P-38l

[Captain Virgil Hilts]

Originally posted by HoHun
Hi Hilts,

>Hohun, you have flat out stated on multiple occaisions
that the fight that Galland and Lowell described at
the "Gathering of Eagles" never occured.

That's not even on topic in this thread :-) And where's the quote, anyway?

>I never said that the P-38 did not have a dive weakness

You seem to be highly sensitive to others saying just that, though.

>They said compression was not an issue below 20K in combat, I'll have to take their word, I wasn't there.

Do you have their word that they exceeded Mach 0.75? If you have, then it's a case of HoHun vs. The Veterans. If not, it's just a case of HoHun vs. Hilts.

>I have better things to do than argue with you every time someone makes a post about a P-38 and you cannot deal with the fact that it was a superior aircraft and not the cripple you wish to believe it was.

Hilts, the low Mach limit of the P-38 is a fact. It's not even Mach 0.75, but I'm allowing for a generous margin of error.

Do you mean to suggest the low Mach limit didn't exist? You'd be pretty lonely defending that position.

Do you mean to suggest that a low Mach limit wasn't significant in combat?

Then you should have no issue with me pointing out that the P-38 was inferior in that regard to every other WW2 fighter for which I've ever seen a Mach limit stated.

So what's your point? :-)

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

No, it is not the topic of this thread, but rather an example of your position. If I want to waste precious time, yes, I can go find several instances of you clearly stating that the fight as Lowell described it TO Galland with Gabreski and Foss (not to mention several others) listening and watching could not possibly have ever occured. You said it was not possible due to the time frame, the location, the planes available, and any number of reasons. Funny, you seem to be the only one questioning their memory or their honesty. I just have to ask, what does ANY of them have to gain by lying about it? And why, when Lowell and Galland, the two who fought the battle, said it was a fact, YOU seem to feel you are more qualified than they are, and YOU say it did not happen.

No, I'm not sensitive about the dive weakness of the P-38. Every plane has its weaknesses, and that does happen to be a big issue with the P-38, although it is one of few, and is really overstated and overemphasized.

I never said the Mach limit of the P-38 WASN'T low, it is. I just said that the low Mach limit was not the defining element of combat, it isn't.

I never said that critical Mach was not a factor in combat, I said it was not THE DEFINING FACTOR in combat. Regarding prop driven piston engine fighter planes, critical Mach simply is not THE defining factor. Whether you'd like it to be or not, it isn't.

No one ever said they exceeded .75 Mach, or for that matter even .69 Mach. If you have your opponent broken down enough he is FORCED to dive away to save his hide, then you are close, you are gaining, and he is in deep trouble. It DOES NOT mean you are both approaching 450MPH in level flight, and critical Mach will instantly decide the outcome. Quite the contrary. If he is already broken down and must dive then he is most likely very SLOW. If he dives and you are both slow, then it is very likely if your plane accelerates quickly, especially in a dive, you can catch him and finish him long before critical Mach becomes a factor.

I said that several pilots stated on numerous occasions that in the P-38J or later with dive flaps in combat they could easily push over and follow their opponents into a dive, catch him, and hit him. Simple as that. You ASSume that all fights must occur at or near critical altitude and top speed for that altitude, and immediately become a race to critical Mach in a terminal dive, and it just ain't so.

After arguing this with you for three years, I have yet to figure out how you've reached the conclusion that every fight will be decided by a terminal dive to critical Mach. Your argument regarding the P-38 seems to be soley based on critical Mach. Air to air combat is not a race to critical Mach in a dive, it simply just isn't. Live with it.

I have no problem with the fact that the P-38 has a lower critical Mach than many or even most other fighters (whether it does or not). Big fat hairy deal. YOU seem to think it is the defining factor in air to air combat and it ain't. That's where the problem is yours and not mine.

[GScholz]

The P-38 did not fare well in the ETO because the LW fighters were faster, better divers and better climbers. The P-38 is a wonderful plane, and showed its usefulness in the PTO against the slower Japanese planes, but in the ETO it was out of its league as a fighter. It did however find use in other niches like fighter-bomber and recce duty.

