P 38 wish

[humble]

Correct me on this if i am wrong.  Despite the paid load of the P-38, didn't the U.S. felt that the P-47 was more successful to ground attacks than the P-38.  Thus, not having the P-38 as a ground attack roll but more of air combat roll. 

Perceptions of planes varied due to circumstance. Ask most folks what the 1st fighter over Berlin was and they'll almost invariably say the P-51....but the P-38 was actually the 1st allied fighter to venture over Berlin. By the time the teething issues had been worked out in the 38 many units had switched to the pony. All 3 planes were actually very capable in both capacities...as were the F6F and F4U. Sadly the best plane of the war was never deployed in either theater simply because the US had such an abundance of capable planes already...

[321BAR]

Perceptions of planes varied due to circumstance. Ask most folks what the 1st fighter over Berlin was and they'll almost invariably say the P-51....but the P-38 was actually the 1st allied fighter to venture over Berlin. By the time the teething issues had been worked out in the 38 many units had switched to the pony. All 3 planes were actually very capable in both capacities...as were the F6F and F4U. Sadly the best plane of the war was never deployed in either theater simply because the US had such an abundance of capable planes already...

and that best plane would be...?

[Guppy35]

I think it's a misunderstanding calling the field-mod bomb shackles "outer hardpoints"....

But overall the 2000lb bombs weren't used much, and neither were the 1000lb bombs. In real life the 250lb and 500lb bombs were way way way more common.

1000 pounders were the standard from October 44 on in the ETO. 

[oakranger]

I know many felt, along with the USAAF brass that the Jug was the better ground attack aircraft of the two but it didn't cause the P-38 to be pushed out of that role.  It was used to great affect as a ground attack aircraft in three of the four theaters of combat, so much so that in the tail end of the war that was primarily what the Lightning did.

The one thing I find ironic about this thread is that the dedicated P-38 flyers are the ones that are wholeheartedly against this wish, while the ones that don't fly it very much are in favor.


ack-ack

CC, it just seem that the P-47 was well suited for ground attack do to the abuse it can take.  But never-less, both the 47, 38 and all other fighters/attackers preformed to a certain degree. Personally, i would think it would be hard to dive bomb a P-38, but what would i know i do not fly it. 

and that best plane would be...?

I was just thinking of the same thing........maybe it was................

[humble]

and that best plane would be...?

F7F, by far the best all around piston engined fighter ever built...

[Karnak]

F7F, by far the best all around piston engined fighter ever built...

Its performance doesn't really support that.

The F8F, Sea Fury, Hornet and Sea Hornet all seem to be as good or better.

EDIT:

And the Navy kept the F4U over both the F7F and F8F.

[oakranger]

F7F, by far the best all around piston engined fighter ever built...

That is kind of daring to say that when it never saw any action to back that remark.. 

[Avanti]

Which outer hardpoints are you referring to?  There were no outer wing hard points.  The rocket trees were on the L.  2000 pounds bombs were the max carried and that was very limited and on the wing hard points.  Again no outer wing hard points.

What you are asking never happened, never was, never could have been based on the 38s.  I'm curious where you got this idea from?

just some links for you

http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=118584399818
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P-38_Lightning
http://www.aviation-history.com/lockheed/p38.html
http://aircraft-list.com/db/Lockheed_P-38_Lightning/49/

these state that they were able to carry and often did carry 2x 1,600lb
http://www.warbirdalley.com/p38.htm
http://www.aircraftaces.com/p38-lightning.htm

[AWwrgwy]

just some links for you

http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=118584399818
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P-38_Lightning
http://www.aviation-history.com/lockheed/p38.html
http://aircraft-list.com/db/Lockheed_P-38_Lightning/49/

these state that they were able to carry and often did carry 2x 1,600lb
http://www.warbirdalley.com/p38.htm
http://www.aircraftaces.com/p38-lightning.htm

Those are some ugly sources.

Were there 100 US Army squadrons that flew the P-38?

I didn't once see mention of "often" carrying 2 1600 lb bombs much less "often" carrying 1000 lb bombs.  The only "1600 lb bomb" I can even think of is a torpedo.

I think this is a great example of why to never use wiki as a primary source.



wrongway

[Ack-Ack]

just some links for you

http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=118584399818
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P-38_Lightning
http://www.aviation-history.com/lockheed/p38.html
http://aircraft-list.com/db/Lockheed_P-38_Lightning/49/

these state that they were able to carry and often did carry 2x 1,600lb
http://www.warbirdalley.com/p38.htm
http://www.aircraftaces.com/p38-lightning.htm

Those images do not show a hard point on the outer wing.

1,600lb bomb?  Never knew those existed in the USAAF inventory.

Here is a picture of the underside of a P-38L.  No hard point on outer wing and like a lot of P-38Ls, also had the rocket tree removed.


Another shot of a P-38L, again no hard points on outer wing.



ack-ack

[321BAR]

never fight the mighty and powerful ackack in p38 fights...on OR off AH

[Captain Virgil Hilts]

F7F, by far the best all around piston engined fighter ever built...

I don't think I agree with that assessment. It was a fine aircraft, but I think the F8F was a better pure fighter, and the F4U is a better all around fighter.

[humble]

Its performance doesn't really support that.

The F8F, Sea Fury, Hornet and Sea Hornet all seem to be as good or better.

