Was the corsair as good a fighter as the spitfire or the FW?

[FLYBOYJ]

I know in the old book Fighter Aces of the Luftwaffe (Toliver and Constable) they quote many pilots saying the P-38 was an easy kill, Heinz Baer is quoted saying that in a 1955 interview with Toliver, HOWEVER we could talk about the above average P-38 driver that could bring his aircraft around and accomplish this, the P-38 stalled flaps down, gear up between 94 and 105 mph depending on weight - under normal circumstances this would be suicide to bring your aircraft that slow and start turning it at the "buffet" with flaps down but remember one thing - the P-38 had no adverse yaw which meant unless it was heavily banked, it would not drop a wing during a stall (unlike most single engine aircraft of WW2) if both engines were running, as a matter of fact if you stalled the P-38 "flat" (limited pitch attitude) and kept the yoke back inducing a secondary stall the aircraft basically dropped like a falling leaf - this I was told by Tony LeVier....

It was documented and witnessed that Elliot Dent turned with an Oscar at 90 mph - the Oscar (KI-43) was probably one of the most (if not the most) maneuverable aircraft of WW2 below 200 mph and yet this guy got his P-38 to turn with one - while I totally accept this is definitely the exception than the rule, I still think it leaves the door open that it could be done with a select pilot behind the yoke!!!

[wmaxt]

Belive it or not in my pilots handbook for the P-38 a L model was capable of flying at 67mph power on flaps and gear down.

wmaxt

[FLYBOYJ]

YEP - at 15,000 pouunds....

[wmaxt]

No I don't take it as fact but it should be representitive. But I suppose I deserved that one.

Originally Posted by Soren

You see in the real world the Fw-190D-9 could actually almost turn with a Spitfire, and at high speed actually out-turn it. The Fw-190A-4 was on par with P-51 in turn rate, while the Fw-190A-5/6 and some A-7's would turn tighter.

AS I posted Rall compared the Spitfire to the P-38.
There is also a well known competition with a Spit Griffon that the P-38 dominated.
Stienhoff stated "the clear superority of the Lightning in speed and maneuverability over our aircraft"
Galland couldn't get away.
Knoke couldn't close
The AAF pilots belived they could and they actually flew P-38s in combat against Fw-190s - I'm willing to bet your German pilots, judging from their remarks, never saw a P-38, or bounced the one they did.
last here is a test by the British of a F model againse a SpitIX and comparison with a Fw-190 on the Docs page.
http://prodocs.netfirms.com

Originally Posted by Soren

Based on that "Warbird" game, sure... In real life, sorry but no.

No, actual tests, you'll find the chart in http://home.att.net/~ww2aviation/RollChart.html

Originally Posted by Soren

I'll respond by asking you wmaxt, do you believe the P-38 could out-turn a Zero at 100ft ?

It was done and witnessed. My pilots handbook for the P-38 gives a power on full flaps gear down minimum speed at 67mph

Originally Posted by Soren

Sorry but you've got that all wrong wmaxt, the P-38 would need one hell of a pilot controlling it for it to be successful against a Fw-190. And if the Fw-190 pilot knows his plane well enough, the P-38 just hasn't got chance. (Except maybe to dive and run away)

Sorry, I gave you examples where it was done, who did it, the opinions of "Both" sides that even give the P-38 an edge on the very best the Germans had. That should be enough to pique your intrest to find out for yourself. All you've come up with is derision, flat statements, and a couple of quotes from German pilots that probably never encountered a P-38.

Originally Posted by Soren

Well you see most of the guys I was refering to have either shot a P-38 down, or has atleast been bounced by one themselves. And all of them agree that the P-38 was a Turkey compared to both the Fw-190 and Bf-109. It was easy to out-maneuver according to them, and it was 'the' Allied aircraft they were the very least afraid of. And Aerodynamics certainly backs them up !

Four out of five German aircraft that met P-38s, 5 out of six in the MTO, didn't make it home. The fifth got the P-38, he, with some right probably thought it wasn't capable. Did they really or was it a successful bounce, The P-38 was a turkey for the first 30 seconds if caught unawares when the pilot was switching from cruise to combat mode.
Areodynamic certaintiy? Heres a couple of examples of why the P-38 works as well as it does
1, high aspect ratio of 8 giving high speed while preserving maneuverability and climb.
2, Power was split doubling prop sweopt area giving efficent use of the power available and for above average pilots differential throttle control. Trim changes were minimal, single engine aircraft change trim every time power changes. Central guns.
3, Tail length to chord ratio in the P-38 was 4:1, most fighters had a ratio of 2/2.5:1. The longer ratio gives more torque to the controls and lets them be smaller for less drag for the same effect. it also lowered control forces
4, the J-25 and L models had hydralic ailerons that got better as the speed increased even after it became too hard for other planes to maintain their roll rate.

Originally Posted by Soren

And about my book knowledge on the P-38, don't worry it is more than sufficient for this discussion.

Well if its all the old propaganda I can see where your coming from. I'm dissapointed you won't even considder looking into it, I've certainly given enough info to question it.

wmaxt

[Soren]

No I don't take it as fact but it should be representitive. But I suppose I deserved that one.

