PDA

View Full Version : P-38L with 1,720hp engines, info requested.



Hunde_3.JG51
05-30-2005, 12:50 AM
According to my sources there were 3,923 P-38L's produced during the war.

This from the beta readme:

"2) The P-38L with 1,720 hp engines €" about 2,000 aircraft of this type were produced and used on both European and Pacific theaters."

When I research the P-38L I find no mention of a 1,720hp engine variant. You would think that if over half the production total used this powerplant information about it would be more available. Does anyone have information on this aircraft and whether or not it actually saw any combat?

Thanks for any information provided.

ImpStarDuece
05-30-2005, 01:37 AM
This is off a snippet from a discussion board, taken from Rings Public Record Office site.

I'm not going to testify to its accuracy but it was all that I could remember seeing off the top of my head.


In 1943 the F-30 was qualified at 1725hp@64in/Hg@3200rpm by Allison based on demanding USAACs standards for determining WER established in December of 1942. Lockheed tests confirmed Allison's 1725bhp rating for the F-30s, up to a critical alt of around 26,000ft. However, the Air Force never bothered to authorize the new rating, instead rubberstamping a P-38L on the manual in place of a P-38J and staying with the 3000rpm rating.

A couple comparisons between the P-38Js F-17s and the P-38Ls F-30s:
F-17:*
Takeoff - bhp/MAP: 1425/54.0
Normal - bhp/Alt/MAP: 1100/30,000/44.0
Military - bhp/Alt/MAP: 1425/24,900/54.0
WER - bhp/Alt/MAP: 1600/10,000/60.0

F-30:*
Takeoff - bhp/MAP: 1500/54.0
Normal - bhp/Alt/MAP: 1100/34,000/44.0
Military - bhp/Alt/MAP: 1425/29,00/54.0
WER - bhp/Alt/MAP: 1600/28,700/60.0

Crankshaft Overspeed Rating:*
"C" series: Overspeed rating of 3600rpms
"F" series Allison with 6 counterweight crankshaft (F-17): 4100rpms
"F" series Allison with 12 counterweight crankshaft (F-30): 4400rpms

* Source: Vee's For Victory! The Story of the Allison V-1710 Aircraft Engine 1929-1948 by Daniel D. Whitney.
The F-30 was clearly a more capable engine than the F-17. This was primarily due to the 12-cwt crankshaft used in the F-30. At 1725bhp at 3200rpms, the F-30s bearing and crankcase load was less than that of the F-17 at 1600bhp and 3000rpms with its 6-cwt crankshaft. The F-30 could run longer at 1725bhp than the F-17 could at 1600bhp!

I have found several references to the P-38 maxing out at almost 440 mph. There is a really long P-38 article floating around the net somewhere, i'll do some more digging

ImpStarDuece
05-30-2005, 01:53 AM
These quotes and the speed chart are taken from Carlo Kopp's excelent "Der Gabelschwanz Teufel" article on the WW2 aviation page which can be found HERE (http://home.att.net/~C.C.Jordan/index.html).

Its good reading and obviously written by someone who has a great love and deep knowledge of the P-38.




The P-38J was followed by the P-38L, deliveries of which commenced in June, 1944, almost 4,000 were built by the end of hostilities. The P-38L was fitted with F-30 engines, delivering equal or better power to higher altitudes, and slightly larger fuel tanks, with booster pumps in the wings. Detail changes included the first tail warning radar in a fighter.

Snippet 2


The two Allison V-1710F-30 V-12s had a 5.5 in. bore and 6.0 in stroke, providing a compression ratio of 6.5. These drove Curtiss Electric constant speed props via a 2:1 reduction gear, delivering 1,475 HP military and takeoff ratings at 3,000 RPM, or 1,612 HP maximum rating at 3,000 RPM and 60 in. of manifold pressure. Some later engines are described as delivering up to 1,725 HP WEP rating. The engines required 100 octane or higher rated fuel, and had 13 USG oil capacity. The oil was cooled in two outboard chin core radiators, vented via automatically controlled flaps on either side of the nacelle. Fuel consumption was 0.65 lb/HP./hr at 1,100 HP normal rating, at 2,600 RPM.

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y290/ImpStarDuece/P-38speedchart1.jpg

3.JG51_Stecher
05-30-2005, 01:36 PM
Could these later P-38Ls be the ones build by Vultee?

fordfan25
05-30-2005, 06:59 PM
bump

bolillo_loco
05-31-2005, 05:41 AM
Originally posted by 3.JG51_Stecher:
Could these later P-38Ls be the ones build by Vultee?

if I am not mistaken only 112 lightnings were built by the 2nd manufacturing plant. all others were built by lockheed.

all P-38Ls and not just the last 2,000 like others have said were built with the F-30 allision engines which were rated by allision at 1,725 hp. The army aircorps never officially adopted this rating during the war to my knowledge. the F-30 was allisions identification of the engine. the army called them 111/113 one being right hand drive the other being left hand drive. the F-17 was the engine used in the J model which the army called 89/91.

from things I have read I would suspect the 38L with a take off weight of 17,699lbs to climb 4,500-5,000 fpm initial and have a top speed of 440 mph while using the allision 1,725 hp rating.

again, all 3,900 odd 38Ls had the F-30 111/113 allision rated 1,725 hp engines.

Hunde_3.JG51
05-31-2005, 12:20 PM
I can find nothing on this, or any information showing a rating of 1,720hp. Nor do I see any speeds approaching 440mph ever mentioned, all top speeds seem to be 414-417mph. I just checked some reference books I had, and did a bunch of searches on the internet, and I have seen nothing about a P-38L utilizing 1,720hp during wartime.

Does anyone actually have information about this plane being used in combat, or does it belong on the YP-80, He-162, Me-163 etc. ban list?

CUJO_1970
05-31-2005, 12:38 PM
They weren't used in the 8th AF in the west, so maybe they were used by the 15th or 9th AF?

According to bollillo's post above, perhaps the engine was capable of generating 1700+ hp at WEP but was not officially adopted operationally?

According to Roger Freeman, only the 479th was still using P-38s when the first L's became available(July 1944) and that all their replacement aircraft were actually P-38Js turned in by units that had converted to the P-51.

The 479th flew it's last P-38 mission on 27 Sept., 1944 and the P-38 was no longer used as a fighter in the 8th AF.

I have very little information on the PTO.

p1ngu666
05-31-2005, 01:47 PM
doubt itll be banned
might make the p38 something other than a flying target, for the average pilot

VMF-214_HaVoK
05-31-2005, 02:16 PM
First a thread on the MarkIII and now the Lighting. Could it be that LW pilots fear something being faster? We been chasing 190s and K4s around for a long time. Its not going to kill you to the same for awhile http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

You could always email Oleg and request this information Im sure he will share it with you. Just because you cant find it googling does not mean it dont exist.

bolillo_loco
05-31-2005, 02:31 PM
Originally posted by Hunde_3.JG51:
I can find nothing on this, or any information showing a rating of 1,720hp. Nor do I see any speeds approaching 440mph ever mentioned, all top speeds seem to be 414-417mph. I just checked some reference books I had, and did a bunch of searches on the internet, and I have seen nothing about a P-38L utilizing 1,720hp during wartime.

Does anyone actually have information about this plane being used in combat, or does it belong on the YP-80, He-162, Me-163 etc. ban list?

this doesnt supprise me one bit. may I venture the guess that you do not like the P-38 and your not willing to spend money on books written specifically written on the P-38 or units that flew them. I frown heavily on people who use net searches.........reason........nearly all information that is posted on the web is posted by less than credible sources.

