Comparing the P-51, P-38, P-47

[Daryl Hunt]

Here is a fun one. Compare those 3 fighters from WWII. Keep in mind that all 3 were highly successful and used in all fronts. Also keep in mind that a heavy fighter had many roles it had to do like fighter intercept, bomber escort, strafing, recon and more.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

I chose the P-38 due to it being the most versatile of the 3.

The P-51 is slightly better at high altitudes as a pure fighter, second comes the P-38 as long as the altitude is below 20,000 feet. Below 20,000 feet, the P-38 rarely gets into the compression ability problem. Above that, it can get a newbie pilot killed fast in a dive. But above 25K, the P-47 is far superior to the other 3.

As for claiming the P-51 was the "Only" long ranged fighter, the P-38J+ had a much longer range. The first fighters above Berlin were P-38G models. They were supposed to escort bombers but the bombers were scrubbed. Since the P-38s were already over Germany, they proceeded to Berlin and did strafing runs. This was mid 1943.

If you are doing Recon, the P-38 wins hands down. It's counter rotating props made it very, very smooth in comparison (the P-47 was the rough one). It meant the pictures could be taken at a higher altitude and be clearer due to the lack of motion on the camera. Even so, there was a 75% loss on the P-38 recon birds since they were not armed and had to fly at specific altitudes without changing their altitude or direction while filming. And they were 2000 lbs lighter with all the armor removed. They relied on speed but still.....

As for strafing, the P-47 barely edges out the P-38. The P-47 packed 8 50 cals and could take severe damage from the the ground forces. Meanwhile, the P-38 carried 4 50 cals and was the only WWII Usaf fighter to carry a cannon. The P-47 used convergent fire meaning the bullet paths crossed at about 250 yards. But if you are operating at less than that in ground attack, it doesn't mean a thing. The P-38 had straight trajectories meaning all guns were aimed directly forward including the cannon. At longer Ranges the P-38 was superior but a closer range (due to the rugged construction) the P-47 gets the nod. The P-51 was also used for ground attack but it wasn't nearly as effective as the other 2 due it only having 6 50 cals and it's inability to absorb damage.

Now, let's go onto being able to absorb punishment and still get home. The King is the P-47 with it's radial engine and heavy armor hands down. Hitting his engine may reduce his power but he can be flinging oil with a couple of jug blown off and still get home. The P-38 has two engines. The only way to get him not to come home due to engines is to take out both since he is still very flight worthy on only one (find a cloud bank and boogie home). The worst is the P-51 since he has only one engine. He can be taken out just by hitting his radiator. To give you an idea, more P-51s were lost due to this than either the P-38 or the P-47 combined.

You also have to look at the period of the War. Until the P-47 arrived in mass in early 1943, the only long ranged fighter was the P-38. In 1942, the P-38 faced experienced Luftaffe Pilots at a 11-1 rate. And they tried to use the P-38 by having him fly with the bombers. Here the P-38 is flying in a zig zag formation with the bombers at 200 kts when they are jumped by the 109 doing a dive zoom at 320 kts. The P-38 has to spool up to get up to speed. During that time, bombers are lost and so are the lumbering P-38s. Same goes for the P-47 flying the same mission. Early 1944, that doctrine was changed and allowed the fighters to fly ahead of the bombers and disrupt Luftwaffen Fighters. Early 1944 was when the bulk of the P-51s came into service. And you have to know that the flight training of a P-38 pilot was extremely poor until 1944. By the time the P-51B/C showed up, the heavy lifting was already done and the Luftwaffen was running low on experienced pilots and had a shortage of fuel. Not having the P-51 at all would have changed nothing except a lot of P-38 and P-47 pilots lives.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Someone chose the P-51 but didn't say why?

 

[westwall]

I chose the P-38 due to it being the most versatile of the 3.

The P-51 is slightly better at high altitudes as a pure fighter, second comes the P-38 as long as the altitude is below 20,000 feet. Below 20,000 feet, the P-38 rarely gets into the compression ability problem. Above that, it can get a newbie pilot killed fast in a dive. But above 25K, the P-47 is far superior to the other 3.

As for claiming the P-51 was the "Only" long ranged fighter, the P-38J+ had a much longer range. The first fighters above Berlin were P-38G models. They were supposed to escort bombers but the bombers were scrubbed. Since the P-38s were already over Germany, they proceeded to Berlin and did strafing runs. This was mid 1943.

If you are doing Recon, the P-38 wins hands down. It's counter rotating props made it very, very smooth in comparison (the P-47 was the rough one). It meant the pictures could be taken at a higher altitude and be clearer due to the lack of motion on the camera. Even so, there was a 75% loss on the P-38 recon birds since they were not armed and had to fly at specific altitudes without changing their altitude or direction while filming. And they were 2000 lbs lighter with all the armor removed. They relied on speed but still.....

As for strafing, the P-47 barely edges out the P-38. The P-47 packed 8 50 cals and could take severe damage from the the ground forces. Meanwhile, the P-38 carried 4 50 cals and was the only WWII Usaf fighter to carry a cannon. The P-47 used convergent fire meaning the bullet paths crossed at about 250 yards. But if you are operating at less than that in ground attack, it doesn't mean a thing. The P-38 had straight trajectories meaning all guns were aimed directly forward including the cannon. At longer Ranges the P-38 was superior but a closer range (due to the rugged construction) the P-47 gets the nod. The P-51 was also used for ground attack but it wasn't nearly as effective as the other 2 due it only having 6 50 cals and it's inability to absorb damage.

Now, let's go onto being able to absorb punishment and still get home. The King is the P-47 with it's radial engine and heavy armor hands down. Hitting his engine may reduce his power but he can be flinging oil with a couple of jug blown off and still get home. The P-38 has two engines. The only way to get him not to come home due to engines is to take out both since he is still very flight worthy on only one (find a cloud bank and boogie home). The worst is the P-51 since he has only one engine. He can be taken out just by hitting his radiator. To give you an idea, more P-51s were lost due to this than either the P-38 or the P-47 combined.

