Vraciu - it seems that you are more 'comfortable' dealing in generalities. Between October 15th 1943 and June 5th 1944 the P-38 flew APPROXIMATELY the same sortie total as the P-51B - both were initially 1:6 (P-38 October 1943 to P-47); 2 to 8 (P-38 to P-47), 1:8 (P-51 to P-47) on December 31, 1943; 2 to 9 for P-38, 1:9 for P-51 at end of January; 3 to 11 on the 1st of March for both the P-38 and P-51. Are you still with me on this 'ratio thingy'?
March brought a ramp up of P-51 and 9th AF P-47s. April brought more P-51, P-38 and P-47 FGs into ops.
At the end of May the combined 9th and 8th AF TO&E for P-38, P-47 and P-51 - ALL flying escort to the VIII BC - were six P-38 (20, 55, 364, 367, 370, and 479FGs); eight P-51 (4, 339, 352, 354, 355, 359, 361 and 363FGs); Fourteen P-47 (56, 78, 353, 356, 358, 362, 365, 366, 368, 371, 373, 404, 405 and 406FGs). Sources Maurer-Maurer and Frank Olynyk. (They match)
So pick the months you want to whine about sortie balance, 'equal and relentless foe', 'foe with diminished capacity', target assignment mix, fighter pilot quality, etc. Or as you are prone to do, whimper and say that 'there you go again - discrediting me'.
Generalities are fine. They often show us the forest because all we notice are trees. Besides, people seem more than happy to state the airplane sucked and paint with a broad brush. I simply painted over their nonsense.
Drop tanks were not effectively employed. I am well aware of the subterfuge used to plumb the airplanes against Air Corps directives. This is of no use in combat when you have a General who sees them as useful only for ferrying. It took a lot more effort than necessary to bring drop tanks into proper use. Bloody noses are powerful motivators I guess.
I've been pulled away from my original point. The airplane fought against top tier opponents while heavily outnumbered and held the line. In fact it did better than that and helped rescue daylight bombardment from total collapse in the last quarter of 1943. The reasons it didn't do even better are manifold but point to factors beyond the airplane.
Could it have been better? Yes. Should it have been better sooner? Yes. But it was hardly a failure. The 8th suffered from self-inflicted wounds as much as anything else. Other Commands did much better with the same airplane flying the same missions. It is what it is.
Beyond that this discussion is going in circles as you're straining gnats in an attempt to look smart while missing the big picture. Never mind that you're mocking a point you previously conceded. That's disingenuous.
Also, I politely asked you to stop with the inline text. You can't do that one courtesy so I am done parlaying with you. I can't track all this on a tiny cellphone screen.
(Edit in: And lest anyone think I am angry, quite the contrary. See below.)
