Aircraft of World War II - Warbird Forums

Corsair vs Lightning

Aviation Discuss Corsair vs Lightning in the World War II - Aviation forums; Originally Posted by P38 Pilot Agreed. With that Two engine design, they could keep on going even after they took ...


Go Back   Aircraft of World War II - Warbird Forums > World War II - Aviation > Aviation

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 10-26-2005, 09:47 PM   #46
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by P38 Pilot
Agreed. With that Two engine design, they could keep on going even after they took some damage.
It was really not vs. damage that those pilots were usually talking about. It was vs. mechanical failure.

The odds that after taking hits the P-38 was going to go down were much higher than for a corsair or hellcat. The fuel tanks are comparitavely exposed and the engines are no where near as robust vs. combat damage. An R2800 could take signifcant damage and still get the pilot home, where an inline would fail after almost any hit due to coolant loss. Even with two engines the liquid cooling aspect plus the fuel tank vulnerability made it less able to survive combat damage and get the pilot home.

=S=

Lunatic
Lunatic is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2005, 09:54 PM   #47
Senior Member
 
syscom3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 8,133
But what happens when you are flying 1300 miles from base, and one engine fails for any reason. Is that Hellcat or Corsair going to glide all those miles?

Another plus for the 2 engine design is it was great for the morale of the P38 pilots. Knowing you could come home after losing an engine made the flying the vast distances in the SW pacific far more bareable.

The 475th FG pilot I talked to at Chino 2004, told me having a second engine brought home many pilots who otherwise would have parachuted way out over the ocean or into the jungles.
__________________
"Pilot to copilot..... what are those mountain goats doing up here in the clouds?"
syscom3 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2005, 11:07 PM   #48
IP/Mech THE GREAT GAZOO
 
FLYBOYJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Colorado, USA
Posts: 13,004
Country:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lunatic
The odds that after taking hits the P-38 was going to go down were much higher than for a corsair or hellcat. The fuel tanks are comparitavely exposed and the engines are no where near as robust vs. combat damage. An R2800 could take signifcant damage and still get the pilot home, where an inline would fail after almost any hit due to coolant loss. Even with two engines the liquid cooling aspect plus the fuel tank vulnerability made it less able to survive combat damage and get the pilot home.
While I agree with the robustness of a radial engine the area around the P-38s fuel tanks (along with a good portion of the wings) were made from corrugations riveted to structure and then the corrugations riveted to the skin - the same system found on B-17 wings - this is extremely strong and I would compare it to the structure of the Corsair or the Hellcat any day....

Bottom line I rather have one feathered and one running Allison engine than one R-2800 with 3 jugs missing....
__________________
"IF ITS RED OR DUSTY, DON'T TOUCH IT"
FLYBOYJ is online now  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2005, 03:38 PM   #49
Senior Member
 
wmaxt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Boise, Idaho
Posts: 1,178
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lunatic
Quote:
Originally Posted by P38 Pilot
Agreed. With that Two engine design, they could keep on going even after they took some damage.
It was really not vs. damage that those pilots were usually talking about. It was vs. mechanical failure.

The odds that after taking hits the P-38 was going to go down were much higher than for a corsair or hellcat. The fuel tanks are comparitavely exposed and the engines are no where near as robust vs. combat damage. An R2800 could take signifcant damage and still get the pilot home, where an inline would fail after almost any hit due to coolant loss. Even with two engines the liquid cooling aspect plus the fuel tank vulnerability made it less able to survive combat damage and get the pilot home.

=S=

Lunatic
One thing that is rarley noted is that the P-38 is also spread out. It's outside dimensions are large but the individual parts are not, making the liklyhood that a single burst is going to take it out very unlikely.

The Corsair fuel is more concentrated but it's also at the point an enemy aircraft will be aiming at. The P-38s is more spread out but is self sealing (to) and is also able to be cross fed to ether engine - lose a tank you can at a minimum work your way closer to home. Try that in a Corsair with an empty tank!

All in all I think the two aircraft are extreamly close in capability and 1:1 combat it would probably come down to who exploited/made the first mistake. As for which plane is best, it would come down to mission and each one only has a couple of areas that it is unique in.

IMHO, these are the pinacle in piston engine fighter aircraft though its easily arguable that the Spit and the Fw-190 series should be included even if they can't do everything these two can.

wmaxt
wmaxt is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2005, 04:31 PM   #50
Senior Member
 
syscom3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 8,133
The PTO had its own unique requirements for a successfull fighter. Range was definatley one of the most important considerations.
__________________
"Pilot to copilot..... what are those mountain goats doing up here in the clouds?"
syscom3 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2005, 05:53 PM   #51
Senior Member
 
wmaxt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Boise, Idaho
Posts: 1,178
Quote:
Originally Posted by syscom3
The PTO had its own unique requirements for a successfull fighter. Range was definatley one of the most important considerations.
True, but escorting in the MTO/ETO missions with a 500+ mile radius were common.

I do think, though, that any "Best" aircraft must include the 'You got to get to the fight' condition - the best fighter that ever flew is worth nothing if it can't get to where it's needed.

wmaxt
wmaxt is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2005, 06:07 PM   #52
Senior Member
 
syscom3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 8,133
Quote:
Originally Posted by wmaxt
I do think, though, that any "Best" aircraft must include the 'You got to get to the fight' condition - the best fighter that ever flew is worth nothing if it can't get to where it's needed.
wmaxt
Well summarized.