You also have to look at the period of the War. Until the P-47 arrived in mass in early 1943, the only long ranged fighter was the P-38. In 1942, the P-38 faced experienced Luftaffe Pilots at a 11-1 rate. And they tried to use the P-38 by having him fly with the bombers. Here the P-38 is flying in a zig zag formation with the bombers at 200 kts when they are jumped by the 109 doing a dive zoom at 320 kts. The P-38 has to spool up to get up to speed. During that time, bombers are lost and so are the lumbering P-38s. Same goes for the P-47 flying the same mission. Early 1944, that doctrine was changed and allowed the fighters to fly ahead of the bombers and disrupt Luftwaffen Fighters. Early 1944 was when the bulk of the P-51s came into service. And you have to know that the flight training of a P-38 pilot was extremely poor until 1944. By the time the P-51B/C showed up, the heavy lifting was already done and the Luftwaffen was running low on experienced pilots and had a shortage of fuel. Not having the P-51 at all would have changed nothing except a lot of P-38 and P-47 pilots lives.

The P-38 was not the only US fighter to mount a cannon. The P-39 Aircobra mounted a 37mm cannon firing through the hub. The 51 and the 47 both used harmonizing on their guns to generate a cone of fire, and that was adjustable based on the pilots preference. Some wanted the cone closer, some farther. The P-38 had constant problems with the Allison engines, the intercoolers and turbos were constantly breaking due to their inability to handle the freezing at higher altitudes they were forced to fly in Europe, and maintenance was always a problem. The P-38 was probably the best overall fighter the US fielded in WWII, but it was incredibly complex so there were few pilots who were able to wring the maximum performance from it.

The P-47 was easily the most robust fighter we had, also probably the first to break the sound barrier while in a dive as the thing weighed a TON. Well several tons! It could take enormous punishment thanks to its air cooled radial engine, and in the fighter bomber role, probably had no competitor.

The '51 was on the other hand, a relatively benign aircraft. Forgiving in all areas save high bank, at low air speed,, which could invoke a tip stall which almost always resulted in an inverted flat spin which was unrecoverable. In the hands of competent pilots it made them better, and the Merlin was arguably the finest engine of the era, easy to maintain compared to the Allison, with useful firepower, and incredibly long legs. For mass combat the '51 was the superior bird for the majority of the pilots flying it.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

I chose the P-38 due to it being the most versatile of the 3.

The P-51 is slightly better at high altitudes as a pure fighter, second comes the P-38 as long as the altitude is below 20,000 feet. Below 20,000 feet, the P-38 rarely gets into the compression ability problem. Above that, it can get a newbie pilot killed fast in a dive. But above 25K, the P-47 is far superior to the other 3.

As for claiming the P-51 was the "Only" long ranged fighter, the P-38J+ had a much longer range. The first fighters above Berlin were P-38G models. They were supposed to escort bombers but the bombers were scrubbed. Since the P-38s were already over Germany, they proceeded to Berlin and did strafing runs. This was mid 1943.

If you are doing Recon, the P-38 wins hands down. It's counter rotating props made it very, very smooth in comparison (the P-47 was the rough one). It meant the pictures could be taken at a higher altitude and be clearer due to the lack of motion on the camera. Even so, there was a 75% loss on the P-38 recon birds since they were not armed and had to fly at specific altitudes without changing their altitude or direction while filming. And they were 2000 lbs lighter with all the armor removed. They relied on speed but still.....

As for strafing, the P-47 barely edges out the P-38. The P-47 packed 8 50 cals and could take severe damage from the the ground forces. Meanwhile, the P-38 carried 4 50 cals and was the only WWII Usaf fighter to carry a cannon. The P-47 used convergent fire meaning the bullet paths crossed at about 250 yards. But if you are operating at less than that in ground attack, it doesn't mean a thing. The P-38 had straight trajectories meaning all guns were aimed directly forward including the cannon. At longer Ranges the P-38 was superior but a closer range (due to the rugged construction) the P-47 gets the nod. The P-51 was also used for ground attack but it wasn't nearly as effective as the other 2 due it only having 6 50 cals and it's inability to absorb damage.

Now, let's go onto being able to absorb punishment and still get home. The King is the P-47 with it's radial engine and heavy armor hands down. Hitting his engine may reduce his power but he can be flinging oil with a couple of jug blown off and still get home. The P-38 has two engines. The only way to get him not to come home due to engines is to take out both since he is still very flight worthy on only one (find a cloud bank and boogie home). The worst is the P-51 since he has only one engine. He can be taken out just by hitting his radiator. To give you an idea, more P-51s were lost due to this than either the P-38 or the P-47 combined.

You also have to look at the period of the War. Until the P-47 arrived in mass in early 1943, the only long ranged fighter was the P-38. In 1942, the P-38 faced experienced Luftaffe Pilots at a 11-1 rate. And they tried to use the P-38 by having him fly with the bombers. Here the P-38 is flying in a zig zag formation with the bombers at 200 kts when they are jumped by the 109 doing a dive zoom at 320 kts. The P-38 has to spool up to get up to speed. During that time, bombers are lost and so are the lumbering P-38s. Same goes for the P-47 flying the same mission. Early 1944, that doctrine was changed and allowed the fighters to fly ahead of the bombers and disrupt Luftwaffen Fighters. Early 1944 was when the bulk of the P-51s came into service. And you have to know that the flight training of a P-38 pilot was extremely poor until 1944. By the time the P-51B/C showed up, the heavy lifting was already done and the Luftwaffen was running low on experienced pilots and had a shortage of fuel. Not having the P-51 at all would have changed nothing except a lot of P-38 and P-47 pilots lives.

The P-38 was not the only US fighter to mount a cannon. The P-39 Aircobra mounted a 37mm cannon firing through the hub. The 51 and the 47 both used harmonizing on their guns to generate a cone of fire, and that was adjustable based on the pilots preference. Some wanted the cone closer, some farther. The P-38 had constant problems with the Allison engines, the intercoolers and turbos were constantly breaking due to their inability to handle the freezing at higher altitudes they were forced to fly in Europe, and maintenance was always a problem. The P-38 was probably the best overall fighter the US fielded in WWII, but it was incredibly complex so there were few pilots who were able to wring the maximum performance from it.

The P-47 was easily the most robust fighter we had, also probably the first to break the sound barrier while in a dive as the thing weighed a TON. Well several tons! It could take enormous punishment thanks to its air cooled radial engine, and in the fighter bomber role, probably had no competitor.

