Author Topic: well noone else has asked (Read 530 times)

Hans · « **Reply #15 on:** October 29, 1999, 03:38:00 AM »

Ok, I am a big time WWII enthusiast, especially aviataion.

P-38s do have counter rotating props. One engine has a different transmission setup on the front of the engine (the engines themselves are the same). It spun that prop the oposite direction and thus eliminates torque problems.

It also has a turbo super charger on each engine. From what I have read there is so much machinery for the exaust to run thru before leaving the tailpipe that the airplane is very quiet.

It also has some drawbacks. Its large wingspan (the same span as a modern F-16 jet) means it didn't roll too fast. It has a problem when going too fast and the controls are just too tough for a human being to arm wrestle (compression). The controls are basically a control wheel in the cockpit, cables bolted to it and run thru pulleys back to the ailerons and elevators, then bolted to them. Your biceps are the lone source of power for the controls. To add to your misery when you hit compression speeds, the plane will start to nose over and dive.....meaning you go faster....meaning you compress more...meaning you dive.....well.....sooner or latter the ground comes into play.

It also had inferior cockpit heating . The turbo-supercharger was to blame. After the exaust was run thru the turbo all of the engine heat was gone and none left to heat the cockpit. Cockpit heating doesn't sound like a big problem right? Wrong. Go get some wax paper from the kitchen and tape it to your monitor. This is to represent all the frost that forms on the inside of your cockpit when flying with no heating when the temperature is below zero degrees at 20,000 feet.

Swager · « **Reply #16 on:** October 29, 1999, 06:45:00 AM »

Unforgivin'

The other pilot I believe was Thomas McGuire who at the time had 38 kills in a P-38. He turned his P-38 too hard, low and slow, after a Japanese that was attacking his wingman. Apparently he has done low and slow maneuvers before and was a master at it. I believe he had a bomb attached and did not jettison it before his maneuver. Thought he could get away with it.

Regardless, it was said Thomas McGuire could make the P-38 do amazing things and he would always push it to it's limits.

------------------
Damn Ghostrider! This bogey is all over me!!

fats · « **Reply #17 on:** October 29, 1999, 07:08:00 AM »

Hans:

The later models had boosted ailerons, which meant you only needed like 15% ( can't recall the figure from the endless debates over at WB ) of the forces you would need w/o the boosters to deflect ailerons.

The later models also had dive flaps to overcome compressibility. P-38J-25 onwards had both of these features and we're most likely to get J-25 or L model figuring the current plane set and its timeline.

//fats

funked · « **Reply #18 on:** October 29, 1999, 07:41:00 AM »

Fats - The aileron boost only helps at high speed, where roll rate is limited by the aero. forces on the control surfaces. At low speeds the roll rate is limited by the size and shape of the ailerons and the roll stability (wingspan) of the plane. Also the twin-boom design makes the inertia about the roll axis very high, so it has slow roll acceleration.

Downtown · « **Reply #19 on:** October 29, 1999, 06:07:00 PM »

Again The History Channel.

They were interviewing a guy that flew with Bong and McGuire. This guy had like seven at the end of World War Two. Three German, and Four Japanese. I think he got five in Korea also.

He talked about taking a nurse with him on a morale ride, into combat. I belive they bombed some ack.

He said that Bong got several kills in the P-40, and at first he didn't like the 38. I guess McGuire loved the 38 and started catching Bong. Then Bong flew his wing a few times, and McGuire showed him how to use the 38.

Let the Races begin.

They were both (Bong and McGuire) supposedly very reckless in combat, but they were successful. This guy said they wouldn't hesitate to go into situations where they were out numbered. But working together they were lethal.

God I love the history channel.

(Also good on the episode of whatever it was called was the guy talking about his fight with Vietnams leading aces. Enough Split S's to make you puke.)

------------------
"I could feel the 20MM Cannon impacting behind me so I made myself small behind the pilot armor" Charlie Bond AVG
lkbrown1@tir.com
http://www.tir.com/~lkbrown1
Very Opinionated Person.

fats · « **Reply #20 on:** October 30, 1999, 12:10:00 AM »

--- funked: ---
Fats - The aileron boost only helps at high speed, where roll rate is limited by the aero. forces on the control surfaces.
--- end ---

Yes I understand this, and I made no comment about it. Only commented on the forces needed to deflect the ailerons. Not the effect( s ) of deflected aileron at any given speed.

I have been prolly one of the most anti-38 persons in WB history - from CK.91 when it first came. I have ordered stuff from the museums and such trying to prove the P-38 WB FM wrong - w/o much success I might add ( laugh it up pyro! ). But in any case I wasn't trying to give the impression the aileron boosts made it the roll king of the universe known to man kind.

I did discover ( surely the regular P-38 fliers knew of it I am sure ) the flip-flop where you could do a ~0' radii loop with it though, and soon after the 38 FM got changed. Prolly not because of it, but it still got changed.

//fats

Hans · « **Reply #21 on:** October 31, 1999, 05:54:00 PM »

About Richard Bong.

He is the current U.S. ace of aces with 40 kills.

He also had a reputation for loosing wingmen. Nobody wanted to fly with him.

