PDA

View Full Version : Interesting WW2 American pilot commentary



XyZspineZyX
10-25-2003, 03:09 AM
This came from the Mustangs/Mustangs site. A lot to chew on, and some provocative observations about the P38L as well.


QUOTE -

: If I may I would like put in my two cents worth on this subject. I have some 375+ hours in the P-47 and 510 hours in the P-51. Although I have no time in the '38, Michael Breezas of the 14th FG was a friend of mine and the leading P-38 ace in the theater. In addition, Jack Walker of the 82nd FG and I have often discussed the merits of these aircraft. Both these gentlemen were aces.
: First let me address the P-47 vs the P-51. If I were strafing, my choice would be the P-47; it was built like a tank. Above 15,000 feet, I do not think any German plane except a jet could outperform it. It was a comfortable aircraft to fly but to me it flew like two separate aircraft at low and high altitudes. It was quite tender at altitude and a fast movement on the stick easily induced a high speed stall; however, it was still very maneuverable. At low altitudes one could rack it around with impunity.
: We had been instructed never to get into a turning contest with enemy aircraft below 15,000'. I have no question this has a lot to do with pilot ability. Col Herschel Green who was our leading ace in the 15th AF outturned and destroyed a Macci 202 right on the deck. That is difficult to believe because the Macci could outturn the P-40 which could outturn both the P-47 and P-51. It must have been pilot ability!
: The P-47s overseas were a lot different from those we flew in the states. In the U.S. we never used water, never saw a drop tank, and could not draw more than about 45 inches of Hg due to 87 octane fuel. In our long range escort missions in the 15th AF, our engines were able to draw 70 inches of Hg which caused the factory reps to go crazy. The engine was supposed to be limited to 52" and emergency power was restricted to 5 minutes at 56". Our Group philosopy was that if you were in a real tight position, it would be better to take a chance on the engine blowing up rather than letting yourself be shot down. Never heard of an engine failing although we drew this power only in a dire emergency. We never had the P-47 with the paddle blades, which I understand increased its performance significantly. Unfortunately it burned a lot more fuel than the 51; more than twice as much.
: The various models of the P-38 improved the aircraft a lot during the war. Earlier models, before I believe the P-38L, had no maneuvering flaps nor dive flaps and the Germans would make a pass and just continue in their dive to escape. The 38 hit compressibility easily, and apparently had a tendency to shed its tail section on occasion in these high speed dives. Because it was difficult to pull out in time, most pilots avoided a steep dive in the earlier models used in North Africa. All this changed with the advent of the P-38L which now could outturn the German aircraft, stay with them in a dive, and recover. By the way they could outturn a P-51 also if you stayed in a turn with them. Walker says that before the maneuvering flaps, it was touch and go as to whether they could or could not turn with the Me-109 in North Africa. I think again, pilot ability was critical. I have read accounts of German pilots who felt that diving on a 38 followed by a climb away was very dangerous because the 38 could transition into a high rate of climb very rapidly. Every German fighter pilot I have talked with was adamant that one did not make a head-on pass at a P-38. Mike Breezas complained bitterly about the cold at high altitudes (> 25,000 feet) over Germany where the temperatures at these alitudes often hovered near -60? in the winter. Obviously the heating system was completely inadequate. After the P-38L became available, I was told that if a German pilot got a 38 on his tail, he would quickly reverse his turn, go into a dive and usually get away. Apparently the 38 had a lot of inertia to overcome in reversing their turn, and the enemy would be gone. Never forget though that the 38 had two engines which quite often allowed it to return home with an engine out whereas we were going down if we lost ours.
: I am sure that other pilots have different opinions on the above but this is what I think based on my exeriences and chatting with my comrades of that time. I apologize for the length of this but there is much, much more that coud be said on this controversial subject.
: Cordially, Art Fiedler

- UNQUOTE



Blutarski

XyZspineZyX
10-25-2003, 03:09 AM
This came from the Mustangs/Mustangs site. A lot to chew on, and some provocative observations about the P38L as well.