414 mph has been used in every general reference book I have ever read and until you purchase books written specifically on the P-38 you will never see figures higher than that.

I can assure you that several books state that the 38L was rated for 1,725 hp and that it had a top speed of 360-365 mph sea level - 440-445 mph at altitude and the rate of climb was 4,500-5,000 fpm. warren bodies book "Lockheed P-38 Lightning" is one. several books by Jeff Ethell are others. if your only going to buy one book on the P-38 I would suggest warren bodies book. it is very inexpensive at 16 dollars, any other book only confirms what bodie has already written.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/096293595...nce&s=books&n=507846 (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0962935956/qid=1117569907/sr=8-2/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i2_xgl14/102-9746483-3378508?v=glance&s=books&n=507846)

to exclude the plane because there is no real proof that pilots used the lockheed rating is rather odd when one considers just how many a/c are included in this game and used by servers that never saw any combat or their combat useage was very limited......ie 200 planes or less. there were nearly 4,000 P-38Ls manufactured during the war and they served in every yes EVERY theater that the americans fought in.

a less than complete list of my P-38 sources

P-38 lightning in WW II color jeff ethell isbn 0879388684

american eagles P-38 lightning units of the 8th and 9th af roger freemanisbn 1903223172

happy jacks go buggy, jack ilfrey isbn 0764306642

lockheed P-38 Lightning steve pace isbn 0760301514

The P-38 Lightning gene gurney library of congress catalog card number 70-76218

peter three eight john stanawayisbn 0933126735

an escort of P-38s john mullens isbn 1883809037

the 370th f/g in WWII jay jones isbn 0764317792

adorimini 82nd fb in WWII steve blake w/ john stanaway no isbn or library of congress number listed

attack and conquer 8th fg in WWII stanaway and lawrence j hickey isbn 0887408087

possum clover and hades 475th fg in WWII stanaway isbn 0887405185

fighter aces of the usa raymond toliver and trevor constable isbn 0764303481

the geyser gang the 428th fg in WWII john truman steinko library of congress catalog card number 86-060601

the lockheed P-38 Lightning warren bodie isbn 09629355905

pattons eyes in the sky tom Ivie isbn 1903223261

55th fg vs the luftwaffe gray isbn 1580070043

P-38 Lightning jeff ethell isbn 0517552477

americas hundred thousand F. Dean isbn 0764300725

lockheed P-38 Lightning frederick johnsen isbn 0933424655

P-38 lightning at war joe christy and jeff ethell isbn 0711007721

the P-38 lightning pamela reynolds isbn 0938021354

vees for victory allison 1710 aircraft engine daniel whitney isbn 0764305611

I could go on with another 20+ odd books that go into a lot more detail than any general reference book that you will read. because I have read the abovem mentioned books this is why I have not only heard of but seen the 1725 hp figure and performance figures for the 38L.

get bodies book, at 16 dollars its a steal

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/096293595...nce&s=books&n=507846 (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0962935956/qid=1117569907/sr=8-2/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i2_xgl14/102-9746483-3378508?v=glance&s=books&n=507846)

Gibbage1
05-31-2005, 03:09 PM
I also hope the P-38 Late gets this.

http://www.gibbageart.com/files/p38k14.jpg

AerialTarget
05-31-2005, 03:58 PM
You mean the pilot's relief tube? Yes, that is something that no P-38 pilot should be without! Oh, wait. You mean the sight, don't you?

On another note, that doesn't happen to be the same John Clements as the one in ARMA, does it? It seems to good to be true that there might be another P-38 obsessed sword fanatic out there!

Hunde_3.JG51
05-31-2005, 06:04 PM
I never said I wanted this plane banned, I asked if it was going to end up in this catagory. And if you do a search you will find that I have said several times as far as the "cool" factor goes, nothing beats the P-38 with its loud dual Allisions and nasty nose armament (that mysteriously wallows around when firing). As for books, I said that I used reference books, meaning they cover a large group of aircraft, I didn't exactly use books by Dr. Suess to find information. My collection of more in-depth books deal with the FW-190. Sorry I am "not willing to spend the money" on specific books dealing with every type of aircraft http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif, that is what I thought this forum was about, sharing information.

I posted threads on the Mustang III (read that again and ask yourself if it sounds like I want it banned, nice try with the LW bias though http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif) and the P-38L with 1,720hp because I just saw them in the beta readme that was posted and I wanted some information on them. The Mustang III thread filled up with good information almost immediately, while this thread had to be bumped several times. As for being afraid of any plane, well, I'll let the numbers speak for themselves. As for chasing planes around the P-38J is faster than the A-6 in '43 at SL and faster at very high altitudes. The P-51B is no slow poke either. In '44 I end up in the FW-190A-8 alot (I have flown the Ta-152 about 8 times total) because again, I like historical stuff, and the P-51D overall is easily faster and the P-47D is as fast or faster at all but the lowest altitude and simply blows it away at high altitude (as it should). If you are always chasing 190's and 109's it depends at what altitude. It's not like the Blue side airacraft are faster at all altitudes.

So take off the tinfoil hat and relax.

And I will ask again, any proof they were used in combat? You say several books talk about the 1,720hp Lightning, could you share this information, particularly concerning use in combat? I don't care what planes did on occasion, or at manufacturer/test facilities. I fly on historical servers, and we are VERY specific about what planes we include when we make missions/scenarios, this is my sole reason for asking about this. I simply want to know where it belongs.

SkyChimp
05-31-2005, 06:11 PM
There was not a "special" P-38 with engines that developed that power. They were run of the mill P-38Ls with V-1710-111/113 engines run at a higher boost. The tests that produced the numbers in the above graph were apparently Lockheed tests. The boost required to achieve 1,700+ hp was never approved by the USAAF for general use.

bolillo_loco
05-31-2005, 07:28 PM
as I have stated and skychimp has just restated...every 38L had the F-30s rated at 1,720 hp. there is no special trick to using that rating. even when talking about the 414-417 mph figure I can provide 421-426 to nearly 430 mph figures from several of my books for 38J and 38L models that are using the 1,600 hp rating and the rate of climb is 4,000 fpm at that rating. the time to climb to 20,000 ft is a full minute lower than what is listed in other books.

I would like to see the 5,200lb bomb load that some 38 units used. for this I can provide pictures, about a dozen pictures to be exact. the standard bomb load of the J and L model was 4,000 lbs 2 x 2,000 lb bombs. It seems that a few imaginative units fixed 4 additional hard points next to the factory ones which meant that the J and L could carry 4 x 300 lb bombs and 2 x 2000 lb bombs for a 5,200 lb bomb load. I have also seen pics (few pics, very few) of a P-38 with 6 50 cal nose guns and 1 20mm. I believe it was only used by 1-2 pilots though.

I use the term general reference books. I consider any book that lists multiple ww II a/c and gives a very brief discription of 1-3 pages a general reference book. general reference books are great at giving general information on a lot of a/c, but lack a lot of detail. the books that you have described sound a lot like general reference books.

16 dollars for warren bodies book is very cheap and the only real book you need on that a/c.

you may never find what you wish here at a forum. I almost didnt provide the sources that I did simply because I learned one thing about discussing the P-38, nearly everybody thinks that it is a laim a/c. no matter what I post (quoted from a book) a lot of people come a long and pick it apart almost like they have a vendeta against the P-38. because of this I am simply not willing to spend hours to go through my 40+ books on the P-38 to quote authors.

due to the 38s unpopularity I doubt many have the amount of books that I do. in the years that I have been reading this forum I would venture a guess that there are about a dozen true P-38 fans out there and less than half of those have an extensive collection of books written on the P-38.

