Post by DarylPost by David E. PowellI have to wonder if the XP-71 would have ever been a capable fighter.
As it was, the mission never really came up for it, and the XP-82 Twin
Mustang served well into Korea, so it seemed to fill the long range
escort niche as well as a night fighter niche with mounted radar.
The Jets were still very fuel hungry and didn't have the range for any
kind of long range escort duty. That fell to the F-51H which had the
longest legs of all the piston fighters including the F-82.
Will it be a surprise to anyone the P-51D had a longer range than the
P-51H? And the P-82B a longer range than the P-51D?
Most of the rest is simply cut and paste from the last time Daryl
ran this set of fictions.
Post by DarylAnd even if it didn't have longer legs, it was more lethal as a fighter
with a much faster roll rate than the F-82.
Single engined fighter tend to have roll advantages over twins.
Post by DarylThere were a lot of reasons not to use the H model in Korea.
Actually there were two, it was not in theatre at the start and was
required in the US.
Post by DarylBut us Yanks have to understand that not all reasons were written by those
that used the equipment. History isn't always right. It always depends
on who is telling it.
Daryl needs the history isn't right claim since his telling is so wrong.
I wonder if the above can be used next time Daryl tries the you were
not there so cannot be right line.
Post by DarylLike saying the P-51 defeated the Luftwaffe when in fact, by the time the
51 made the scene with enough force, the P-38J was already doing the job
and could fly with the 109 and 190 all day long.
In fact the 8th Air Force first mission using P-38J models of any type
seems to have been on 28 December 1943 or about 3 weeks after the
P-51 was flying missions.
Daryl defines enough force as a flexible time to show Daryl is right and
already doing the job is defined as taking at best a 1 to 1 loss ratio. As
can be seen below it was the P-47 that had the numbers and would
continue to do so well into 1944.
And of course as is well known the P-38 had a shorter range on internal
fuel than the P-47 which had a shorter range on internal fuel than the
P-51 and the P-38 was certainly not able to fly with the Bf109 and FW190
all day long, whatever that means.
Post by DarylThe P-47 and the P-38 were the ones that started the fighter sweeps
starting in Early 1944. The P-51s were still building up.
Fighter sweeps were missions without bombers and proved
largely unproductive, meantime,
On 20 December 1943 the 55th Fighter Group P-38, discovering
the bombers are 30 minutes late decide to finally try a tactic much
discussed by the fighter pilots, ranging well ahead of the bomber
formations to try and intercept the Luftwaffe fighters to at least
break up their formations. No kills credited.
On 7 January 1944 the phased escort tactic is used, fighters patrol
areas of the route after flying direct, not with the bombers.
On 11 January 1944 the first sanctioned attempt at distant escort,
ranging both ahead and to the side of the bomber formations, the
56th Fighter Group provides 2 formations of P-47, one claims 11
kills the other none.
P-38 operations with the 8th AF started on 15 October 1943.
First escort mission, 20 October, 39 P-38, no kill claims, 321 P-47
6 kill claims. No USAAF fighters MIA.
table is date / number of P-38 / P-38 kill claims / P-38 MIA //
number of P-47 / number of P-47 kill claims / P-47 MIA. Bomber
escort missions only
3 November / 45 / 3 / 0 // 333 / 11 / 2
5 November / 47 / 5 / 0 // 336 / 13 / 4
7 November / 0 / 0 / 0 // 283 / 1 / 0
11 November / 59 / 0 / 0 // 342 / 8 / 2
13 November / 45 / 7 / 7 // 345 / 3 / 3
19 November / 0 / 0 /0 // 288 / 0 / 0
26 November / 28 / 0 / 0 // 353 / 36 / 4
29 November / 38 / 2 / 7 // 314 / 13 / 9
30 November / 20 / 0 / 1 // 327 / 0 / 5
1 December / 42 / 0 / 5 // 374 / 20 / 2
The third set of figures is for P-51
5 December / 34 / 0 / 0 // 266 / 0 / 1 // 36 / 0 / 0
11 December / 31 / 0 / 0 // 313 / 20 / 3 // 44 / 0 / 1
13 December / 31 / 1 / 0 // 322 / 0 / 1 // 41 / 0 / 1
16 December / 31 / 0 / 0 // 131 / 1 / 1 // 39 / 1 / 0
20 December / 26 / 0 / 0 // 418 / 16 / 2 // 47 / 3 / 4
22 December / 40 / 0 / 2 // 448 / 9 / 2 // 28 / 6 / 0
24 December / 40 / 0 / 0 // 459 / 0 / 0 // 42 / 0 / 0
30 December / 79 / 0 / 0 // 463 / 8 / 11 // 41 / 0 / 2
31 December / 74 / 3 / 1 // 441 / 4 / 2 // 33 / 2 / 1
Totals, P-38 749 sorties, 21 kill claims, 23 MIA,
P-47 6,877 sorties, 169 kill claims, 54 MIA,
P-51 351 sorties, 12 kill claims, 9 MIA.
The P-38 started flying 8th AF escort missions on 20 October, the P-51
on 5 December, the difference is 9 bomber missions and until the second
P-38 group flew combat at the end of the month there were more P-51
on escort than P-38 in December.
Ignoring 1942, the first
8th Air Force P-38 group flew its first mission mid October 1943,
when there were 7 P-47 groups flying missions. The second P-38
group flew it first mission at the end of December. The third group
flew its first mission in early March 1944, by which stage the 8th had
2 operational P-51 groups and was borrowing the 9th AF ones.
In late May 1944 it was 4 P-38 to 7 P-51, by end July it was 1 P-38 to
10 P-51 groups flying missions.
Post by DarylThe only reason the P-51 was kept was that it was less costly to operate
but like all the other two, there were plenty in reserve that none would
have to be purchased and no new parts would have to be purchases.
The P-38 was being phased out in 1945 and quickly post war, the
P-47 and P-51 were still around in comparable numbers when the
Korean war began. All those Air National Guard Units. The USAAF
deliberately went to an all jet single seat fighter production policy,
phasing out the piston engined type by end 1945, And while the air
force no doubt had lots of spares they still probably had to buy more
given the time the aircraft were kept in service and their flying hours.
Post by DarylBut I'll say it again,
Since it is so wrong only Daryl says it so needs to repeat it in
the hope someone will believe it, including Daryl.
Post by Darylthe H was considered the P-51 light
No, that was the F and G. The H was the redesign for the Merlin.
Post by Daryland lacked many of the beefiness of the D in things like cockpit and
nacelle armor, fuselage mounts, etc..
No.
Post by DarylYou can't have those things and lighten it up like they did.
Actually you can, given the airframe was stressed the same, better
design based on experience. Remember the early Allison was
lighter than the Merlin with the resultant problems of having the
engine mounts strengthened.
Meantime the P-51H was around 100 pounds heavier than the P-51A,
while carrying 2 extra machine guns. I await Daryl letting us know
about the lightweight A model and its lack of robustness.
Post by DarylThey were going for speed, range and performance over robustness.
They were going with more speed, less range overall, better
performance with the same robustness.
Post by DarylAs I said, it all depends on who is telling the history lesson.
Daryl of course is telling fictional history.
Geoffrey Sinclair
Remove the nb for email.
