Range of the top 3 fighters in WWII

[Vrenn]

Here is a series of studies that reinforce what I have said about the short changing of the P-38 and the over advertising of the P-51B and up. The P-47 was recipient of the same slamming the P-38 received.

 

[whitehall]

When military intelligence revealed Yamamoto's route the plan was to intercept him but the Navy and Marine fighters didn't have the range from Guadalcanal. The venerable P38 was picked for the job and Yamamoto was killed.

 

[martybegan]

Here is a series of studies that reinforce what I have said about the short changing of the P-38 and the over advertising of the P-51B and up. The P-47 was recipient of the same slamming the P-38 received.

I never got all the animosity over the backers of these three aircraft, each had its place in the war, and each excelled at something.

P-51's were the best escorts and overall superiority fighters, P-47s were the best at CAS and over battlefield air control, and P-38's were preferred in the pacific due to having two engines and range to provide better reliability over vast stretches of ocean.

 

[Zincwarrior]

Vought Corsair was better, and oh so pretty!

 

[martybegan]

Vought Corsair was better, and oh so pretty!
View attachment 1089147

The Corsair had some stability issues, which is why it was used as a ground based fighter while they worked out the kinks. Then they were able to carrier certify it.

 

[Zincwarrior]

The Corsair had some stability issues, which is why it was used as a ground based fighter while they worked out the kinks. Then they were able to carrier certify it.

During landings it was an ensign eliminator. It tended to "bounce" when it landed and was squirrelly on the approach. The Brits bled the suspension and trimmed the wing edges and it was good to go. There are films of bombers over the Tirpitz and you see a RN Corsair boom by flying cover - very disconcerting!

Post war they tested it against the FW190 and it beat the 190 handily.

 

[Zincwarrior]

I never got all the animosity over the backers of these three aircraft, each had its place in the war, and each excelled at something.

P-51's were the best escorts and overall superiority fighters, P-47s were the best at CAS and over battlefield air control, and P-38's were preferred in the pacific due to having two engines and range to provide better reliability over vast stretches of ocean.

Agreed. One note, both the P-47 and P-38 were just absolute monsters in size compared to Axis and RAF planes.

The P38 had a bunch of problems at high altitude as an escort. Most involved the cold and all the steps you had to take to prep the plane to dive from high altitude - very bad if you were bounced. Most of these were eventually fixed.

Why the P-38 Flunked Europe

Celebrated as one of the Pacific War’s best fighters, Lockheed’s Lightning earned a less-than enviable reputation in European air combat.

www.historynet.com

 

[Vrenn]

When military intelligence revealed Yamamoto's route the plan was to intercept him but the Navy and Marine fighters didn't have the range from Guadalcanal. The venerable P38 was picked for the job and Yamamoto was killed.

Funny how that worked out. I, and others like me, thinks the P-38 and the P-47 to some degree for the P-47. The deep water as well as Chinese and the Med begged for more P-38s.

In the Pacific they rolled their own drop tanks. The tanks used to bag Yamato carried the 168 on one bomb rack on the other pilon it held the big 310 Tank. Although the p-47 could fly with that much, they didn't have the 310 gallon tank But the P-47 could use on of the 108s carried in the Center line instead. The bomber mafia made damned sure those tanks didn't use the until the first part of 1944. Like the author, i think the stink bombs the Bomber Mafia got lot of people killed. Even when they started to use the P-38 and P-47 as fighter escorts.

In early 1943, the finally allowed the P-38s to fly into Germany but the limited the use of drop tanks. And they made the P-38 fly in the rear of the bombers. The second I learned of Hap Arnolds stubborness cost hundreds of thousands Allied lives in ETO. Funny or a coincidence that thinks started go a lot smoothly when Ike took over the ETO including the drop tanks and the change in the Fighters and in the ETO allowing when they dropped of the bombers to another fighter group,

I think another reason for the fighter Mafia was the the p-38 carried up to 4000 lbs of ordinance. for that trip into Berlin and back. The P-38 with the large drop tanks could carry 4000 lbs This why in the Med and African theaters The P-38 was used for everything including flying in the Generals special crapping papers.

