Luftwaffe accounts of "The Forked Tailed Devil

[storch]

Originally posted by Ack-Ack
Yawn...



ack-ack

oh look!!! alt-alt has put down the chorizo and typed another heroic message to me!!! thanks alt-alt.

[Raptor]

Originally posted by Bruno
You P-38 fan bois are so desperate to show how good the P-38 was that you create 'top Luftwaffe aces' and 'top Luftwaffe geschwader' out of thin air.

Actually I miss the old days whene everyone thought the P38 was a peice of junk. Oh how surprised they were to find me turning with them:)

[Guppy35]

Originally posted by Bruno



I never said one set of claims is more credible then the other. I said that there has never been any study to match claims with losses. I have posted in numerous threads about the reliability of claims on all sides. Do a search.

I agree enough is enough. You P-38 fan bois are so desperate to show how good the P-38 was that you create 'top Luftwaffe aces' and 'top Luftwaffe geschwader' out of thin air.

Bruno, my response was to Storch's comment.   My point was the 38 aquitted itself well enough against the LW.  Was it the top performer?  No.  But it was hardly FW fodder.

The 'fan bois' comments get old in a hurry too.  Somehow that's meant to discredit any commentary?

Does that make you a LW 'fan bois"?

I tend to give you the benefit of the doubt when it comes to commentary on the Luftwaffe and their aircraft. You've clearly done your research.  I'd like to think that my interest and research into the Allied stuff would recieve that same sort of consideration.  

As for using the term kills vs claims.  I'm guilty.  But they totals are the 'comfirmed' kills that the groups were credited with.     We can go on all day about claims, overclaiming etc.  My point was their kill tally (real or imagined) was comparable to any other fighter groups in the ETO/MTO

[Bruno]

Bruno, my response was to Storch's comment. My point was the 38 aquitted itself well enough against the LW. Was it the top performer? No. But it was hardly FW fodder.

Ok then we agree, I guess...

The 'fan bois' comments get old in a hurry too. Somehow that's meant to discredit any commentary?

I included myself in that:

I don't wish to get into another romp with the 'P-38 mafia' but if any one looks beyond just what the fan bois post (including myself) and keeps an objective mind as much as possible you may find your own 'acceptable' version of the truth.

But you can't deny that whenever anything is pointed out contrary to the view that the 'P-38 teh RoXXoR' the P-38 mafioso turn up with exaggerations at best, if not down right lies, just to show us just how great it was.

What do we have in this thread? A bunch of cherry picked, out of context, quotes, lies (see Lowell) and the Capt'n's exaggeration over who and what a 'top Luftwaffe ace is'. It's mostly nonsense...

As I said above the P-38 was fine aircraft. However, it wasn't 'great' by any stretch. No other country could have afforded the resources and man power to produce such an 'adequate' aircraft such as the US did with the P-38.

[Captain Virgil Hilts]

Well, 22 victories in a 110 is nothing to sneeze at. I'll give the guy plenty of credit, even if you won't.

It isn't that the P-38 fans expect or demand that everyone agree that the P-38 was the ultimate fighter, that isn't it at all. It's that P-38 fans simply aren't going to agree with anyone who claims the P-38 was a "second rate also ran". It wasn't. And to even attempt to say that it was is to give great discredit to any of the Axis pilots who fell in front of the guns of a P-38.

No exagerration is necessary. The OFFICIAL credits that P-38 pilots scored is more than testament enough to the capability of the plane. Forget the extra claims for Lowell, or anyone else for that matter. What they got officially credited with is more than enough to show the P-38 was an excellent plane when in capable hands.

The fact is, the P-38 was better than average, and better than simply adequate. It handled every task assigned to it well when flown by capable pilots. It was a good fighter, a good ground attack plane, a good fighter/bomber, a good escort fighter, a good interceptor, and even a good recon plane. Was it the very best at any of those tasks? Maybe, it was, maybe it wasn't, probably not. But it was more than capable, and it acquitted itself quite well facing ANY piston engine prop driven plane any of the enemy could put up against it. Not bad for a plane designed in 1937, especially considering it was never designed for most tasks it was assigned, actual development ceased in 1943 for the most part, not to mention fixes were available for most of the perceived faults but never installed, and the best prototype (the P-38K in April 1943) never saw production.

[Guppy35]

Originally posted by Bruno


But you can't deny that whenever anything is pointed out contrary to the view that the 'P-38 teh RoXXoR' the P-38 mafioso turn up with exaggerations at best, if not down right lies, just to show us just how great it was.

I suppose in that regards the 38 fans are a bit like their historical counterparts.  It's been interesting in the histories to read the reactions by the guys trained in 38s to transitioning to 51s.  On the whole, they preferred the 38 to the 51 "spam can".  

Obviously the guys that were statside trained in 51s that had to transition to 38s saw it differently.  They by far preferred the 51.