[Captain Virgil Hilts]

Originally posted by GScholz
The P-38 did not fare well in the ETO because the LW fighters were faster, better divers and better climbers. The P-38 is a wonderful plane, and showed its usefulness in the PTO against the slower Japanese planes, but in the ETO it was out of its league as a fighter. It did however find use in other niches like fighter-bomber and recce duty.

Wrong. The P-38 did not fare as well with the 8TH AF due to poor management and leadership, look into the performance of the P-38 in the Med, on North Africa, and with the 9TH and 15TH AF. The P-38 did quite well against the Luftwaffe's finest. By most measures, the tally was 4-6 Luftwaffe planes lost to P-38's for every P-38 lost to Luftwaffe aircraft. The fault for the less than stellar performance of the P-38 with the 8TH AF lies with the 8TH AF and their management/tactics, not with the plane. Check stats before you declare the P-38 to be lacking in performance compared to Luftwaffe aircraft. You'll be surprised how well it stacks up. Try reading Stienhoff instead of Galland and you might find the truth.

[GScholz]

On 21-Nov-42, the 1st and 14th Fighter Groups of the 12th US Air Force arrived in North Africa, their P-38s joining other fighter units in P-40s, P-39s, and Spitfires. After a "muscular" greeting by the Luftwaffe (the two unit's base was bombed during the night of 16-17 November ), the new American fighters carried out their first mission on November 18. Very quickly, Lightnings engaged in the Mediterranean suffered a fate quite contrary to those fighting in the Pacific. Flown by young inexperienced pilots, handicapped by their poor roll rate and unsuitable combat tactics, they underwent terrible reverses against frightening FW 190s of the II./JG 2 and Bf 109Gs of the JG 53 and JG 77, which arrived in Tunisia shortly after Operation "TORCH". Used for support missions by the III./ZG 2 (which became III./SKG 10 on 20-Dec-42), FW 190 (as well as Bf 109G) was going to hold the high edge during its stay in North Africa.

On their side, the two FG suffered such losses in combat that 14th FG had to be withdrawn from combat at the end of January 1943, surrendering its remaining aircraft to the new 82nd FG which arrived on Christmas 1942. The two units continued their interception and escort) missions, with moral rather low.

Success finally came with Operation FLAX, where P-38 were going to destroy many Axis transport aircraft over the Mediterranean from the 5 to April 10, 1943.

The end of the campaign in Tunisia on May 13, 1943 did not prevent the continuation of the missions of P-38 with the return of 14th FG. One can nevertheless assess that in this campaign, the Lightning was hardly remarkable in its operations against Luftwaffe, compared with the brilliances successes gained during the same period in the Pacific against the Japanese. The problems inherent in P-38 operations were reproduced at the time of the first missions escorting the heavy bombers of the 8· Air Force over Western Europe from October 1943, where the losses would prove such that the USAAF was obliged to quickly withdraw P-38 in this type of mission in favor of the P-51 Mustang.

Regarding the various comments about throttling back or up a P-38 engine to increase maneuverability I can only repeat that this was not practiced as far as I know. When I was overseas in 44 and 45, flying the J winter thru summer, the policy was to drop tanks and push up MP to 45 inches when German fighters were spotted in a position where an engagement was likely. When you actually went for them, throttle up to WEP, 60 inches or so, rpm all the way up too, up past 3000 rpm. And there it would stay until the engagement was over and you remembered to throttle back. You could easily be at WEP for 20 minutes or more.

Full power all the time was wanted because maneuvering bled off so much speed and altitude. What you wanted was more power and more power. All the prop fighters were underpowered and the only way to keep them turning was to keep them descending. The more power you had available, the slower the descent and the easier the recovery. The 38 seemed to have plenty of power for a prop job and certainly below 15,000 ft. no German fighter could get away from it.