EDIT:

And the Navy kept the F4U over both the F7F and F8F.

I'm basing the comment on comments from the guys that flew all of the planes and its capabilities overall. It was a true midwar design that entered active service in 5/44 and would have been in service sooner if viewed primarily as a land based design. The Hornet entered service in 1946 and is a true postwar plane. Without question if we place the F7F in the context of of the planes above then you have a variety of trade offs and a further element of role since you'd need to add the skyraider to any discussion.

My comment is geared to the reality that the F7F could have been in service in the ETO replacing the P-38/P-47 before the P-51D ever arrived...

[Guppy35]

just some links for you

http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=118584399818
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P-38_Lightning
http://www.aviation-history.com/lockheed/p38.html
http://aircraft-list.com/db/Lockheed_P-38_Lightning/49/

these state that they were able to carry and often did carry 2x 1,600lb
http://www.warbirdalley.com/p38.htm
http://www.aircraftaces.com/p38-lightning.htm

My sources.  I've got this thing about 38s


Group or Squadron Histories:

“An Escort of P-38s-The 1st Fighter Group in World War 2” - John D. Mullins
“Attack & Conquer-The 8th Fighter Group in WW2” –John Stanaway & Lawrence Hickey
“The Eight Ballers: Eyes of the Fifth Air Force”-John Stanaway & Bob Rocker
“20th Fighter Group” – Ron MacKay
"Straight and Level-The story of the 33rd Photo Recon Squadron in WW2"  J.B. Woodson Jr.
“The Fighting 33rd Nomads in World War 2 Volumes 1 & 2” -James E. Reed
“Cobra in the Clouds-Combat History of the 39th Fighter Squadron”-John Stanaway
“Protect & Avenge-The 49th Fighter Group in World War 2”-S.W. Furguson & William K. Pascalis
"The Only Way Home"  54th FS in the Aleutians"  Robert Haynes Murray
“The 55th Fighter Group vs The Luftwaffe”-John M. Gray
“Adorimini-A History of the 82nd Fighter Group in World War 2” –Steve Blake with John Stanaway
“The 370th Fighter Group in World War 2” -Jay Jones
“The Geyser Gang-The 428th Fighter Squadron in World War 2” –John Truman Steinko
"Vampire Squadron-The saga of the 44th FS in the Southwest Pacific"-William Starke
"The 474th Fighter Group in WW2"- Isham Keller.
“Possum, Clover & Hades-The 475th Fighter Group in WW2”-John Stanaway
“The 479th Fighter Group in World War 2” - Terry Fairfield


Books on the P38 Lightning and it’s pilots

“The Lockheed P-38” – Warren Bodie
“Peter Three Eight-The Pilot’s Story” -John Stanaway
“P38 Lightning Aces of the Pacific and CBI” - John Stanaway
“P38 Lightning Aces of the ETO/MTO” - John Stanaway
“Lockheed P38 Lightning” -Steve Pace
“Lockheed P-28 Lightning” -Frederick A. Johnsen
“P-38 Lightning in World War II Color” - Jeffrey L. Ethell
“P-38 Lightning-Restoring a Classic American Warbird” –Jesse Alexander
"Forked Tailed Devil"- Martin Caiden
"Lightning Strikes" - Donald Davis
"Aces High: The Heroic Saga of America's two top-scoring Aces of WWII" - Bill Yenne

"P38 Lightning in Detail & Scale Part 1 XP-38-P38H"  by Bert Kinzey
"P38 Lightning in Detail & Scale Part 2 P-38J-P38M"  by Bert Kinzey
"Lockheed P38 Lightning-in USAAF, French, Italian, Chinese Nationalist Service"  Arco Aircam Aviation Series #10
"Twelve to One"-5th Fighter Command Aces of the Pacific.  Compiled by Tony Holmes.  (This is the manual put together by 5th FC using the words of their best pilots.  Includes lots of 38 drivers)
"Lockheed P-38 Lightning in Italian Service 1943-1955"-Marco Mattioli

[humble]

I don't think I agree with that assessment. It was a fine aircraft, but I think the F8F was a better pure fighter, and the F4U is a better all around fighter.

I've certainly got zero ability to argue that one way or the other. To a large degree I'm relying on comments from Corky Meyer and others who clearly believed the F7F was the best US built piston engined fighter. This is snippet from Corky's story about his run in with Fred Trapnell the Navy's chief test pilot in WW2. He is the guy who approved production of the F6F after just 1 3 hour test flight, shortcutting the entire process to get the bird in production and generally regarded as the top US authority across all US services in his judgement of aircraft suitability in this regard during WW2...

Just as we reached his Tigercat, I blurted, "If you dislike the Tigercat so much, why do you always fly it?" He explained: "The excess power of its two engines is wonderful for aerobatics; the cockpit planning and the forward visibility in the carrier approach is the best in any fighter ever built; the tricycle landing gear allows much faster pilot checkouts; the roll with the power boost rudder is faster than the ailerons; and it has a greater range than any fighter in inventory." Again, he was absolutely right. As he climbed up the ladder to the cockpit, he turned around, grinned and told me, "It's the best damn fighter I've ever flown." I realized he had thrown the entire test-pilot schoolbook at me with his succinct tirade and that we were probably pretty close in our opinions regarding the handling characteristics that define a really good fighter.   
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3897/is_200208/ai_n9120620/pg_4/