Author Topic: P-38k  (Read 785 times)

Offline Nashwan

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1864
P-38k
« Reply #15 on: January 29, 2002, 03:58:54 PM »
Quote
BUT P82, and P80 etc never saw action, nor did the meteor MK III, The Meteor MKIII flew on the other side of the channel for a few sorties but that's it.

Meteor IIIs flew several ground attack sorties in which they engaged German ground units (counts as action to me), and also had an encounter with a group of Fw190s, which was cut short by the arrival of other allied aircraft which mistook the Meteors for German jets.

Offline BigCrate

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 268
P-38k
« Reply #16 on: January 29, 2002, 09:26:34 PM »
fdiron I don't think they changed the shape of the wings.. I think everything stayed the same but the cowlings spinners and props. Anyways the 38s dive performance in Ah is porked.. And I have the data to prove it. :) Ummm was talking out of my bellybutton when i said maybe the P-38K could be a offline plane. Or maybe the HTC could do this. If you have enough points you could modify your main ride.. But it would have to modified to test aircraft. Like the p-38K.. But you couldn't change alot just little things.. Like if you wanted to change up the 38 in AH you could only change the
props and maybe a tad mor powerful engines.. And thats it.
and every plane that had test aircraft modified from the production plane could have this.. But these planes would have to have the toejam perked out em.. So it wouldn't upset the balance of the MA.

CW



Would badass to fly a F7F tigercat in AH!

Cw

Offline Widewing

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8804
P-38k
« Reply #17 on: January 29, 2002, 11:14:39 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by K West
TA152 was an actual production and deployed aircraft. The P 38K was a one-off prototype that there aren't even any pictures of.

 It would have been nice had it been developed and produced back then but, well it wasn't. Niether was the P-72.  Warren Brody and CC Jordan can explain the politics behind the botched decision,  on not putting the Merlin in the P-38,  than I.


 My motto is, YES to production birds. No to prototypes.

  Westy


Westy is correct. Moreover, there were other considerations that must be accounted for when we discuss the P-38K-1-LO.

1) There was no way that the USAAF would authorize the 64 in/Hg manifold pressure that Lockheed used during their test program. This added to the maximum climb and speed. 1,875 hp rating was based upon over-boosting and the use of non-standard fuel. Expect about 1,500 hp for service use.

2) Even if the production version did attain 450 mph, it was very close to its critical Mach limit of 0.68, where buffeting began.

3) Although the prototype was flown to extreme altitudes, it did so with a special O2 system installed. The standard demand type system of the day would have been inadequate for prolonged flight in excess of 40,000 feet.

4) Where the P-38 would have excelled was at low to medium altitudes, where its already impressive acceleration would have improved markedly, and its climb rate from sea level would have been impressive.

If the goal is to get a prototype, than the XP-72 would be the one, as twice as many were built and tested (2). :D

As it is, I can see no valid reason to include prototypes. Perhaps one could make an argument for aircaft that arrived too late to see combat, but were in full production at the end of the war. But, prototypes? No.

My regards,

Widewing

AKA: C.C. Jordan ;)
« Last Edit: January 29, 2002, 11:18:12 PM by Widewing »
My regards,

Widewing

YGBSM. Retired Member of Aces High Trainer Corps, Past President of the DFC, retired from flying as Tredlite.

Offline Tac

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4085
P-38k
« Reply #18 on: January 29, 2002, 11:56:28 PM »
Superdolts.

Gimme a CHAIN LIGHTNING baby! :) :D ;)

Offline BigCrate

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 268
P-38k
« Reply #19 on: January 30, 2002, 12:42:04 AM »
This was taken from a 1972 issue of Air Power magazine the same issue as my post P38 very tight turning. The article title was
Lockheed P-38 Flying the Forked Tailed Devil. The P-38 models were the G model not the L model.

The much maligned allison engine has in my experience, covering nearly 1,000 hours, been a been reliable power plant and could take considerable abuse. The engine life in north africa was only 100 hours because of the sand, but these were usually reliable hours. In the P-39 for example; I have flown an allison power with 1200 rpm and 30 inches of manifold pressure, mixture leaned out until it was almost detonating, for over over hour with no advesre effects, not even excessive engine temperature.
To further illustrate its toughness, my crew chief and I altered the boost control to allow me to pull 75 inches of manifold pressure
when the maximum allowable war emergency power was only 57 inches. Again I've used this much power in several times for short bursts with no problems.

Even if lockheed put the P-38K into production it still wouldn't have the more powerful engines from the factory. Or if they installed the Hamilton Standard hydraulic propellers on the L models.. The ground crews could modify the trusty ole allsions to put out 65 inches or more of manifold pressure.