That may sound pretty low, but if you initiated an engagement at 27,000 ft. going into a shallow dive and making a few parring turns, you could easily lose 10,000 ft. Certainly in a 38 without dive flaps you would not want to drop the nose too sharply above 20,000 ft. As krauts got to know the 38 they would tend to dive sharply away from it, convinced it would not follow. But that was just fine, because the 38's job was to protect the bombers. If a gaggle of 109s approached the bombers, escorting P-38s turned to engage them and the 109s bugged out for the deck, the 38's job was done. Those 109s wouldn't have enough gas to climb back up to altitude, chase the bombers and position for an attack. And if they did, the 38s would turn in to them and the process would repeat.

The krauts figured this out pretty soon and knew they had to hit the 38s. They would climb very high (109s, the 190s weren't seen at very high altitudes)and bounce the 38s, who would be cruising at around 220 or so if they hadn't spotted the krauts. Most losses were the result of surprise bounces, the krauts keeping on moving so there was no chance for retaliation. The 38 formation would be broken up, with guys turning looking for the enemy, leaving a way open for other German fighters to hit the bombers.

The only solution to the surprise bounce was to open up the escort fighter formation, have high cover several thousand feet above the bombers and close escort, and keep your head on a swivel. Of course, simply having MORE escorts also helped. (I would wager that was a big problem for the two early 38 groups. They just didn't have enough people to play both the infield and the outfield.) The trick was to spot the Germans as they maneuvered into position for a bounce. That's where having outstanding eyesight mattered, mattered a LOT more than dive flaps or a few more horsepower. One man in a squadron with exceptional eyesight was a real lifesaver. If a high group of krauts was spotted, some of the escort would be tapped to go after them. They didn't have to shoot them down to succeed. All they needed to do was break up their party and force them to dive away.

On October 15, 1943, P-38H pilots in the 55th Fighter Group flew their first combat mission over Europe at a time when the need for long-range escorts was acute. Just the day before, German fighter pilots had destroyed 60 of 291 Eighth Air Force B-17 Flying Fortresses (see NASM collection) during a mission to bomb five ball-bearing plants at Schweinfurt, Germany. No air force could sustain a loss-rate of nearly 20 percent for more than a few missions but these targets lay well beyond the range of available escort fighters (Republic P-47 Thunderbolt, see NASM collection). American war planners hoped the long-range capabilities of the P-38 Lightning could halt this deadly trend, but the very high and very cold environment peculiar to the European air war caused severe power plant and cockpit heating difficulties for the Lightning pilots. The long-range escort problem was not completely solved until the North American P-51 Mustang (see NASM collection) began to arrive in large numbers early in 1944.

Poor cockpit heating in the H and J model Lightnings made flying and fighting at altitudes that frequently approached 12,320 m (40,000 ft) nearly impossible. This was a fundamental design flaw that Kelly Johnson and his team never anticipated when they designed the airplane six years earlier. In his seminal work on the Allison V-1710 engine, Daniel Whitney analyzed in detail other factors that made the P-38 a disappointing airplane in combat over Western Europe.

[DiabloTX]

I remember seeing or reading an anecdote by a 38 pilot that claimed he could turn inside *any* LW plane by simply cutting the throttle to the engine on the side he was turning into.  I will look for this source and post it but I remember him saying that in the right hands the 38 was more than a match for LW iron.

G, those quotes you posted, they are all about new squads getting hosed.  How about some quotes from 38 squads that were veterans?  I for one would like to see them.

Thanks.

[Kweassa]

Diablo, that's sort of exactly the point.

 So presumably an "experienced" P-38 pilot would turn inside any LW plane... but then again we also have here the "experten" who've been fighting since 1940 in the Battle of Britain who claim they can turn inside Spitfires with 109s, or even 190s for that matter.

 So, just how much scientifical credit can we give to those anecdotal claims? Not by much.

 As Scholz did, anecdotal evidence always has an equal amount of counter-evidence(also in an anecdotal form) - which more or less if this continues, nobody would possibly know what's right or wrong.

 Same thing with the dive-test debate. Frankly, with no disrespect to Hilts, honestly I can't see much of a "scientific fact" from his arguments. What the veterans "state" is one thing, the real "fact", may be other. The unfortunate fact of life is what one believes in may always be wrong, no matter how sincere and without lying intent.

