Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Pudgy on February 12, 2016, 10:07:48 AM
-
Not sure if this has been posted here before, but here is a long but interesting P-38 Article that I got linked to while reading another forum.
It goes through the development of the various version and talks about a lot of the problems in the ETO and incorporated pilots experiences and opinions.
http://www.ausairpower.net/P-38-Analysis.html
I never get tired of reading about the Lightning.
Enjoy,
Pudgy
-
It is a good read. :aok
-
http://www.ausairpower.net/P-38-Analysis.html
That article is from C.C. Jordan's old site. Some of you vets might remember C.C.Jordan's by his handle "Widewing"
There is a book that was compiled from reports of squadron leaders and senior officers from the various fighter squadrons (P-40, P-47, P-51, P-38) in the 5th AF. The book details in the squadron officers own words their tactics and tips for fighting the Japanese. It was written in the last few months of the war as an aid to new incoming pilots. The 8th AF and 15th AF also published something similar and this was the 5th AF's version.
-
I thought the P-38 had "handed" prop rotation--outboard. The article says inboard.
Or is this just Ozspeak?
-
I thought the P-38 had "handed" prop rotation--outboard. The article says inboard.
Props rotated inboard on the P-38.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3c/Counter-rotating_propellers.gif)
Or is this just Ozspeak?
No Ozspeak since the writer is from the US.
-
Props rotated inboard on the P-38.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3c/Counter-rotating_propellers.gif)
No Ozspeak since the writer is from the US.
I guess the blades are on backwards then... Or it flies in reverse.
-
Looks outboard to me...
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_PQfAWFHHFA
-
The P-38 pilot manual states that the propeller rotation is clockwise for the right engine and counter clockwise for the left engine, as it is in the game.
-
The P-38 pilot manual states that the propeller rotation is clockwise for the right engine and counter clockwise for the left engine, as it is in the game.
Yep. So the article has it wrong.
-
Yep. So the article has it wrong.
Atcually it's just as ACK ACK's drawing shows,facing the AC the right engine turns clockwise,or inboard....
I hardly think Mr Jordan would make this type of mistake,but dont take my word on it instead watch a video that has a shutter speed that shows the prop spinning in reverse!
:salute
-
Atcually it's just as ACK ACK's drawing shows,facing the AC the right engine turns clockwise,or inboard....
I hardly think Mr Jordan would make this type of mistake,but dont take my word on it instead watch a video that has a shutter speed that shows the prop spinning in reverse!
:salute
I posted a video. As I mentioned, the author screwed up (with the exception of the prototype).
The non-Brit production 38s have "handed" prop rotation. They turn outboard over the top.
Facing the aircraft the engine turning clockwise from the viewer's perspective would be on his right (No. 1). Take Ack-Ack's picture and watch it upside down.
The picture shows them turning inboard over the top like a Seminole.
No disrespect intended. :salute
-
Atcually it's just as ACK ACK's drawing shows,facing the AC the right engine turns clockwise,or inboard....
I hardly think Mr Jordan would make this type of mistake,but dont take my word on it instead watch a video that has a shutter speed that shows the prop spinning in reverse!
:salute
I believe the illustration is incorrect. Rotation should be from the pilot's perspective.
-
I believe the illustration is incorrect. Rotation should be from the pilot's perspective.
The illustration is fine for a PA-44 Seminole, just not a P-38L. Flip it upside down and it is perfect.
Rotational perspective isn't relevant in this case. For a conventional twin it would be.
-
Props rotated inboard on the P-38.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3c/Counter-rotating_propellers.gif)
I found your diagram at this Wikipedia page:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counter-rotating_propellers
Which also said "In designing the Lockheed P-38 Lightning, the decision was made to reverse the counter-rotation such that the "tops" of the propeller arcs move outwards, away from each other."
I know that Wikipedia is not authoritative, but I found it interesting what the article said, compared to the diagram.
The diagram was included in the article simply to show what "counter-rotating" means. It doesn't mean that the P-38 follows this rule in regards to the direction. And we have multiple authoritative texts that tell us the rotation on the P-38 was the opposite of what this particular diagram shows.
