P-38 & The Yoke

[Karnak]

Like AH, if you were low fuel, you shut down an engine to stretch it and hoped.  The advantage of two engines in a 38.  I guess I'll have to start typing specific stories of guys having to be towed in after running out of fuel on the runway too

I've done that in the Mossie in AH.  I am still not sure if it saves fuel overall or not.

[Captain Virgil Hilts]

If they had changed from a yoke to a stick there would have been some re-engineering needed, tooling on the assembly line would have changed, etc.  These are all things that would slow the production of aircraft.  It would not have been allowed to happen.  It was felt that getting the a/c out as is was more important than making small changes.

Simply not enough benefit from the change to warrant the delay.

Considering how good the P-38K was, and they wouldn't let Lockheed stop production for two weeks for it, that's as good an answer on the yoke as any. Pilots who liked the P-38 liked the yoke, too.

[MachFly]

If they had changed from a yoke to a stick there would have been some re-engineering needed, tooling on the assembly line would have changed, etc.  These are all things that would slow the production of aircraft.  It would not have been allowed to happen.  It was felt that getting the a/c out as is was more important than making small changes.

Simply not enough benefit from the change to warrant the delay.

That's actually a good reason.

You flown aircraft of those times, do you think originally installing a yoke was a good reason? I flown only light aircraft with direct controls and heavy with fly-by-wire so I think you have a "bit" more experience to properly answer that question.

[Captain Virgil Hilts]

That's not very efficient. When you shut down one engine you have to use a lot of rudder and aileron to keep the plane going straight, all of those control deflections create a lot of drag. For maximum fuel efficiency and speed you want to keep all engines on and throttle down to the appropriate cruise settings.   

You think. Have you actually talked to a P-38 pilot, or a P-38 engineer, or a P-38 test pilot?

Because what you think, and what may apply to one plane, does not necessarily apply to all planes.

The P-38 was excellent on one engine, it still had plenty of power to cruise, even to climb, at a reduced rate.

I suggest you search and read what Captain Stan Richardson Jr. wrote about the P-38 on one engine, as he was assigned to train pilots, and single engine training was part of it.

[MachFly]

You think. Have you actually talked to a P-38 pilot, or a P-38 engineer, or a P-38 test pilot?

Because what you think, and what may apply to one plane, does not necessarily apply to all planes.

The P-38 was excellent on one engine, it still had plenty of power to cruise, even to climb, at a reduced rate.

I suggest you search and read what Captain Stan Richardson Jr. wrote about the P-38 on one engine, as he was assigned to train pilots, and single engine training was part of it.

Just like every twin the P-38 will have asymmetric thrust when operating on one engine, that will require control deflection to fly straight. That control deflection will create drag that will slow down the plane. This is not specific to one plane, this is specific for the laws of physics.
Now I'm sure the P-38 did fly well on one engine because it had almost 2000hp, but flying with two engines is still a lot more efficient than one (on a twin).

Considering how good the P-38K was, and they wouldn't let Lockheed stop production for two weeks for it, that's as good an answer on the yoke as any. Pilots who liked the P-38 liked the yoke, too.

You mean P-38L, right? Think there were just one or two Ks build.

[Widewing]

You mean P-38L, right? Think there were just one or two Ks build.

He means the P-38K. Lockheed proposed the P-38K to the War Production Board, who elected to continue with the J model as the K would have required retooling a portion of the line, and a work stoppage of about two to three weeks.

[MachFly]

He means the P-38K. Lockheed proposed the P-38K to the War Production Board, who elected to continue with the J model as the K would have required retooling a portion of the line, and a work stoppage of about two to three weeks.

Roger, misread his post.

[colmbo]

but flying with two engines is still a lot more efficient than one (on a twin).

I'm going to go with one engine being the best bet in the scenario where you can afford to slow way down and sip fuel....situation where you want maximum endurance.  While you do pay a penalty in drag when shutting down an engine you also cut fuel consumption in half.

[colmbo]

You flown aircraft of those times, do you think originally installing a yoke was a good reason?

I can't argue with success.  I've never read anything that indicated P-38 pilots didn't like the yoke so I'm thinking it just wasn't a big deal.  I personally prefer a stick, for me it's easier to get maximum throw with a stick vs with a yoke -- especially full aileron with lots of back yoke -- but that being said rolling an airplane with a yoke isn't a big deal.

And a yoke works a lot better when it comes to approach plates or cup- holders.

[MachFly]

I'm going to go with one engine being the best bet in the scenario where you can afford to slow way down and sip fuel....situation where you want maximum endurance.  While you do pay a penalty in drag when shutting down an engine you also cut fuel consumption in half.

That would only work if your holding, most of the time your trying to get somewhere, especially in combat. Also because flying on one engine is more dangerous (easier to spin) and is generally harder (can't relax as you need a lot of rudder pressure) I would still keep that second engine on.

[MachFly]

I can't argue with success.  I've never read anything that indicated P-38 pilots didn't like the yoke so I'm thinking it just wasn't a big deal.  I personally prefer a stick, for me it's easier to get maximum throw with a stick vs with a yoke -- especially full aileron with lots of back yoke -- but that being said rolling an airplane with a yoke isn't a big deal.

And a yoke works a lot better when it comes to approach plates or cup- holders.

I see. And I defiantly agree about approach plates.

[colmbo]

Also because flying on one engine is more dangerous and is generally harder I would still keep that second engine on.

I'll let the SAR folks know where you ditched.

[MachFly]

I'll let the SAR folks know where you ditched.

 

If you got to turn the 2nd engine off due to fuel economy while holding something is really wrong.

[colmbo]

That would only work if your holding, most of the time your trying to get somewhere, especially in combat. Also because flying on one engine is more dangerous (easier to spin) and is generally harder (can't relax as you need a lot of rudder pressure) I would still keep that second engine on.

Being single-engine in cruise isn't a big deal.  Hell, even in the B-24 with 1 and 2 shut down it's doable.

You can't state which is better until you run the numbers.  If the guys who's lives depended on their decision were shutting an engine down I'm going to guess they had probably worked the problem.

[colmbo]

If you got to turn the 2nd engine off due to fuel economy while holding something is really wrong.

I'm not talking about holding...we're discussing getting a low fuel P-38 back to base during a combat mission.