PDA

View Full Version : Mosquito vs P38



lezbianseagull
11-09-2008, 10:34 PM
Ok...

So why is the mosquito completley outclassed by the p38 in this game?

Is this historically accurate?

The mosquitos is completley unstable, and has a VERY hard time getting of the ground. While the p38 has no problems, even with 1-2000 lbs payloads...

I expected the mosquito to be at least on par with the american 2 engine fighter/bomber.

Am I wrong? What am I missing?

na85
11-09-2008, 10:46 PM
Yes

WTE_Galway
11-09-2008, 11:17 PM
Maybe the fact the p38 was a single man fighter interceptor (note the "P" designation) which (from memory) had about 200 more horsepower under boost and a takeoff weight roughly 1000kg lighter compared to the mosquito which was a two man light bomber or at best fighter/bomber has something to do with it.

ImpStarDuece
11-09-2008, 11:24 PM
Well, the Mossie was designed as a night fighter and light recon bomber, while the P-38 was designed as a interceptor.

Two completely different roles.

So, in terms of one on one dog fight, yes, the P-38 is going to be better.

That said, I feel the handling and edge of envelop modeling for the Mossie is a bit less forgiving than pilot accounts indicate. And it has some other issues like break-up speed and such like.

The other thing to consider is that this isn't a strategic sim, its a tactical sim concentrated on ground pounding and daylight fighter operations.

So, all those roles that the Mosquito excelled at, like long range intrusion, reconnisance, night fighting, path finding, precision bombing, anti-shipping, nuisance bombing, high value target bombing, counter intruder operations, ect ect tend to get ignored.

I'd much rather a P-38 if I was going to dogfight Zeros over the Pacific, or escort bombers to Berlin. I'd much rather the Mosquito if I had to shoot down a night bomber over Britain, or a night fighter over Germany, bomb an aqueduct, mark a target for bombers or lob a 4,000 lbs blast bomb into a rail tunnel.

WTE_Galway
11-09-2008, 11:29 PM
Originally posted by ImpStarDuece:

The other thing to consider is that this isn't a strategic sim, its a tactical sim concentrated on ground pounding and daylight fighter operations.



yeah .. for some reason a 6 hour high altitude photo-recon milk run where you are high enough and fast enough to avoid all contact with enemy interceptors does not seem to excite people much as a mission concept.

leitmotiv
11-09-2008, 11:50 PM
The P-38 is a single-seat fighter/interceptor. The Mosquito is a heavier two-seat fighter-bomber/night fighter. They are in different classes. Capably handled and at certain altitudes the P-38 was able to maneuver with Western single-seat, single-engine fighters. The Mosquito was never intended for dueling with fighters. It's guns were for destroying bombers or night fighters (the night-fighter Mosquitoes) or shooting up ground targets (the fighter-bomber). Crazed fighter-bomber pilots like Braham did take on fighters but a Fw 190A shot him down.

WTE_Galway
11-09-2008, 11:55 PM
By the way the RAAF is restoring a photo-recon Mosquito ...

http://www.aussiemossie.asn.au/index_files/Page435.htm

It will be pretty exciting when it finally flies again.

Divine-Wind
11-10-2008, 09:05 AM
Originally posted by lezbianseagull:
Ok...

So why is the mosquito completley outclassed by the p38 in this game?

Is this historically accurate?

The mosquitos is completley unstable, and has a VERY hard time getting of the ground. While the p38 has no problems, even with 1-2000 lbs payloads...

I expected the mosquito to be at least on par with the american 2 engine fighter/bomber.

Am I wrong? What am I missing?
How are they even comparable? The P-38 was a single-seat interceptor, whereas the Mossie was a light bomber. The only thing they have in common is that they both have two engines. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

VW-IceFire
11-10-2008, 03:16 PM
Originally posted by Divine-Wind:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by lezbianseagull:
Ok...

So why is the mosquito completley outclassed by the p38 in this game?