Its not even close to representative wmaxt, its downright BS.

AS I posted Rall compared the Spitfire to the P-38.
There is also a well known competition with a Spit Griffon that the P-38 dominated.
Stienhoff stated "the clear superority of the Lightning in speed and maneuverability over our aircraft"
Galland couldn't get away.
Knoke couldn't close
The AAF pilots belived they could and they actually flew P-38s in combat against Fw-190s - I'm willing to bet your German pilots, judging from their remarks, never saw a P-38, or bounced the one they did.
last here is a test by the British of a F model againse a SpitIX and comparison with a Fw-190 on the Docs page.
http://prodocs.netfirms.com

Rall Why does everyone always quote Rall ?

Rall never dared fly any a/c to its true limits, and there are many examples of this, one being that after one near fatal accident in a 109E where one slat jammed in a banking maneuver sending Rall into a vicious spin, caused him never to even attempt flying the 109 at the verge of stall anymore. So then what makes you think he'll try the same maneuver in a Fw-190 then ? Thats right, he wouldn't, he had already specialized himself in B&Z tactics and had become an expert at it, so thats the tactic he was going to use no-matter the a/c.

No, actual tests, you'll find the chart in http://home.att.net/~ww2aviation/RollChart.html

Thats great, but I was talking about the Fw-190 wmaxt, and it certainly had a better roll rate than what you make out to be. (Up to 180 degree's/sec )

Btw, that is an impressive roll rate for the P-38 I must admit though.

It was done and witnessed. My pilots handbook for the P-38 gives a power on full flaps gear down minimum speed at 67mph

The P-38 had very effective flaps, there's no getting around that, but deploying full flaps was impossible in a dogfight wmaxt.

Sorry, I gave you examples where it was done, who did it, the opinions of "Both" sides that even give the P-38 an edge on the very best the Germans had. That should be enough to pique your intrest to find out for yourself. All you've come up with is derision, flat statements, and a couple of quotes from German pilots that probably never encountered a P-38.

Sorry but I take RAF and USAF tests with Axis aricraft with a BIG grain of salt, especially the Fw-190 tests, as both aileron and engine problems were ignored. The Navy's Fw-190 and Faber's Fw-190 both exibited aileron flutter and reversal, leading to premature stalling in turns or any violent pitch maneuver. The LW mech's knew about this problem and routinely checked and corrected it, but Allied mech's didn't, not until well after the war where no further tests were carried out.

And about the RAF's 109 tests, they're just too ridiculous, flying them against their own cleanly loaded fighters while still having cannon pods attached and pissing their pants each time the slats deploy thinking the airplane is going to stall. Those tests are just worthless, absolutely worthless..

Four out of five German aircraft that met P-38s, 5 out of six in the MTO, didn't make it home. The fifth got the P-38, he, with some right probably thought it wasn't capable. Did they really or was it a successful bounce, The P-38 was a turkey for the first 30 seconds if caught unawares when the pilot was switching from cruise to combat mode.

And where exactly are you getting those stats wmaxt ?

The P-38's tally is result of ground kills and bouncing unaware LW boys on their way home from a bomber intercepting mission. If the P-38's had normally engaged an aware Fw-190 or 109 pilot it would have been a different story.

Fact is most LW boys got shot down as a result of a bounce, one where they never even knew they being bounced until they were hit, and then it was usually too late.

Areodynamic certaintiy? Heres a couple of examples of why the P-38 works as well as it does
1, high aspect ratio of 8 giving high speed while preserving maneuverability and climb.
2, Power was split doubling prop sweopt area giving efficent use of the power available and for above average pilots differential throttle control. Trim changes were minimal, single engine aircraft change trim every time power changes. Central guns.
3, Tail length to chord ratio in the P-38 was 4:1, most fighters had a ratio of 2/2.5:1. The longer ratio gives more torque to the controls and lets them be smaller for less drag for the same effect. it also lowered control forces
4, the J-25 and L models had hydralic ailerons that got better as the speed increased even after it became too hard for other planes to maintain their roll rate.

Here's a couple you forgot:
1)Massive flat plate area
2)High power-loading
3)High lift-loading
4)Disturbed airflow over the wings because of engine placement
5)High aspect ratio wing advantage ruined by engine placement
6)Low CL-max of tip airfoil

Those were some of the most important, but there's plenty more...

Well if its all the old propaganda I can see where your coming from. I'm dissapointed you won't even considder looking into it, I've certainly given enough info to question it.

Old propaganda ? Do you believe that the USAF's museum archives are dealing out propaganda ?

Btw, by your logic the Bf-110 was one hell of a dogfighter !

[FLYBOYJ]

Originally Posted by Soren

[
The P-38 had very effective flaps, there's no getting around that, but deploying full flaps was impossible in a dogfight wmaxt.

Full flaps? Not impossible but probably not done; Maneuvering (10 to 12 degrees)? YES! Recommended or done routinely? Hell no! Suicidal? Only if you don't get away with it!