Now to make things even more interesting. I have two links from Joe Baugher's site that talk about the development history of the P-38.
XP-38
http://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_fighters/p38_1.html
YP-38
http://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_fighters/p38_2.html
On the XP-38, the props rotated inwards. On the YP-38, they switched so the props rotated outwards. The engineers found that reversing the direction made the plane more stable.
-
Well my left and right brain saw that completely different! Wouldnt be the first time or the last.
I often see letters backwards,b's and d's cause me all kinds of fits.
I had to go reread widewings write up and I'm still not sure where it's mistaken,I saw the prototype section but dont see the mistake.
Oh well my bad!
-
Well my left and right brain saw that completely different! Wouldnt be the first time or the last.
I often see letters backwards,b's and d's cause me all kinds of fits.
I had to go reread widewings write up and I'm still not sure where it's mistaken,I saw the prototype section but dont see the mistake.
Oh well my bad!
"The USAAF on the strength of completed tests, ordered thirteen development aircraft, designated YP-38. The Lockheed Model 122-62-02 was fitted with a pair of V-1710-F2 engines rated at 1,150 BHP with GE B-2 turbochargers and weighed in at 11,171 lb empty for a design weight of 13,500 lb. Armament was specified at one 37 mm Oldsmobile M9 cannon, two .50 cal and two .30 cal machine guns. Counter-rotating props were specified, these rotating inboard."
----
He never once mentions the "standard" outboard rotation, leading the reader to believe "inboard rotation" was how they were throughout, excepting British machines.
-
The illustration is fine for a PA-44 Seminole, just not a P-38L. Flip it upside down and it is perfect.
Rotational perspective isn't relevant in this case. For a conventional twin it would be.
Did you think I said it was correct?
-
Did you think I said it was correct?
You said it should be from the rear. I merely pointed out that with counter rotating props it doesn't matter. :salute
-
Irrelevance noted.
-
Irrelevance noted.
Cheers, sir. :salute
-
From that link, about the P38L:
"An added benefit of the dive recovery flaps was their ability to pitch the nose 10-20 degrees "up" momentarily when trying to out turn the Luftwaffe's best, even when using the flap combat position on the selector."
-
According to Lockheed's 'Hanger Flying' you could loop using the dive flaps.
-
From that link, about the P38L:
"An added benefit of the dive recovery flaps was their ability to pitch the nose 10-20 degrees "up" momentarily when trying to out turn the Luftwaffe's best, even when using the flap combat position on the selector."
Some P-38 pilots used that trick and others thought it wasn't of any useful benefit.
-
:salute very nice read. :cheers:
-
According to Lockheed's 'Hanger Flying' you could loop using the dive flaps.
There is no aerodynamic reason for this to be possible. I think this was news article spin trying to promote confidence in the P-38 new fix.
-
There is no aerodynamic reason for this to be possible. I think this was news article spin trying to promote confidence in the P-38 new fix.
I imagine it's difficult to change a wing's air flow and not get an aerodynamic effect. Some pilots did report a pitch up.
-
Another interesting source for P-38 info. http://yarchive.net/mil/p38.html
It's a shame that the WPB didn't 2nd source the P-38 by '42. Another source would both have increased production when it was so badly needed, but also offered more chances to cut in design improvements (such as the P-38-K) without interrupting production.
-
That article is from C.C. Jordan's old site. Some of you vets might remember C.C.Jordan's by his handle "Widewing"
There is a book that was compiled from reports of squadron leaders and senior officers from the various fighter squadrons (P-40, P-47, P-51, P-38) in the 5th AF. The book details in the squadron officers own words their tactics and tips for fighting the Japanese. It was written in the last few months of the war as an aid to new incoming pilots. The 8th AF and 15th AF also published something similar and this was the 5th AF's version.
I was going to say this.... Carlo and I put this together back in '99 and posted it to my old website....
Carlo is still writing on aviation... He's also still lecturing at Monash University, Melbourne.