 The P-38 had the Mach limit of 0.685 - that's a cold, mundane fact. So, it's not necessarily Hohun vs Vets. It's the Law of Physics vs Vets - unless the Vets have found a way to warp the physical world of the third dimension, I cannot believe them.

[Captain Virgil Hilts]

Once again, where is it I said anyone exceeded .69 Mach? I did not. I said that they could roll over and follow the enemy down. With dive flaps there was no real concern, without you had to be both good and confident.

Sure, Scholtz can post all the anecdotal evidence from whatever book he wants, the fact remains that the P-38's killed 4-6 Luftwaffe planes for every P-38 lost to Luftwaffe aircraft in Europe. And I can quote books that describe incredibly successful units and actions as well.

The two biggest problems with the P-38 is there weren't enough of them, and bad results due to poor tactics and leadership were blamed on the plane instead of 8TH AF staff and leaders.

The air over Europe at 25-30 thousand feet is no colder than it is over the SW Pacific. That tells anyone with good sense that the problem was the people, not the plane.

The P-38 was a plane that required dedication, practice, and confidence. The three went hand in hand. Take one away, the other two are gone. In the hands of John Lowell, Robin Olds, Jack Ilfrey, Larry Blumer, Erv Ethell, or any number of good pilots, it was deadly. They had confidence, talent, and skill.

It was all too easy to blame the poor performance of the 8TH AF FG's on the P-38, but the fact remains, the P-51 had just as much if not more trouble when it did finally arrive. Further, the P-38 outnumbered the P-51 in numbers deployed to the 8TH AF until April 1944, which was after the Luftwaffe was on its last legs.

Doolittle took over the 8TH AF, and only then, in VERY late 1943 and early 1944 did the 8TH AF turn around. It was a major turnaround in leadership and tactics that made the difference. Doolittle even went so far as to pressure his peacetime employer Shell to provide more and better fuel for the fighters. Further, rather than being tied to the bombers and their slow speed, Doolittle released the fighters to do what they did best, hunt the Luftwaffe.

Doolittle made the decision to replace the P-38 because the P-38 was in such short (critically short) supply, and there were plenty of p-51s. The P-38 was in such high demand and short supply throughout the war that Lockheed was forbidden under any circumstances to have production slowed or halted for more than 48 hours.

By the way, when Doolittle flew a fighter to the continent on 6 June 1944, you know what he flew? That's right, a P-38.

Oh, and just a little side note, that first mission the P-38 flew as escorts, the bomber losses dropped by 60%. Hardly an indictment of the P-38's performance as an escort.

The fault for the lack of escorts until late 1943, and the poor performance of the P-38 and escorts in general until early 1944 can and must be laid squarely at the feet of Tooey Spatz and Ira Eaker. Their failure to get escort squadrons into action properly trained and in a timely manner and then their attempts to blame it on the P-38 and the lack of range of the P-47 is their fault and no one else's.

The P-38 was providing escort service to B-24's in Europe for longer missions than the 8TH AF was flying early in 1944, and doing it against the exact same planes of enemy territory with excellent results. And they were doing it in early 1943. With F and G models as well.

If you want to know the truth about what was wrong with the 8TH AF, read Warren Bodie's latest book on the 8TH AF.

The 8TH AF failed to:

Request, acquire, train, and indoctrinate long range escort units (namely p-38 units) until losses of bombers was so overwhelming they could not be sustained for even 30 days. Even when the units arrived, they were rushed into service with no indoctrination, no in theatre training, and no experienced leadership. The men were not trained on how to properly manage the engines or operate the planes at high altitudes.

Take advantage of experienced pilots made available to them for leadership and training positions. These men had successfully fought the Luftwaffe in P-38's for quite some time before the 8TH AF had ANY operational long range escort units. These men were experienced in air to air combat with the Luftwaffe in the P-38 and with long range escort duty. They were either transferred or placed in low ranking positions with no means to pass on their knowledge and experience.

Use proper tactics for fighter escort missions that were already well known in and use in other theatres.

