P-38 Lightning

World War II American Military
#101

I what way? The Luftwaffe Jagdwaffe, what was left of it, was being preserved or used for bomber intercepts - largely avoiding combat in key theaters by 1945…

So much so that the USAAF had to relegate its dedicated high-altitude turbo-charged P-38J [see USAAF technical report in post #45 this thread] & P-47D long-range interceptors to the tactical support role [& indeed the P-38 was even tried in the medium bomber role - due to excessive casualty rates] in favour of the P-51…

You mean the P-38L, which was by far the largest variant ever produced. And P-51’s only saw Luftwaffe fighters on long range escort missions as the Jagdwaffe was incapable of anything else. I occasionally have a drink with a former P-51 pilot, Don, who flew in Italy at the end of the war. He said the Germans were avoiding fighter combat then and he never engaged a fighter - though there were times he saw them “forming up in the distance” to attempt bomber intercepts. But even then the ill-trained pilots flying questionable equipment weren’t particularly effective nor aggressive. He did shoot down a train though… :slight_smile:

& how many P-38s obtained jet claim/credits? FYI, RAF Tempests were credited [via gun camera film] with every type of Nazi jet flying, inc’ He 162…

I don’t know. There weren’t really that many jets to begin with and they had virtually no impact on the war. Jets were also easy targets when taking off or landing at aerodromes which is why the Allied air forces essentially when goal-picking by the end by smothering fighter bases…

& P-38s were Vne limited to ~100mph less than say, a Tempest [540mph IAS Vne @ 10,000ft] , which was a grave disadvantage compared to 109/190s,

  • in their typical attack, then split-S/dive away tactics.

It’s funny, yet the P-38 shot down many more aircraft than the Tempest ever did though, so by your logic it was better than the Tempest. :slight_smile: The Tempest was a low level tactical bomber and is a poor comparison since it was a different concept with a completely different mission and didn’t even fly until the P-38 was in production. It should have high performance at low altitudes! The Tempest also never faced a Jagdwaffe filled with well trained pilots that outnumbered them, sometimes two 0r three to one…

Whereas, P-38s in the PTO did not have to contend with such high air-speed capable opponents…

No, just extremely agile aircraft that were the most maneuverable of any WWII fighters despite their drawbacks in other areas…

#102

I believe the Tempest was actually a fighter (what the typhoon was supposed to be), it was better at low to medium altitudes than as a high level fighter.

It was used mostly as ground attack and armed recconaisance, as well as anti V1 duties more to the lack of a credible opposition than its designed role.

#103

Lets not get the Tempest confused with the Typhoon. Tempest had better performance, but reached combat much later, pretty much after the airwar had already been won by the Allies. First Tempest squadrons (only two) began operations in April 1944, first Tempest group began operations in July 1944. Luftwaffe was defeated by May 1944, so the Tempest was too late to have any meaningful role. Sure the Allies flew many many more missions after May 1944, but they were mostly all ground support and strategic bombing missions since the Luftwaffe was nowhere to be found. Lots of air fighting left to be done by the Allies, but the big danger was flak, not the Luftwaffe.

#104

H.G. if you think that there was no Normandy-invasion to VE day air-war, then you need to do some study on the subject…

It is true that the Tempests were held back in Britain as the primary fighter defence against the Nazi V1 cruise-missile assault on London
[ & P-38s were too slow to catch them, since they flew in at low level & ~400mph ], but they were on the continent by Sept…

From Air Enthusiast /48 P. 20 ‘Air Superiority a Case Study’
“This was the start of an amazing six months of intense activity for the Tempest Wing, during which they inflicted enormous damage on the German forces & suffered severe losses themselves.”

Flying in tactical support of the Allied armies, “Most combat associated with tactical air superiority was expected to take place at low to medium altitudes & the Tempest was thought to be the ideal aircraft…the fastest aircraft in the Allied inventory at medium altitude.”

However, [P.31] “Although the Luftwaffe was restricted by the Allies overwhelming superiority in numbers, the Allies were never able to achieve true air superiority. The Germans remained able to impose losses on the Allies to the very end.”

Indeed the last Tempest air to air loss was “flown by F/O M. Austin from 486 [NZ] Squadron. He was shot down by a He 162 lightweight jet fighter”.

