 | P-38 with Merlin Engines? Any such animal?| Aviation Discuss P-38 with Merlin Engines? Any such animal? in the World War II - Aviation forums; Hi Flyboyj,
>The Merlin P-38 never happened because there were no guarantee it was really going to improve ... |
|
07-19-2008, 08:16 PM
|
#32 | | IP/Mech THE GREAT GAZOO
Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Colorado, USA
Posts: 13,588
Country:  | Just saw that - great info!
__________________ "IF ITS RED OR DUSTY, DON'T TOUCH IT"  | 
|  | |
07-21-2008, 01:37 PM
|
#33 | | Member
Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Riyadh
Posts: 40
Country: | Are there any documents that the Merlin was More reliable than the Allison?
I have read after action reports for the P-51A used for low missions over france where the commentator felt that an Allison could bring you home on ruined bearings but a merlin wouldn't. Also read that the packards were stronger than the merlins due to metalurgy.
Just because Allison sat on their hands instead of developing a two-speed super charger doesn't mean the engine isn't any good.
Example is the P-51J
"Ahh, now you've gone and done it!!" | |
| | |
07-21-2008, 01:41 PM
|
#34 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: St. Louis, Mo.
Posts: 217
| Quote:
Originally Posted by krieghund  Are there any documents that the Merlin was More reliable than the Allison?
I have read after action reports for the P-51A used for low missions over france where the commentator felt that an Allison could bring you home on ruined bearings but a merlin wouldn't. Also read that the packards were stronger than the merlins due to metalurgy.
Just because Allison sat on their hands instead of developing a two-speed super charger doesn't mean the engine isn't any good.
Example is the P-51J. | I always wondered this myself. It seems like from reading personal accounts from WWII, that the Merlins in P-51s had a high non-combat casualty rate. If this is true (which it may just be my conclusion), there may be other factors in play.. | |
| | |
07-21-2008, 01:48 PM
|
#35 | | IP/Mech THE GREAT GAZOO
Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Colorado, USA
Posts: 13,588
Country: | I had a neighbor who flew P-38s and P-51s in the ETO (some of our older members seen my posts on this, so this is for the sake of our newer members) told me he thought the P-38 made the better G/A aircraft, not only for the two engines but he thought the P-38 was built better than the P-51 and the Alisons could take more punishment.
__________________ "IF ITS RED OR DUSTY, DON'T TOUCH IT" | |
| | |
07-21-2008, 02:01 PM
|
#36 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 275
| Theres essentially no difference between the Rolls-Royce and Packard Merlins apart from the supercharger drive and carbs. Reports of differing reliability might not be wrong in themselves, but overall there was nothing between the two. Later models had a difference, with the RR models having more boost and more power but the Packard models with less boost and less power. Reliability improved throughout the war.
The early turbocharged V-1710s were not particularly reliable in Europe, having many many problems. These were to most extents cured with the P-38J in late 1943/44. Then at the end of the war sees the return of the supercharged V-1710 with abysmal reliability when mounted in the P-82. | |
| | |
07-21-2008, 09:33 PM
|
#37 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: South Carolina
Posts: 308
Country: | Don't forget the XP-49. Wasn't that a P-38 with Continental engines mounted? | |
| | |
07-21-2008, 11:29 PM
|
#38 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: oregon
Posts: 2,500
Country: | Quote:
Originally Posted by FLYBOYJ I had a neighbor who flew P-38s and P-51s in the ETO (some of our older members seen my posts on this, so this is for the sake of our newer members) told me he thought the P-38 made the better G/A aircraft, not only for the two engines but he thought the P-38 was built better than the P-51 and the Alisons could take more punishment. | Joe - there are lies, damn lies and statistics but my current studies show 2x losses of P-38s in strafing losses (all ground attack) to number of aircraft destroyed on the ground vs the Mustang.. I was amazed - and the 51 had about 20% more losses due to flak than P-47. I will say that the losses counted are all forms of strafing and flak and hitting trees etc to a/c destroyed and does not take into account trains, road traffic etc.
The 38 was also weak ( less tha 1/3 the Mustang and 1/2 the P-47) relative to 47 and 51 in air to air ratios.
8th AF FC numbers only | |
| | |
07-22-2008, 12:14 AM
|
#39 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 2,274
Country: | Do you know how pilot losses compare? (ie. taking into account if made it home with an a/c that had to be scrapped) | |
| | |
07-22-2008, 08:03 AM
|
#40 | | IP/Mech THE GREAT GAZOO
Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Colorado, USA
Posts: 13,588
Country: | Quote:
Originally Posted by drgondog Joe - there are lies, damn lies and statistics but my current studies show 2x losses of P-38s in strafing losses (all ground attack) to number of aircraft destroyed on the ground vs the Mustang.. I was amazed - and the 51 had about 20% more losses due to flak than P-47. I will say that the losses counted are all forms of strafing and flak and hitting trees etc to a/c destroyed and does not take into account trains, road traffic etc.
The 38 was also weak ( less tha 1/3 the Mustang and 1/2 the P-47) relative to 47 and 51 in air to air ratios.
8th AF FC numbers only | Interesting stuff Bill....
Mike Alba told me that many in his squadron didn't want to give up their P-38s. He said the losses mounted with the Mustang when they went down on the deck.
__________________ "IF ITS RED OR DUSTY, DON'T TOUCH IT" | |
| | | 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 05:49 PM. | | |