Hunde_3.JG51
05-31-2005, 08:12 PM
That's cool loco, my friend is a P-38 nut and I have a high opinion of the aircraft myself.

Oh, I almost forgot. Just so you don't think I have anything against the P-38, not too long ago I posted (took me over an hour to type) a pilot's impression of his first flight in the P-38 from the book "Pacific Sweep." It was very complimentory towars the Lightning and the author finished by saying something like "I feel the P-38 was the finest aircraft of its day, and yes, I have flown the P-51."

Totally agree about the heavier bombload.

As for general reference books, I am aware of their limitations, hence me asking for detailed information.

I'll check out that book (thanks for the heads up).

Sorry you had bad experiences with the forum http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif.

But again, I am sorry to sound like a broken record but was this power used in combat? Is there any proof that it was, or pilot accounts? As it stands now it sounds more like a "what if" type thing. I understand that any P-38L could, according to sources, achieve those numbers, but were they used/approved?

Again, to understand where I am coming from you have to realize that I try to fly with historical planesets as much as possible. I am not against the P-38, I just want to know where this new P-38L will belong, and the only way I can do that is to know if it was approved and used for combat. Even in my limited readings, something that important with such a big difference in performance would surely be worthy of more frequent mention, at least IMO. Also, it seems from what I have read from mid '44 on the P38 was used almost exclusively as a ground attack aircraft. Maybe it was present in the Pacific, who knows.

Hunde_3.JG51
05-31-2005, 08:17 PM
I found what I had typed previously (note I did the same for the P-40 and P-47):

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/5291...291073142#5291073142 (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/5291073142/r/5291073142#5291073142)

Now tell me if I have a vendetta against the P-38 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif.

bolillo_loco
05-31-2005, 09:23 PM
sorry didnt mean to imply that you personally had a vendetta against the 38 I meant to say that it happens frequently. I just meant that when one spends hours researching a subject and then puts it to print w quotes and w/o personal opinions only to have it picked apart by people who only have their "general reference books"........well after a while it seems pretty futile.

I think more people should do what I did. I disliked the P-38 and I got tired of reading what P-38 fans had to say about it. they were quoting books and the like so I set out to prove that they were stating their opinions and not what was written in books......after I read the 2-5 books that they suggested I was a little less skeptical of the 38, but still unsure. well after another dozen books I began to understand what they were writting about. 40+ books later I agree with most of what they say. I will not however stand by and let somebody (a 38 fan) write untruths about the 38 being some end all be all WW II a/c. If somebody strays from what I have read in the many books I have read I will question it. usually they have no source which I can purchase or they are just flat out lying. an example would be somebody stating that the 38 could safely be dived to mach .80 it simply wasnt possible....well atleast from what I have read and I will call them on it.

I wish I had the money to purchase bodies book on the P-38 for everybody that does not have one. sadly though I would guess that many would not read it simply because it has been treated like a red headed step child. rumors, half truths, and mistatements about the 38 flourished during its use and continue to be carried on to this day...............mainly by "general reference books"

if I remember correctly you are somewhat of a fan of the Fw 190. I am quite sure that you are aware that general reference books do not give an accurate account of how the Fw 190 performed. The Fw 190 is another less than glamorous WW II fighter so many general reference books paint a less than accurate picture of how the 190 performed. The same is true for the P-38, but more pronounced IMO. I do not think that there is a fighter more maligned by print and rumors than the P-38.

I do remember the threads you posted on the 47 and 51. I myself am as guilty of doing to others as what I complain about people doing to me.

the 38L served in every theater the americans fought in. this includes fighting against the germans be it from england, bases on the continent, north africa, and italy.

how many units used it? thats a good question and I would guess nobody will ever know. I am not sure what a/c are used in the historical server your speaking of, but I would guess that many of the german a/c included played such an insignifican role in the war that they should be excluded. I am also quite sure that many of them carry armament that was not used a lot in combat if it was ever used at all. I see historically inaccurate servers all the time. just because one or a few units began use of a x plane in december 1944 this qualifies it as a 1944 plane. join the server and everybody is using that a/c. to me a historical server should only use run of the mill a/c that were fielded by countries that took part in the conflict. an example..... during 1944 the 109G6 was the most commonly used german a/c during that entire year. I think nearly half of all 30,000 odd 109s were 109G6 or earlier G versions. about 1400 109K4s were produced which is about .0467 % of total 109 production..........join a 1944 historical server and look at what type of 109 is being used. the bulk and majority are 109K4s not 109G6s

moreover I believe that the entire "historically accurate" part has no place in this game anywhere. La 7 3 x 20 mm, yak 3p, ta 152, go 229, P-80, F4U-1C, I-185, bf 109Z, Ki-84Ic, the list goes on and on of a/c in this game that played a very minor part in the war, never saw combat, were prototypes, never made it past the drawing board, or were post war a/c yet many are accepted in "historically accurate" servers.

Hunde_3.JG51
05-31-2005, 11:34 PM
Good reply Loco.

Gotta get some sleep but I just wanted to clarify something.

We try to set up historical planesets by month and year. We try to utilize aircraft that actually fought against eachother and those that saw the bulk of the action. As I said I end up in the FW-190A8 alot because it was the most produced Anton. I rarely fly the Dora. And I almost never fly the Ta-152 unless goofing around on a server.

Here is where we set up matches now:

http://www.gofisc.com/

We created FISC to find like minded people/squads. We prefer certain settings and many of us appreciate historical accuracy. We brought this together because we could not find what we wanted consistently on servers. We are about immersion, and that includes historical planesets IMO, and we are trying to do something different. I wish more servers considered historical planesets but the admins probably get drilled with hate mail when they exclude an aircraft so... I wish we could limit armament options, hopefully it will be an option in the future.

And I totally agree about the planes you listed:

"La 7 3 x 20 mm, yak 3p, ta 152, go 229, P-80, F4U-1C, I-185, bf 109Z, Ki-84Ic, etc."

You won't find any of these aircraft on matches we create.

And yes I am a FW-190 fan http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif.

Anyway, I'll see what I can learn about the P-38. Regardless, I think it was an excellent aircraft and that it was certainly underrated.

Cheers!

lbhskier37
06-01-2005, 08:31 AM
Bumping. I would also like to know what units, if any ran the engine with higher boost during the war. Even pilot accounts would be nice, we've heard it confirmed many times that the P47 was boosted often, there has to be some info about this thing. I look forward to flying it, hope I can find a server that isnt 90% red like usually happens when I try to fly red though.

Makkusu_244
06-01-2005, 01:01 PM
=S= All

Hmmm very interesting. I have 2 different books one published in 1990 & one in 2004. Both show the P-38L as being powered by 2 Turbocharged Allison V-1710-111/113 engines with 1600hp. I wonder where this 1720hp engine came from?

The P-38L was rated at a max speed of 414mph @ 25,000 ft.

3,924 P-38L's were built by Lockheed & 113 were built by Consolidated-Vutee in Nashville TN.

Resources:

P-38 Lightning in Action, Squadron signal publications copyright 1990.

The Aviation Factfile: Aircraft of World War II
copyright 2004. I highly recommend this book. It covers over 120 of the most popular Aircraft between 1939 & 1945 and @ $17.98 from amazon it's a bargain.

Heres the Amazon link.