#105

In April`45, Kiwi Pilot W. Schrader became a Tempest ace in just over a week, flying hard against top line opposition, & Canadian Spitfire pilot R. Audet had earlier managed the same feat in a single mission, [ & not against P-38s either]…

#106

So, the Luftwaffe with no fuel, no way to train new pilots, their experienced pilots dead or in prison and their aircraft factories being bombed around the clock were putting up a ferocious fight against the Allies? Hardly. Sure, fighter ground support missions were extremely dangerous, much more dangerous than air to air fighting, but that danger wasn’t coming from the Luftwaffe. It was coming from the German troops and AAA on the ground

#107

Of course, the point is that there was little left of the Jadgwaffe to actually fight. Most aircraft were moved into tactical roles by default. Even Mustangs assigned to bomber escort were simply rampaging aggressively close to the deck…

#108

There’s a difference between “air superiority” and “air supremacy.” The Allies had achieved both as the Luftwaffe was broken on multiple fronts. Some unfortunate Allied pilots were taken down by jets or by Me109’s/FW190’s. But they faced a much larger hazard from ground fire. The Western air forces simply ran out of targets to bomb and fighters were then sent closer to the deck as opposed to waiting for German fighters to intercept bombers…

#109

Well, not according to the histories… Donald Caldwell has a new book out focussing on the fighter defence of the Reich, & gives detailed reports on it.

His earlier book on JG 26 - ‘Top Guns of the Luftwaffe’ gives a history of their operational service throughout the war on the Western Front…
…including ~800 victory credits over USAAF/RAF aircraft in `44-45…

& includes the statistical fact that the Western Allies were about 7 times more dangerous to fly air combat missions against - than the VVS…

#110

Seems these guys got fairly busy at times… http://www.hawkertempest.se/Victories.htm

#111

Hello to all, just for information, JAW, Hans Philipp Oberleutnant the second pilot to reach the 200 victories mark (17-3 -1943) total 206 victories Kommodore of the JG1 killed near Nordhorn in aerial fights with Thunderbold the 8-10-1943 . Look for the mistake my dear JAW.
To come back to the German aerial activity in 1944-45, my subject was never to say that there was not any, but the aerial superiority of the allies was such, that it could not replace their losses as more quickly, especially the pilot, the production of hunters was that some to it very important, but that is worth a good plane without a good pilot. You forget a thing, it is that in the Luftwaffe the pilots didn’t know the tour of operations, of this fact the a lot of big German aces had disappeared already and the pilots who arrived freshly émoulus of the schools didn’t have at all the experience of their eldests. It is said besides by Pierre Clostermann in its book “The Big Circus”, and know my dear JAW that the Fock Wulf 190 D were not considered by its inventor Kurt Tank like a very good plane, but like a device of transition toward the FW Ta 152, that would have been him the most important threat for the aviation allied its performances so much were outstanding for the time, the “Mustang” and “Tempest” would have fought a plane that was to them then of very far superior.

For what is the P38 and whatever you told some, he/it will remain in history like a very important plane and those in spite of its detractors, because it is true that some pilots didn’t like it, but he/it doesn’t remain less of them that the two bigger American ace Bongs and McGuires were on P38. Anyway we won’t ever rewrite history it is a fact, we can only try to analyze it. Besides I would say that it is necessary to mistrust the false interpretations of numbers or data, unfortunately internet overflows from it and a lot of pseudo historians make false analyses, be by ignorance or simply for that to make really see a certain community. Fortunately some pilots wrote their memory, and it permits in spite of the few mistakes that it includes to make itself a real idea of that that was the aerial fights during World War II.

Best Regards Fred

#112

So, 65 victories in almost 7 months in the last half of 1944 against a beaten Luftwaffe with no gasoline, few experienced pilots and outnumbered in every engagement. Doesn’t sound like the Luftwaffe was able to put up much of a fight to me.

#113

Does the IRS know what your maths is like H.G.?

The Jagdwaffe put up more of a fight than the USAAF P-39/400s did over the Solomon Is/New Guinea…

& Fred, it is true that the best performing war planes of WW2 were fighting over NW Europe in `44-45,
& the P-38 could not find a place in the top ranks of them…

#114

A rather bizarre, dare I say meaningless comparison.

& Fred, it is true that the best performing war planes of WW2 were fighting over NW Europe in `44-45,
& the P-38 could not find a place in the top ranks of them…

There were several squadrons of P-38L’s over Europe until the end, probably almost as many Lightnings in the air as what was left of the entire Jagdwaffe…

#115

A nice write-up of a P-38 pilot’s existence in the PTO: http://www.kilroywashere.org/003-Pages/Tilley-John/03-Harm-Tilley-story.html

#116

Interesting PTO P-38 story, thanks Ndf…
… We might have expected the Germans in `45…
… to do as poorly as the PTO P-39/400s…

But was it 900+ Lightnings of the USAAF 9th AF doing airfield strafing on New Years Day `45?

Ah no, that’d be the Jagdwaffe…

As P.Clostermann wrote [ p.161 ‘The Big Show’]…

"What was the Luftwaffe up to? For the general public, naturally, Germany had no aircraft & no pilots left.
This belief was carefully fostered by the Allied information services for a variety of reasons…

…For us who were in daily contact with it & from whom it was impossible to hide the real state of affairs,
the optimism of the American O.W.I. was not without a certain piquancy.
The more Hun fighters the Americans shot down, the more there were!

