Best Fighter

[Lightning Guy]

The P-47N was the only fighter than could seriously challenge the range of the P-38. Still, it was far too-late coming in the war to make much of an impact and probably shouldn't be compared to the P-51 and the P-38 as an escort fighter.

[plan_D]

It still saw service even if it was only in the PTO. That's a good way to knock out the competition, and the Mustang could get the bombers to Berlin and back so they could match the P-38.

I've got the P-38L ranged at 2,260 miles on maximum fuel. P-51D to dry tanks 2,080. P-47D on tanks 1,900 miles, P-47N on tanks 2,350 miles. These are all ferry ranges.

[Lightning Guy]

The 2,260 mile range is a common figure, however it is incorrect. On August 27th, 1942, Milo Burcham flew a P-38F for 2,907 miles over 13 and a half hours. Calculations revealed that if he had absolutely drained the tanks and jettisoned the external tanks when empty that could have been stretched to 3,167 miles. And that was a P-38F, the L model carried 124 gallons of additional fuel.

[the lancaster kicks ass]

but that's an extreme case, i'm sure they couldn't all do that...................

[plan_D]

How do they know he flew this far? Calculations of range are most of the time wrong but never 1000 miles off.

[Lightning Guy]

The flight was done over the cotinental US. Since he was flying over easily recognizable cities (and I assume tracked by radar) it was relatively easy to judge how far he traveled.

Why couldn't they all do that Lanc? He wasn't flying a specially modified plane and it even carried a full ammo load. Now not every pilot would be up to that strain, but the plane definitely was.

[cheddar cheese]

thats pretty amazing

[the lancaster kicks ass]

3,167 isn't a very impressive ferry range for a twin engined plane is it??

[cheddar cheese]

but like he said, this was a standard P-38F carrying full ammo load, it wasnt the recon version or anything.

[Lightning Guy]

3,000+ miles is an impressive ferry range for just about anything from the era especially a fighter. On a true very mission, now ammo would have been carried (saving upwards of 1,500lbs) and the fuel tanks would have been jetisoned once empty (cutting drag and thus increasing speed without increasing fuel consumption). The result is the ferry range would be a few hundred miles greater.

[plan_D]

What is this? Ammo would save up to 1,500 lbs, you mean firing off ammo. But you're not taking into account combat. So either it will have a full load of ammo or it will have been in combat using more fuel from manuvers and constant change in throttle, like a car uses more fuel if you are changing your acceleration all the time.

3,000 + isn't impressive for a twin-engined Recce plane.

[Lightning Guy]

I'm sorry, there was a typo in my last post. I had meant to note that on a true ferry mission NO ammo would have been carried. I wasn't refering to a combat mission. And why isn't 3,000+ miles impressive? The only recon plane I know of that could match that was the POST-war Mossies.

[plan_D]

Exactly another twin-engined plane. It's good, yes but it's not something to shout about if you're comparing it to a single-engined plane. The Spitfire PR. XI could achieve 2000 + miles, and that's single-engined.

[the lancaster kicks ass]

a few mossies were modified after VE day for use in the pacific, but they we a bit late, they could hit 3,500miles, giving tham a ferry range of 7,000+ miles.............

[Lightning Guy]

No Lanc. They didn't have a ferry range of 7,000 miles. When discussing the range of the P-38F it should be noted that we are talking about the range of a FIGHTER. Find me another fighter from WWII capable of making a 3,000 mile flight. And for comparison numbers, the ferry range of a B-17G was 3,400 miles. Now when a fighter can come within a few hundred miles of matching the range of a 4 engined bomber, that is something to shout about.