Author Topic: P38 weapon load outs (Read 1073 times)

Hooligan · « **Reply #15 on:** February 08, 2004, 06:47:09 PM »

2000 rounds of belted .50 ammo weighs 622 lbs. So you can save 373 lbs by using the reduced ammo load (about equivalent to reducing fuel load by 15%). This is on a 17,000 lb airplane mind you. The extra ammo seems well worth the weight to me.

Hooligan

killnu · « **Reply #16 on:** February 08, 2004, 08:38:36 PM »

if you can land double digit runs with small ammo load, whats the point? i like the less weight, to each their own.
~S~

Delirium · « **Reply #17 on:** February 08, 2004, 09:03:54 PM »

Great discussion, tho it looks like Hooligan is the only one with anything close to hard data.

Anyone else have anything?

Sway · « **Reply #18 on:** February 08, 2004, 10:00:47 PM »

Not too historical here, just know how to fly the thing in this game. Too lazy to look up charts and data.

Ack-Ack · « **Reply #19 on:** February 08, 2004, 10:32:51 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Hooligan
2000 rounds of belted .50 ammo weighs 622 lbs. So you can save 373 lbs by using the reduced ammo load (about equivalent to reducing fuel load by 15%). This is on a 17,000 lb airplane mind you. The extra ammo seems well worth the weight to me.

Hooligan

If you were to fly a light ammo load P-38L and then a heavy ammo load P-38L, you will be very hard pressed to notice any appreciable advantages in carrying the light load.

And if a light ammo load did give you a significant maneuverabilty or performance increase, why did the vast majority of the P-38 pilots take the full ammo load? Probably because it really didn't make all that much of a difference in performance.

ack-ack

Tequilla · « **Reply #20 on:** February 09, 2004, 12:16:26 AM »

always light ammo and i notice the difference

Guppy35 · « **Reply #21 on:** February 09, 2004, 01:28:04 AM »

I can't hit the broad side of a barn anyway, so the more ammo the better

From a historical standpoint, I don't know that I've ever heard of a real 38 driver going out with less ammo when he could carry more.

One of the redesigns from the 38D to the E model was changing the nose gear so that they could get more ammo in the nose.

For most the 38 was a B & Z plane in reality not a turn and burn bird. Only the best of the best would stay in and turn and that was only as the last resort.

Torps tested but not used operationally. I've seen photos of 1st FG 38s that carried 3 500 pounders under one wing, two 500 pounders and a drop tank under the other. Clearly there were lots of in the field mods that allowed them to carry more then they came from the factory ready to carry.

Dan/Slack

Guppy35 · « **Reply #22 on:** February 09, 2004, 02:12:06 PM »

Since I like photos to go with the conversation. Nothing to do with 38 ammo in the nose, but stuff that came up in the thread

Dan/Slack

The initial model 322-60-04 Lightning(Only turbosupercharged Lightning to carry RAF Markings. Essentially a P38F-13-LO) It was loaned by the USAAF to Lockheed and was tested with two torpedos

82nd FG P38L, 15th AF loaded out with 2 drop tanks and 4 500 pounders

1st FG P38L, 15th AF loaded out with 5 500 pounders and 1 drop tank

82nd FG P38L "Droop Snoot", 15th AF with 6 500 pounders

And a landing P38F cause I love the image and those early, small intake 38s

Ack-Ack · « **Reply #23 on:** February 09, 2004, 04:02:54 PM »

You wouldn't have any pictures of the P-38L "Super Strafer" outfitted with 8 .50 caliber machine guns in the nose and two more mounted in pod under the wings? That's one weapons package I wouldn't mind seeing on the P-38 in AH

ack-ack

Guppy35 · « **Reply #24 on:** February 09, 2004, 04:12:48 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Ack-Ack
You wouldn't have any pictures of the P-38L "Super Strafer" outfitted with 8 .50 caliber machine guns in the nose and two more mounted in pod under the wings? That's one weapons package I wouldn't mind seeing on the P-38 in AH

ack-ack

Never heard of that one Ack-Ack. Was it a field mod or something tested by Lockheed? I have enough 38 books floating around, I'm surprised I haven't run across it.

Dan/Slack

Ack-Ack · « **Reply #25 on:** February 10, 2004, 12:23:26 AM »

It was supposedly an after war modification they did to a P-38L. They doubled the .50s in the nose to 8 and added gun pods under the wings with 2 more .50 cals per gun pod. Don't know if is a USAAF test or Lockheed's but obviously nothing ever came out of it.

This is the site where I saw it was mentioned. They also talk about another P-38 that was modified with 3 .60 caliber machine guns.

P-38 "Super Strafer"

ack-ack

killnu · « **Reply #26 on:** February 10, 2004, 05:10:00 AM »

good read ack ack. be kinda fun shooting something with 4x37mm too.

all in the nose nonetheless, what a punch.
~S~

Dessy · « **Reply #27 on:** February 12, 2004, 12:49:14 AM »

I don't really see the point of taking less than full, unless you intend to jump right into a turnfight on the deck. Even if I am a bit heavier, I'll tend to burn off the excess .50 rounds before I get into a position where ammo weight might be a significant factor...