I linked the source on the drop tanks a while back, but here it is again: http://chicagoboyz.net/archives/38801.html
. And even if you drop them at the first sign of combat, you've still got lots more fuel to play with at that point since you still have all your internal fuel.
I think that what it mentioned with the P-38 was that it simply didn't get the higher capacity 165-gallon wing tanks and 310-gallon belly tanks until the P-51 was already around in Europe, despite them being in use if the PTO as early as April 1943.
Really dude, that is your source? Got something better that doesn't reek of history crank? It starts with innacurate statements right out of the gate.
The P51's historical narrative has never been how it won war. The writer of the article is starting out with really damn obvious bias and a short read in they are already discounting the shitloads of evidence to the contrary including accounts from the pilots who flew the craft. Many P51 pilots were also P38 pilots and their reports match the official record rather closely.
You lose more points for the charming emblem blazoned at the top of the page.
Just read most of it. What drivel. The guy has a major stick up his ass and seems to enjoy pulling his conclusions out of thin air and enjoys ignoring the well recorded and documented historical narrative. He is like the Mike Sparks for WWII aircraft.
The article is full of at best questionable conclusions and more then a few meaningless buzz words.
I like how he fails to mention the design flaws of the P-38 that dogged the fighter well into the late war for starters including the issue with loss of control in a dive that German pilots took great advantage of.
edited 21st Dec '13 6:26:41 AM by TuefelHundenIV
Who watches the watchmen?Sure did.
The cockpit had freezing issues and opening even a small window for ventalation led to noticeable buffeting of the aircraft due to interuption in the airflow.
The Germans became adept at using its difficulty in diving against it. The German fighter pilots in the Med racked up quite a few P38 kills.
I was looking at the sharp uptick in bomber losses to fighters towards end of the war. The Germans apparently decided that their fighter craft were too geared towards fighter on fighter conflict. They were ill suited to knocking down the larger heavier aircraft even the British bombers required a fair amount of concentrated fire power to knock down.
So they started putting auto cannons on more of their fighters and pushign some of the twin engined craft like the BF 110 with heavier armaments into the bomber hunter role.
The uptick in autocannons and even Air to air rocketry apparently matches pretty well with an uptick in bomber losses to enemy fighter craft.
And there I have found the crux of the issue with the Allison engines. The Allisons were Turbo Super Chargers. The air intake point though was on the leading edge of the wings and meant the craft had to be operated at lower speeds and powers at the high altitudes the 8th was running their bombers at. It also limited the use of the manuevering flap. The key variant to blame is the P38H which was a stop gap apparently.
The P38J though solved these issues and started production at the same time as the H but they had trouble getting the runs done quickly enough. The air intakes were moved to "chin mounts" un the front underside of the nacelles. The craft also had an electronically activated dive flap.
Damn pity they couldn't get the manufacturing lines sorted out more quickly with those cooling cores and general manufacture. If they had the P38 would have stayed with the 8th instead of being sent to the pacific and replaced in Europe with the P51's.
edited 21st Dec '13 11:27:54 AM by TuefelHundenIV
Who watches the watchmen?Pretty sure this is aviation related:
http://www.cracked.com/blog/7-reasons-tsa-sucks-a-security-experts-perspective/
Makes me glad I ain't an American air traveller.
Yep, the Packard licenced built version. Purty good bit of kit. Wikipedia has the skinny.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Packard_V-1650
Btw, did the Lightning ever get the Packard Merlin option?
edited 21st Dec '13 2:42:42 PM by TamH70
True> But the P51 got sorted out before the p38. The P51 D was available in larger numbers with the improved engine before the P38 J's even really had sufficient numbers to be useful.
By the time the J rolled out the P38 H proved to be a bit of a muck up and not that great for the high level bombing raids on the still existing German industry.
So several P38 groups were shifted to P51 D's for the escort missions. Most of the 38's went to the pacific where the craft had fewer issues due to both climate and nature of the enemy craft in that theatre. Some stayed on in Europe but were still used as ground attack aircraft to great effect. Including tearing the shit out of the German rail lines.
