P38L - Page 2 - ED Forums


Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-17-2020, 02:39 PM   #11
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Poland
Posts: 1,838

Originally Posted by JG13~Wulf View Post
I don't remember max speed of it. But it was told that the P38 was the fastest twin engine fighter of the war (not talking about jet and Do 335). I remember it can get over 600 km/h at some altitude because of it's design. But his design had a major problem. Air hitting the wing when the plane is at high speed didn't get to the tail. Lot of early Lightning crash because it was impossible to pull up when it was in high speed dive. That why they add the air brakes.

That a plane that can do a lot but that is really dangerous ! I like it !
That is what im talking about, when you pass crit mach number in p-38 with almost no buffeting nose went down like crazy. It is due to that wings and tail horizontal stab is at same plain. When crit mach number is passed turbulent air is hitting horizontal stab creating this nose down craziness.
Problem was real because when flying at 20-30k alt when pilot put p-38 power on, in 10-15 degrees dive and plane was in this situation in matter of couple hundreds of feet.

Last edited by grafspee; 01-17-2020 at 04:33 PM.
grafspee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2020, 10:43 PM   #12
Senior Member
Robert31178's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Norfolk, VA
Posts: 1,504

Though they may select the P-40 or even P-39 first to get a single engine Allison engine aircraft in game first, getting a good solid model of that powerplant working before pushing on to the complexity of the P-38 and it's turbo and intercooler systems.[/QUOTE]

I think both of these would be poor engines to follow examples of, neither of the Allisons in these planes were turbocharged.....
Robert31178 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2020, 12:06 AM   #13
Eviscerador's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Gijón, Spain
Posts: 326

I'd love to see the P38 in DCS. We can only wait...

Just a few notes:
- Main problem with Lightings in the ETO was lack of training from the crews, the compresibility problems (all you need to avoid the lightinings was to dive and they won't follow you because of their fear to a dive lockdown) and the freezing at very high altitudes.
- In the PTO the lightning was the fighter of choice for almost the whole duration of the war. There they had a lot more of training in the plane, freezing was not a problem (in fact it was the opposite, pilots flew in shorts and hawaian shirts) and japanese fighters were not built for speed, so compresibility was not a problem.
- Most ETO US veterans had been flying in spitfires and RAF mustangs for a lot of time, so switching to the US mustang was easy, while the P38 needed a lot of training in all the complex systems. Also, mustang was much easier and cheaper to build.
- P38L with hydraulic aileron boosters, dive brakes and improved cooling systems had best acceleration, high altitude performance and firepower of all allied fighters in the late stages of the war, but ETO pilots and brass just wanted a simple and reliable fighter (mustang) instead. It also had the best range, best ordenance capabilities and the dual engine was always a built in insurance.
- RAF lightnings were scrapped because they were given without turbochargers (they were classified at that time) and with all the engines turning the same side instead of counter rotating. Of course they were shit.
Eviscerador is offline   Reply With Quote

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT. The time now is 04:04 AM. vBulletin Skin by ForumMonkeys. Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.