[CODE] http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1592232248/qid=1...771086-5816831/CODE] (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1592232248/qid=1117652347/sr=2-1/ref=pd_bbs_b_2_1/002-0771086-5816831/CODE])

=S-

AerialTarget
06-01-2005, 02:07 PM
Maybe you should read the thread. You might find the answer to your question very soon.

BigKahuna_GS
06-01-2005, 02:48 PM
S!


I suggest getting a copy of Vee's for Victory!: The Story of the Allison V-1710 Aircraft Engine, 1929-1948 by Daniel D. Whitney. Used copies can be found at http://www.alibris.com for abut $60.00.

The 2 best books for the P38 are "Vee for Victory" and Warren Bodie's book "The P38 Lightning". All P38L's were fitted with the F30 engine capable of 3200rpm at 1,725hp WER. Becuase of prior engine problems the USAAF was nervous about posting the 3200rpm figure in their pilots manual.
But it was SOP to run at these ratings.

According to Whitney & Bodie, Allison engine techs were present in the ETO working with P38 crew chiefs instructing them of the operations of 1725hp WER and engine maitenance. The new F-30 engines were proving to be much more reliable than any previous P38 engines.


P38J

Here are official performance numbers of an USAAF fighter evaluation of the P38J-10, P47D-10, P39Q-5 and P51B. The P38J-10 serial number AC42-67869 was flown by 3 pilots during a 30hour accelerated flight test on December 2, 1943.

Maximum horsepower at 60.8 inches of Hg manifold pressure, 3000rpm was listed at 1,612 brake horse power (WEP) per F-17 Allison engines. (P38 J10-LO) pg.213 "The Lockheed P38 Lightning" by Warren M. Bodie Lockheed engineer/historian.

USAAF flight test results P38J-10 :
Maximum Sea Level speed -----------------------345mph
Maximum critical alt speed --------------------421.5mph (WEP) (25,800ft)
Rate of climb (SL) ----------------------------4000fpm
Rate of climb (critical alt) ------------------2900fpm (23,400ft)
Time to critical alt --------------------------6.19 mins. (23,400ft)
Service ceiling -------------------------------40,000ft


P38L

The P38L was fitted with high-output Allison F-30 engines capable of 1,725hp (WEP) rating. Bodie posts this 1,725hp WEP rating about 5 times in his book. This WEP rating coincided with an order from General Jimmy Doolittle commander of the 8th Air Force for a special fuel blend for P38 operations. This letter is dated early March 1944.
(Poor Brit fuel quality was considered to be one of the sources of earlier Allison engine problems)

Bodie also says that the P38L max speed of 414mph listed in many books was actualy a military power rating and not a WEP power rating, that is a difference of 600hp.

The basic performance figures for the P-38L are as follows (from Lockheed
factory test logbooks):

Max speed at sea level: 360 mph
Max speed at 5,500 ft : 369 mph
Max speed at 23,500 ft. 440 mph (WEP) 5 minutes max.
Max speed at critical alt: 444 mph @ 25,800 (WEP) 5 minutes max.


Allison spent a great deal of time and money on the "dash thirty" program.
They produced volumes of dynometer data for Lockheed and the AAF.
Lockheed did their own testing and confirmed the Allison numbers. Hence,
the installation of the -30 in the L model.

From Vee for Victory/Bodie

The following are the CORRECT stats for the Allison V-1710F-30.
Write 'em down somewhere....

Ratings [minutes] Power RPM Manifold [in.Hg] Altitude [ft]
Normal (no limit) 1,100 2,600 44 30,000
Take Off (5) 1,475 3,000 54 SL
Military (15) 1,475 3,000 54 30,000
WEP (5) 1,725 3,200 60 28,700


Bodie also has one of the best P47 books out there:
"Sveresky to Victory"

Robert Johnson was running his P47D-5 at 72" MAP and claimed he was getting close to 470mph TAS at alt. That was in 43/44. Later P47s models were claiming even higher speeds while overboosted.

I had requested most of this information from the USAF historical archives and information about P47 groups overboosting their engines several months ago. Still waiting for the documents to arrive.

I also recieved emails from Warren Bodie, C.C. Jordan, & Dr Carlo Kopp concerning these P38L performance ratings.

Sent: Friday, March 11, 2005 10:30 AM
Subject: RE: P38L WEP rating of 1,725hp

Email from Warren Bodie:

Hello Keith,

What in the world is going on outside of my small enclave of residents here on the shore of beautiful Lake Chatuge?
I am being deluged this week by all sorts of people wanting to know if I can provide the best possible accurate info on several related and unrelated av subjects. What will happen when the new Special Edition of FLIGHT JOURNAL gets into circulation in the next couple of weeks. I have a feature story in there on the subject of Supermarine Spitfires.
They only used half of what I submitted, but they are constrained by top management to about 7 or 8 pages for any one story. Umpteen thousands of Spitfires in more models and modified models than anyone can believe were in the fight during WWII.

First of all, let me advise you that with my 43 years of experience in various engineering jobs in the manufacturing industry, and having been on very friendly basis with people from Kelly Johnson and Gen. Ben Kelsey to Jack Northrop and a host of others (I have been a senior service engineer specialist, technical publications supervisor, structural repair designer, etc.,), there are no two engines or no two airplanes that perform to exactly the same level anywhere in the world. Too many manufacturing, rigging, adjusting, etc. factors involved, not to mention what each flight hour does to different airframes and engines of the same model, for any two engine-airplane combinations to perform in the same, exact way. I suspect that even two identical appearing cement blocks might not give exactly the same results. Airplanes are subjected to too many different actions and material combinations to work anywhere near exact standards.

The really most definitive book on the subject that you have forwarded to me is the great study and product from my friend, Daniel D. Whitney. Published by Schiffer Publishing Ltd. with ISBN: 0-7643-0561-1; try your local bookstores first, then, if unsuccessful, e-mail to schifferbk@aol.com for info.

But, meantime get this single fact: Allison Engineering qualified the F-30 engine WER at 1,725 bhp at 3200 rpm. However, the USAAF NEVER authorized that rating, with ATSC preferring to stick with a 3000 rpm limitation. These engines were in Lockheed P-38L, F-5G and P-38M airplanes. Aircraft installation, maintenance, rigging, supercharger performance, propeller performance, etc. all affected individulal engine and airplane performance. And, as certain pilots, including the great Col. Cass Hough who shared command with Col. (later B/Gen.) Ben Kelsey, would have been glad to tell you, if you needed more in combat situations, you did whatever was necessary to escape being defeated. If you did it right and if you were lucky enough to have a top-quality PRODUCTION engine set, you won the game. Ben Kelsey would be among the first to agree with me on that assessment. (Just think of how many things can affect friction in an operating engine, with detonation being the most fierce ingredient and fuel being high on the list as well.

No matter who throws other figures at you, with little to fall back on (maybe even Martin Caidin's pitiful Lightning book as a reference), you will not find a better reference source than Dan's book. He pursued facts for years, maybe decades. I never asked. Read the back, inside dust jacket of the book, before you read it. You will learn about Dan's background. When I did my P-38 book, I had already retired from 40 years in the aerospace industry, several years (decades), in fact, of writing for magazines as a side effort. Dan focused on one primary subject out of several millions that could have attracted his attention. His coverage is indisputable. And don't let anyone tell you otherwise.