I guess that bias is based on the belief in the plane and the training they had in it to get the best out of it.

[leitwolf]

Originally posted by Captain Virgil Hilts
[..]
The fact is, the P-38 was better than average, and better than simply adequate. It handled every task assigned to it well when flown by capable pilots.
[..]
But it was more than capable, and it acquitted itself quite well facing ANY piston engine prop driven plane any of the enemy could put up against it. Not bad for a plane designed in 1937, especially considering it was never designed for most tasks it was assigned [..]

I think your argument just reinforced the assessment of the P-38 being an 'adequate' fighter, the keywords being "when flown by capable pilots". Replace the word "P-38" in your text with Me-109 and voila, you can use it everytime someone writes about the drawbacks of the Messerschmitt.

When you are fighting a strategic war, individual skill and kill #s are good for propaganda shows, the outcome of the war, however, is not related to individuals - as demonstrated by the insane numbers the top LW pilots got (in arguably obsolete 109s) and still lost the war.
The top american ace flew P-38s so it must've been 'good enough' for the job in his hands but in a strategic sense, the P-38 was not the best. Here's why:

P-51 $50,985
P-47 $83,000
P-38 $134,284

a plane with less than half the production cost and roughly the same performance is simply the better strategic fighter.
Add up the fact that using your own words you need 'capable pilots' the P-38 goes further down on the list.
I'm a fanboi of the 38 but i dont see why anyone can argue the fact that the P38 in the sum of all traits is only an average fighter.

[Debonair]

does it smell like fish in here?

[LEADPIG]

I think what the Storchter and the other Luftwaffe guys fail to realize is that compared to a 109, or 190, the 38 isn't going to win any maneaverability contests, it will out vertical just about any plane in WW2, and out accelerate and out dive. The main reason for succes of the 38 in WW2 and AH for that matter is tactics and trying to keep numbers up during a fight, wingman tactics saved a lot of 38's. That is more the reason for the succes of the 38's 6\1 kill ratio over the luftwaffe. The 38's would fly high, dive on some poor sap, blow him to pieces, and repeat ad naseum untill the german was dead, usually while being covered by other 38's watching. I believe the 38 would outturn the 190 accelerate and out vert it, about the only thing it's got is roll rate. If the 109 is BnZ, or E fought by a 38 it is a hapless target, however on the same side if the 38 gets low and slow, the 38 ends up the 109's lunch, there's not much you can do. Therefore it takes a much smarter 38 pilot to kill and live, you "have to know when to hold em, know when to fold em" in that plane" when flown that way it's untouchable.

[storch]

in the ETO the P38 was a dismal failure.  the P38 was successful in the pacific simply because it was fighting frail japanese aircraft and the US held a huge numerical advantage over the japanese not because the P38 was anything even marginally approaching "good".  in it's intended role as a high altitude interceptor it was mediocre, as a medium altitude fighter it was mediocre, as an attack platform it was ok.  the P38 was so substandard that inspite of being the costliest fighter to produce they were immediately junked after the war.  they probably even made poor skillets after the materials were recycled.  The best American fighter was clearly the P51 followed closely by the F6F and the F4U.  The P38 was an innovative design and must have looked futuristic in 1939 but in reality it was mostly show but no go.

[Angus]

But...
P38 has good range.
P38 carries a lot of ordnance.
P38 has decent firepower
P38 has 2 engines and can fly one only 1.
P38 is quite fast for a twin.
P38 is quite nimble for a twin.

It's a tool for the attacker, and did well so.

[LEADPIG]

Ohhhhh this is fun :

Top Allied fighters: (drum roll please)

1. P-51 Mustang

2. F-4u Corsair

3. P-38 Lightning

4. P-47 Thunderbolt

5. F6f  Hellcat


Top German fighters:

1. Me-109

2. Fw-190

3. A6m-Zero

4. Nikj-2

5. ki-84

[Angus]

I presume you mean top USA fighters there.
Allies also include Britain and the USSR, as well as Poland untill 1939, and the Lowlands and France until 1940, - all aircraft builders.

And I presume you mean AXIS fighters, not German. Axis are mainly Germany, Italy and Japan, as well as some others who built aircraft - notably Romania. Last time I checked the Zeke, N1K2 and Ki84 were Japanese.

Btw, wonder which allied fighter shot down most 109's. My money is on the Spitfire.

[Oldman731]

Originally posted by Angus
Btw, wonder which allied fighter shot down most 109's. My money is on the Spitfire.

Mine is on the 47.

- jkw

[storch]

I would guess that since the spit had a three+ year lead on all fighters American and that they were involved in the fight when the luftwaffe could actually field numbers there is good probability the english fighters would be responsible for the lion's share of 109 kills.  keep in mind though that the russians miraculously managed to knock down a good number of 109s as well.