The '51 was on the other hand, a relatively benign aircraft. Forgiving in all areas save high bank, at low air speed,, which could invoke a tip stall which almost always resulted in an inverted flat spin which was unrecoverable. In the hands of competent pilots it made them better, and the Merlin was arguably the finest engine of the era, easy to maintain compared to the Allison, with useful firepower, and incredibly long legs. For mass combat the '51 was the superior bird for the majority of the pilots flying it.

Let's look at the ETO. The P-38 required better fuel than the fuel that the Brits offered. Until 1944, the only fuel was 100 Octane. The P-38 had to use an octane booster that would seperate from the gas at low temperatures. This caused back firing which were hell on the turbochargers. There were two things fixed in 1944. First was the US started to get the 115(145) fuel so the octane booster was not needed. This also affected the P-47 as well. Also, the new series 33 turbocharger was introduced. With the introduction of the P-38LO-25, the 38 was just as good as every other front line heavy fighter for Air to Air regardless of altitude.

As for the 37mm Cannon, how about we say that the P-38 (20mm) was the only cannon in the US inventory that actually worked. They tried the 37mm on the 38 but it jammed all the time. It also jammed in the 39 in hard turns. Having a 37mm is like adding extra weight just for the hell of it and no other reason.

When the 1425 (1600 in military) was put into the J models of the 38, the engine problems went away along with running the hotter fuel. To say the P-38 didn't like cold weather, it was the primary fighter out of Alaska and didn't experience those problems even with the lower power allison engines. It got decent fuel so the Turbochargers were less prone to go bang. But it wasn't until the J model that the fridged cockpit was addressed by introducing heated flight suits. Of course, this didn't help that the 38s cockpit was hotter than hell in the Pacific. Just wear your tidy whities, jump boots and a smile got around that.

The problems with the coolers on the early 38s is that it was only good on the 1000 hp Allisons. The initial engine was the 1125 hp engine and you had to use the throttle stops to keep you from running it up. Most Pilots had the blocks removed as they thought they new better. They were inexperienced and didn't know better. The leading edge radiators were used from the E through the H model. The J went to the cowling version and it could use the 1425 hp with no problems for cooling of the intercooler and engine temp and oil. But the initial J lost about 25 mph in the process as the cowl cooler was not as streamlined as the leading edge cooler. For the first time, though, the 38 could use all it's HP. There were other fixes as well. By late 1943, the J model was out and by late 43 it was out in numbers.

BTW, the 38 did have a problem of compression but the way to get out of it was chop the power on ALL models until the J-25 version and L. Inexperienced pilots would try and handle it like a single engine by adding power. Had the chopped power and let the bird fly out of it, not a single one of the compression deaths would have occurred. A Pilot only made that mistake once.

Few pilots? In the beginning of the war, pilots were taken from single seaters and dumped into the 38 where they had NO twin engine experience at all. Really poor training. They would come off a P-39 training bird (and others) directly into combat with the 38. It became a "Get Good or get Dead" situation. Most got good fast. Once they learned to use the throttles in a turn, the 38 could turn with anything. The addition of the fowler flaps meant that an experienced pilot could out turn even a Zero. The Military finally owned up to the poor training problem in 43 and the 38 started to really run the numbers up. The P-38 had more air to air kills than the P-47 and the P-51 by the end of the war. That brand new trainer with the piggy back seat was worth it's weight in gold.

The P-47 would be rated #2 in almost all areas except for ground attack. One battle the P-47s hit a German Armor division so hard that the enemy wanted to surrender to the P-47s. You can't surrender to any aircraft so they just pounded even harder. The same thing happened in DS1 when a flight of Buffs hit an Iraqi Armor Division. Those folks were trying to surrender to anyone not Iraqi wearing a green suit. They even tried to surrender to the Press. They got as far away from their armor as they could. Yes, the P-47 wins for ground attack.

Now, the P-51. It was less than half the cost of the P-38 and 2/3rds cost of the P-47. This is NOT a reason for it to be voted #1. The only thing it had was is that it was 2% better than the 190 in a dog fight. I will admit it was easier to fly. The more you take away from the pilot to do the better they will perform. But that only applies in the 51s case in dog fights. And that is only one part of being a fighter.

 

[MaryL]

Here is a fun one. Compare those 3 fighters from WWII. Keep in mind that all 3 were highly successful and used in all fronts. Also keep in mind that a heavy fighter had many roles it had to do like fighter intercept, bomber escort, strafing, recon and more.

Sorry, I am a big aviation enthusiast (blind as a bat so I couldn't get a pilot's licence.) I met old man Jeppesen, used to work as a cartographer at Jep years ago. You never mention my alltime favorite WW2 fighter, the Super Marine Spitfire. A sensuous air-frame, and the unique sound of the Rolls Royce power plant was rich and just wrapped it self around you like a lover. Spit mark V, great plane.

 

[IsaacNewton]

Fighter to fighter the P-51. The F6F Hellcat which isn't mentioned is neck and neck with the P-51. The Hellcat had a kill ratio of 19-1 in WW2, best of any fighter. When it showed up in the Pacific in 1943 the Japanese pilots quickly figured out the Hellcat was now king of the hill where the Jap Zero had dominated the feckless F4F Wildcat.

The P-38 was great for the Pacific war as it afforded better ability to return and long legs for open stretches of ocean. It was very fast and could carry a cannon as noted, giving it great punch. If I were flying in the Pacific I'd want the P-38.

The P-47 was a ground pounder though it faired pretty well in dogfights as well. But it was huge and very heavy and its strength was not dogfighting. It could shred ground targets though. US fighters were almost all heavy well armored aircraft designed to allow the pilot a good chance to survive with things like self-sealing fuel tanks.

The Zero was designed to be very light and maneuverable and gave little notice to the pilot's life. The Zero was in fact a paper kite. Hit it at the wing root and a wing would snap off or put an incendiary round into a fuel tank and it would catch fire or explode.

Each US fighter had its roll and each filled its niche. Even the P-40 played its role early on in the war. Using boom and zoom tactics against the Japanese in India and Thailand the Flying Tigers shot down 300 Japanese planes with the loss of about 20.

 

[MaryL]

Of all American planes. the P-51 had an overall faster climb rate, better turn radius and not sure about stalls, I am not sure how it compared to a BF 109 or FW 190. The North American P 51 used a repackaged Rolls Royce engine, and without that, that Allison powered air-frame would have been no better than a sexier P 40.

 

[westwall]

I chose the P-38 due to it being the most versatile of the 3.