Cordially, Warren Bodie



____

lbhskier37
06-01-2005, 04:21 PM
Thanks for the info Kahuna. That's one of the nice things about this forum is the ability for people to share information. Not everyone can afford the nice library of books they would like (I already spend close to $600 a year on textbooks, so my book budget is about filled there). The way I understand it is that the 1725hp could be considered somewhat of a field mod as it wasn't officially recommended by the airforce, but done anyways? It's too bad we can't get a P47 "field mod" with higher boost.

BigKahuna_GS
06-01-2005, 05:05 PM
S!


lbhskier37 Posted Wed June 01 2005 15:21
The way I understand it is that the 1725hp could be considered somewhat of a field mod as it wasn't officially recommended by the airforce, but done anyways? It's too bad we can't get a P47 "field mod" with higher boost.



Hya Ibhskier,

The standard Allison F-30 engine from the factory was capable 3,200rpm and 1,725 WER. This was NOT overboosted. The USAAF had concerns over the extra 200rpms but pilots routinely flew the P38L this way and the engine proved to be very reliable. All the pilot had to do was advance the throttle a little farther to get those extra 200rpms . No field mod was needed. The advent of 150grade Avgas in the ETO sealed the deal of running the P38L at these ratings.


I have sent Oleg a suggestion of using the in game 3-D model of the P47D-27RE as the model for the P47M. In real life the P47D-27 was used as the test bed for the P47M, they basically just installed the new P&W 2800 C series engine in the P47D-27. The P47D-27 with the P47M flight model could be called the "P47D-27 Late" to avoid any copy right problems.

http://www.geocities.com/pentagon/quarters/9485/Yp-47m.jpg
Number two of three YP-47M development aircraft (P-47D-27-RE).
Warren Bodie photo

Upon being informed of the XP-47M, three YP-47M development aircraft were ordered. These were built using P-47D-27-RE fighters straight off the production line.

Hopefully this or the overboosted records from the USAF Historical archives will show up someday.

___

SkyChimp
06-01-2005, 07:31 PM
Originally posted by bolillo_loco:
as I have stated and skychimp has just restated...


I should have read a little further, I would have seen you already more than adequately answered the question.

JG53Frankyboy
06-02-2005, 05:21 AM
Originally posted by bolillo_loco:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by 3.JG51_Stecher:
Could these later P-38Ls be the ones build by Vultee?

if I am not mistaken only 112 lightnings were built by the 2nd manufacturing plant. all others were built by lockheed.

all P-38Ls and not just the last 2,000 like others have said were built with the F-30 allision engines which were rated by allision at 1,725 hp. The army aircorps never officially adopted this rating during the war to my knowledge. the F-30 was allisions identification of the engine. the army called them 111/113 one being right hand drive the other being left hand drive. the F-17 was the engine used in the J model which the army called 89/91.

from things I have read I would suspect the 38L with a take off weight of 17,699lbs to climb 4,500-5,000 fpm initial and have a top speed of 440 mph while using the allision 1,725 hp rating.

again, all 3,900 odd 38Ls had the F-30 111/113 allision rated 1,725 hp engines. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

good to know.
just wondering why maddox made it not easier to edit the already existend P-38L to that powerstandart , instead adding another one. would have been much better and less confusing. propably looks better in the 4.0 README http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
- and sure, a K-14 would have been nice http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
but its not there http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

btw, with all that Lightning experts here around. when the P-38L saw its first combat action in ETO and PTO ?

Bull_dog_
06-02-2005, 11:03 AM
I believe the P-38 made its combat debut in the Aluetian Islands campaign...I wouldn't bet a paycheck on it but I'd definitely save one of my lifelines on "who wants to be a millionare" if I were asked that question.

Oops...missed the "L" part. I don't know for sure, but I think it was March or April of 1944 and I don't know which theatre first...that is a difficult question because there is a process before the plane actually flies its first sortie...or goes to squadron strenght etc.

JG53Frankyboy
06-02-2005, 11:32 AM
well, actually im interested if the P-38L flew combat mission in june, july, august 1944 in europe. because thats the area we can use the Normandie map (for both sides ) http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

i much lesser care about PTO, because we have no maps for that bird

BigKahuna_GS
06-02-2005, 01:05 PM
S!


According to Warren Bodies book, P38L deliveries to the ETO commenced in June of 1944.



___

bolillo_loco
06-02-2005, 03:14 PM
I concur with what big kahuna typed. I have both books that he speaks of and thats what they say.

SkyChimp
06-02-2005, 06:59 PM
Originally posted by JG53Frankyboy:
well, actually im interested if the P-38L flew combat mission in june, july, august 1944 in europe. because thats the area we can use the Normandie map (for both sides ) http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

i much lesser care about PTO, because we have no maps for that bird

I would say no. Deliveries of the P-38L began in June 1944, but only a couple of units in the ETO got them, and even then they were mixed units, with both Ls and Js.

I had a lengthy discussion about this very subject at the Great Plane Community. At that time I had all the units that got the L and the dates, and they were few and far between. I'll see if I can find that information instead of researching it again.

SkyChimp
06-02-2005, 07:14 PM
Here's some stuff I postyed at the GPC:



As far as Ls operating in the ETO, I can't be certain, but I doubt it. The 1st FG would be the only one to do it, IMO (but I think technically the 1st would have been considered an MTO FG).

L deliveries didn't begin until June 1944. The 8th AF started in earnest to get rid of its P-38s in July 1944, and had planned for it long before that. The 8th AF wouldn't have gotten any Ls.

The last unit to get get rid of their P-38s was the 9th AF's 370th FG in Febuary 1945. I seriously doubt it would have gotten any Ls.

The only ETO unit to fly P-38s to the end of the war was apparently the 474th FG. But the 474th was not an 8th AF FG, it was a 9th AF FG.

The 1st FG unit may have flown them on raids into Germany. But technically, I think the 1st was a MTO group.


----

Here's unit website that mentions the use of the L in Europe. The 474th was a 9th AF unit by the time any L would have been available to them:

http://usaaf.com/9thaf/fighter/474fg.htm

-----

As the conversation developed, I wrote:



9th AF Fighter Groups were flying from Belgium in October 1944. They were flying Js at that time. In fact, the 370th was still flying Js during the Battle of the Bulge. There is a picture in Bodie's definitive book of 485th FS (370th FG) P-38Js taxiing out to attack Fld Mrshl Von Rundsedt's troops, which would date the photo to very late 1944 or very early 1945. The 367th and 370th transitioned to P-47s and P-51s in February 1945. I seriously doubt they would have received new L models for just two months.

That leaves the 474th.


-----

Then I wrote:



I think the possibility exists with just one group. I think the 367th and 370th can be effectively ruled out. If they were flying Js at the end of 1944, the USAAF wouldn't have reequipped them with new Ls just to reequip them again in two (or less) months with P-47s and P-51s.

Now that website you pointed out says the only L model flown by the 474th was the P-38L-5-LO. Before that was the P-38J-15-LO. Refer back to Bodie's book. The L-5 was delivered to the USAAF between October 1944 and August 1945. The J-25 was being delivered to the USAAF as late as November 1944. In fact, the P-38J-25 and the P-38L-1 were delivered in exactly the same time frame - June 1944 to November 1944. Therefore, there was delivery date overlap between all three models.

I'm not sure why the USAAF would send the latest long-range P-38L-5 to the ETO instead of the P-38J-25 when they were winding down P-38 use in the ETO, but didn't have enough P-38s in the PTO to equip all the P-38 units they wanted. And even if they did, it wouldn't have gotten to the ETO for several months after it was delievered. A very small window for use.