Down on the ground he was also a boy-scout and didn't like drinking and carousing.

Hans.

-towd_ · « **Reply #22 on:** November 01, 1999, 08:24:00 AM »

"punt"

i just cant get enough of that 38 stuff.

and didnt the 38 have a really incredible roll rate at hight speeds with the hydrolic boost models

-towd_ · « **Reply #23 on:** November 01, 1999, 08:36:00 AM »

duckwing 6 asked

Just a question TOWD .. did the P38 have counter rotating props ?

well i have a unusual source. grampa was a supply sgt in the 54th (not shure but am trying to find out for shure) in the hundreds of storys one wad the first 38 they recieved at attu were little more than production prototypes (no pilot relief tube ect) and most importantly no counterrotating props he said the plane was almost suicidal to fly hard in that form and the 39s were considered worse tho somthin about ground loops what is that?

-towd_ · « **Reply #24 on:** November 02, 1999, 12:23:00 PM »

spent the whole day tryin to find out more about my granfathers 38 squadron in alaska to little sucess. bun found out som neet stuff. according to a very detailed sight i found the early model 38 did have counter rotating props ( inboard ie port eng turned clock wise from pilots point of view) this was changed in later models because of some unfavorable flight characteristics.

also she had a 37mm gun in the early variations (one of these planes scored the the first airborn kill of ww2 for america)

charles linberg got his one and only kill of the war (as a civilian no less lol)in one

it was the only american aircraft in production at the start of the war that was still in production at the end of the war.

she had a pressurised cockpit (so you could litteraly just fly over alot of resistance and make their blood boil (a pun get it?)

the spit 9 and 38 had a mock battle in ww2 when a raf guy was braggin about spit 9 being a uber plane. the 38 spanked the 9 with a "cloverleaf" manuver that was the staple of 38 dogfightin. i suspect this was a spit throttle manuver usin the unusual layout of the plane to do what a single eng simply cannot.

just cant wait for that purty 38

fats · « **Reply #25 on:** November 02, 1999, 01:46:00 PM »

--- -towd_: ---
the spit 9 and 38 had a mock battle in ww2 when a raf guy was braggin about spit 9 being a uber plane.
--- end ---

Perhpas there was a P-38 vs Spit IX fight, but then one I know of is P-38L versus Spitfire Mk.XV. I wouldn't put too much weight on the accuracy of the Spitfires mark as this pilot has several inaccuracies in his stories, he does point out it had five prop blades so it's something newer ( == heavier ) than Spitfire Mk.IX. Both planes apparently had half tank of gas and no ammo. Below the P-38 pilot's account ( John Lowell 364th FG ) as found in a book called 'Top Guns'.

"We agreed to cross over the field at 5,000 feet, then anything goes. I took off in a new P-38L after my crew chief had removed the ammo and put back the minimum counterbalance, dropped external tanks, and sucked out half the internal fuel. I climbed very high, so that as I dive down to cross over the field at 5,000 feet, I would be close to 600 mph. When Donaldson and I crossed, I zoomed straight up while watching him try to get on my tail. When he did a wingover from loss of speed, I was several thousand feet above him, so I quickly got on his tail. Naturally he turned into a full power right Lufbery as I closed in. I frustrated that with my clover-leaf, and if we'd had "hot guns", he would have been shot down. He came over the field with me on his tail and cut throttle, dropped flaps, and split-Sed from about 1,000 feet. I followed him with the new flaps, banked only about forty-five degrees, but still dropped below treetops.

The men of the 364th were watching this fight and saw me go out of sight below treetops. Several of them told me later that they thought I would crash. But they were wrong! All I had to do was move over behind the Spit XV again...[ rest omited ]"

To be honest anyone can win if you have enough smash to out zoom your opponent in the merge. And it seems he did build quite a reserve pre-merge. In AH/AW/WB though I would be quite surprised to see P-38L win, let alone dominate the fight like above, 1on1 _duel_ against Spitfire Mk.IX.

//fats

-towd_ · « **Reply #26 on:** November 02, 1999, 04:06:00 PM »

thanks for that cool post

i agree 38 wont be a uber plane in the hands og anyone but a master. but with a correct modeling i think it will be a cool plane able to really frustrate a opponent with quick manuvers and great (better that anything else because of lack of torq?) low speed handling. and the cloverleaf (i wold love to see exactly what that move entails

thanks again for the correction/verification

juzz · « **Reply #27 on:** November 02, 1999, 04:33:00 PM »

Does anyone actually know what this "clover-leaf" move is exactly?

-towd_ · « **Reply #28 on:** November 02, 1999, 11:50:00 PM »

. The P-38D featured a new low-pressure oxygen system, which supplanted the old high-pressure oxygen system of earlier versions. This system became standard on all subsequent production models.

this i ment the cabin was pressurised ad a mask would not be termed hi or low pressure right?

here is my source
http://www.csd.uwo.ca/~pettypi/elevon/baugher_us/p038-01.html

-towd_ · « **Reply #29 on:** November 02, 1999, 11:53:00 PM »

also the cealing was listed at 39,000 ft for the d model (real early) that is around blood boilin point isnt it? the l model shurely went to the 40s i must have had a pressureised cabin no?