Author Topic: P-38 - Was its size and shape a disadvantage? (Read 2162 times)

F4UDOA · « **Reply #15 on:** May 12, 2005, 04:26:04 PM »

I'd say it's high wingloading, slow initial roll and roll inertia as well as low mach number were probably it greatest disadvantages.

Also I believe that scale is a little deceptive. The smaller the picture the less obvious the size becomes. I have seen an F4U, P-51, P-40 and P-47 parked in close proximity. The difference is staggering. You can't tell at all from those drawings what the scale really is.

Furball · « **Reply #16 on:** May 12, 2005, 04:59:42 PM »

this game/forum makes me believe that the p-38 was the greatest thing.. evar.. had no vices, was flown by all the best pilots and was the most feared aircraft of all time.

L33T!

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #17 on:** May 12, 2005, 05:14:45 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Ack-Ack

ack-ack

What exactly is thios supposed to show?

Lets see:

P38 biggest wing planform & top profile

P38 biggest frontal area and most things sticking out

P38 longest fuselage

P38 least tall - oh mighty that sure makes the shape advantegeus!

Ack-Ack · « **Reply #18 on:** May 12, 2005, 05:15:45 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Furball
this game/forum makes me believe that the p-38 was the greatest thing.. evar.. had no vices, was flown by all the best pilots and was the most feared aircraft of all time.

L33T!

Hmmm...strange. None of us have implied that at all. The P-38 was a good all around plane, a jack of all trades so to speak. While not a master in one area, it did everything well. That's something not many other planes can claim. And this thread in no way even tries to claim superiority of the P-38 over any other plane.

ack-ack

Ack-Ack · « **Reply #19 on:** May 12, 2005, 07:50:52 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
What exactly is thios supposed to show?

Lets see:

P38 biggest wing planform & top profile

P38 biggest frontal area and most things sticking out

P38 longest fuselage

P38 least tall - oh mighty that sure makes the shape advantegeus!

It shows exactly what that article was saying. If you look at the profile of the P-38 compared to the P-47 and P-51, it's relatively small considering it's large size.

ack-ack

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #20 on:** May 12, 2005, 07:59:01 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Ack-Ack
it's relatively small considering it's large size.

ack-ack

Come on, thats pretty hillarious...

Kweassa · « **Reply #21 on:** May 12, 2005, 08:54:07 PM »

Honestly honestly, the only thing 'small' I see in that pic is the small rudder/stab section, and a very slim view from the side.

The total area of it's frontal profile seems to even about as large as the frontal profiles of the P-47 and the P-51 combined....although it's just a quick eye-estimation.

Murdr · « **Reply #22 on:** May 13, 2005, 12:47:50 AM »

erace the props, then count the individual pixels each plane occupies in the front view......let us know your results

niklas · « **Reply #23 on:** May 13, 2005, 03:51:53 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Murdr
erace the props, then count the individual pixels each plane occupies in the front view......let us know your results

Here you go

the col order in the table is according to the numbers in the pic
to make it more clear here the explicit values:
ac_____frotal __ side____ top
P38 __ 2931 ___ 4300 __ 15948
P47 __ 2253 ___ 5721 __ 12677
P51 __ 1688 ___ 4523 __ 9698
109 __ 1542 ___ 3698

no scale check of the drawing was made

It should be noted that the P-38 looks slim from the side, BUT consider that the booms are not in the rotation center, that means even under SLIGHT angles deviation you begin to see both booms (one moves up, one down in a rotation) what in turn means a huge increase of visible area.

niklas

MANDO · « **Reply #24 on:** May 13, 2005, 08:13:38 AM »

Now add a bit of positive AOA for level flight and what an enemy sees from the six of a P38 is a massive shape compared to any of the other planes.

Niklas, which system did you use to calculate the number of pixels? it seems pretty decent to estimate relative flat areas also and drag.

F4UDOA · « **Reply #25 on:** May 13, 2005, 08:44:59 AM »

Also keep in mind that the empty weight of the P-38L was 14,100LBS. That is as much as a loaded P-47.

That is a big bird, I am not sure those drawings reflect that.

straffo · « **Reply #26 on:** May 13, 2005, 09:00:19 AM »

Why it's the profile of a P51K ?
It's a typo or the K and D have the same shape/silhouette ?

TimRas · « **Reply #27 on:** May 13, 2005, 10:55:19 AM »

From AH help:
"The P-51K was a Dallas built version of the P-51D. The only other difference between the two was the use of an Aeroproducts propeller on the P-51K."

Ecliptik · « **Reply #28 on:** May 13, 2005, 11:02:55 AM »

But, the 38 has the advantage of a huge hole in the middle for bullets to pass through.

leitwolf · « **Reply #29 on:** May 13, 2005, 11:36:30 AM »

Sorry guys. I love the 38.
But claiming "its shape and size wasn't all that much of a disadvantage" is ..errm.. pushing it.