Is this historically accurate?

The mosquitos is completley unstable, and has a VERY hard time getting of the ground. While the p38 has no problems, even with 1-2000 lbs payloads...

I expected the mosquito to be at least on par with the american 2 engine fighter/bomber.

Am I wrong? What am I missing?
How are they even comparable? The P-38 was a single-seat interceptor, whereas the Mossie was a light bomber. The only thing they have in common is that they both have two engines. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
If you believe the propaganda reels then the Mosquito can do everything including slice bread with its propeller blade. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

This is the reason why in depth reading to form opinions on aircraft is more important than the glossed over versions which are usually grossly inaccurate but reflect the attitudes of far too many.

lezbianseagull
11-10-2008, 03:28 PM
I do compare them when it comes to payload.

the p38 in this game has a MUCH easier time with the heavy payload.

And to me that doesn't make sense, if what the above people are saying is true, and that the mosquito is more of a medium bomber.

Supposadly the mosquito had more power than it had room for payload! And yet in this game the mosquito can barley get off the ground, and it certainly can't reach altitude/speed with any sort of payload.

M_Gunz
11-10-2008, 04:24 PM
Delivery capability at range.
Also I've never heard of a P-38 variant that carried a 57mm cannon.

Get the speed of the loaded Mossie up before taking off should be better, ditto for climb.

Supposadly the mosquito had more power than it had room for payload! And yet in this game the mosquito can barley get off the ground, and it certainly can't reach altitude/speed with any sort of payload.

Just because an article says "Mosquito" doesn't mean they were all the same. If you want to
make a point then it's better to get down to specifics unless you like your generalizations
being shot down, sometimes in (forum) flames.

Buzzsaw-
11-10-2008, 04:30 PM
Originally posted by leitmotiv:
The P-38 is a single-seat fighter/interceptor. The Mosquito is a heavier two-seat fighter-bomber/night fighter. They are in different classes. Capably handled and at certain altitudes the P-38 was able to maneuver with Western single-seat, single-engine fighters. The Mosquito was never intended for dueling with fighters. It's guns were for destroying bombers or night fighters (the night-fighter Mosquitoes) or shooting up ground targets (the fighter-bomber). Crazed fighter-bomber pilots like Braham did take on fighters but a Fw 190A shot him down.

'Bob' Braham, a 32 victory RAF Ace, who flew both nightfighters and day intruders, shot down 2 FW-190A's in a Mosquito. In both cases, he chased down the 190's with the Mosquito, in one case he outturned the 190.

Chasing them down you can't do in the game since the game's 1942 Mosquito version is obviously much slower than what he was flying. This model, which appears to be equipped with the Merlin 23, (a derivative of the Merlin 60 series which equipped the Spit IX's) has around 1400 hp. The later Merlin 25 equipped versions reached 1950 hp on 150 octane fuel.

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/mosquito/merlin25-powercurve.jpg

Document courtesy Mike Williams "WWII Aircraft Performance" site.

Braham was shot down in a fight versus two 190's. He had outmaneuvered the first, but was hit by the second.

In the game, you can outturn a 190A with a Mosquito at lower speeds using combat flaps.

The Mosquito's roll rate in the game is glacial, far less than what was historical.

As far as the original question:

The P-38 was lighter and smaller, a single seat fighter compared to a dual seat fighterbomber.

The P-38 was undoubtably the best twin engined fighter made in the war. In the areas of speed, maneuvrability and climb it was quite clearly ahead of other aircraft.

Whether it was a match for single engined fighters is another question. In the Pacific, it did well. In Europe, not so good.

Divine-Wind
11-10-2008, 04:38 PM
The model we have ingame is the Fighter-bomber version. IIRC other versions were able to carry much bigger payloads, but weren't equipped with the awesome guns the Mk VI FB had. Correct me if I'm wrong.


Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
If you believe the propaganda reels then the Mosquito can do everything including slice bread with its propeller blade. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
If it can't slice cheese then it's useless, in my opinion.

VW-IceFire
11-10-2008, 09:39 PM
Originally posted by lezbianseagull:
I do compare them when it comes to payload.

the p38 in this game has a MUCH easier time with the heavy payload.

And to me that doesn't make sense, if what the above people are saying is true, and that the mosquito is more of a medium bomber.

Supposadly the mosquito had more power than it had room for payload! And yet in this game the mosquito can barley get off the ground, and it certainly can't reach altitude/speed with any sort of payload.
The P-38 has an easier time because its lighter weight, later model, plus with more powerful engines attached to turbosuperchargers. Compared to an early model Mosquito FB.VI with the earliest engines which means far less horsepower and much more weight.

The Mosquito was many things including a fighter bomber (the FB.VI), a fast level bomber, a night fighter...but no where is it an interceptor. Its not really a medium bomber...it can do so much more than a medium bomber...but thats more its class than a P-38.

Don't believe the wartime propaganda about the Mosquito having more power than room for payload. Its not a super fighter. Its a very reasonable, some what radical in concept, and ultimately very effective twin engine aircraft. Its useful for dropping bombs, cruising at medium and high altitudes at high rates of speed compared to a conventional bomber, built of wood meaning its not using strategic materials and also less likely to be picked up on radar (and thus less likely to be intercepted by radar guided night fighters), and its half decent in handling enough to consider going up against single engine fighters.

Thats an impressive package all together...but its not perfect. Its not lightweight and its not really going to be super agile. I'm talking purely about the real one for a moment here. The in-game model is of course an early variant and therefore has less power...compare the early model to a late model in the same way we'd compare a Spitfire Vb versus a Mark IX or a Mark IX with +25lb. Big differences there.

lezbianseagull
11-10-2008, 11:31 PM
Thank you vw and others for you answers....

And for the one flameer...

Here is the specifics....

I have found the p38 to outclass the mosquito in all of the following areas.

1. Speed
2. Climb
3. Roll
4. Turn
5. Dive
6. Payload
7. Stability

(they both kick *** in armament)

I find it hard to believe that the p38 would be so dominate over a plane every historian agrees to be one of the greatest aircrafts ever.

Aaron_GT
11-11-2008, 01:08 AM
Don't believe the wartime propaganda about the Mosquito having more power than room for payload.

It was calculated that it had lifting capability in the end for ~8000lb* and was even accidentally weighted to this but for over 2000lb internal it had to have a bulged bay and because the weight wasn't then at the CofG (not really a design flaw as at the original 1000lb design load it was at CofG) and its stability suffered. Those aircraft loaded with Cookies were not particularly stable.

With a Cookie, plus 100 gallons external fuel plus addtional internal fuel and nav aids that is an around an additional 6400lb above the basic weight, and the planned long range versions were to have 200 gallon drop tanks plus Cookie for an additional 9000lb. So the 'double Cookie' weight was in theory possible except distribution for stability meant it wasn't possible.

Aaron_GT
11-11-2008, 01:17 AM
6. Payload

True for the FB.VI as the Mosquito lacked the hard points to carry as much ordnance but the P-38 had a much lighter fixed armament. In bomber configuration some P-38s could carry 4000lb externally but suffered a speed penalty and could not carry external fuel and so range in this configuration was more limited.

The P-38 was a far, far better interceptor, escort and could carry a superior external load as a fighter bomber. It was not used with such success as a level bomber or night fighter.

WOLFMondo
11-11-2008, 02:42 AM
Originally posted by lezbianseagull:

I find it hard to believe that the p38 would be so dominate over a plane every historian agrees to be one of the greatest aircrafts ever.

You use WEP boost when flying the Mosquito right?

I think you miss the points that have been pointed out. We have one variant, an early Fighter bomber. If you took a mid to late variant night fighter or a XVIII with a Molins cannon and compared it to the P38J or L you'd have a different set of variables to consider.