QUOTE -

: If I may I would like put in my two cents worth on this subject. I have some 375+ hours in the P-47 and 510 hours in the P-51. Although I have no time in the '38, Michael Breezas of the 14th FG was a friend of mine and the leading P-38 ace in the theater. In addition, Jack Walker of the 82nd FG and I have often discussed the merits of these aircraft. Both these gentlemen were aces.
: First let me address the P-47 vs the P-51. If I were strafing, my choice would be the P-47; it was built like a tank. Above 15,000 feet, I do not think any German plane except a jet could outperform it. It was a comfortable aircraft to fly but to me it flew like two separate aircraft at low and high altitudes. It was quite tender at altitude and a fast movement on the stick easily induced a high speed stall; however, it was still very maneuverable. At low altitudes one could rack it around with impunity.
: We had been instructed never to get into a turning contest with enemy aircraft below 15,000'. I have no question this has a lot to do with pilot ability. Col Herschel Green who was our leading ace in the 15th AF outturned and destroyed a Macci 202 right on the deck. That is difficult to believe because the Macci could outturn the P-40 which could outturn both the P-47 and P-51. It must have been pilot ability!
: The P-47s overseas were a lot different from those we flew in the states. In the U.S. we never used water, never saw a drop tank, and could not draw more than about 45 inches of Hg due to 87 octane fuel. In our long range escort missions in the 15th AF, our engines were able to draw 70 inches of Hg which caused the factory reps to go crazy. The engine was supposed to be limited to 52" and emergency power was restricted to 5 minutes at 56". Our Group philosopy was that if you were in a real tight position, it would be better to take a chance on the engine blowing up rather than letting yourself be shot down. Never heard of an engine failing although we drew this power only in a dire emergency. We never had the P-47 with the paddle blades, which I understand increased its performance significantly. Unfortunately it burned a lot more fuel than the 51; more than twice as much.
: The various models of the P-38 improved the aircraft a lot during the war. Earlier models, before I believe the P-38L, had no maneuvering flaps nor dive flaps and the Germans would make a pass and just continue in their dive to escape. The 38 hit compressibility easily, and apparently had a tendency to shed its tail section on occasion in these high speed dives. Because it was difficult to pull out in time, most pilots avoided a steep dive in the earlier models used in North Africa. All this changed with the advent of the P-38L which now could outturn the German aircraft, stay with them in a dive, and recover. By the way they could outturn a P-51 also if you stayed in a turn with them. Walker says that before the maneuvering flaps, it was touch and go as to whether they could or could not turn with the Me-109 in North Africa. I think again, pilot ability was critical. I have read accounts of German pilots who felt that diving on a 38 followed by a climb away was very dangerous because the 38 could transition into a high rate of climb very rapidly. Every German fighter pilot I have talked with was adamant that one did not make a head-on pass at a P-38. Mike Breezas complained bitterly about the cold at high altitudes (> 25,000 feet) over Germany where the temperatures at these alitudes often hovered near -60? in the winter. Obviously the heating system was completely inadequate. After the P-38L became available, I was told that if a German pilot got a 38 on his tail, he would quickly reverse his turn, go into a dive and usually get away. Apparently the 38 had a lot of inertia to overcome in reversing their turn, and the enemy would be gone. Never forget though that the 38 had two engines which quite often allowed it to return home with an engine out whereas we were going down if we lost ours.
: I am sure that other pilots have different opinions on the above but this is what I think based on my exeriences and chatting with my comrades of that time. I apologize for the length of this but there is much, much more that coud be said on this controversial subject.
: Cordially, Art Fiedler

- UNQUOTE



Blutarski

XyZspineZyX
10-25-2003, 03:18 AM
Very interesting! Thanks Blutarski!/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

47|FC
http://rangerring.com/wwii/p-47.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-25-2003, 03:19 AM
Great read.

Regards,

SkyChimp

http://members.cox.net/rowlandparks/jug_sig.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-25-2003, 10:26 AM
above 15,000 ft the jug could not be outmanuevered or outflown.....dang straight.

www.fighterjocks.net (http://www.fighterjocks.net) home of the 11 time Champions Team AFJ. 6 Years Flying. Semper Invictus! <img src ="http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/ah_120_1065509047.jpg">