I think when people start flying off the handle about the 8th Airforce bomber command they keep forgetting the high risk day raids were over heavily fortified territory. The German AA guns were not exactly a slouch at really mangling enemy aircraft. Staying as high as they did helped reduce the effective accuracy of the guns a bit but it made bombing campaigns even harder to pull off without large area bombing. That and the bombs of the day had a lot of deviation in the free fall. Even going low and fast was very dangerous.
edited 21st Dec '13 2:45:39 PM by TuefelHundenIV
Who watches the watchmen?
There was a reason the RAF moved to night raids...
edited 21st Dec '13 3:06:31 PM by Greenmantle
Keep Rolling OnBalmung: That piece is very much like a certain mil history wonk called Mike Sparks. He seemed to be fishing for a conspiracy that simply wasn't there. Granted his work was a lot more detailed and frankly far less insane by comparison.
If there wasn't a dearth of information from those who flew both 38's and 51's and the bombers themselves I might lean his way but everytime you start looking you find the reasons for some the seemingly odd decisions is often rather boringly mundane.
Something else to remember is the art of strategic bombing with long range aircraft was still pretty new and honestly I am surprised things didn't go worse.
Tactical bombing at least enjoyed an earlier start and experimentation.
I can understand that night raids were safer for the bombers but at the same time it was easy to get lost, crash into other craft, miss your target point, or even bomb the wrong target. Even with the most sloppy of night time light discipline it is pretty hard to tell cities and landmarks apart at night.
Night bombing was extraordinarily difficult at best until certain guidance methods made finding targets in the dark more accurate.
edited 21st Dec '13 3:42:44 PM by TuefelHundenIV
Who watches the watchmen?That Cracked article about the TSA is brutal. I also love how someone who is evidently a Serious Person (former head of security at fucking Ben-Gurion airport) decided to take the time to write for Cracked. I urge everyone here to read it. There isn't as much of the usual "wouldn't it be awful if there were also BEARS?!"-style absurdism and more just cold sneering contempt.
One of the best things I've read on Cracked.
Schild und Schwert der Partei@ Tuefel:
Ahem, "Bomber" Harris
...
For the other targets, the RAF had a lot of other machinery to choose from: Mosquitos, Typhoons, the various Bristol fighter/bombers, Mustangs, Spitfires, Wellingtons and obviously the other lend-lease kit from the US.
edited 21st Dec '13 3:47:02 PM by Greenmantle
Keep Rolling OnThis is what Rafi Sela, the guy who co-wrote that TSA PSA, looks like.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/25451173@N08/4342539773/
Cool old guy or what?
Balmung: Yeah he is less crazy and better organized but he still is fishing pretty hard when the answers are likely more mundane and frankly boring.
Green: I love the Big Gun Skeeter.
Wow. Mr Harris is a piece of work. Though to be fair not letting him in on the reasoning for the targeting kinda kept him in the dark and likely only made him suspicious and stubborn.
Though I do have to wonder why they didn't consider strangling the German supplies more directly by taking out oil and shipping earlier.
In a very round about way targettign the industrial cities widely gets the job done but how did he not think that destroying factories more directly would have had greater effect?
edited 21st Dec '13 4:36:37 PM by TuefelHundenIV
Who watches the watchmen?Balmung: It is ok man. We all fuck up like that at least once. A few years back I thought Mr Sparks was interesting and had a few good points. I made the mistake of sharing a link. I got a quick and embarassign but rather informative correction by someone who was familiar with his insanity in its fullest extent.
Who watches the watchmen?Yes, but I judge myself harshly and there's a part of brain that assumes that everyone will remember my every fuck up for the rest of eternity, no matter how much I know that they won't, meaning I'll still bete kicking myself about this in five years. I know because I still occasionally kick myself about minor stupid things I did even longer ago than that.

That would have been scary. Give that craft to Erich Hartmann.
Who watches the watchmen?