The P-51 is slightly better at high altitudes as a pure fighter, second comes the P-38 as long as the altitude is below 20,000 feet. Below 20,000 feet, the P-38 rarely gets into the compression ability problem. Above that, it can get a newbie pilot killed fast in a dive. But above 25K, the P-47 is far superior to the other 3.

As for claiming the P-51 was the "Only" long ranged fighter, the P-38J+ had a much longer range. The first fighters above Berlin were P-38G models. They were supposed to escort bombers but the bombers were scrubbed. Since the P-38s were already over Germany, they proceeded to Berlin and did strafing runs. This was mid 1943.

If you are doing Recon, the P-38 wins hands down. It's counter rotating props made it very, very smooth in comparison (the P-47 was the rough one). It meant the pictures could be taken at a higher altitude and be clearer due to the lack of motion on the camera. Even so, there was a 75% loss on the P-38 recon birds since they were not armed and had to fly at specific altitudes without changing their altitude or direction while filming. And they were 2000 lbs lighter with all the armor removed. They relied on speed but still.....

As for strafing, the P-47 barely edges out the P-38. The P-47 packed 8 50 cals and could take severe damage from the the ground forces. Meanwhile, the P-38 carried 4 50 cals and was the only WWII Usaf fighter to carry a cannon. The P-47 used convergent fire meaning the bullet paths crossed at about 250 yards. But if you are operating at less than that in ground attack, it doesn't mean a thing. The P-38 had straight trajectories meaning all guns were aimed directly forward including the cannon. At longer Ranges the P-38 was superior but a closer range (due to the rugged construction) the P-47 gets the nod. The P-51 was also used for ground attack but it wasn't nearly as effective as the other 2 due it only having 6 50 cals and it's inability to absorb damage.

Now, let's go onto being able to absorb punishment and still get home. The King is the P-47 with it's radial engine and heavy armor hands down. Hitting his engine may reduce his power but he can be flinging oil with a couple of jug blown off and still get home. The P-38 has two engines. The only way to get him not to come home due to engines is to take out both since he is still very flight worthy on only one (find a cloud bank and boogie home). The worst is the P-51 since he has only one engine. He can be taken out just by hitting his radiator. To give you an idea, more P-51s were lost due to this than either the P-38 or the P-47 combined.

You also have to look at the period of the War. Until the P-47 arrived in mass in early 1943, the only long ranged fighter was the P-38. In 1942, the P-38 faced experienced Luftaffe Pilots at a 11-1 rate. And they tried to use the P-38 by having him fly with the bombers. Here the P-38 is flying in a zig zag formation with the bombers at 200 kts when they are jumped by the 109 doing a dive zoom at 320 kts. The P-38 has to spool up to get up to speed. During that time, bombers are lost and so are the lumbering P-38s. Same goes for the P-47 flying the same mission. Early 1944, that doctrine was changed and allowed the fighters to fly ahead of the bombers and disrupt Luftwaffen Fighters. Early 1944 was when the bulk of the P-51s came into service. And you have to know that the flight training of a P-38 pilot was extremely poor until 1944. By the time the P-51B/C showed up, the heavy lifting was already done and the Luftwaffen was running low on experienced pilots and had a shortage of fuel. Not having the P-51 at all would have changed nothing except a lot of P-38 and P-47 pilots lives.

The P-38 was not the only US fighter to mount a cannon. The P-39 Aircobra mounted a 37mm cannon firing through the hub. The 51 and the 47 both used harmonizing on their guns to generate a cone of fire, and that was adjustable based on the pilots preference. Some wanted the cone closer, some farther. The P-38 had constant problems with the Allison engines, the intercoolers and turbos were constantly breaking due to their inability to handle the freezing at higher altitudes they were forced to fly in Europe, and maintenance was always a problem. The P-38 was probably the best overall fighter the US fielded in WWII, but it was incredibly complex so there were few pilots who were able to wring the maximum performance from it.

The P-47 was easily the most robust fighter we had, also probably the first to break the sound barrier while in a dive as the thing weighed a TON. Well several tons! It could take enormous punishment thanks to its air cooled radial engine, and in the fighter bomber role, probably had no competitor.

The '51 was on the other hand, a relatively benign aircraft. Forgiving in all areas save high bank, at low air speed,, which could invoke a tip stall which almost always resulted in an inverted flat spin which was unrecoverable. In the hands of competent pilots it made them better, and the Merlin was arguably the finest engine of the era, easy to maintain compared to the Allison, with useful firepower, and incredibly long legs. For mass combat the '51 was the superior bird for the majority of the pilots flying it.

Let's look at the ETO. The P-38 required better fuel than the fuel that the Brits offered. Until 1944, the only fuel was 100 Octane. The P-38 had to use an octane booster that would seperate from the gas at low temperatures. This caused back firing which were hell on the turbochargers. There were two things fixed in 1944. First was the US started to get the 115(145) fuel so the octane booster was not needed. This also affected the P-47 as well. Also, the new series 33 turbocharger was introduced. With the introduction of the P-38LO-25, the 38 was just as good as every other front line heavy fighter for Air to Air regardless of altitude.

As for the 37mm Cannon, how about we say that the P-38 (20mm) was the only cannon in the US inventory that actually worked. They tried the 37mm on the 38 but it jammed all the time. It also jammed in the 39 in hard turns. Having a 37mm is like adding extra weight just for the hell of it and no other reason.

When the 1425 (1600 in military) was put into the J models of the 38, the engine problems went away along with running the hotter fuel. To say the P-38 didn't like cold weather, it was the primary fighter out of Alaska and didn't experience those problems even with the lower power allison engines. It got decent fuel so the Turbochargers were less prone to go bang. But it wasn't until the J model that the fridged cockpit was addressed by introducing heated flight suits. Of course, this didn't help that the 38s cockpit was hotter than hell in the Pacific. Just wear your tidy whities, jump boots and a smile got around that.

The problems with the coolers on the early 38s is that it was only good on the 1000 hp Allisons. The initial engine was the 1125 hp engine and you had to use the throttle stops to keep you from running it up. Most Pilots had the blocks removed as they thought they new better. They were inexperienced and didn't know better. The leading edge radiators were used from the E through the H model. The J went to the cowling version and it could use the 1425 hp with no problems for cooling of the intercooler and engine temp and oil. But the initial J lost about 25 mph in the process as the cowl cooler was not as streamlined as the leading edge cooler. For the first time, though, the 38 could use all it's HP. There were other fixes as well. By late 1943, the J model was out and by late 43 it was out in numbers.