To acquire drop tanks and learn how to make them work until late 1943/ early 1944.

Problems with the P-38.

The electrical system in the early models was slightly overloaded, and if the props weren't properly maintained, they'd short out.

The early models did not have dive flaps, auxillary outer wing tanks, or proper intercoolers.
 
It had notoriously poor cockpit heat.

It was complex and more difficult to fly. There were two of every engine and prop control, and little of the management was automatic.

It had limited visibility.

If you want to know the truth about the P-38, from some guys who flew it, go here:

http://www.home.att.net/~C.C.Jordan  
there you'll find several articles on the P-38.

http://www.geocities.com/Pentagon/Quarters/6940/20thfg.html
here you'll find out about the 20TH FG.

http://www.web-birds.com/8th/55/55th.htm
The 55TH FG, first Allied fighters over Berlin, in P-38s as well.

http://www.web-birds.com/8th/364/364.html
The 364TH FG. Flew P-38s to Berlin.

http://www.367thfightergroup.com/
The 367TH FG, home of Larry Blumer.

http://usaaf.com/8thaf/fighter/479fg.HTM
The 479TH FG, home of the last P-38 ace Robin Olds.

Plenty more out there if you'll search for those groups.

[Kweassa]

I said that they could roll over and follow the enemy down. With dive flaps there was no real concern, without you had to be both good and confident.

 And as Hohun, not me, have already said, the "roll over, then follow" states a delayed method of pursuit which itself means that the P-38 pilot was not wanting to risk the results of a direct pursuit. What we can logically make out of the barrel-roll procedure is more or less a clear intent of  dumping the speed through the maneuver, or elongating the total length of the flight path which to cut it short, means the P-38 could not really "dive".

 It's pretty much the same thing as what the BoB Spitfire pilots have mentioned - if the 109 enters a power dive then the Spitfire would roll inverted and then dive. It's a certain method of overcoming the initial shortcomings - which hardly does anything to prove that there weren't any shortcomings in the first place.

 As for the the diveflaps, from what people have dug up it would provide a 3 degrees nose up attitude, or a slow but steady pitch up momentum throughout the dive, depending on which situation it was deployed. It should be viewed as a secondary device which would help a pilot avoid a certain dangerous outcome - but was it enough to say "no problem at all"? I sincerely doubt it.

 It was a device that would try and help the plane pull out of its death. It's not a device, also as Hohun said, that acted as a full-out airbrake. No airbrake of that era would suspend a plane to a certain max dive speed no matter how well it worked. The P-38 is a massive, heavy plane. Even the relatively light Ju87 with its large dive brakes fully deployed would still accelerate eventually to its doom if it was left in that condition - so, just how much effectively would the tiny diveflap installed underneath wings help the P-38 in such a quantity that it would have "no problems in a dive"??

 If the P-38 had no problems whatsoever during a dive with diveflaps deployed, then it simply means it was diving too slow - hence, as said, "of limited tactical value." If the P-38 would be able to waste the escaping enemy within the limits of Mach 0.7 then alls well that ends well. But if the dive contest lasts any longer, than frankly how would anyone be willing to deny the fact that the P-38, restrained due to its physical limits, simply could not cope with that situation, is beyond me.

 I've not followed you for 3 years, but still immediately, a few problems I could spot right out from your analogy. The links you've provided was a great read, but nothing there suggests anything different from what I've or Hohun has said.

[HoHun]

Hi Hilts,

>YOU seem to feel you are more qualified than they are, and YOU say it did not happen.

Bring me that 500 ft hole in the North German plain where the fight supposedly ended, and that story will look a lot more credible :-) Qualified - well, I live here, and I've never heard of such a hole (or anything approaching it).

>Funny, you seem to be the only one questioning their memory or their honesty.

So what? If you're unable to answer the question posed by a single man, that means his doubts are justified.

I'd tend to think their memory fails them, but if you mean to make it a question of their honesty - well, your idea entirely.

>YOU seem to think it is the defining factor in air to air combat and it ain't. That's where the problem is yours and not mine.