In regards to the ETO/MTO, my intent of this thread was their performance in the PTO. There they fought the same opponents, in the same theater and had to contend with the same operational problems.
__________________
"Pilot to copilot..... what are those mountain goats doing up here in the clouds?"
syscom3 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2005, 02:15 AM   #53
Master of Ewes
 
the lancaster kicks ass's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 19,959
Country:
Send a message via MSN to the lancaster kicks ass
Quote:
I do think, though, that any "Best" aircraft must include the 'You got to get to the fight' condition - the best fighter that ever flew is worth nothing if it can't get to where it's needed
although in the case of interceptors where it was needed was baisically straight up, not miles away over enemy teritory, i know this is nothing to do with the discussion i just didn't want people thinking that planes like the spitfire and EE Lightening were bad fighters because of their range, it's ok for a plane to have short range of it was designed to.........
__________________

"Reminds me of the time I sank the Tirpitz" comments a Spitfire pilot, "One pass of course, old boy."
the lancaster kicks ass is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2005, 07:20 AM   #54
Konfused with a 'K'
 
cheddar cheese's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Turin, Italy
Posts: 20,412
Country:
Send a message via AIM to cheddar cheese Send a message via MSN to cheddar cheese
Agreed on both counts lanc and wmaxt.
__________________

with my one last gaping breath id apologise for bleeding on your shirt...
cheddar cheese is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2005, 07:22 AM   #55
Senior Member
 
Gnomey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Royal Deeside/St Andrews, Scotland, UK
Posts: 11,223
Country:
Send a message via AIM to Gnomey Send a message via MSN to Gnomey
Quote:
Originally Posted by cheddar cheese
Agreed on both counts lanc and wmaxt.
Me too. Good points.
__________________


"Success is not Final, Failure is not Fatal, it is the Courage to Continue that Counts"
Sir Winston Churchill

"To him the people of the world largely owe the Freedom and liberties they enjoy today"
Enscription on Hugh Dowding's (AOC Fighter Command 1936-40) statue in London


Moderator WW2 Talk: A WW2 Discussion Forum
Gnomey is online now  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2005, 10:57 AM   #56
Senior Member
 
syscom3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 8,133
One of the unique problems for both the Japanese and Allied forces in the PTO was the vast distances involved. If you cannot send your fighters out to where your opponant is, youre strictly on defense. In the PTO that meant your opponant could take islands or jungle just out of reach of your aircraft and build strips to cutoff your sealane supply.

What made the P38 and Corsair so great was they could fly practically anywhere the bombers went and cover them. A Spitfire in the PTO would be of quite limited use since it would be tied closely to its base and couldnt fly to where the action was.
__________________
"Pilot to copilot..... what are those mountain goats doing up here in the clouds?"
syscom3 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2005, 03:16 PM   #57
Senior Member
 
wmaxt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Boise, Idaho
Posts: 1,178
Quote:
Originally Posted by syscom3

What made the P38 and Corsair so great was they could fly practically anywhere the bombers went and cover them. A Spitfire in the PTO would be of quite limited use since it would be tied closely to its base and couldnt fly to where the action was.
Thats part of my point, I don't feel range is make or break as to a planes capability as a fighter but one must considier it as an advantage/bonus point when comparing fighters.

The P-51 wasn't much better than average but its range makes it a serious contender.

The BoB was lost as much by the short range Bf-109 as it was won/lost by any other factors.

Air superority over Europe was won by P-38s and P-51s and later P-47s and range was a prime reason they were able to do it.

That doesn't make the Spit a poor fighter but it is less effective strategicly and should be a factor in any comparison.

wmaxt
wmaxt is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2005, 04:11 PM   #58
Senior Member
 
syscom3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 8,133
Exactly. I couldnt have summed it up any better.
__________________
"Pilot to copilot..... what are those mountain goats doing up here in the clouds?"
syscom3 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2005, 04:14 PM   #59
Senior Member
 
P38 Pilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Auburn,Alabama; USA
Posts: 1,934
Country:
Send a message via MSN to P38 Pilot
What also made the P-38 very useful was its bomb and rocket load if you ask me. Carry either 2 500lb bombs or two 600lb bombs along with a rocket load of 8,6 in rockets. Very useful when strafing trains or bringing down an armor column.
__________________

Its better to have an
Army of deer being led by a lion,
rather an Army of Lions being led by a deer
...
P38 Pilot is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2005, 04:18 PM   #60
Konfused with a 'K'
 
cheddar cheese's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Turin, Italy
Posts: 20,412
Country:
Send a message via AIM to cheddar cheese Send a message via MSN to cheddar cheese
I believe the norm would probably be to carry 10 5in rockets, plus just one 1600lb bomb so that the other space can be used for a droptank on long range missions. If its short range though, shove a couple of 1600lb on
__________________

with my one last gaping breath id apologise for bleeding on your shirt...
cheddar cheese is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Reply



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:22 AM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.1.0
   

AVIATION TOP 100 - www.avitop.com Avitop.com


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86