Its not a pure fighter aircraft and never was intended as such or was ever used as such. The only time it was used in that sort of role was as a night fighter where it hunted down other night fighters and bombers.

It was always meant to be a fast bomber but it just so happened that the basic design could:
Could take 4 cannon (thats the equivilent of 12 .50's in firepower) and 4 .303's,
It could house radar and an operator making it the no.1 nightfighter of WW2,
It could have an enlarged bomb bay so it could carry a 4000lbs cookie/block buster internally,
It was cleared for carrier use although never used operationally they were on there way to the Pacific when the war ended,
It was fast enought and stable enough to be a very good PR plane employed by both the RAF and USAAF,
It was fast enough to be a low level daylight intruder,
It has the space to fit large calibre cannons like the 57mm Molins gun on the XVIII,
It could be used as an all weather day or night ground attack aircraft
With extra boost and polished finish it was fast enough to hunt V1's (achieving 380mph at SL).
Without armament and in civilian markings it was used as a passenger plane and mail plane on routes other aircraft would have failed,
It could remain at 30,000ft+ as a radio relay for extended periods of time.

There is probably a dozen of so more uses it had. It was unique and legendary because it was so versatile.

One simple way of looking at how good it was at its intended role, look at daylight bombing loss rates of the mosquito and compare it to unescorted B17's doing the same job in 1943 and thier horrific loss rates. They even carried pretty much the same bomb load.

Remember it was never designed to be a night fighter, it was never meant to be one but with some simple conversion it was the best and most successful night fighter of WW2. Better than many of the custom designed night fighters at roles they were designed to fill.

I suggest you read up about the Devhavilland Hornet. The fighter successor to the Mosquito.

JG53Frankyboy
11-11-2008, 03:06 AM
Originally posted by Buzzsaw-:
.................

Chasing them down you can't do in the game since the game's 1942 Mosquito version is obviously much slower than what he was flying. This model, which appears to be equipped with the Merlin 23, (a derivative of the Merlin 60 series which equipped the Spit IX's) has around 1400 hp. The later Merlin 25 equipped versions reached 1950 hp on 150 octane fuel.

.....................

the Merlin 20series had a single stage, two speed supercharger.
Like the in the Hurricen Mk.II.
so no derivate of the Merlin 60 series

Xiolablu3
11-11-2008, 06:45 AM
Propaganda? How dare you, the Western Allies were immune from propaganda werent they?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xS15uUfcztA

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

WTE_Galway
11-11-2008, 10:33 PM
Originally posted by lezbianseagull:

I find it hard to believe that the p38 would be so dominate over a plane every historian agrees to be one of the greatest aircrafts ever.

uh huh ... can you name these historians please ?

If you want a sim that has planes that fly like the Hollywood movies rather than real life go buy MS CFS3 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

M_Gunz
11-12-2008, 06:01 AM
He says "every" which includes "any". Take your pick, it's black and white time!

M_Gunz
11-12-2008, 06:08 AM
Originally posted by Aaron_GT:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Don't believe the wartime propaganda about the Mosquito having more power than room for payload.

It was calculated that it had lifting capability in the end for ~8000lb* and was even accidentally weighted to this but for over 2000lb internal it had to have a bulged bay and because the weight wasn't then at the CofG (not really a design flaw as at the original 1000lb design load it was at CofG) and its stability suffered. Those aircraft loaded with Cookies were not particularly stable.

With a Cookie, plus 100 gallons external fuel plus addtional internal fuel and nav aids that is an around an additional 6400lb above the basic weight, and the planned long range versions were to have 200 gallon drop tanks plus Cookie for an additional 9000lb. So the 'double Cookie' weight was in theory possible except distribution for stability meant it wasn't possible. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

They should have swept the wings. How could they have missed that?