And one would think that the "L" served in group strength in the ETO, a photo of one in a war-time ETO setting would be in Bodie's book, somewhere. In fact, no such photo exists. In fact, it doesn't exist in any of my books, anywhere. If you have access to one, please post it, we can determine the model and block with the serial number.

P-38Ls may have served in the ETO, but I think the chances are slim. The 367th and 370th flew Js so late that it would have been unlikely the 9th would have given them Ls just to give them an entirely different fighter soon after. And P-38L-5s were delivered so late that at most it would have only had a couple of months in theater - tops.


-----


Then:



Here's a neat picture, dated March 1945...

http://www.web-birds.com/9th/474/14.jpg

It's from Web-Birds (not official either), and carries the caption:
Lt. Lloyd Wenzel, 428th FS, by his P38J-25-LO, "Ho-Hum The Second", serial no. 44-23652, F5-N, at airfield A-78, Florennes, Belgium, March 1945. With Wenzel are his crew chief, T/Sgt Ivan Dahn (L) and his assistant crew chief, Sgt.John Edwards (R).

March 1945 and Js are still in service with the 474th.

So that tells me that if the 474th got any Ls it had to be after March 1945. So I checked my list of losses in the ETO by serial number. I came up with these:

44-25126
44-25497

and there were a couple more.

These serials are for P-38L-5-LOs. Both of these, and a few more were assigned to the 474th FG. They were lost in April 1945. So, you are correct, the 474th got P-38L-5-LOs by April 1945 - and even lost a few before the end of the war the following month.

But I maintain the other P-38 groups you listed never flew Ls. I assert this because no L models appear to have been lost in Europe prior to April 1945, and by that time both of those other groups had converted to P-47s and P-51s. In fact, the only L model lost in the ETO other than a few L-5s of the 474th appears to have been an F-5 recon plane. I could find no evidence of any L-1 being lost in the ETO at all, or any L-5 being lost prior to April 1945


-----

What I'm getting at with all this **** is that if Ls served int eh ETO, it wouldn't have been in northern Europe in the late summer or fall fo 1944. Taht was too early for them. The definately were in service by the end of the war in teh 9th's 474th FG. There MAY have been a couple of other ETO units to use them, but probably very few - if any.

So, that's why I say no to the question, "were L's used in the summer of 1944 over Normandy?"

Hunde_3.JG51
06-02-2005, 08:53 PM
Thanks for the great information gentlemen, I appreciate you taking the time to respond. I am getting a much better idea where this plane might be utilized.

bolillo_loco
06-02-2005, 09:58 PM
38Ls served in the ETO during the summer of 1944 and continued to serve until the war ended. even after a squadron transitioned into 47s and 51s the transistion did not happen over night. many squadrons flew a mixed bag of 38s and their new a/c till the squadron was up to strenght w/ the new a/c.

I just paged through a few books that I have "The Geyser Gang" the 428th fighter squadron in WWII" by John Truman Steinko. no isbn number but the library of congress catalog card number is 86-060601. In this book there are several pictures of 38Ls and in the back there are "encounter reports". In the encounter reports section it gives pilots name, mission number, and type of aircraft flown. by july 1944 several 38L models begin showing up, moreover even 38J-25s begin to show up. only 200 odd 38J-25s were built vs 3900 odd 38ls. this fighter squadron appeared to fly a mixed bag of 38J-15s and 38Ls.

The second book I grabbed was "The 370th Fighter Group in WW II" by Jay Jones isbn 0-7643-1779-2. In this book there are several pictures of 38Ls.

"american eagles P-38 units of the eigth and ninth air forces" by Roger Freeman isbn 1-903223-17-2 has a couple of pics of 38Ls. This book does state that no 38Ls were used in the 8th AF that they were exclusively used by the 9th.

"The 474th fighter group in WWII an enlised man's observations" by Isham G. Keller no isbn or library of congress number, copyright 1988 by roma associates. In this book it seems like every photo that the author took were of 38Ls. He most likely (and I am guessing) took nearly all his photos late in the war.

"The Dynamite Gang the 367th fighter group in WWII" by Richard Groh isbn 0-8168-9771-9 also has several photos of 38Ls.

The fact that there are several 38Ls photographed in each book leads me to believe that more than "just a few" served in the ETO since there are many photos of them in each book. 38Ls are very easy to identify even if the photo does not show the landing light in the leading edge, which most photos do not include since it is usually a pilot posing infront of his 38. For these close in shots you must look for the missing gun camera in the nose. 38Js and earlier versions had the gun camera located in the nose just below the 20mm cannon. 38Ls had the gun camera in the port side pylon for external stores. not every L model had the hole for the camera in the nose deleted so w/o having the gun camera in the pylon visible its hard to tell if it is a J or an L.

I only picked up a few of the over 40 books I have on the 38 and I did not have a difficult time finding pics and mission reports of 38Ls being used in combat during mid 44 on. Just because they were 9th a/f does not mean that they did not engage enemy a/c. the "encounter reports" from "the geyser gang" lists a fair amount of 38L activity, nearly the same amount as 38J-15s in which enemy a/c were encountered.

let us not forget that there was another theater of operations where a lot of 38Ls went...the MTO. many flew missions from Italy into germany.

There is one book on the 38 that I have not yet purchased http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif but I will soon have my grubby hands on a copy http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif http://www.schifferbooks.com/newschiffer/book_template.php?isbn=0764320564

Gibbage1
06-02-2005, 10:08 PM
My 2 cents. P-38 squads typically flew a mix bag of models. If a P-38J had to be replaced, it may of been replaced with a P-38L, but no real attempt to outfit the entire squad with L's. There is also quite a lot of pilot reports of L models flying against 109's and 190's using the new Dive Flaps to fallow the Split-S and suprisy the Jerry's http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif For the most part, I would agree that most L's went to the PAcific, with quite a few also going into the Med. So I would say an L in England was possible, but rare.

Copperhead310th
06-02-2005, 11:39 PM
Originally posted by 609IAP_Kahuna:
S!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">lbhskier37 Posted Wed June 01 2005 15:21
The way I understand it is that the 1725hp could be considered somewhat of a field mod as it wasn't officially recommended by the airforce, but done anyways? It's too bad we can't get a P47 "field mod" with higher boost.



Hya Ibhskier,

The standard Allison F-30 engine from the factory was capable 3,200rpm and 1,725 WER. This was NOT overboosted. The USAAF had concerns over the extra 200rpms but pilots routinely flew the P38L this way and the engine proved to be very reliable. All the pilot had to do was advance the throttle a little farther to get those extra 200rpms . No field mod was needed. The advent of 150grade Avgas in the ETO sealed the deal of running the P38L at these ratings.


I have sent Oleg a suggestion of using the in game 3-D model of the P47D-27RE as the model for the P47M. In real life the P47D-27 was used as the test bed for the P47M, they basically just installed the new P&W 2800 C series engine in the P47D-27. The P47D-27 with the P47M flight model could be called the "P47D-27 Late" to avoid any copy right problems.

http://www.geocities.com/pentagon/quarters/9485/Yp-47m.jpg
Number two of three YP-47M development aircraft (P-47D-27-RE).
Warren Bodie photo

Upon being informed of the XP-47M, three YP-47M development aircraft were ordered. These were built using P-47D-27-RE fighters straight off the production line.

Hopefully this or the overboosted records from the USAF Historical archives will show up someday.