So you're confirming this is a case of HoHun vs. Hilts and not HoHun vs. The Veterans.

> Every plane has its weaknesses, and that does happen to be a big issue with the P-38, although it is one of few, and is really overstated and overemphasized.

I take that as admission that you were unable to find anything wrong with my original post which you attacked so vigerously.

You better give it another look then, as I'm not particularly fond of people who try to hide themselves behind the "honour of the veterans" for spin-doctoring purposes.

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

[Captain Virgil Hilts]

Just believe what you want to, it does not matter. Just remember a whole lot more Luftwaffe planes died in front of P-38's than P-38's died in front of Luftwaffe planes. Diving or not. Seems critical Mach wasn't the deciding factor you two seem to think it was. Evidently at least four times as many fights didn't end in a dive as did. Think about it. If you can out dive the P-38, you still have to go back up where he stopped and try again. With neither a speed nor an altitude advantage. If you can't climb up again and get the P-38 or the bombers, you lose. You figure it out.

Oh, and about the "roll over and follow him down" thing. To do a split S, you roll over and dive, that's how the maneuver works. If you are behind your enemy and setting him up for the kill, you don't need to roll over and dive away first, he does. So if he does, you have to "roll over and follow him down" (notice I didn't say roll over and THEN follow him down, meaning a delay was there, I didn't say it, you and/or Hohun made a pitiful attempt to put words in my mouth, one of you added the word THEN). That's how you pursue your enemy if he has to split S away to save his hide, from your supposedly inferior plane. Of course, if it is so inferior, how did it gain a superior position and advantage, and why do you have to resort to a desperate maneuver like a split S to save your hide? I never said a thing about "delayed" pursuit, now did I? In order to jolt you out of your fantasy, I'll answer that for you. NO, I did not.

Like the early Spitfire with the older carb, the first P-38's didn't follow the Germans through the negative G split S and dive. So for a while it was a valid tactic, if that inferior plane got position on you. Like the later Spitfire, the later P-38 could and did follow, and the tactic was no longer quite so valid.

The only people saying the dive flap on the P-38 was a brake are you and Hohun, I never said any such thing. That fact that either or both of you would like to believe I did does not matter.

The two of you continually confuse terminal velocity dives to critical Mach with a dive away from combat. They are not necessarily one and the same. They do not even have to be close. At the point where you NEED to pull a split S and dive away from a plane you seem to think you can out run, out turn, and out climb, that move will be a last ditch to save your slow and nearly helpless hide, not a move made from high speed and an advantageous position.

The ability to speed away in a high speed terminal dive is not some all conquering advantage. It is one facet of the whole picture of air to air combat. If that's the best advatage you have, well, ain't that just tough. If you can dive away, and you have to, it doesn't mean you won, it just means you didn't get shot to rags. You'll need a lot more advatage than that to be markedly superior. Especially when your opponents only two REAL disadvantages are his plane is a little bigger, and it won't go much over 500MPH in a dive. But then you knew that, didn't you. Otherwise you wouldn't be so hung up on critical Mach and terminal velocity dives.

[Captain Virgil Hilts]

Originally posted by HoHun
Hi Hilts,

>YOU seem to feel you are more qualified than they are, and YOU say it did not happen.

Bring me that 500 ft hole in the North German plain where the fight supposedly ended, and that story will look a lot more credible :-) Qualified - well, I live here, and I've never heard of such a hole (or anything approaching it).

>Funny, you seem to be the only one questioning their memory or their honesty.

So what? If you're unable to answer the question posed by a single man, that means his doubts are justified.

I'd tend to think their memory fails them, but if you mean to make it a question of their honesty - well, your idea entirely.

>YOU seem to think it is the defining factor in air to air combat and it ain't. That's where the problem is yours and not mine.

So you're confirming this is a case of HoHun vs. Hilts and not HoHun vs. The Veterans.

> Every plane has its weaknesses, and that does happen to be a big issue with the P-38, although it is one of few, and is really overstated and overemphasized.

I take that as admission that you were unable to find anything wrong with my original post which you attacked so vigerously.