When the bomber mafia finally allowed the P-47 and P-38 to carry those drop tanks I wonder how many bombs crew died because were covering the asses of the hundred of lost crew members.

 

[Deadstick]

The Corsair had some stability issues, which is why it was used as a ground based fighter while they worked out the kinks. Then they were able to carrier certify it.

My Uncle served on HMS Victorious as a 20mm Oerlikon gunner the Carrier had Corsair aircraft on board in 1945 hi Ship was attached to the US fleet in the Pacific supporting the US forces taking the Islands, it took three strikes from Kamikazi

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

The P-51 had a range of 2,200 miles (more than 3,300 km).

 

[Vrenn]

The Corsair had some stability issues, which is why it was used as a ground based fighter while they worked out the kinks. Then they were able to carrier certify it.

The real problem was the length of the nose and where the pilot sat. The Brits installed a Malcom Hood which allowed them to move the pilot 7 inches higher to see better around that long nose for landing. The reason the cockpit was so far back was the fact the bird carried extra fuel in a tank just ahead of the cockpit. The other problems should have been taken care of in the flight testing trials as they were serious but easily fixed.

The F4U was a better fighter in the air than the F6F but the F6F was more manageable as a carrier based fighter. You can have the greatest car in the world but if it crashes when you try and park it, it makes it pretty worthless.

 

[martybegan]

The real problem was the length of the nose and where the pilot sat. The Brits installed a Malcom Hood which allowed them to move the pilot 7 inches higher to see better around that long nose for landing. The reason the cockpit was so far back was the fact the bird carried extra fuel in a tank just ahead of the cockpit. The other problems should have been taken care of in the flight testing trials as they were serious but easily fixed.

The F4U was a better fighter in the air than the F6F but the F6F was more manageable as a carrier based fighter. You can have the greatest car in the world but if it crashes when you try and park it, it makes it pretty worthless.

People forget that aircraft were less than 50 years old at that point. it's quite amazing the development that occurred in that short period. One can look at the 20's and 30's for all the crazy designs that didn't pan out at best, or killed their pilots repeatedly at worst.

Plus all this was done on paper with slide rules, and a lot of trial and error.

All those aircraft, even the wrongly derided P-40 played their part.

Now if we want to denigrate an aircraft, the Brewster Buffalo probably can deserve some of the heat, but it was obsolete by the time WWII for the US kicked off.

 

[Vrenn]

The P-51 had a range of 2,200 miles (more than 3,300 km).

p-51/specifications

The longest range for the 51 goes to the D and K models. With two 110 gallon drop tanks 2055 miles. This is called Ferry Range.

Meanwhile the P-38J had a ferry range of 2900 miles. And the P-47D had a ferry range of slightly more than 2000 miles.

Meaning, when the P-51D was introduced in early 1944, both the P-38J-25 (and L) and the P-47D through N could already do the job of escort duties over Germany. The deciding factor was partially the fact that you could make 2 P-51Ds for the cost of 1 P-38 and the P-47 was somewhere between the two in cost. Quantity was the most important factor.l

 

[Vrenn]

People forget that aircraft were less than 50 years old at that point. it's quite amazing the development that occurred in that short period. One can look at the 20's and 30's for all the crazy designs that didn't pan out at best, or killed their pilots repeatedly at worst.

Plus all this was done on paper with slide rules, and a lot of trial and error.

All those aircraft, even the wrongly derided P-40 played their part.

Now if we want to denigrate an aircraft, the Brewster Buffalo probably can deserve some of the heat, but it was obsolete by the time WWII for the US kicked off.

When the was started, there wasn't a lot of time to make it perfect or even near perfect. Once it reached a certain point, you tossed it into the manufacturing monster. Then you fixed it in the field or retired it. Funny how the Finns enjoyed a healthy kill rate in their Brewsters.