M_Gunz
11-12-2008, 06:15 AM
How many Mossies suffered engine failure at high alts over Europe?
I bet the P-38's had more of that too.

lezbianseagull
11-12-2008, 06:51 PM
To: Wolfmondo

thanks for the great reply...and the numbers...

I did some in game test's/comparisons.

At 1k eleveation the moquito came in as follows. (all tests done at 100% throtle)

Mosquito with 2k bombload: Max speed of 230mph
Mosqito with no bombs: Max Speed of 250mph

P38 (early 1943 version) with 2k bombload: Max speed of 270mph

P38 with no bombs: max speed of 280mph.

Obviously the p38 handles much better in terms of roll/turn etc.

So why does it also outperform the mosquito in bombload aswell?
Was teh p38 a better fighter AND BOMBER?

M_Gunz
11-12-2008, 07:49 PM
If you're going to ignore whole categories of difference between the two then whatever you say,
have it your way and stay away from those Mossies.

How far can the Mossie take 2k of bombs and how far can the P-38?
Which can deliver ordinance more precisely?
Forget the max speeds for a while and tell the cruise and range.

It should be obvious to you that the Mossie gained its reputation at a time when Britain did
have P-38's so try this on: maybe they knew things that you don't about what's important.

Ditto with your newbie evaluation, partial stats will never give the whole picture just like
off the rack clothes won't fit everyone well. You forgot a FEW important categories. I'll
give you one: View. At some point you'll find that synergies between design elements also
have values of their own.

It's not simple, it's not going to fit on a bubblegum card and it won't let you pick the winner.

The Mossie got a good reputation. You'll do better just learning why.

lezbianseagull
11-12-2008, 07:59 PM
M+guns....

Aparantly you want to turn this into a flame fest.../booring

p.s. go **** yourself

Mercanario
11-12-2008, 08:13 PM
Originally posted by WTE_Galway:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ImpStarDuece:

The other thing to consider is that this isn't a strategic sim, its a tactical sim concentrated on ground pounding and daylight fighter operations.



yeah .. for some reason a 6 hour high altitude photo-recon milk run where you are high enough and fast enough to avoid all contact with enemy interceptors does not seem to excite people much as a mission concept. </div></BLOCKQUOTE> It was on such a mission that Antione St Exupery was killed..

M_Gunz
11-12-2008, 08:22 PM
Originally posted by lezbianseagull:
M+guns....

Aparantly you want to turn this into a flame fest.../booring

p.s. go **** yourself

Up yours, fool.

Freiwillige
11-12-2008, 08:53 PM
Here are some variables.....
1. Cost. The wooden whonder was produced because it was cheap to manufacture being wood and all and that suited the strapped for cash English rather well.
Now a P-38 was expensive even the U.S. Government bought as few as possable due to its high cost. I think its cost ratio in 1940 was 4 1/2 P-40's for every one P-38!

2. Nationality. The Mossie was English the P-38 was not, After all why use other their equipment when ours works just fine!

3.The Mossie was being used against German Targets long Before a P-38 set foot in Europe!

Divine-Wind
11-12-2008, 08:57 PM
Originally posted by lezbianseagull:
M+guns....

Aparantly you want to turn this into a flame fest.../booring

p.s. go **** yourself
So polite, and friendly too.

berg417448
11-12-2008, 09:10 PM
Originally posted by Freiwillige:

Now a P-38 was expensive even the U.S. Government bought as few as possable due to its high cost. I think its cost ratio in 1940 was 4 1/2 P-40's for every one P-38!


1939-41 cost of a P-40 was $ 60, 562.
1939-41 cost of a P-38 was $134, 284

So it was closer to 2 1/2 than 4 1/2.

By 1944 the prices had dropped to:

$ 44, 892 for a P-40
$ 97, 147 for a P-38

Interestingly enough, the 1943 price for a P-47 was $104, 258 and a P-38 was
$105, 567.

http://www.au.af.mil/au/afhra/aafsd/aafsd_pdf/t082.pdf

M_Gunz
11-12-2008, 09:41 PM
But when you add the cost including time of pilots and crew, you want the better planes.
The US had a -lot- of P-47's built regardless of cost. Most produced in US fighter?

