Best Heavy Fighter

[J.A.W.]

Care to provide the ETO USAAF claim/loss ratios & show how the `38 stacked up against the others then, A.A.?

I note that the Mosquito FB VI managed to do the fighter-bomber/intruder-ranger gig ok, but  - like the `38  - was deemed too vulnerable to flak to do the down & dirty  close support/tank-busting stuff like the T-bolt & Typhoon..

[J.A.W.]

You know your argument isn't valid, correct? Use in a secondary role does not necessarily imply ineffectivness in the primary role. Look at all the nightfighter versions of bombers like the Ju-88, Do-217, Ju-188, etc. That doesn't mean they weren't some of Germany's best bombers.

T-A, You do realize that the `38 was dumped from the 8th AF?
That does more than 'imply ineffectiveness in the primary role' - correct?

[TwinBoom]

After reading all of J.A.W.'s post's I think his day job is adding content to Wiki both are often wrong and misleading

[bozon]

I note that the Mosquito FB VI managed to do the fighter-bomber/intruder-ranger gig ok, but  - like the `38  - was deemed too vulnerable to flak to do the down & dirty  close support/tank-busting stuff like the T-bolt & Typhoon..

And where exactly did you read it was deemed too vulnerable to flak? I'd like to read that too. The mossies were of too high demand in their other roles to send them on such high-risk menial jobs as close support. Mossies VIs did a lot of interdiction work close behind the enemy line, so I have no idea where you get the idea that they were considered vulnerable. With coastal command FB.IVs were strafing flak ships. That is just about the most dangerous interaction with flaks you can imagine. Of course they did it after flying across the north sea - the typhoons would not have made it even half way.

T-A, You do realize that the `38 was dumped from the 8th AF?
That does more than 'imply ineffectiveness in the primary role' - correct?

The P-38 had several issues with its role as a high alt escort. That is just about the only role it had any problems with and it excelled at everything else it was used for. Insisting on trying to make it work better with the 8th AF would have been stupid given that it was in very high demand in the Pacific and Med.

[J.A.W.]

After reading all of J.A.W.'s post's I think his day job is adding content to Wiki both are often wrong and misleading

After reading this post by T.B., I think it is clear he has failed to provide anything remotely resembling validity to back his assertions..

[J.A.W.]

True - the Coastal Command FBs did wreak havoc, but when tasked to the G/A role over Germany for the maximum effort Operation Clarion, the Mossies copped plenty in return.. see the 2nd TAF history on that..

As for Typhoon anti-ship efficacy, I suggest you look up the infamous
'friendly-fire' Typhoon vs RN minesweeper action.. nasty stuff..
[& don't even mention the dreadful 'Cap Ancona' incident]

Indeed,  F-F accounts involving Typhoon air to surface attacks on Allied units give grim validation of their destructive powers..

[Ack-Ack]

Ah, sorry S.N., but actually the D.S. couldn't/didn't tote 4,000lbs of ord'..

This is a picture of the S-1 bomb racks on a P-38J Droop Snoop.  The S-1 had the capacity to hold 2x 2,000 pound bombs or 4x 1,000 pound bombs.


The most common load out though was either 2x 1,000 pound bombs or 6x 500 pound bombs like in this picture below.


The Droop Snoop were also used as navigational lead planes.

ack-ack

[J.A.W.]

Thanks A.A.,but a Lockheed public relations pic is one thing,
& a flight plan using the USAAF mission profile manual is another..

What was the D.S. max permissible take-off weight?

Effective range at speed/heights at max ordnance loading?

Was such a load practicable or just more hype - like twin torpedos?

Any verifiable actual historical mission data to post?

[& again, they really are starting to look like try-hard medium bombers..]

AFAIK, the Norden bombsight was operationally speed limited to ~180 mph too.

[J.A.W.]

Mosquito FB VI tactical trials..

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/mosquito/Mosquito-VI-tactical.pdf

Note - that while considered capable of some Typhoon roles, it was not able to compete with the Typhoon in low level speed, A2A , or Vne..

[Scherf]

True - the Coastal Command FBs did wreak havoc, but when tasked to the G/A role over Germany for the maximum effort Operation Clarion, the Mossies copped plenty in return.. see the 2nd TAF history on that..

Mossies of  2 TAF flew just over 1700 daylight sorties in 1944, the majority before the invasion, losing 18 of their number.

Clarion was hardly representative - targets for the Mossies were up near Bremen when the Allies were still west of the Rhine, and the vast majority of crews were undoubtedly on their first daylight op.

[Tank-Ace]

I feel like we're arguing with someone who is wilfully dumb.

[J.A.W.]

I feel like we're arguing with someone who is wilfully dumb.

Be fair, Earl hasn't done his Skyraider boosting for wee while..

As for yourself,
well, you could try putting up some real data, rather than 'dumb' opinion..

[Tank-Ace]

Relevant data has already been posted. You're the one who is misinterpreting it.

[Ack-Ack]

Thanks A.A.,but a Lockheed public relations pic is one thing,
& a flight plan using the USAAF mission profile manual is another..

The top picture is one of the 23 P-38s being converted to the Droop Snoot at Lockheed's Langford Lodge factory and not a P.R. picture you try to dismiss it as.  The 2nd picture is of a Droop Snoot from the 474th getting ready to taxi to the flight line before a mission.

What was the D.S. max permissible take-off weight?

Effective range at speed/heights at max ordnance loading?

Not at home so I can't look it up but from what I remember, ordnance payload was the same as the standard P-38.

Was such a load practicable or just more hype - like twin torpedos?

What load?  Don't know why you brought up the test with the torpedoes, no one has claimed it was done beyond a single test nor even relevant to this discussion. 

Any verifiable actual historical mission data to post?

[& again, they really are starting to look like try-hard medium bombers..]

Verifiable mission data for what?  Here is a video of the 430th FS in action over Germany, you'll see the use of the Droop Snoot in the mission.  In the video it also explains why Droops Snoots were used, in missions "where risky, precision dive bombing was unnecessary - rail yards, dock yards - doing level bombing from higher altitudes."

430th FS in action over Germany

AFAIK, the Norden bombsight was operationally speed limited to ~180 mph too.

And? 

ack-ack

[J.A.W.]

Relevant data has already been posted. You're the one who is misinterpreting it.

Not so, & again you present no data, only your opinion..