BTW, the 38 did have a problem of compression but the way to get out of it was chop the power on ALL models until the J-25 version and L. Inexperienced pilots would try and handle it like a single engine by adding power. Had the chopped power and let the bird fly out of it, not a single one of the compression deaths would have occurred. A Pilot only made that mistake once.

Few pilots? In the beginning of the war, pilots were taken from single seaters and dumped into the 38 where they had NO twin engine experience at all. Really poor training. They would come off a P-39 training bird (and others) directly into combat with the 38. It became a "Get Good or get Dead" situation. Most got good fast. Once they learned to use the throttles in a turn, the 38 could turn with anything. The addition of the fowler flaps meant that an experienced pilot could out turn even a Zero. The Military finally owned up to the poor training problem in 43 and the 38 started to really run the numbers up. The P-38 had more air to air kills than the P-47 and the P-51 by the end of the war. That brand new trainer with the piggy back seat was worth it's weight in gold.

The P-47 would be rated #2 in almost all areas except for ground attack. One battle the P-47s hit a German Armor division so hard that the enemy wanted to surrender to the P-47s. You can't surrender to any aircraft so they just pounded even harder. The same thing happened in DS1 when a flight of Buffs hit an Iraqi Armor Division. Those folks were trying to surrender to anyone not Iraqi wearing a green suit. They even tried to surrender to the Press. They got as far away from their armor as they could. Yes, the P-47 wins for ground attack.

Now, the P-51. It was less than half the cost of the P-38 and 2/3rds cost of the P-47. This is NOT a reason for it to be voted #1. The only thing it had was is that it was 2% better than the 190 in a dog fight. I will admit it was easier to fly. The more you take away from the pilot to do the better they will perform. But that only applies in the 51s case in dog fights. And that is only one part of being a fighter.

A friend of mine flew P-38's in Alaska and he loved it. His aircraft was named Gizmo, and after a fellow pilot wiped out his first plane he named the second Gizmo II. According to him they flew 10,000 feet or below 99% of the time. So the air temp was fairly high. It certainly wasn't the -30 you get at 30,000 feet. The fuel was certainly an issue, but that just shows the innate superiority of the Merlin.

Yes, the 37mm would jam in a hard turn, but it worked great for the Soviets who LOVED the P-39, and used it to good effect.

Yes, few pilots were able to get the most from the aircraft. It WAS an incredibly complex aircraft to fly. The pilots who could get the maximum from it did very well, and were pretty much unbeatable in a fair fight.

The '51 had almost no vices. It made a average pilot a good pilot, and a good pilot an excellent one. I agree that the P-38 was the better fighter, but the P-51 was the better WARPLANE.

 

[westwall]

Here is a fun one. Compare those 3 fighters from WWII. Keep in mind that all 3 were highly successful and used in all fronts. Also keep in mind that a heavy fighter had many roles it had to do like fighter intercept, bomber escort, strafing, recon and more.

Sorry, I am a big aviation enthusiast (blind as a bat so I couldn't get a pilot's licence.) I met old man Jeppesen, used to work as a cartographer at Jep years ago. You never mention my alltime favorite WW2 fighter, the Super Marine Spitfire. A sensuous air-frame, and the unique sound of the Rolls Royce power plant was rich and just wrapped it self around you like a lover. Spit mark V, great plane.

Yes, I have a soft spot for the Spit too! Though I probably favor the IX over the V, as it could take on the Focke Wulf on an even footing. The V was definitely a sexier looking airplane though, I have to give you that one!

 

[Sunni Man]

Because the P-38's weapons were mounted in the nose of the aircraft and did not require a cone of fire adjustment for each pilot's personal optimal aim point.

Enemy pilots quickly learned that you don't get into a head on fight with a Lightning. .....

 

[MaryL]

I chose the P-38 due to it being the most versatile of the 3.

The P-51 is slightly better at high altitudes as a pure fighter, second comes the P-38 as long as the altitude is below 20,000 feet. Below 20,000 feet, the P-38 rarely gets into the compression ability problem. Above that, it can get a newbie pilot killed fast in a dive. But above 25K, the P-47 is far superior to the other 3.

As for claiming the P-51 was the "Only" long ranged fighter, the P-38J+ had a much longer range. The first fighters above Berlin were P-38G models. They were supposed to escort bombers but the bombers were scrubbed. Since the P-38s were already over Germany, they proceeded to Berlin and did strafing runs. This was mid 1943.

If you are doing Recon, the P-38 wins hands down. It's counter rotating props made it very, very smooth in comparison (the P-47 was the rough one). It meant the pictures could be taken at a higher altitude and be clearer due to the lack of motion on the camera. Even so, there was a 75% loss on the P-38 recon birds since they were not armed and had to fly at specific altitudes without changing their altitude or direction while filming. And they were 2000 lbs lighter with all the armor removed. They relied on speed but still.....

As for strafing, the P-47 barely edges out the P-38. The P-47 packed 8 50 cals and could take severe damage from the the ground forces. Meanwhile, the P-38 carried 4 50 cals and was the only WWII Usaf fighter to carry a cannon. The P-47 used convergent fire meaning the bullet paths crossed at about 250 yards. But if you are operating at less than that in ground attack, it doesn't mean a thing. The P-38 had straight trajectories meaning all guns were aimed directly forward including the cannon. At longer Ranges the P-38 was superior but a closer range (due to the rugged construction) the P-47 gets the nod. The P-51 was also used for ground attack but it wasn't nearly as effective as the other 2 due it only having 6 50 cals and it's inability to absorb damage.

Now, let's go onto being able to absorb punishment and still get home. The King is the P-47 with it's radial engine and heavy armor hands down. Hitting his engine may reduce his power but he can be flinging oil with a couple of jug blown off and still get home. The P-38 has two engines. The only way to get him not to come home due to engines is to take out both since he is still very flight worthy on only one (find a cloud bank and boogie home). The worst is the P-51 since he has only one engine. He can be taken out just by hitting his radiator. To give you an idea, more P-51s were lost due to this than either the P-38 or the P-47 combined.