___ </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Kahuna- your my new hero!!!

bolillo_loco
06-03-2005, 08:52 AM
wonders if he can find the motivation to dig up more information http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

SkyChimp
06-03-2005, 07:06 PM
Bolillo,

How do you know they are pictures of Ls? Are the serial numbers visible? That's the only way you can tell Js from Ls in many cases.

bolillo_loco
06-04-2005, 09:48 AM
Originally posted by SkyChimp:
Bolillo,

How do you know they are pictures of Ls? Are the serial numbers visible? That's the only way you can tell Js from Ls in many cases.

if the plane does not have any hole for the gun camera it is probably an L model even though some L models still carried the hole for the nose mounted gun camera I have seen pics where no gun camera hole was below the 20mm gun on L models. I believe that the L model was the first series to have a factory mounted gun camera in the port side pylon. some photos are clear enough that I can read P-38L-5-LO, others include the entire a/c and then the leading edge landing light makes it obvious whether or not it is a J or an L. I know enough about 38s to properly identify production variants. what do you mean by the serial number visible? you mean under the cockpit? Ive seen people ID 38Ls by saying the large block numbers were on the nose. I do not think lockheed did this to J models nor did vultee which made 113 L models. the main problem with using the last method to ID Ls from Js is that I have seen a lot of pics of 38Ls that had these numbers missing because the squadron modified the aircraft while painting it and removed the numbers. the large block numbers on the nose is what I mean, not the U.S. Army P-38L-5-LO serial number bla bla bla near the leading edge of the wing on the gondola.

I picked up about 4 books on the P-38 written specifically on 9th A/F fighter groups/squadrons that used them and found no difficulty in finding many pics of 38Ls. I could have gone through some more books, but that would have only confirmed what the first 4 books did, ie The P-38L was used to fight the germans. more over enough of them were used that they frequently show up in photo graphs by squadrons that used P-38s. In going through the many P-38 threads here I have seen a few people state that they were used for ground attack only. I can assure you that the 9th af did not only do ground attack missions. the 9th af also had bombers and 9th af P-38s and P-47s flew bomber escort missions. they flew a wide variety of missions and frequently encountered enemy a/c. In my book "geyser gang" 428th f/s has mission reports in the back of the book which state, who the pilot was, what type of a/c was used including its serial number, how many rounds of 50 cal and 20mm were expended, what type of mission it was, and goes into details about enemy a/c encounters, for example:

DATE/TIME/PLACE: December 1944, 1350, vicinity N of Euskirchen, Germany.
WEATHER: 8/10-10/10; tops 9000, bases 1500; haze below.
Target: E/A (Fw 190)
Pilot: 2nd lt. Max Hagemeyer.
A/C, markings: P-38L-1 #44-24615, F5 Ron sides of booms black sq outside ea vert fin, R inside ea vert fin.
AMMUNITION EXPENDED: 24 rds. 20 mm., 160 rds. .50 cal.
ACCOUNT OF COMBAT: I was cruising at about 15,000 feet, looking for a good target for my flight to dive bomb when Lt. Trueblood (squadron leader) called, saying that he was going down to check a marshalling yard. As soon as he got down to approx 10,000 feet, he called in 12 plus E/A. I took my flight down to joint Lt. Trueblood, but my flight fell behind so I joined Trueblood and flew his wing. we attacked four Fw 190s, following the No. 4 man down through the clouds. We overtook the E/A and Lt. Trueblood shot him down. I was in position to see the Fw 190 hit the ground and burst into flames.

As we pulled up through the clouds, I found myself in position to make a pass on four 190s at 5 o'clock. I was able to make a head on pass on the lead ship and just as I passed over him I saw pieces, including one large piece, fly off; the pieces were probably either from his cowling or canopy or both, judging from where I was observing strikes. I was forced to break into another flight of four E/A immediately thereafter and so was unable to observe further results of my attack. On the basis of the confirmation of L. Trueblood, who by that time was on my wing and who was able to observe the 190 split S, burst into smoke and disappear into clouds, the base of which at that point was 1500 feet or lower, I claim one Fw 190 probably destroyed.

CLAIMS: One Fw 190 destroyed by Lt. Hagemeyer

the "geyser gang" is full of encounter reports like this and L models began showing up in their encounter reports by mid 1944. from november/december on atleast half the reports are of 38L-1-LOs or 38L-5-LOs.

the book contains every mission flown by the 428th fighter squadron, but it only states how many a/c took part in the mission, example: Mission 242 18 P-38s so it doesnt tell you what exact type of 38 took part in the mission.

the "encounter reports" section does not list every pilots story who flew a mission, probably for reasons of brevity, 428 missions with 12 or more pilots taking part in each mission....get the idea it would be a rather large book.

would you like pictures too? it would take me a day or two because I would have to run accross the county to my seesdoors house because I do not have a scanner.

SkyChimp
06-04-2005, 07:02 PM
Maybe you missed the question. The question was whether P-38Ls served in Northern Europe in June, 1944.

I'm not saying the L didn't serve in the ETO. I know it did. I'm saying I'm not convinced it got there in any siginficant numbers before 1945. In fact, I don't think their numbers were ever signficant in the ETO.

If you can post proof that Ls were in northern Europe before winter 1945, please post it.

WOLFMondo
06-04-2005, 07:08 PM
Originally posted by Hunde_3.JG51:
I like historical stuff, and the P-51D overall is easily faster and the P-47D is as fast or faster at all but the lowest altitude and simply blows it away at high altitude (as it should).

You don't fly the P47D much do youhttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif. Its pretty slow on the straight and level until that last stage of the supercharger kicks in, it doesn't even top 400mph until well past 20,000ft which is correct AFAIK.

RedDeth
06-04-2005, 10:04 PM
skychimp not to sound obnoxious as i like both you and bolillo but....in his last post he showed reports from mid 44 in ETO of p38Ls shooting down fw190s. i think thats the general gist of it. and he has many more books stating similar accounts.

on a side note ive known bolillo for years. he lives near my parents in PA. the dude is terminally insane. he has probably close to 100 books on the P38 and with average costs of 40 to 100 bucks per book by my guess then i would have to say this qualifys for permanent insanity.

but by the same token i think he is about the most well read on the subject of any here aside from KAHUNA.

SkyChimp
06-04-2005, 10:18 PM
December isn't mid year.

And btw, the 428th was just one squadron of the 474th FG, which I already stated flew the L.

Even in late 1944, the 428th was clearly still operating Js as their principal fighter. All of the photos I've seen of 428th P-38s that can be dated show J models up through at least November 1944. The only photos I've seen of Ls were dated 1945. That tells me that Ls were rare in the ETO prior to 1945, and probably non existent in mid 1944.

You just can't introduce a new model in June, get it across an ocean into combat units and into action all in the same month.

If Bolillo can post a date verifiable picture of an L model in service with an ETO unit prior to November 1944, I'd love to see it.

Additonally, the 474th's official website says the only L it flew was the L-5, introduced in October 1944.

http://usaaf.com/9thaf/fighter/474fg.htm

Bolillo references 44-24615. In a list of P-38L-1-LO/F-5E-4-LO serials, that particular serial number doesn't seem to exist.

Here's the serial range that should include that number:

24587 to F-5E-4-LO
24588 to F-5E-4-LO
24638 (48th FG) lost over Austria Jan 20, 1945. MACR 11389
24648 to F-5E-4-LO
24649 fitted by Lockheed with experimental 8 .50-in machine gun
arrangement in a gondola nose.
24652 to F-5E-4-LO
24654 (1st FG, 94th FS) lost over Austria Mar 31, 1945. MACR 13479
24655 to F-5E-4-LO

Additionally, Bolillo earlier said, "others include the entire a/c and then the leading edge landing light makes it obvious whether or not it is a J or an L." A closer perusal of Bodie's book would have revealed that that is not a reliable indicator.

