Author Topic: P38 question (Read 791 times)

SIK1 · « **on:** August 03, 2007, 12:44:28 PM »

I was watching a show about the mission to kill Yamamoto(sp), and the program showed actual war time footage of P38's where the top canopy was hinged on the right side. Now, I always thought that the top canopy was hinged in the back. Any info would be appreciated.

This isn't really important and doesn't effect AH at all, since we don't have canopies that open and close. I was just curious and figured one of the aircraft gurus would know.

Benny Moore · « **Reply #1 on:** August 03, 2007, 12:55:04 PM »

Early models (I'm not sure, but I believe prior to the J) did open to the side. I'm not sure why they changed it, but I am guessing that it would be easier to open it to the back, and I do know it also allows entry from both sides.

Ack-Ack · « **Reply #2 on:** August 03, 2007, 01:06:23 PM »

Early models (XP-38 through early F) the canopy hatch opened to the right. On later models (late F through M) had the canopy hatch to the rear.

ack-ack

SIK1 · « **Reply #3 on:** August 03, 2007, 01:28:55 PM »

Thanks gents. I knew someone here would know the answer.

Quote

Originally posted by Benny Moore
Early models (I'm not sure, but I believe prior to the J) did open to the side. I'm not sure why they changed it, but I am guessing that it would be easier to open it to the back, and I do know it also allows entry from both sides.

Maybe they changed it to make bailing out easier. Seem like it would be a real biatch to flip the canopy over to the right and hold it there while you get out of a damage plane. Where as with the later style just pop the latch and let the wind take the canopy away. I don't know just a guess.

dedalos · « **Reply #4 on:** August 03, 2007, 01:43:04 PM »

The early version of the P38-MBR had it hinded on the right side. That was not very effective since bombing was effected by the pilot being right or left handed. After the introduction of the P38-ASB the hinge went in the back for obvius reasons

tedrbr · « **Reply #5 on:** August 03, 2007, 02:32:42 PM »

A canopy going back is easier to open in a slipstream, and keep open, than one flipping over to the side, if you find yourself in a position where una**ing the plane in a hurry is a desirable action.

SgtPappy · « **Reply #6 on:** August 05, 2007, 08:41:24 PM »

I' searched it up and no one seemed to find the answer so ...

The P-38L - power-boosted ailerons (requires piping, hydraulic fluid, etc.)
- speed brakes (requires new electrical systems and equipment)

But somehow, the P-38L is identical in weight to the P-38J-10 we have which has neither of those modifications.

Is out P-38J too heavy or is the P-38L too light?

At any rate, the P-38J's, IMO are supposed to maneuver better and run faster than the USAAF-rated P-38L we have.

Benny Moore · « **Reply #7 on:** August 05, 2007, 10:52:49 PM »

Not quite, Pappy. The P-38L was much faster and more manueverable than the J-15 (which is what we seem to have in Aces High II), even though the L was about two hundred pounds heavier. The reason for this was that the L had boosted ailerons, dive flaps, and better engines with lots more power.

I made a thread on this a while ago. I believe that the P-38L was 40 lb. heavier than the P-38J-25-LO (which had boosted ailerons and dive flaps but was missing some of the features of the L, like perhaps fire extinguisers, tail warning radar, and the second generator). The P-38L was 200 lb. heavier than the P-38J-15, which is what most people agree is the P-38J we have in game.

By the way, the reason people think that the P-38J was faster than the P-38L (utterly wrong) is that popular sources list a war emergency power speed for the P-38 but only a military power speed for the P-38. Warren Bodie clearly stated that the famous 414 M.P.H. figure was obtained at fifty four inches of manifold pressure. That's not even the mid-war W.E.P. rating of 60", which yields the well-known figure of 1600 horsepower. The actual top speed of the P-38L was something like 440 M.P.H., according to Bodie. I think that came from 70", however, and not 60. 60" probably brought it the same speed that it brought the P-38J, which was about 425 M.P.H.

SgtPappy · « **Reply #8 on:** August 06, 2007, 10:47:02 AM »

Thanks Benny, though I must say that 200 lbs of extra weight may give a slightly worse turning radius.

Also, in regards to the Allison-rated engines that the P-38L used, I remember what you told me in Blue Sky, but that's why I said in my previous post 'USAAF-rated P-38L' which only rated the former hp figures you mentioned.

Ack-Ack · « **Reply #9 on:** August 06, 2007, 12:10:43 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by SgtPappy

The P-38L - power-boosted ailerons (requires piping, hydraulic fluid, etc.)
- speed brakes (requires new electrical systems and equipment)

P-38L had dive flaps not speed brakes. And no, the speed brakes were not the same thing.

ack-ack

dedalos · « **Reply #10 on:** August 06, 2007, 01:12:23 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by dedalos
The early version of the P38-MBR had it hinded on the right side. That was not very effective since bombing was effected by the pilot being right or left handed. After the introduction of the P38-ASB the hinge went in the back for obvius reasons

Ohhh comon people!!!!! no one wants to know what those models are?

SgtPappy · « **Reply #11 on:** August 07, 2007, 05:51:43 PM »

Dive flaps = to pull out of compression
Speed brakes = to prevent overspeeding..

I believe that's correct.

Benny Moore · « **Reply #12 on:** August 07, 2007, 07:28:23 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by SgtPappy
200 lbs of extra weight may give a slightly worse turning radius.

Yes, but the better engines more than countered the weight. The more power, the better you turn, below corner velocity. Moreover, more power boostd maneuverability across the board. But regardless, even if the P-38L didn't have better engines and thus better sustained turn,, it would still be more maneuverable overall even with a slightly inferior turn (which it didn't have) because of the boosted ailerons and dive flaps.

Quote

Originally posted by SgtPappy
Also, in regards to the Allison-rated engines that the P-38L used, I remember what you told me in Blue Sky, but that's why I said in my previous post 'USAAF-rated P-38L' which only rated the former hp figures you mentioned.

No, the figures I mentioned were official U.S.A.A.F. ratings, cleared for use. They just never made it into the Pilots Manual For the Lockheed P-38 Lighting, which was seldom updated and not always correct. As a matter of fact, at least some P-38 pilots never saw the manual. The ratings of which I speak were approved via memorandums sent to the individual units.

But even if they weren't official (which they were) it's still quite wrong, doubly so in fact, to say that the P-38L was slower than the P-38J. First, whether an airplane is "officially" slower or not doesn't matter; what matters is whether or not it actually was. Secondly, the commonly quoted numbers are apples and oranges; one is military power and the other is war emergency power. You can't say that the P-38J is faster than the P-38L, using the P-38J's war emergency power speed and the P-38L's military power speed. I'm not even talking about the extra horsepower from the later ratings.