One fact was for certain:…the Germans succeeded in maintaining a monthly production of 1,200 to 1,700 machines
[2,325 in November`44]" …

& as Fred commented, the long-nose Focke-Wulf…

" was a formidable opponent. Its general performance put it in the same category as the Tempest & gave it
a distinct edge over the American Mustang, Lightning & Thunderbolt…"

H.G. see if you can find the NW Europe P-38 air-to-air combat claims for Sept `44 to VE day…
…its 'bout a hundred all up… or a ~20th of the Mustang claim credits…

#117

From Wikipedia:

With such serious Allied fighter opposition, the Luftwaffe was put under severe pressure in March–April 1944. According to a report made by Adolf Galland, General der Jagdflieger, on 27 April 1944, 500 aircraft and 400 pilots had been lost in the 10 previous operations.[104] Galland also said that in the previous four months 1,000 pilots had been killed. Galland reported that the enemy outnumbered his fighters between 6:1 and 8:1 and the standard of Allied fighter pilot training was “astonishingly high”.[105] Some 25% of the German fighter pilot force had been lost in May 1944 alone, while 50% of the available fighters were also each month from March–May 1944.[106] Galland recognised the Luftwaffe was losing the attrition war and pushed for a focus on quality rather than quantity. Galland stated in his 27 April report, “I would at this moment rather have one Me 262 in action than five Bf 109s. I used to say three 109s, but the situation develops and changes.”[105]

The need for technical superiority was evident in the losses in the first half of 1944. In January the Luftwaffe had on strength some 2,283 pilots. It lost some 2,262 between January and May 1944, a 99% loss rate.[107] This helped extend USAAF air superiority over the continent.[108] German losses included experienced personnel. The situation was so serious, [u]Galland remarked:

The strained manpower situation in the air defence of the Reich demands urgently the further bringing up of experienced flying personnel from other arms of the service, in particular for the maintenance of fighting power to the air arm, tried pilots of the ground-attack and bomber units, especially officers suitable as formation leaders, will now also have to be drawn upon.[109]

It was a vicious circle. In order to meet frontline requirements training time was cut. Shorter training hours meant a poorer quality of pilot, which in turn increased the likelihood of a pilot being killed in action. The offensive against Axis oil production was forcing a cut in training time was making things even worse.[110][/u]

The position of the Luftwaffe continued to deteriorate throughout 1944. As German territory contracted the number of AAA guns rose. In November–December 1944, the FlaK defenses were more effective at shooting down Allied bombers than the Luftwaffe. One such example indicates that during sustained attacks on the synthetic oil targets inside the Ruhr, 59 USAAF bombers were lost to AAA, while just 13 were lost to German fighters. Heavy AAA did reduce the bombing accuracy as well as acting for a guide for German fighters searching for the bomber stream.[111] Losses reached an all-time high on 26 November, when intercepting a raid, the RLV lost 119 fighters, 60 pilots killed and 32 wounded for just 25 USAAF fighters and six bombers.[112]

#118

Now JAW, let’s get something straight: I’m not a big advocate of the P-38 Lightning. Nice plane, great in the Pacific, but the total cost of operation was about three times that of a single engine fighter (including original cost, maintenance and fuel), it took about twice as long for a pilot to become proficient in a P-38, and they didn’t dive well. Not to mention at altitude the pilot nearly froze to death. No other combatant in WWII fielded a single seat twin engine fighter. Only America had the resources to pay that much for a fighter plane. It did have it’s advantages and it did to some things well and certainly did it’s part in WWII, but in my opinion those resources could have been put to better use.

#119

I myself prefer the P-51D and later overall. The P-51’s were easier to learn on and fly, and as stated here many times were cheaper and easier to produce. Given the USAAF’s ability to churn out competent, well trained pilots, the P-51 seems like a better overall choice. But that doesn’t in anyway reflect the quality of the temperamental Lightening…

It should be stated that most of the problems listed were “fixed” with the P-38L and late model J’s, which comprised over 40% of all production Lightnings. The pilot had a heated suit and dive kits were installed making it a phenomenal dive-bomber. It’s also been stated here that while many pilots and their commanders did not like the inferior, earlier versions - some pilots felt that with an elite, experienced pilot at the controls, the P-38 exceeded the P-51 overall in performance and as a fighter and that appears to be borne out in today’s video game simulations…

#120

Not quite true.

Westland Whirlwind and Westland Welkin are two examples and the De Haviland Hornet flew in 1944.

Of course not including the Me 262 or Gloster Meteor jets

Maybe better to say no other country fielded significant numbers of twin piston engined single seat fighters.