Originally posted by Widewing
Gripen and I have hashed out the P-38 quite a bit over the years, here and on usenet. Ultimately, we agree that the P-38 was a dead end in terms of development. The basic design was past mature by 1944. It was limited by a wing design that allowed for a relatively low critical Mach of just .68, whereas virtually all of its contemporaries boasted .75 through .80 Mach. At high altitude, a low critical Mach means that buffeting is as near as a lazy relative.
While many of the initial deficiencies of the P-38 were corrected over time, basic problems endemic to the design remained. Complex system controls, poor heating, generally poor outward vision, high maintenence costs, high initial purchase cost and the limitations of the wing design. All of these things conspired against the Lightning. It was competitive throughout the war, but clearly had no future beyond VJ day.
My regards,
Widewing
There's no doubt there were cheaper planes available. However, the same remains true today. An easy comparison is the F-15 and the F-16. No doubt the F-16 is cheaper and simpler. But that does not make it superior.
Lockheed certainly could have done more on the heating and on the complex controls. In fact Carlos' article on your site includes mention of the new control system Lockheed had, that, like may other things Lockheed had for the P-38, the War Production Board and the USAAC decided not to bother with.
Yes, the critical mach limit did hurt performance. But given the fact that once a prop plane enters a fight, it only gets slower, unless it dives, the critical mach limit becomes less a factor (not saying it isn't a factor at all, but just less a factor). It's a factor if you attempt to escape, or chase an escaping plane.
The basic design had limits. But the fact remains that more power and better props would have improved the performance in all areas except top speed and dive speed. Range, climb, acceleration, and turn performance would have been greatly improved. Even with maxed out Allisons and four blade Hamilton Standard High Activity paddle props, the P-38 still would not out run or out dive the fastest of the F4U, P-47, or P-51 series. But it would likely out accelerate them to 440MPH (or whatever the critical mach limit was at that particualr altitude), and it would also likely outclimb them as well as maintain speed better while climbing AND turning.
On the other hand if all you are going to do is run or dive, you aren't going to fight much. If you have to run or dive out, you've lost that fight, although admittedly you've had the ability to survive by running away. But if you cannot do anything but hope to score with a surprise high speed bounce, you don't have a truly superior plane. If you can only exhibit superior speed, and not by more than 40MPH or so, you don't have that great an edge.
Figure the average fight between prop planes begins at 360-380MPH at best, and only gets slower so long as the fight goes on, unless someone dives. Few, or more accurately, VERY few, fights began at over 400MPH, and even those were below 350MPH after the first or second turn. If you cannot out accelerate the opposing plane, you cannot even count on speed to save you after the second turn. Say the fight only drops your speed to 300MPH, you still have to out accelerate the slower plane until it can no longer accelerate. How long does it take to accelerate the faster prop planes from 300MPH to 420MPH?
The point is, had the P-38K gone into production, and the P-38 been allowed to continue to evolve with regards to engines and props (as well as the control system Lockheed already had, to name one example) it would have been far more competitive than it was to begin with, and also that it really was no more outclassed than the other prop planes after World War II ended and the jet age began. Now had the jet age NOT begun, then prop planes probably would have eclipsed the P-38 in time.