WOLFMondo
11-13-2008, 05:13 AM
Originally posted by lezbianseagull:
To: Wolfmondo

thanks for the great reply...and the numbers...

I did some in game test's/comparisons.

At 1k eleveation the moquito came in as follows. (all tests done at 100% throtle)

Mosquito with 2k bombload: Max speed of 230mph
Mosqito with no bombs: Max Speed of 250mph

P38 (early 1943 version) with 2k bombload: Max speed of 270mph

P38 with no bombs: max speed of 280mph.

Obviously the p38 handles much better in terms of roll/turn etc.

So why does it also outperform the mosquito in bombload aswell?
Was teh p38 a better fighter AND BOMBER?

Your tests don't look very accurate. Your using IAS rather than TAS for a start. How much fuel are you using? Is it on the Crimea map? Have you got device link set up?

Thing is though, your looking at two planes with different roles. Even the FBIV is not intended to be in the same role as the P38.

If you were in a real life situation and you were leading an anti shipping attack on the North sea, would you take a single seat P38J or a dual seat Mosquito FBIV? One is distinctly better suited to all weather day or night time operations.

If you were to compare a pure bomber version of the Mosquito vs a P38 you'll notice a couple of distinct advantages the Mosquito has:

Bomb aimer = P38's used in level bombing had to have a lead aircraft aiming for them. AKAIK this wasn't successful or used very much. This second person was also a sudo navigator, engineer and pilot. Something integral to a 6 or 7 hour sortie where you might be flying at night and/or in bad weather (something thats quite common in Norther Europe).

Internal bomb load = greater aerodynamics meaning better fuel efficiency across the speed range.

Carrying capacity over great distances = The mosquito had an enourmouse internal carrying capacity internally and could take it a very long way and back.

The P38 was a great fighter and a great fighter bomber but you have to look at the context both aircraft were designed for and in the situations they were used.

In the context of this simulation the P38 is always going to look like a better option because your not facing the same challenges real pilots faced, which demanded an aircraft with the Mosquito's traits.

WOLFMondo
11-13-2008, 05:23 AM
Originally posted by Freiwillige:
Here are some variables.....
1. Cost. The wooden whonder was produced because it was cheap to manufacture being wood and all and that suited the strapped for cash English rather well.
Now a P-38 was expensive even the U.S. Government bought as few as possable due to its high cost. I think its cost ratio in 1940 was 4 1/2 P-40's for every one P-38!

2. Nationality. The Mossie was English the P-38 was not, After all why use other their equipment when ours works just fine!

3.The Mossie was being used against German Targets long Before a P-38 set foot in Europe!

Actually it wasn't cheap to produce. Raw materials had to be imported from south America (hence why Canadian production was pushed). The benefit is that it didn't use Bauxite imports and used a different work force.

I don't think nationality had much to do with it though. The British test P38 as we all know was a failure (maybe in retrospect it could have been a great import had the US decided to include turbochargers - different discussion) so it was never on the cards as an import.

But I'm signing out of this one as i'm not going to bleed my finger tips dry writing up another 1000 words on why the Mosquito was not the British P38 and why the Mosquito was a success.

Xiolablu3
11-13-2008, 06:29 AM
Originally posted by Freiwillige:
Here are some variables.....


2. Nationality. The Mossie was English the P-38 was not, After all why use other their equipment when ours works just fine!

!

This was ceetainly not a factor, Britian was crying out to the US for aircraft, which is what lead to the P51 and also buying fortresses, B26's, P40's etc.

They wanted as many P40's as the US could send, which is what led NAA to suggest they could produce a better aircract than the P40 instead, so the Brits enthusiastically said 'yes please!'.