Bodie provides a picture on page 218 of a P-38J-25-LO with the L's leading edge wing light and and states, "That item could usually be counted on as being the only real way to identify a P-38L, proving that nothing is absolutely certain in aircradft identification. "

Hunde_3.JG51
06-04-2005, 11:21 PM
Originally posted by WOLFMondo:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Hunde_3.JG51:
I like historical stuff, and the P-51D overall is easily faster and the P-47D is as fast or faster at all but the lowest altitude and simply blows it away at high altitude (as it should).

You don't fly the P47D much do youhttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif. Its pretty slow on the straight and level until that last stage of the supercharger kicks in, it doesn't even top 400mph until well past 20,000ft which is correct AFAIK. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Wolfmondo, I said the P-47 blows away the FW-190A-8 at high altitudes (ie; above 20,000 feet, but more like above 25,000 feet), as it should. I think you must have confused what I said or you thought I was comparing P-51 and P-47, if you read fully you can see I was speaking of FW-190A-8, which most certainly gets blown away by the Thunderbolt at high altitude. Again, as it should. At medium altitudes speeds are similar, and the FW-190 is faster at low altitudes. As for acceleration, that was not part of my discussion, my statement was in response to the claim that red is always chasing blue, my point is that it depends on altitude. And that when historical matchups are used, blue tends to be at a disadvantage in most of '44.

RedDeth
06-04-2005, 11:26 PM
dang it ED EARL!

never bring up skychimps name lol hes no easy mark


hehe

Flakenstien
06-05-2005, 12:45 PM
Did any of you know that the P38 scored the first and the last American kill in W.W.I.I.?

Now you do http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

LStarosta
06-05-2005, 12:53 PM
All I can say is that from all accounts, the 1720HP P38L is a fricken rocket.

CUJO_1970
06-05-2005, 02:09 PM
Originally posted by Flakenstien:
Did any of you know that the P38 scored the first and the last American kill in W.W.I.I.?

Now you do http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif


Actually, the P-38 didn't score the first American kill in WWII.(Unless there was some unknown P-38 defending Pearl Harbor http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif)

THe P-38 did however share the first kill against the Luftwaffe in the ETO, when a P-40 and a P-38 based in Greenland attacked a FW Condor over the Atlantic on 15 Aug. 1942.

bolillo_loco
06-05-2005, 06:12 PM
chimp, june 1944......I do not see any way possible considering deliveries only began that month. I misunderstood the question and I do not understand why a thread was started if that was the original question. the serial number I provided was what was printed in the book. I have grown tired of the topic and I am no longer willing to spend a few hours paging through a lot of books to find tid bits of information only to have it picked apart. I flicked around in the book and found the first encounter report that looked juicey and typed it in my post. I picked up 4 books and found 38L pics from 4 different fighter squads. bolillo throws hands in air and gives up....stick a fork in me im done.

Slickun
06-05-2005, 06:39 PM
Thanks to Chimp and Loco.

Great stuff.

Hunde_3.JG51
06-05-2005, 07:43 PM
Thanks to bolillo_loco, and to everyone that provided information. It is appreciated.

p1ngu666
06-05-2005, 08:23 PM
any difference in real terms for us the players in the J vs L, if the J in question has dive breaks fitted?

AerialTarget
06-05-2005, 08:33 PM
Yes, because the J in the game is about fifteen miles per hour faster than the L, which is wrong.

lightning474th
09-20-2012, 12:47 AM
Bolillo_Loco....ARE YOU STILL ON THIS FORUM BY CHANCE.? I NEED HELP ON A PARTICULAR P-38 AND YOU MIGHT BE ABLE.

lightning474th
09-20-2012, 08:45 PM
To bolillo-loco (or anyone out there)
this is a longshot but i thought i'd put it out there. I saw an old post you had made on a ubisoft forum and you stated you had almost 40 books on the p-38 lightning.
My brother-in-laws father, lt. James frederick, was shot down over montmerri france and was hidden by the french underground untill the liberation of france. This amazing story has come to light only within the last two years and we have uncovered tons of information of his experience during the war.
Lt fredericks flew a model p-38j-15-lo serial number 42-104224. The plane had a black square on the tail and a f5 on the boom indicating the 474th fg, 428 fs.
We have read the book the geyser gang and a book called "swat" by bob milligan. Bob was the ace that shot down the fw190 that had shot lt. Fredericks plane down during that dogfight on july 6th 1944. My brother in law scott frederick has talked to bob who is still remembers that day. Bob lives in wyoming. This dogfight was also mentioned in his book.
Scott and i are current members of the 474th fg association and have had an outpouring of interest and support in gathering information about scott's fathers p-38.
The name of lt. Fredericks p-38 was the "h0-hum". Yes, the same name as lt lloyd wensels p-38. I have talked to his daughters but they know of no relationship between the two pilots.
The thing we lack the most is a picture of lt fredericks plane the "ho-hum" . It would also have the number 224 on it.
I thought you having so many books on the p-38 you might come accross a picture of it. Any help would be so appreciated.
Thanks so much
phil

gabacho2015
10-18-2015, 02:27 AM
To bolillo-loco (or anyone out there)
this is a longshot but i thought i'd put it out there. I saw an old post you had made on a ubisoft forum and you stated you had almost 40 books on the p-38 lightning.
My brother-in-laws father, lt. James frederick, was shot down over montmerri france and was hidden by the french underground untill the liberation of france. This amazing story has come to light only within the last two years and we have uncovered tons of information of his experience during the war.
Lt fredericks flew a model p-38j-15-lo serial number 42-104224. The plane had a black square on the tail and a f5 on the boom indicating the 474th fg, 428 fs.
We have read the book the geyser gang and a book called "swat" by bob milligan. Bob was the ace that shot down the fw190 that had shot lt. Fredericks plane down during that dogfight on july 6th 1944. My brother in law scott frederick has talked to bob who is still remembers that day. Bob lives in wyoming. This dogfight was also mentioned in his book.
Scott and i are current members of the 474th fg association and have had an outpouring of interest and support in gathering information about scott's fathers p-38.
The name of lt. Fredericks p-38 was the "h0-hum". Yes, the same name as lt lloyd wensels p-38. I have talked to his daughters but they know of no relationship between the two pilots.
The thing we lack the most is a picture of lt fredericks plane the "ho-hum" . It would also have the number 224 on it.
I thought you having so many books on the p-38 you might come accross a picture of it. Any help would be so appreciated.
Thanks so much
phil

I'm sorry Lightning474th, but I cannot answer your question. I was the online P-38 pilot and poster at these forums years ago known as bolillo_loco. I no longer debate games, ww2 aircraft and such. Because others and myself never got any place with the game developers, I quit playing this game in 2005. Having had nothing but bad experiences in this regard since I started playing WWII flight sims in 1997, 2005 marked the last year I've played one of these games. I grew tired of people who use supposition, what they saw on the history channel, and or some internet source rather than real test documents and books, so circa 2007, I stopped writing about these topics. In 2009, I sold all of my books, and I've become so disinterested in WWII aviation, that I no longer bother with it. I only come back here once every year or two when I think, "Hum, maybe I should go back to playing flight sims and debating the topics, I used to have great fun." I revisit these topics on rare occasions so I can smash any notion that I would again be interested in this subject.

Cheers,
gabacho aka bolillo_loco