 | Best Aircraft in Many Different Roles Part II| Aviation Discuss Best Aircraft in Many Different Roles Part II in the World War II - Aviation forums; Compromise, the Mosquito was a bomber trying to be a fighter and the P-38 was a fighter trying to ... |
|
01-26-2005, 01:49 PM
|
#16 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Saffron Walden/Sheffield
Posts: 3,001
Country:  | Compromise, the Mosquito was a bomber trying to be a fighter and the P-38 was a fighter trying to be a bomber
__________________ 
When you realise that the light at the end of the tunnel is actually an oncoming train, you know it's time to run for your life | 
|  | |
01-26-2005, 03:07 PM
|
#17 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 2,512
| Well, Lanc has done a lot of duplicating on his list.
For example he lists day fighter and high altitude fighter. Certainly the P-38 was both of these as well.
I fail to see the true distinction between a day/night fighter-bomber and a day/night intruder.
Nor is there any true distinction between a PR plane and a high altitude PR plane.
Most of the items on his Mossies list the P-38 did do. But he is right that the P-38 couldn't carry the cookie. But the a Mossie couldn't carry two torps.
__________________  | |
| | |
01-26-2005, 03:18 PM
|
#18 | | Konfused with a 'K'
Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Turin, Italy
Posts: 20,412
Country:  | lanc, the term bomber is far broader than fighter. The Mossie was a light bomber, so it isnt really all that amazing that it acted well as a night fighter. Remember, the Ju-88 started off in a similar manner. You cant say that it was the allies best NF, most proven is a more suitable term. P-38M's scored well during the small time they saw service and would probably have been damn good competition for the mossie. Quote: |
and this is a list of some of the roles the mossie opperated in, let alone the mods..........
| Yes, more roles doesnt make it better. Was the Ju-88 better than the Mossie or P-38? No, it wasnt. Besides, half that stuff is a bit specific. Anti-Tirpitzing? Thats just some **** you made up. wmaxt has also left a couple of things off his list which Ill have to rectify later. You say it was a day fighter, but several times I have asked for evidence of this and I have not been given any, so I do not believe this until I am proven otherwise.
mosquitoman, your statement is incorrect, as the P-38 wasnt a fighter a trying to be a bomber, it was a fighter that was also used as a bomber. The mossie was a bomber used that was also used as a night fighter.
__________________  with my one last gaping breath id apologise for bleeding on your shirt... | |
| | |
01-26-2005, 04:13 PM
|
#19 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 584
| LG put up a list of different nations best bombers....which I think was really good, as we've hashed this all out before....
I felt the best Japanese was a Ki. ''Dinah''...
I always vote Mosquito, but if we're going to get into what the P-38M Fighter did in the last stages of the War, then we should include the DH Hornet, which was the ' Fighter' version of the Mosquito, as it was essentially similar to the Mosquito, just smaller being a single-seater and with just 4x 20mm's...They were flying and gearing-up for Squadron strength when the ETO War finished.....A comparative study between that and a P-38M would be a read........ | |
| | |
01-26-2005, 09:07 PM
|
#20 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 2,512
| You are refering to the Ki-46 Dinah. I don't think it was as versatile as the P1Y. The Dinah was a fine recon aircraft. But the only other role they really tried it as was as an interceptor and it did not was not very effective as its climb rate was unimpressive.
__________________ | |
| | |
01-27-2005, 12:27 PM
|
#21 | | Master of Ewes
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 19,959
Country: | ok but almost any fighter could carry bombs, that's nothing specail, how many bomber could dogfight??
the P-38 could carry two torps, with no guns, the mossie could carry a torp, 1,000lbs of bombs internally and guns, i'd give that to the mossie.........
__________________ 
"Reminds me of the time I sank the Tirpitz" comments a Spitfire pilot, "One pass of course, old boy." | |
| | |
01-27-2005, 12:44 PM
|
#22 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 2,512
| Wrong Lanc. The test conducted with the P-38 was with two torpedoes and a full ammo load.
And the Mossie was hardly a dogfighter.
__________________ | |
| | |
01-27-2005, 02:20 PM
|
#23 | | Konfused with a 'K'
Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Turin, Italy
Posts: 20,412
Country: | Quote: |
ok but almost any fighter could carry bombs, that's nothing specail, how many bomber could dogfight??
| Well, lets put 'dogfight' in inverted commas. The Ju-88 could.
Ok, almost any fighter can carry bombs, buit name me another fighter that can carry 5,200lbs of bombs?
__________________ with my one last gaping breath id apologise for bleeding on your shirt... | |
| | |
01-27-2005, 02:45 PM
|
#24 | | Master of Ewes
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 19,959
Country: | it's not the fighter part that's significant, the P-38 was a twin engined aircraft, 5,200lbs is not specail for a twin engined plane.............
__________________
"Reminds me of the time I sank the Tirpitz" comments a Spitfire pilot, "One pass of course, old boy." | |
| | |
01-27-2005, 02:51 PM
|
#25 | | Konfused with a 'K'
Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Turin, Italy
Posts: 20,412
Country: | Its more than many American twin-engined bombers could carry...
__________________ with my one last gaping breath id apologise for bleeding on your shirt... | |
| | |
01-27-2005, 03:13 PM
|
#26 | | Master of Ewes
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 19,959
Country: | no, the P-38's max of 5,200lbs is more than the normall load carried by the mediums, the mediums were capable of much more than the 4,000lbs some of them normally carried...........
__________________
"Reminds me of the time I sank the Tirpitz" comments a Spitfire pilot, "One pass of course, old boy." | |
| | |
01-27-2005, 04:32 PM
|
#27 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: New York City
Posts: 105
| Quote: |
Ok, almost any fighter can carry bombs, buit name me another fighter that can carry 5,200lbs of bombs?
| p-61 widow, its unusal for it 2 carrie bombs but it can carrie more than 7000 if it needs | |
| | |
01-27-2005, 04:58 PM
|
#28 | | "Shooter"
Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Moorpark, CA
Posts: 12,544
Country:  | Where did you get the number for the bomb load on the P-61? What I have seen shows the max bomb load of 6,400 lbs.
__________________  http://www.vg-photo.com Wherever their bones may lie, the courage of heroes is consecrated in the hearts and engraved in the history of the free. Lt Col Honner DSO MC, 39th Commander speaking of the dead from the battle of Kokoda. | |
| | |
01-27-2005, 05:00 PM
|
#29 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 2,512
| I'm with evan, the highest I've seen for a P-61 is 6,400lbs made up of 4 1,600lb bombs.
__________________ | |
| | |
01-28-2005, 10:50 AM
|
#30 | | Konfused with a 'K'
Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Turin, Italy
Posts: 20,412
Country: | Quote: |
Originally Posted by the lancaster kicks ass no, the P-38's max of 5,200lbs is more than the normall load carried by the mediums, the mediums were capable of much more than the 4,000lbs some of them normally carried........... | Ive seen the normal load for the B-25 as being 3,500lbs...
__________________ with my one last gaping breath id apologise for bleeding on your shirt... | |
| | | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | | | | | Display Modes |  Linear Mode | 
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off | | | All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:12 AM. | | |