More reasons why they are not really comparable :

The MOsquito had two crew, which made it better for navigation, level bombing, night fighting, carrying RADAR, transport and so on.


I should note that I asked this very same question about a year ago. See if you can dig up that thread, it was interesting, and because its been asked before people are not very enthusiastic to go through it all again.

Seek it out if you can with the search function

Heres one such thread where I asked the same question....

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/9331002375/p/2

Read all 5 pages.

lezbianseagull
11-13-2008, 11:37 AM
So apparantly the mosquito is superior in...fuel capacity?

I have no problem with the p38 being a more nimble aircraft, but should it also be a more effective bomber?

Aaron_GT
11-13-2008, 11:51 AM
They should have swept the wings. How could they have missed that?

The introduced some front edge sweep in the proposed jet version at least, but not proper sweep.

Aaron_GT
11-13-2008, 12:00 PM
As noted the Mosquito wasn't really designed to avoid strategic material (both the balsa and the spruce was imported and wood is bulky to transport, and a different type of spruce had to be substituted due to shortage) but it did avoid a critical shortage of skilled metal workers and allowed the use of a large resource of furniture workers and piano and other instrument makers. In fact the biggest contractor was G-Plan, a furniture firm.

The USA was actually very keen to use it and requested that production be started in the USA but de Havilland had no personnel to spare when also starting production in Canada and Australia. As noted the logic of Canadian production was it was near the source of the timber. Some ancilliary components for these were manufactured in the USA.

In the end the USA used a number of Mosquitos, primarily for weather reconnaisance and as carriers of navigation aids such as Oboe and H2S to help USAAF heavy bombers to bomb through overcast although later some B17s did get H2S (at the expense of bombs). I have never seen a photo of a B24 with H2S.

Aaron_GT
11-13-2008, 12:06 PM
So apparantly the mosquito is superior in...fuel capacity?

It was capable of taking a 2000 to 4000lb bombload further (by a factor of about two - the B.XVI had a combat range of 1500 miles with A 4000lb bomb load, the P-38 1300 miles with external tanks and no bombload), faster, and drop it more accurately. To me that makes it a better level bomber.

Don't look just at maximum speed but also cruise speeds. Bombers don't fly all the way to target on WEP. Maximum speed is used when threatened, but not otherwise.

Also the later B marks were pressurised for crew comfort and carried an extensive range of navigational and blind bombing aids and warning detectors.

The P-38 is superior for fighter bomber work over land (2000lb + rockets versus 1000lb + rockets) although with slightly less fixed armament and a superior dogfighter. But then the P-38 was designed as a fighter whereas the Mosquito was designed as a bomber.

Really it makes more sense to compare with the A-20 or Ju-88 and to compare the P-38 with the Hornet or Fw-187.

Xiolablu3
11-13-2008, 12:10 PM
It had heavier armament, much more space for RADAR, cameras, another crew member to navigate or aim the bombs, an internal bomb bay.

And you are comparing a 1942-early '43 Mosquito with a late 1944 P38.

Aaron_GT
11-13-2008, 12:39 PM
p.s. go **** yourself

One more example of that sort of behaviour and it is holiday time...

Kurfurst__
11-13-2008, 01:38 PM
Originally posted by lezbianseagull:

I have no problem with the p38 being a more nimble aircraft, but should it also be a more effective bomber?

Delivering those bombs may be a problem - the Mosquito bomber variants were properly equipped with a bombsight, and could perform level bomb attack runs. On the P-38 (as well as FB Mosquito types), it was all the pilots guesswork when to release the bombs, leading the questionable accuracy in this role.

Having to carry bombs externally on bombracks also costs a significant reduction is speed - to an extent that the speed advantage offered by a fighter bomber would diminish completely.