You also have to look at the period of the War. Until the P-47 arrived in mass in early 1943, the only long ranged fighter was the P-38. In 1942, the P-38 faced experienced Luftaffe Pilots at a 11-1 rate. And they tried to use the P-38 by having him fly with the bombers. Here the P-38 is flying in a zig zag formation with the bombers at 200 kts when they are jumped by the 109 doing a dive zoom at 320 kts. The P-38 has to spool up to get up to speed. During that time, bombers are lost and so are the lumbering P-38s. Same goes for the P-47 flying the same mission. Early 1944, that doctrine was changed and allowed the fighters to fly ahead of the bombers and disrupt Luftwaffen Fighters. Early 1944 was when the bulk of the P-51s came into service. And you have to know that the flight training of a P-38 pilot was extremely poor until 1944. By the time the P-51B/C showed up, the heavy lifting was already done and the Luftwaffen was running low on experienced pilots and had a shortage of fuel. Not having the P-51 at all would have changed nothing except a lot of P-38 and P-47 pilots lives.

The P-38 was not the only US fighter to mount a cannon. The P-39 Aircobra mounted a 37mm cannon firing through the hub. The 51 and the 47 both used harmonizing on their guns to generate a cone of fire, and that was adjustable based on the pilots preference. Some wanted the cone closer, some farther. The P-38 had constant problems with the Allison engines, the intercoolers and turbos were constantly breaking due to their inability to handle the freezing at higher altitudes they were forced to fly in Europe, and maintenance was always a problem. The P-38 was probably the best overall fighter the US fielded in WWII, but it was incredibly complex so there were few pilots who were able to wring the maximum performance from it.

The P-47 was easily the most robust fighter we had, also probably the first to break the sound barrier while in a dive as the thing weighed a TON. Well several tons! It could take enormous punishment thanks to its air cooled radial engine, and in the fighter bomber role, probably had no competitor.

The '51 was on the other hand, a relatively benign aircraft. Forgiving in all areas save high bank, at low air speed,, which could invoke a tip stall which almost always resulted in an inverted flat spin which was unrecoverable. In the hands of competent pilots it made them better, and the Merlin was arguably the finest engine of the era, easy to maintain compared to the Allison, with useful firepower, and incredibly long legs. For mass combat the '51 was the superior bird for the majority of the pilots flying it.

Let's look at the ETO. The P-38 required better fuel than the fuel that the Brits offered. Until 1944, the only fuel was 100 Octane. The P-38 had to use an octane booster that would seperate from the gas at low temperatures. This caused back firing which were hell on the turbochargers. There were two things fixed in 1944. First was the US started to get the 115(145) fuel so the octane booster was not needed. This also affected the P-47 as well. Also, the new series 33 turbocharger was introduced. With the introduction of the P-38LO-25, the 38 was just as good as every other front line heavy fighter for Air to Air regardless of altitude.

As for the 37mm Cannon, how about we say that the P-38 (20mm) was the only cannon in the US inventory that actually worked. They tried the 37mm on the 38 but it jammed all the time. It also jammed in the 39 in hard turns. Having a 37mm is like adding extra weight just for the hell of it and no other reason.

When the 1425 (1600 in military) was put into the J models of the 38, the engine problems went away along with running the hotter fuel. To say the P-38 didn't like cold weather, it was the primary fighter out of Alaska and didn't experience those problems even with the lower power allison engines. It got decent fuel so the Turbochargers were less prone to go bang. But it wasn't until the J model that the fridged cockpit was addressed by introducing heated flight suits. Of course, this didn't help that the 38s cockpit was hotter than hell in the Pacific. Just wear your tidy whities, jump boots and a smile got around that.

The problems with the coolers on the early 38s is that it was only good on the 1000 hp Allisons. The initial engine was the 1125 hp engine and you had to use the throttle stops to keep you from running it up. Most Pilots had the blocks removed as they thought they new better. They were inexperienced and didn't know better. The leading edge radiators were used from the E through the H model. The J went to the cowling version and it could use the 1425 hp with no problems for cooling of the intercooler and engine temp and oil. But the initial J lost about 25 mph in the process as the cowl cooler was not as streamlined as the leading edge cooler. For the first time, though, the 38 could use all it's HP. There were other fixes as well. By late 1943, the J model was out and by late 43 it was out in numbers.

BTW, the 38 did have a problem of compression but the way to get out of it was chop the power on ALL models until the J-25 version and L. Inexperienced pilots would try and handle it like a single engine by adding power. Had the chopped power and let the bird fly out of it, not a single one of the compression deaths would have occurred. A Pilot only made that mistake once.

Few pilots? In the beginning of the war, pilots were taken from single seaters and dumped into the 38 where they had NO twin engine experience at all. Really poor training. They would come off a P-39 training bird (and others) directly into combat with the 38. It became a "Get Good or get Dead" situation. Most got good fast. Once they learned to use the throttles in a turn, the 38 could turn with anything. The addition of the fowler flaps meant that an experienced pilot could out turn even a Zero. The Military finally owned up to the poor training problem in 43 and the 38 started to really run the numbers up. The P-38 had more air to air kills than the P-47 and the P-51 by the end of the war. That brand new trainer with the piggy back seat was worth it's weight in gold.

The P-47 would be rated #2 in almost all areas except for ground attack. One battle the P-47s hit a German Armor division so hard that the enemy wanted to surrender to the P-47s. You can't surrender to any aircraft so they just pounded even harder. The same thing happened in DS1 when a flight of Buffs hit an Iraqi Armor Division. Those folks were trying to surrender to anyone not Iraqi wearing a green suit. They even tried to surrender to the Press. They got as far away from their armor as they could. Yes, the P-47 wins for ground attack.

Now, the P-51. It was less than half the cost of the P-38 and 2/3rds cost of the P-47. This is NOT a reason for it to be voted #1. The only thing it had was is that it was 2% better than the 190 in a dog fight. I will admit it was easier to fly. The more you take away from the pilot to do the better they will perform. But that only applies in the 51s case in dog fights. And that is only one part of being a fighter.

A friend of mine flew P-38's in Alaska and he loved it. His aircraft was named Gizmo, and after a fellow pilot wiped out his first plane he named the second Gizmo II. According to him they flew 10,000 feet or below 99% of the time. So the air temp was fairly high. It certainly wasn't the -30 you get at 30,000 feet. The fuel was certainly an issue, but that just shows the innate superiority of the Merlin.