And tac did the chain lightning ever see combat?? I can't remember if it did. a critical mach number of .68-.71 would translate into how many MPHs???

CW

Offline Widewing

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8804
P-38k
« Reply #20 on: January 30, 2002, 08:28:47 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Tac
Superdolts.

Gimme a CHAIN LIGHTNING baby! :) :D ;)


And, what would you do with this monster, aside from being a target?:D



My best,

Widewing
My regards,

Widewing

YGBSM. Retired Member of Aces High Trainer Corps, Past President of the DFC, retired from flying as Tredlite.

Offline Widewing

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8804
P-38k
« Reply #21 on: January 30, 2002, 08:35:41 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by BigCrate


And tac did the chain lightning ever see combat?? I can't remember if it did. a critical mach number of .68-.71 would translate into how many MPHs???

CW


No, only one XP-58 was ever built.

As to critical Mach limit and relative speeds, look at the chart below.  



My regards,

Widewing
« Last Edit: January 30, 2002, 08:50:31 AM by Widewing »
My regards,

Widewing

YGBSM. Retired Member of Aces High Trainer Corps, Past President of the DFC, retired from flying as Tredlite.

Offline BigCrate

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 268
P-38k
« Reply #22 on: January 30, 2002, 09:49:42 AM »
Widewing where did you get that chart??? My lockheed doesn't back up that chart? Also it does sort of.. I sent this lockheed stuff to Badz ohh about 3 and half years he used on the p38 dive flap post..... it was a book strait from lockheed.. and it explained so much about the p-38 and its compression problem.  This graph it from this book. and is the only one anyone has scanned. i would scan the entire thing if I could. anyways it showed maimum indicated speed possible from 40,000ft on down and around 28,000ft it 38 could reach 600mph.and lower alts the 38 could reach 550mph with ease.  And it also shows indicated speed for maximum dive tendency. From 40,000ft on down and could get up to 550mph.. But at lower he could dive with releative safety to 525mph at lower alts. The 38 in AH really can't much these numbers. because the 38s dive flaps don't work the way they should and and the 38... But the 38 can't reach these speed at lower alts but it is at higher alts is where the 38 dive performance is porked
This graph also show then bufet starts at 1g of acceleration that is 475mph at 4,000ft  And the speed decreases with alt.

CW




Offline Widewing

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8804
P-38k
« Reply #23 on: January 30, 2002, 06:42:57 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by BigCrate
Widewing where did you get that chart??? My lockheed doesn't back up that chart? Also it does sort of.. I sent this lockheed stuff to Badz ohh about 3 and half years he used on the p38 dive flap post..... it was a book strait from lockheed.. and it explained so much about the p-38 and its compression problem.  This graph it from this book. and is the only one anyone has scanned. i would scan the entire thing if I could. anyways it showed maimum indicated speed possible from 40,000ft on down and around 28,000ft it 38 could reach 600mph.and lower alts the 38 could reach 550mph with ease.  And it also shows indicated speed for maximum dive tendency. From 40,000ft on down and could get up to 550mph.. But at lower he could dive with releative safety to 525mph at lower alts. The 38 in AH really can't much these numbers. because the 38s dive flaps don't work the way they should and and the 38... But the 38 can't reach these speed at lower alts but it is at higher alts is where the 38 dive performance is porked
This graph also show then bufet starts at 1g of acceleration that is 475mph at 4,000ft  And the speed decreases with alt.

CW
 


Let's deal with these issues for you one at a time.

The graph is a copy of that available in the familiarization manual issued to pilots reporting for training at a P-38 RTU (training unit). It incorporates flight test data compiled by Lockheed test pilot Milo Burcham, and is the Gospel. You can see an actual photo of the chart on page 215 of my friend Warren Bodie's book on the P-38, available from Amazon.com in reprint (now a softcover).

Any pilot claiming to have reached 600 mph in a P-38, and living to tell about is either mistaking, or the luckiest man on earth. At speeds exceeding Mach 0.75 buffeting was severe. At Mach 0.85, (assuming that was even possible, which I doubt) it would likely be fatal to the aircraft and pilot. Moreover, simply reaching 550 mph was beyond the safe upper limit, even at sea level. 525 mph was right at critical Mach at sea level, with the onset of buffeting having already begun.

I have no issues with the AH modeling of the P-38L, other than rate of climb which I believe to be too low. Granted, the dive brakes don't work correctly. If they did, the P-38  would recover from a dive hands-off, with a steady 3G load. These dive brakes did three things. First, they induced drag, limiting both acceleration and velocity. Secondly, they induced a pitch up condition. Lastly, they shifted the center of lift forward along the chord of the wing. These last two combined to prevent the dreaded "dive tuck" that usually proved fatal to the plane and pilot. If HTC fixes the dive flaps, you will be have to deliberately hold the nose down in a high speed dive or it will simply pull out all on its own (assuming neutral trim).