Gibbage1
11-13-2008, 02:35 PM
Again, you show how LITTLE you know about US aircraft. Stick with the 109, PLEASE!!!

http://www.waterholes.com/~dennette/models/ww-ii/p-38/droop.gif

P-38 Droop snoot. The guns were removed, and a glass nose installed with a Norden bomb sight. Only 1 of these were in the formation, and all P-38's would drop on his call. Once the bombs were away, then you had a pack of nimble fighters, not lumbering bombers. This was used many times in the way, most notably in Ploesti.


Originally posted by Kurfurst__:
Delivering those bombs may be a problem - the Mosquito bomber variants were properly equipped with a bombsight, and could perform level bomb attack runs. On the P-38 (as well as FB Mosquito types), it was all the pilots guesswork when to release the bombs, leading the questionable accuracy in this role.

Having to carry bombs externally on bombracks also costs a significant reduction is speed - to an extent that the speed advantage offered by a fighter bomber would diminish completely.

Gibbage1
11-13-2008, 02:51 PM
Originally posted by Kurfurst__:
Having to carry bombs externally on bombracks also costs a significant reduction is speed - to an extent that the speed advantage offered by a fighter bomber would diminish completely.

Also, on that note, the FB could only carry two 250lb bombs internally. That means that anything more then that, negated the advantage since more bombs or fuel was stored externally. The B version could carry 4 500lb internally, but had to remove the 4 20MM, and only the 4 .303's.

Aaron_GT
11-13-2008, 03:26 PM
Again, you show how LITTLE you know about US aircraft. Stick with the 109, PLEASE!!!

Not really, these have been referenced more than once already. They were very rare.


This was used many times in the way, most notably in Ploesti.

It was used very rarely. B. series Mosquitos - thousands of sorties.

Also range of the P-38 with external bombs and no external fuel was much more limited than that of a Mosquito.

Aaron_GT
11-13-2008, 03:28 PM
Also, on that note, the FB could only carry two 250lb bombs internally.

Wrong, it could carry two 500lbers internally.

Aaron_GT
11-13-2008, 03:32 PM
The B version could carry 4 500lb internally

Bulged bay versions could carry up to 6 500lbers internally on an Avro carrier although I haven't seen any evidence it was ever actually used. The outer pylons could carry either fuel or more 500lbers, although mostly fuel was carried. So in theory 4000 lb cookie plus 2 500lb could be carried, but was never done AFAIK.

Aaron_GT
11-13-2008, 03:33 PM
The B version could carry 4 500lb internally, but had to remove the 4 20MM, and only the 4 .303's.

The B version had no .303s either.

M_Gunz
11-13-2008, 03:45 PM
I'm sure the droop snoot P-38 was just as everything as the regular ones including firepower.

Changes of (regular) P-38 over time:

The P-38 Lightning - Evolution of Speed and Climb Performance (http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/p-38/p-38-wayne.html)

Gibbage1
11-13-2008, 04:00 PM
The droop snoots had the firepower removed, to make room for the bombadeer, but only 1 in the group would have this mod, and the rest would be fully armed P-38's.


Originally posted by M_Gunz:
I'm sure the droop snoot P-38 was just as everything as the regular ones including firepower.

Changes of (regular) P-38 over time:

The P-38 Lightning - Evolution of Speed and Climb Performance (http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/p-38/p-38-wayne.html)

Divine-Wind
11-13-2008, 04:15 PM
Originally posted by Gibbage1:
The droop snoots had the firepower removed, to make room for the bombadeer, but only 1 in the group would have this mod, and the rest would be fully armed P-38's.
I imagine it would have been slightly cramped for the bombardier with the machine guns and cannon left in place. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

Gibbage1
11-13-2008, 04:32 PM
Originally posted by Divine-Wind:
I imagine it would have been slightly cramped for the bombardier with the machine guns and cannon left in place. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

And a bit.... loud?

Lets not forget about the rare passanger pods made out of 150 gal drop tanks that was used. If I was in one, I would of REMOVED the drop tank switch from the cockpit.