over 60-70 degrees if that.
The P-38 carried it's bombs in line with the prop disc.
Lots of fighters did what was called dive bombing but they basically meant a steeper angle than glide bombing and not the angles that true dive bombers used.

As far as the USN goes this comment is from the 9th meeting at the Joint Fighter Conference. Which 'fighters' are not specified, but the comment is with reference to the Pacific Fleet(s).

"Our fighters are authorized to dive up to 85 degrees. Of course they have no displacing gear. Careful investigation down here shows absolutely no danger of the bomb hitting the propeller. At least the airplane and the bomb keep their relative pressures fore and aft, and the bomb drops away from the airplane, which was a great relief to everybody."

A lot of those naval fighters had big propeller arcs too!

Cheers

Steve

When dropping bombs horizontally, planes would jump vertically when the bomb left.

Would planes in a dive also move when the bomb is dropped as there is some lift generated by the wings? There is also the question of the plane slowing down/decelerating after dropping the bomb.

Shortround6 said:

Yep, all they needed was torpedo that actually worked.
BTW, drop speed for the MK 13 Torpedo as used at Midway was 110kts (126mph) from 50ft. A P-38 at that speed and altitude was in trouble even after the torpedoes dropped.

Click to expand...

The B-26s at Midway used an approach at 220', speed 210 mph. Three torpedoes were launched, but scored no hits.

Why anyone would want to take a high speed fighter and shackle it to a torpedo, let alone two, is beyond me. They would have been more useful knocking down Kates, Vals, and Zeroes

What happens when a torpedo is dropped way outside it's intended drop speed ?
Does it dive deep, and never come back to it's proper running depth ?
Or take a long time to get back to it's proper depth ?
Could that effect be minimized by dropping from a lower altitude ?

Did anyone know what dropping outside the parameters would result in ?

tyrodtom said:

What happens when a torpedo is dropped way outside it's intended drop speed ?
Does it dive deep, and never come back to it's proper running depth ?
Or take a long time to get back to it's proper depth ?
Could that effect be minimized by dropping from a lower altitude ?

Did anyone know what dropping outside the parameters would result in ?

Click to expand...

Does it get damaged or break up on impact?

Also, dropping the torpedo from a lower altitude and a higher speed may lead to it skipping along the water a bit.