You better give it another look then, as I'm not particularly fond of people who try to hide themselves behind the "honour of the veterans" for spin-doctoring purposes.

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

Well, I don't know about the hole in the ground, I'd call it a minor detail of the story, which the main focus of was air to air combat, not geographic features. I never claimed to be an expert on topography of German landscape.

As to whether their memory is faulty, I'd say that coming that close to death in a fight for your life would still remain a very vivid memory even 50 years after the fact.

No, actually, if the pilots said they could and did follow their enemy right on through a split S into a dive and catch them, and YOU say they didn't, and they couldn't, I'd say it is your word against theirs. Neither they nor I ever said they dove to 550MPH or .75 Mach. They said in combat they could follow their enemy right through his split S and dive right with him. Of course, if you happen to be so stupid as to think that absolutely positively MUST mean that they went from 250-300MPH  instantly to 500+MPH --- critical Mach-- catastrophic unrecoverable compression, all in the space of 5 or even 15 seconds, then the problem is yours, and I don't share it.

I am not admitting I don't find anything wrong with your initial post, in fact, I've found plenty wrong with your post, you just choose to ignore it.

I really do not give a damn what you are particularly fond of Hohun, I don't care what you think at all. Don't give yourself so much credit, in the grand scheme of things your opinion is worth all of, well, not a damned thing. You can spin it any way you please, or you can stick it where the sun does not shine. Get over yourself.

[GScholz]

I think it is you who need to get over yourself ”Captain”, and the fact that the P-38 wasn’t the superplane you want it to be. Kill statistics doesn’t mean anything unless skill and force levels are equal. The kill statistics in late 1944 and 1945 is equally useless as the kill statistics from Poland in 1939 and the beginning of operation Barbarossa where the LW decimated their opponents. In Africa the LW initially had the initiative, but lost it to the superior number of RAF and USAAF aircraft. What you are left with are the performance facts of each aircraft, and historical fact. The LW could engage and disengage the P-38 at will. An advantage they lost when the P-51 entered the war in numbers. The Bf109 shot down more than twice the number of aircraft than any other plane in history … does that mean that the 109 was twice as good as any other fighter in history? Of course not.

I think I know HiTech’s dedication to accuracy well enough to say that your Super Lightning will never be made in AH … and of course you don’t know how to fly the P-38 in AH as it is since you keep whining about “death spirals” and unrecoverable spins. Perhaps the problem is not the plane, but the man who’s flying it? … just like it was in real life.

[HoHun]

Hi Hilts,

>No, actually, if the pilots said they could and did follow their enemy right on through a split S into a dive and catch them, and YOU say they didn't, and they couldn't, I'd say it is your word against theirs.

You are a liar, Hilts.

You either come up with a direct, unambigous quote proving your claim, or I'll report the next post where you make an unfounded claim like that to the moderation of this forum, complete with a request to take action against you.

Henning (HoHun)

[GScholz]

Originally posted by DiabloTX
G, those quotes you posted, they are all about new squads getting hosed.  How about some quotes from 38 squads that were veterans?  I for one would like to see them.

Thanks.

Why don’t you find some quotes? If you can find them (I’m sure you can). The fact still remains that the P-38’s service was unsatisfactory and was largely withdrawn from fighter service in the ETO when the P-51 became available in numbers. Comparing LW losses in Africa (which include bombers, Bf110 Jabo’s and transports) to P-38 losses is meaningless.

Fact is that the P-38 and I dare say ALL other aircraft modelled are “easy mode” compared to real life. The P-38 had some serious vices that are not modelled, and the same goes for the 109, 190, P-51, Spitfire etc. AH is pretty accurate and realistic for a game, but it is still just a game.

[DiabloTX]

Originally posted by GScholz
Why don’t you find some quotes? If you can find them (I’m sure you can).

Ouch.  I was just hoping with your vast amount of anecdotal and data facts that you could post some rather quickly.  I was not meaning anything argumentative or debatable about my request.  Since you seem to have taken it the wrong way I retract my request, as small as it was, and will leave this debate to the "experts" who seem to be taking it way too personally.