Headache duly noted - I had the same experience during a long running debate with Bodie over the same topic, specifically the ETO. Whether you fit in the category, the legion of P-38 apologists always play 'what if' instead of 'stick with the facts, just the facts, ma'am".
It just wasn't a very good escort in the context of expectations in the ETO. Published fact from both command observations and historical perspectives.
You’re making it hard to reply to your points because they’re in line with mine but I’ll try.
Yes, based on what was expected it didn’t live up to its potential early on. Some of this was doctrinal, some was driven by operational errors (like high RPM, low MP cruising which turned the oil into sludge due to low temps—the reasons for this are manifold, pun intended).
The context in regard to aerial victories depends on circumstances. It doesn’t require a kill to be a success. Based on dim memories I note the following points:
- P-38 employment and utility differed between the 8th and 9th AFs with the latter being much more successful. This points to factors other than just the airplane itself.
- The P-51 with the 8th AF ranged ahead of the formations while the P-38s remained at altitude. This will affect kill totals on a mission by mission comparison basis. The Mustangs had a longer leash than the Lightning’s did.
- Before the Mustang arrived the P-38 had already stymied the LW. Galland himself admitted as much. The fact that the Me-110 was no longer viable was a massive win for the Americans. Loss rates went from 20-percent to less than five BEFORE the Mustang arrived. The P-38 had such an impact that German night fighters were being deployed to day operations which had the ancillary effect of helping the British loss rate.
(Also 650 bombers escorted to Bremen ?? by P-38s without loss—or no more than about five—long before Mustangs arrived showed it could do the job. This was not a fluke and was repeated more than once.)
- The MTO units involved in escort duties outperformed their 8th counterparts in the same role. They also beat MTO-based Mustang and Jug units overall throughout. One squadron that switched from then 38 to the 51 saw no increase in success.
- The P-38 flew a fraction of the total ETO sorties compared to the P-47 and P-51 but did so at the peak of German opposition.
At the end of the day, the P-38 was not fully-developed until 1944 by which time the P-51 and P-47 had come along with similar performance. Someone stated it best on another site: An airplane that would have been a world-beater in 1942 and 1943 became an also-ran in 1944-45.
I can’t help but think the crash of the prototype on a publicity stunt was the difference between these two outcomes, but that’s an emotional response.
I had some other thoughts but they escape me. I’ll throw them in later. Not an apologist, just don’t like people ganging up unfairly on anyone or anything especially without the proper context. The more people bash the P-38 the more I like it.