The chart you are referring to defines the speed/G loading that induces buffet. This is Figure 25, located on page 30 of the P-38L pilot's manual. Figure 25A shows the same data as my chart, which is for normal gravity (1 G) loading.

Get Warren's book. It's the best published source for obscure P-38 history and data.

My regards,

Widewing
My regards,

Widewing

YGBSM. Retired Member of Aces High Trainer Corps, Past President of the DFC, retired from flying as Tredlite.

Offline Tac

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4085
P-38k
« Reply #24 on: January 30, 2002, 07:01:30 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Widewing


And, what would you do with this monster, aside from being a target?:D



Id have orgasms as I flame every gdman n1k I HO in it *G* :D :D :D

Armament:       4x 37mm cannon, 4x 12.7mm machine gun, 4k of bombs

Or this baby:

McDonnell XP-67

Type:           single-seat long-range fighter
Crew:           1
Armament:       six 37mm cannon or one 75mm cannon

Specifications:
        Length:         44' 9.25" (13.65 m)
        Height:         15' 9" (4.80 m)
        Wingspan:       55' 0" (16.76 m)
        Wing area:      414 sq. ft (38.46 sq. m)
        Empty Weight:   17,745 lb (8049 kg)
        Max Weight:     25,400 lb (11,5321 kg) max at takeoff

Propulsion:
        No. of Engines: 2
        Powerplant:     Continental XIV-1430-17/19 contra-rotating inlines
        Horsepower:     1350 hp each

Performance:
        Range:          2385 miles (3838 km)
        Cruise Speed:   N/A
        Max Speed:      405 mph ( 652 km/h) at 25,000 ft
        Ceiling:        37,400 ft (11,400 m)




« Last Edit: January 30, 2002, 07:09:01 PM by Tac »

Offline BigCrate

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 268
P-38k
« Reply #25 on: January 30, 2002, 10:03:26 PM »
Ummmm widewing. You know bodie?? wasn't trying to piss you off
just putting my 2 cents worth in..  maybe i'm just pissed that the  the 38s dive performance was not as good i hoped :(.. I dunno. Ummm I what ?
What if dive flaps on the 38 worked like they should. and you held the nose down in a dive. what would happen? I got that graph from a magazine called lockheed horizons. THat lockheed
publishes. It has a atricle of the 38 and it compressiblty problem. On a side note. I will fly the 38 from now until the end of WW2 combat sims! The 38 is my baby always was and always will be!


ok these are the climb rate figures for the 38j.. from p38 flight manual for the p38h p38j-5 and f-5b-1.. at a gross weight of 16,200lbs

S.L to 5,000 feet 170mph 3400fpm
at 10,000ft 160mph 3200fpm
at 15,000 160mph 3200fpm
at 25,000 155mph 2500fpm
at 35,000  130mph 1100fpm


Tac now thats a aircraft! Would like to sit in the cockit of that bird just once :) i havn't played AH for 3 days and it has sucked :(

CW

Offline Widewing

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8804
P-38k
« Reply #26 on: January 30, 2002, 11:40:04 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by BigCrate
Ummmm widewing. You know bodie?? wasn't trying to piss you off


You didn't "piss me off" whatsoever. I am always happy to discuss the P-38, also a favorite of mine too.

Warren Bodie and I have been friends for several years and have worked together on several projects. Warren is 78 years old, and will continue to keep writing as long as he can. He has several new books in various stages of completion.

My regards,

Widewing
My regards,

Widewing

YGBSM. Retired Member of Aces High Trainer Corps, Past President of the DFC, retired from flying as Tredlite.

Offline Vermillion

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4012
P-38k
« Reply #27 on: January 31, 2002, 09:11:59 AM »
BigCrate, your information is for a J model, while we have a L. Some differences.  I have a pilots manual at home that has performance charts for both the J and L and I'll see how much they differ.

However, compare your data to this chart in the AH Help section on the website for the P-38L



This chart shows performance in AH to be superior to what you posted.  But admittedly I haven't flight tested it lately to see if it still conforms to the chart in the help section.

And 600mph in a P-38??? Not on this planet  :) Kidding of course.


Offline BigCrate

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 268
P-38k
« Reply #29 on: January 31, 2002, 09:34:42 AM »
Those figures were at military power not wep.. and are greater than those of the 38 at MP in AH... And i know we have the L model.. :)

CW