P-38J-L questions.

[LLv34_Snefens]

I'll repeat Skurj and myself from the other thread. Why do you care what other players say it should be like? Its not them who are making the FM's.

[F4UDOA]

bolillo_loco,

You are a little misguided by what your reading. I Think you should go back and read those post one more time. The NACA documents are right. So are the pilots manual. I have the P-38 manual and the F4U manual.

If you don't believe me ask Vermillion or Wells if a P-47 could turn inside any F4U. Or better yet why don't you ask Pyro or HT when they are online. I'm sure they would be happy to explain it to you.

[bolillo_loco]

well I have only questioned why the 38 spins when it stalls. nobody has explained why it stans, but quite a few have used broad and vague statements like all planes spin when stalled. I explained why the 38 would not spin.

[F4UDOA]

It's not supposed to spin in a conventional stall. It is just supposed to mush forward. However it did have some nasty flat spin and inverted spin characteristics.

[Vermillion]

No thats not true. Even the P-38 will spin when it stalls, unless your going straight and level.

Otherwise, if one wing is slightly higher than the other you will have asymetrical lift over the wings, thereby causing one wing to stall before the other.

And you will spin. Period.

It may not be as bad as other aircraft, but even the P-38 will spin.

------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure

[bolillo_loco]

so than explain to me how you figure the 38 should spin? countless reports of 38s both power on, power off, level flight, in banked turns, flaps up, flaps down. it just mushed straight out.

I have yet to hear how any of you figured out why the 38 spins when it is stalled. I would like to be shown how you proved all the pilots and tests wrong. please indulge me. also for you guys who do all these mathmatical calculations, didnt somebody prove that the bumble bee cannot fly due to their calculations?

which is more accurate? the pilots manuals, test results, pilots, and test pilots who flew real planes and recorded the data or the paper and pencil calculations done by a few here with out the benifit of wind tunnels to test their theories nor real aircraft to test their theories with?

[This message has been edited by bolillo_loco (edited 12-15-2000).]

[bolillo_loco]

oh and by the way vill, I didnt say you couldnt spin a 38. anything is possible, but normal maneouvers ie turns or flying straight or banked 38s did not spin when stalled. what part of the 38 in power on or off and also in turns either low speed or high speed accelerated showed no tendency to spin when stalled isnt clear or easy to understand?

 if you wanted to enter a spin it was something you had to force the plane to do and know how to do it. all other aces high planes should spin much more easily than the 38 and corsairs with out spoilers would be among the worst planes here for tendency to spin and spin behavior.

[ispar]

Um, Vermillion... The Lightning was in the ETO. Its chief problems were the weather and technical difficulties. The J and L were definitely superior to many German aircraft in late '44 and early '45. Many German aces considered the Lightning the most dangerous opponent they faced. It was definitely not mediocre. I don't think a plane that was literally twice or three times the weight of a Me-109G or K that could outclimb, outrun, and outturn the aformention aircraft would be mediocre, not even by the standard of early 1945.

There is data to support this. There's data to support your point as well. And I can't find any of it right now. But as far as I'm concerned, there isn't any historical info anywhere that indicates the the P-38L should do as poorly as it does in the arena, except perhaps for the altitude and more or less level playing field with regard to pilot skill.

[Vermillion]

Ispar, I know the Lightning was in the ETO, but comparitively its service record there was quite poor compared to the PTO. Why? Because it faced a quite different enemy in a very different set of circumstances.

If you have any data that shows that a late P-38J or L model can outrun or outclimb a late Me109G (10) of K model, I would love to see it. Everything I have seen says that the opposite is true. Out turn maybe, but the others?

The reason that the P-38L is so mediocre in the AH arena, has nothing to do with its historic or modeled performance. It has too do with the fact that its flown nothing like it was in real life. IE at high altitudes where its turbosuperchargers and wide wingspan gave it an advantage. Down low (under 20k), the P-38 is nothing special in any regards, except if you are flying against slow Japanese fighters like the A6M5.



------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure

[bolillo_loco]

well since nobody wants to explain why this plane handles as poorly as it does, ie spinning ugly when it shouldnt. lets look at the speed of the plane.

38H could not make its 1,600 hp wep above 10,000ft due to innercooler limitations. it was restricted to 1,250 hp maybe 1,350 on the outside, but that is max. it still managed to do 400-405 mph on this restricted hp. now explain why the 414 mph is so widely accepted when you consider

405 mph 2,500 hp 38H
414 mph 3,200 hp 38J/L early
414 mph 3,450 hp 38L late

explain the reason why it only gained 9 mph on 700-950 hp? this is reason enough to believe the 425 mph speed for the J and 440 mph speed for the L all of these at altitudes of 25-30,000ft.

J/Ls didnt suffer from turbo problems and innercooler problems as did the H models. engine reliablity was no longer a problem as was in the H

[juzz]

To cure the engine heat problems, they put bigger intakes on the engine nacelles -> MORE DRAG.

[bolillo_loco]

the bearded chin was not responsible for the hundreds of lbs of drag it would take to slow the plane down when you consider the amount of thrust gained by the hp.

[Dune]

The biggest problem with the J model was the lack of power-assisted ailerones.  The Lightening was famous for its compression in dives.

This proved a huge problem in the ETO becuase the LW would dive through the bomber box and the -38J couldn't dive after it for long.  Plus (according to many sources I've read) the LW would split-S to escape danger.  The -38J couldn't follow then either.

Reading many accounts from -38 pilots in "The History of the 364th FG" all point to this as one reason they didn't score as well in the -38 as they did when they got -51D's.  Most of the 364th's pilots were very reluctant to give up their -38's, my grandfather included.

------------------
Lt Col Dune
X.O. 352nd Fighter Group
"The Blue Nosed Bastards of Bodney"

"Credo quia absurdum est." (I believe it because it is unreasonable)
- The motto of the Republic of Baja Arizona

[M.C.202]

Dune said:
> Most of the 364th's pilots were very reluctant to give up their -38's, my
> grandfather included.

Give him my thanks for his work, he was THERE.

------------------
M.C.202
Dino in Reno

[J_A_B]

The later P-38's gained a lot more horsepower, but could not harness that extra power well because they DID NOT recieve signifigantly better propellers.  Power is worthless unless the plane can use it.

In addition to the larger radiator intakes, later P-38's were also heavier and had things like rocket stubs adding to drag.  The P-38J was actually faster than the P-38L, but neither could do 440.  Maybe 425 for the P-38J.

Nonetheless, the P-38 was an excellent plane.  But with a unit price of about $125,000, it simply was too expensive compared to the likes of the P-51 which went for about $50,000 each.

J_A_B