Yes, the 37mm would jam in a hard turn, but it worked great for the Soviets who LOVED the P-39, and used it to good effect.

Yes, few pilots were able to get the most from the aircraft. It WAS an incredibly complex aircraft to fly. The pilots who could get the maximum from it did very well, and were pretty much unbeatable in a fair fight.

The '51 had almost no vices. It made a average pilot a good pilot, and a good pilot an excellent one. I agree that the P-38 was the better fighter, but the P-51 was the better WARPLANE.

My dad was on the Alaskan island of Attu, he built runways for B 24s and P 38s. He instilled my love of aviation. I love plane watching. My dad, He used to take me to the local airport and we would watch Connies or DC 6's landing, I remember the drone of rotary engine planes, when I was a girl. I actually got to poke around Spitfire, they were absolutely beautiful. But you had to be a bit, er, petite to fly, I guess 109's were especially smallish . But American planes like the P 47? A flying Cadillac, huge cockpit and huge planes. Capable of carrying a lot of firepower.

 

[MaryL]

My father, whom was NO pilot but was a lowly Ex CCC worker, Then Army CB given a rifle and wounded fighting the Japanese at the battle of Attu. he loved Lockeed's P 38. Great lines, looks like a winner. It had it's problems, as a fighter. I will take the Spitfire Mk V any day.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Here is a fun one. Compare those 3 fighters from WWII. Keep in mind that all 3 were highly successful and used in all fronts. Also keep in mind that a heavy fighter had many roles it had to do like fighter intercept, bomber escort, strafing, recon and more.

Sorry, I am a big aviation enthusiast (blind as a bat so I couldn't get a pilot's licence.) I met old man Jeppesen, used to work as a cartographer at Jep years ago. You never mention my alltime favorite WW2 fighter, the Super Marine Spitfire. A sensuous air-frame, and the unique sound of the Rolls Royce power plant was rich and just wrapped it self around you like a lover. Spit mark V, great plane.

I didn't list a lot of fighters. The reason I didn't list most fighters was they either weren't that good or were so short ranged that they only became useful if we could get a field close enough to get them there and back. The Spit only hada 410NM range. Not enough to get across the channel and across france. It did have it's uses in North AFrica but we were losing there big time until the P-38s came onto the scene. They found that it was better to hit the enemy before they could hit us. The over Med Transports and supply ships were heavily curtailed. Not to mention, the landing strips for the Luftwaffe in North Africa. Even so, in NA, the P-40 flown by Brits were more useful since they had longer legs.

The Wings had to be hand made so it's not surprising that just over 1500 were produced. Sort of like the Merlin where Studebaker did an assembly line. The Brits were famous for making one off things where parts may or may not be interchangeable.

Now, if there were a place for the Prettiest then the Spit wins hands down.

 

[westwall]

Here is a fun one. Compare those 3 fighters from WWII. Keep in mind that all 3 were highly successful and used in all fronts. Also keep in mind that a heavy fighter had many roles it had to do like fighter intercept, bomber escort, strafing, recon and more.

Sorry, I am a big aviation enthusiast (blind as a bat so I couldn't get a pilot's licence.) I met old man Jeppesen, used to work as a cartographer at Jep years ago. You never mention my alltime favorite WW2 fighter, the Super Marine Spitfire. A sensuous air-frame, and the unique sound of the Rolls Royce power plant was rich and just wrapped it self around you like a lover. Spit mark V, great plane.

I didn't list a lot of fighters. The reason I didn't list most fighters was they either weren't that good or were so short ranged that they only became useful if we could get a field close enough to get them there and back. The Spit only hada 410NM range. Not enough to get across the channel and across france. It did have it's uses in North AFrica but we were losing there big time until the P-38s came onto the scene. They found that it was better to hit the enemy before they could hit us. The over Med Transports and supply ships were heavily curtailed. Not to mention, the landing strips for the Luftwaffe in North Africa. Even so, in NA, the P-40 flown by Brits were more useful since they had longer legs.

The Wings had to be hand made so it's not surprising that just over 1500 were produced. Sort of like the Merlin where Studebaker did an assembly line. The Brits were famous for making one off things where parts may or may not be interchangeable.

Now, if there were a place for the Prettiest then the Spit wins hands down.

I have no idea where you got your 1500 produced figure but the reality is there were 20, 351 Spits of all marks produced during the war. The P-38 production was slightly over 10,000 in 18 variants. The highest produced aircraft in the world is the IL2M Sturmovik at around 36,000 examples with the Me 109 second at 33,000 aircraft built.

 

[fncceo]

P-51, because it's cool as balls

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Fighter to fighter the P-51. The F6F Hellcat which isn't mentioned is neck and neck with the P-51. The Hellcat had a kill ratio of 19-1 in WW2, best of any fighter. When it showed up in the Pacific in 1943 the Japanese pilots quickly figured out the Hellcat was now king of the hill where the Jap Zero had dominated the feckless F4F Wildcat.

The P-38 was great for the Pacific war as it afforded better ability to return and long legs for open stretches of ocean. It was very fast and could carry a cannon as noted, giving it great punch. If I were flying in the Pacific I'd want the P-38.

The P-47 was a ground pounder though it faired pretty well in dogfights as well. But it was huge and very heavy and its strength was not dogfighting. It could shred ground targets though. US fighters were almost all heavy well armored aircraft designed to allow the pilot a good chance to survive with things like self-sealing fuel tanks.

The Zero was designed to be very light and maneuverable and gave little notice to the pilot's life. The Zero was in fact a paper kite. Hit it at the wing root and a wing would snap off or put an incendiary round into a fuel tank and it would catch fire or explode.

Each US fighter had its roll and each filled its niche. Even the P-40 played its role early on in the war. Using boom and zoom tactics against the Japanese in India and Thailand the Flying Tigers shot down 300 Japanese planes with the loss of about 20.

Like the F-4U, the range that the F-6F meant you had to get the boat close. Long before the F6F showed up and it was safe to get the boat closer, the P-38 was flying long range over the water flights. And the F4F was doing it's bit in destroying things closer to the boat. But it was a willy come lately bird. By late 43, the Japanese were already hurting badly and were being driven back hard.The Air Power was almost gone. We kept telling the Japanese this but the way they fought, they never believed it so we showed them. The ONLY reason I list the P-51 at all is the long range it had. Otherwise, it would be listed with the Supermarine. You had to get it over the enemy and then you can fight. Ask the Luftwaffe how the BoB worked out for them fighting above some elses property.

