Originally posted by J_A_B
Crumpp, you are comparing a P-38F to a P-51B.
That is the same logic as comparing DC-3 to a 707 and concluding that Boeing must build better airplanes than Douglas.
The P-38J is the contemporary of the P-51B. They are pretty much equal, with each of them having small advantages in certain areas. Likewise, the P-51D and P-38L are more or less equal, with the P-38L being arguably the better plane.
Of course, there's the matter of the fact that 8000+ P-51D's cost the US government less money than 3800 P-38L's. This financial factor is IMO what ultimately doomed the Lightning, not any deficiency with the actual airplane.
J_A_B
I wouldn't necessarily say either is actually superior over the other.
In fact, I'd say the P-38 and the P-51 compare much as their modern counterparts the F-15 and the F-16.
In fact, the parallels between the two pairs is striking when you consider it.
Each has a very important role in the AF they serve, and unique characteristics that make it better suited for specific tasks, while able to perform most all tasks required quite admirably.
The two twin engined fighters are larger, heavier, more complex, more expensive, and better suited toward certain specifc tasks. But they are both still capable of handling any of their contemporary enemies in the hands of a skilled capable pilot.
The two single engine fighters are lighter, smaller, somewhat more maneuverable in certain flight envelopes, simpler, and less expensive. While well suited to certain tasks that the twin engined planes are less suited for, they are also capable of handling their contemporary enemies in the hands of competant pilots.
They fill two different roles, while able to crossover and handle other jobs quite well.
The P-47 fits somewhere in between, and really has no modern counterpart. In interdiction and ground attack the A-10 would be a modern counterpart (it is after all a Republic Thunderbolt), but there is no large heavy modern single engine fighter.