[Soren]

Well if you'd want your flaps jammed or damaged then it might be a good idea, but otherwise no. Obviously the Fw-190 pilot would want the fight to take place at high speed, so deploying too much flaps would spell disaster for the P-38.

[FLYBOYJ]

Originally Posted by Soren

Well if you'd want your flaps jammed or damaged then it might be a good idea, but otherwise no. Obviously the Fw-190 pilot would want the fight to take place at high speed, so deploying too much flaps would spell disaster for the P-38.

You could drop half flaps up to 250 mph in the P-38...

[Soren]

Would you recommend flying with half flaps deployed against a Fw-190 ? I sure wouldn't. Cause if you loose speed against a Fw-190, your dead. (Like so many Spitfire pilots learned)

[FLYBOYJ]

Originally Posted by Soren

Would you recommend flying with half flaps deployed against a Fw-190 ? I sure wouldn't. Cause if you loose speed against a Fw-190, your dead. (Like so many Spitfire pilots learned)

I agree - but you still have that one pilot that could it and get away with it - I've seen little posted about this as far as P-38 vs Fw-190, but you could look at that post earlier when it was done against an Oscar. An Oscar (ki-43) is (was) way more maneuvable than an -190 under 300 mph....

[lesofprimus]

I would not drop half flaps against an Anton, in any circumstance....

I recall one Spitfire pilot who commented something to the effect, "I learned, hanging in my parachute, to never ever drop flaps with the -190... I never made that mistake again...""

[FLYBOYJ]

Agree....

[wmaxt]

Maneuvering flaps were used effectively by many pilots in both the P-38 and the P-51. Bud Anderson mentiones it several times.

The good pilot thing - I agree the P-38 was a bit harder to master but as the training stats show once trained properly it was the safest fighter the US used in WWII. Using the curve its my opinion that 30-40% were good enough to fight the P-38 well and probably 10% were exceptionally. That would compare to probably 65% that were adequate for combat in the P-51 or P-47.

Soren,
I've posted ample info which you have ignored I belive your comment was "I know all I need for this conversation" Yet you have not provided one shread of information that is contradictory yet verifiable, or quantifiable. Your German pilots opinions are not verifiable nor can I ask questions to clarify the statements which sometimes change when a third party repeats them.

The opinions of pilots like Art Hieden are just as valid as those your using, Art flew over 300combat hrs in a P-38 (all series) and 50 in the P-51 in the ETO against German fighters. Art was still flying in 1990 and had accumulated 24,000hrs plus, neither you nor I have the experiance or right to criticize his opinions.

I agree I shouldn't have used Hoof's numbers, my research indicates there actualy pretty close except the planes in WWII were stressed for 7-7.5Gs not 9. However I can't support it, I shouldn't have used it. I accept that razz. However the rest of your allegation is groundless until you provide some data coorodarating your view that is verifiable, and quantifiable. Just dissmising my data because you know it all doesn't work.

If you do convince me, I'll change my stance. Until you do I'm not going to legitimize your statements by answering with data you already admitted your not going to consider.

wmaxt

[Soren]

Your the one who has failed to present REAL evidence for these claims wmaxt, not me !

I don't take pilot accounts as gospel, as we will never really know what happened, there are simply to many factors that come into play here. Its anecdotal evidence at best.

We will never know what was going on inside the cockpit of those LW fighters shot down in these claims for instance. Was the pilot aware he was being attacked or was he unaware ? We don't know... And the 109 and 190 pilots actually aware they were being attacked probably hushed when they saw a P-38 was following them, thinking "There's no way that big bird is going to follow me in even the lightest of maneuvers" and so mistakenly made no wild evasive maneuvers...


And about those figures at "Hoof's" site, what facts do you have to support them ? I certainly have none ! Only a bunch debunking them...

These facts about the P-38 below are evidence enough to disprove any claim that the P-38 could normally turn with a Fw-190 or Bf-109 in a dogfight(And especially not a Ki-43 !), it would simply bleed energy way too quickly.

1)Massive flat plate area
2)High power-loading
3)High lift-loading
4)Disturbed airflow over the wings because of engine placement
5)High aspect ratio wing advantage ruined by engine placement
6)Low CL-max of tip airfoil (The NACA 4412 to be specific)


Lastly Im not going to deny that a very good P-38 pilot could bring down an aware Bf-109 or Fw-190 pilot, as we've seen pilots do amazing feats with less than amazing aircraft, but it was definitely the exception rather than the rule !

[Lunatic]

Originally Posted by Soren

Well if you'd want your flaps jammed or damaged then it might be a good idea, but otherwise no. Obviously the Fw-190 pilot would want the fight to take place at high speed, so deploying too much flaps would spell disaster for the P-38.

The P-38 had fowler flaps and these could be deployed effectively without significant chance of jamming. They slide out of the wing and curl down. Besides, the P-38 flaps (and many other US planes) had force limiters and trying to put down too much flap for the given speed was impossible.

Later model P-38's also had dive recovery flaps which could be utilized at any speed, acting as a sort of air-brake.