You mentioned how the Japanese were rolling over the F-4F. Noper. If it was left to the P-39s, more of the larger islands all the way to Australia would have been lost. The P-39 was a clay pigeon. Those attacks were finally stopped by using the F-4F which could zoom and climb. The poor P-39 could do neither.

The Flying Tigers originally flew the Brewster and then upgraded to the Warhawk. They were flying against Nates (and that was the best that Japan had at that time). Both the Brewster and the Warhawk had a higher top speed than the Nates. In fact, it was Chennault that invented the dive, hit and climb zoom attack. Neither the Brewster or the Warhawk could turn, dive or anything against the lowly Nate, much less the Zero later on.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Here is a fun one. Compare those 3 fighters from WWII. Keep in mind that all 3 were highly successful and used in all fronts. Also keep in mind that a heavy fighter had many roles it had to do like fighter intercept, bomber escort, strafing, recon and more.

Sorry, I am a big aviation enthusiast (blind as a bat so I couldn't get a pilot's licence.) I met old man Jeppesen, used to work as a cartographer at Jep years ago. You never mention my alltime favorite WW2 fighter, the Super Marine Spitfire. A sensuous air-frame, and the unique sound of the Rolls Royce power plant was rich and just wrapped it self around you like a lover. Spit mark V, great plane.

I didn't list a lot of fighters. The reason I didn't list most fighters was they either weren't that good or were so short ranged that they only became useful if we could get a field close enough to get them there and back. The Spit only hada 410NM range. Not enough to get across the channel and across france. It did have it's uses in North AFrica but we were losing there big time until the P-38s came onto the scene. They found that it was better to hit the enemy before they could hit us. The over Med Transports and supply ships were heavily curtailed. Not to mention, the landing strips for the Luftwaffe in North Africa. Even so, in NA, the P-40 flown by Brits were more useful since they had longer legs.

The Wings had to be hand made so it's not surprising that just over 1500 were produced. Sort of like the Merlin where Studebaker did an assembly line. The Brits were famous for making one off things where parts may or may not be interchangeable.

Now, if there were a place for the Prettiest then the Spit wins hands down.

I have no idea where you got your 1500 produced figure but the reality is there were 20, 351 Spits of all marks produced during the war. The P-38 production was slightly over 10,000 in 18 variants. The highest produced aircraft in the world is the IL2M Sturmovik at around 36,000 examples with the Me 109 second at 33,000 aircraft built.

I have no idea where I go those numbers either. I was obvious WR-WR-WR erroneous

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Someone stated the P-51D had the best climb rate of the 3. Here are the to climb info.

P-51d 3,200 ft/min (16.3 m/s)
P-38L 4,750 ft/min (24.1 m/s) maximum
P-47D 3,180 ft/min (16.15 m/s)

You didn't try and outclimb a 38, you didn't try to turn with him, you dove for the deck. That was a surefire way until the P-38JLO-25 hit the skies. he could follow a 190 or 109 down to the deck and have supper waiting for him when he got home. By then, the German Recips were so badly over matched it was almost criminal.

 

[westwall]

Fighter to fighter the P-51. The F6F Hellcat which isn't mentioned is neck and neck with the P-51. The Hellcat had a kill ratio of 19-1 in WW2, best of any fighter. When it showed up in the Pacific in 1943 the Japanese pilots quickly figured out the Hellcat was now king of the hill where the Jap Zero had dominated the feckless F4F Wildcat.

The P-38 was great for the Pacific war as it afforded better ability to return and long legs for open stretches of ocean. It was very fast and could carry a cannon as noted, giving it great punch. If I were flying in the Pacific I'd want the P-38.

The P-47 was a ground pounder though it faired pretty well in dogfights as well. But it was huge and very heavy and its strength was not dogfighting. It could shred ground targets though. US fighters were almost all heavy well armored aircraft designed to allow the pilot a good chance to survive with things like self-sealing fuel tanks.

The Zero was designed to be very light and maneuverable and gave little notice to the pilot's life. The Zero was in fact a paper kite. Hit it at the wing root and a wing would snap off or put an incendiary round into a fuel tank and it would catch fire or explode.

Each US fighter had its roll and each filled its niche. Even the P-40 played its role early on in the war. Using boom and zoom tactics against the Japanese in India and Thailand the Flying Tigers shot down 300 Japanese planes with the loss of about 20.

Like the F-4U, the range that the F-6F meant you had to get the boat close. Long before the F6F showed up and it was safe to get the boat closer, the P-38 was flying long range over the water flights. And the F4F was doing it's bit in destroying things closer to the boat. But it was a willy come lately bird. By late 43, the Japanese were already hurting badly and were being driven back hard.The Air Power was almost gone. We kept telling the Japanese this but the way they fought, they never believed it so we showed them. The ONLY reason I list the P-51 at all is the long range it had. Otherwise, it would be listed with the Supermarine. You had to get it over the enemy and then you can fight. Ask the Luftwaffe how the BoB worked out for them fighting above some elses property.

You mentioned how the Japanese were rolling over the F-4F. Noper. If it was left to the P-39s, more of the larger islands all the way to Australia would have been lost. The P-39 was a clay pigeon. Those attacks were finally stopped by using the F-4F which could zoom and climb. The poor P-39 could do neither.

The Flying Tigers originally flew the Brewster and then upgraded to the Warhawk. They were flying against Nates (and that was the best that Japan had at that time). Both the Brewster and the Warhawk had a higher top speed than the Nates. In fact, it was Chennault that invented the dive, hit and climb zoom attack. Neither the Brewster or the Warhawk could turn, dive or anything against the lowly Nate, much less the Zero later on.

The AVG never flew the Brewster. They started with 100 P-40B's and after one of them got dropped in New York harbor while loading, they sailed with 99 of them. They were flown by the Brits in Singapore and the Dutch had some as well. I think the only air arm that actually liked them were the Finns who actually built some to make up for their losses against the Soviets. You are correct about the Japanese using the Nates over China, they also flew the Oscars later when the P-40's showed how superior to the Nate they were. The P-40 could easily out dive both the Nate and the Zero. That was one thing that American fighters almost universally could do better than the Japanese planes. About the only thing in the early war period.