One of Japan's leading aces who survived the war said in an interview here on RU-vid that the P38 was the hardest US aircraft he went up against to shoot down, the reason he gave was it's twin boom design, they preferred to attack aircraft from above from a dive and when he'd fire on the P38 the rounds would pass through the open area between boom's, he said something like "There was nothing to hit!!! The bullets just passed right through!!!".
@@kgblagden Even if I could remember how to find the video I still couldn't post a link, I only have an Android phone and I guess you can't do that from one, however if I remember correctly either his first or last name was Honda but I can't say for sure. The entire interview is in Japanese with subtitles, the interviewer is also Japanese in case that'll help you find it.
@@kgblagden The interview is in 3 parts, it's in the first part he talks about the P38 being hard to hit due to it's twin boom design, I think it's right around 11 minutes in. Watch all 3 parts it's a great interview with him.
National Geographic had an article with stunning colour photos of ‘Yippee’. I was lucky to find it in my school library where it was successful in diverting my attentions from the set project!! I think that p-38 became a racer and was written off in a landing accident. Please put me right if that wasn’t the case!
I had a friend who flew F5's (photo recon P38) from the Marianas for BDA, because his flights would often be canceled he had lots of free time. He got the medical crew to teach im how to take X-rays and by the time he left the service he was grandfathered in to become a licensed X-ray tech. He was one of the few Army air corps pilots who wore wings of gold as he did his training at Pensacola FL with the navy pilots. He was in the same class as Joe Walker who was killed in the B70 crash flying the F104. He also flew the C124 with the twin bubble canopy. He was also one heck of a X-ray tech. He got pictures when others had no idea how to position the patient to get what the Dr. wanted. He told me some great stories of flying. Greg keep up the great work, you bring these world war II planes back to life with each episode.
I've been reading stuff about the P-38 since I first discovered WW2 airplanes about 60 years ago. The twin boom configuration is always rationalized as a solution to maneuverability in a twin engine airplane or improved aerodynamic efficiency, neither of which really made much sense to me. I always thought it was more likely a packaging thing, and a very logical one. You are the first person that's stated that in simple terms. I'm looking forward to more in this series on the P-38.
"The twin boom configuration is always rationalized as a solution to maneuverability in a twin engine airplane or improved aerodynamic efficiency" ...I've been a fan of the P-38 Lightning and have always looked for content specifically focused on the P-38 (...and wondered why how iconic it was, Greg ignored it for the longest time...) and I've *_never_* heard this as a reasoning behind it. It just always made sense to me that this was made well, well before the Merlin and before the R-2800 was ready and this was a way to get more power and more fuel into the the aircraft and have strong structural stability. And, I mean twin-booms were not a new concept with WWI aircraft and plenty of interwar aircraft having them and Focke-Wulf having a successful design with the Fw189 prior to this.
I'm surprised Greg didn't mention the poor visibility of the twin fuselage design (to one side) vs the excellent visibility of the P-38 as built. Odd that he said he wasn't sure why the twin fuselage was passed over at 13:20, except for the central firepower.
Twin booms aside, the push-pull engine configuration AND a requirement for space for a pilot and weapons and superchargers and fuel and methanol-water injection and/or nitrous oxide seems to result in quite the sizeable plane, case in point the Do335. Makes one appreciate how compact a design the P38 actually is.
At least the Do335 manages to have 1 fuselage instead of 3... Not by chance, its top speed is 100km/h higher despite having no turbo and a worse power/weight ratio. Of course, there is more than just top speed. But the 3 gondolas approach isn't exactly the most elegant one from an engineering perspective.
@@jorehir 1 fuselage and what, 5-6 years of progress in aerodynamics. Despite the Do335 being a chungus of a fighter plane, among other developments there's far less scoops, turbos and other doohickeys hanging out in the breeze than on the P38...I mean the gun barrels sticking so far out of the nose cost mph (like the bulges on the cowl of the 109-G6). But I don't think the three gondola or two gondolas and fuselage would be something that couldn't be overcome with a wind tunnel and horsepower like the f7f or Sea Hornet.
A few hours from where I live in Pennsylvania there's two communities right up the road from each other called Intercourse and Blue Ball's, I'm not joking about that, one of the biggest problems that the townships have is people stealing road signs, everyone wants a matching set.
It's what we've come to expect from you Greg - a thorough look at an aircraft based on your considerable research, which really helps us understand some of the design points of this beauty. Many thanks as always and great value for money!
I always wondered about all those little scoops... On my bucket list is a one-third scale (well, ok, maybe only quarter scale '38and now I've got the data sources I needed! 😊
Ah! My favorite WWII American fighter! I still remember how much I enjoyed building a Monogram 1/48 P-38 over 50 years ago, and I know have the lovely Tamiya kit in my stash. Episode One in this series was informative and as always, I learned a lot. Thanks so much.
Monograms pro was that you can built also the Droop Snoot and Recon Version F-4 or F-5 (?), i built a Academy Jor L years ago , have the Academy nightfighter version and the Hasegawa P-38F/G/H (1 kit 3 options) , Haseg. P-38J and Haseg. P-38L, all 1:48. they are in the cellar now together with 200 other kits, plus Resin and other aftermarket parts and decal sets in 1:48 scale, my eyes are really bad now because of Sinusitis and i didnt have enough space for all the Models here in my new Appm., maybe in future but for all the Monogram B-29s, B-17s or B-24s plus the smaller stuff i need a Palace not an Appartm.. Tamiya P-38 sounds like a shake n bake ;) Align the Twin Booms wasnt easy with Academy Kit, think Tamiyas P-38 is a good choice .
@@Sturminfantrist You have an impressive collection! The Tamiya P-38 will be my first WWII airplane build since 1970. I returned to building static models last year after a 50 year hiatus and I’ve built 20 or so WWI planes all in 1:48. The first dozen were vintage Aurora kits as I was nostalgic for the models I had built as a kid. Along the way I discovered models made by Eduard. The kits from that Czech company have excellent detailing and fit although the tiny photo etched parts are a challenge for my old eyes and shaky fingers.
I’ve always loved the Lightning and my family has a special connection to it. On my mom’s side, my grandpa had an engineering job at Lockheed in Burbank and helped develop some of the systems for the late model P-38s. On my dad’s side, my great uncle flew P-38s in Europe before his squadron transitioned to P-51s, mostly on ground attack sorties since this was mid to late 1944.
This is one of the major series I've been so anxious for... Greg's full on special treatment of the P-38, my favorite warbird of all time! Elegant, ground breaking, and a study in the art of engineering and pushing the envelope... Literally. There certainly by were better "fighters" but it's place in history (in many ways like the Jug) is often underestimated by so many. It truly is a beauty of an airplane. Thanks, Greg, this is why I'm a Patreon supporter. Can't wait for the next installments!! My summer just got a lot more interesting! Time to go buy me a P-38 mug. Thanks again, Greg... I thought I knew a lot about this bird and now realize there is sooo much more! Great job, Greg!
Same. With how iconic the P-38 was, how successful it was and how far it was pushing the limits of aircraft design at the time I'm surprised he put it off as long as he did.
@@Mike-eq4ky You say there was certainly better fighters, but was there really? During ww2? I have always been of the opinion that the P-38 remained competitive and even superior to what both the Germans and Japanese could fly up until the end of the war, and superior to our own aircraft that largely replaced it. Often the response I get as evidence that this couldn't have been true is the fact that the army air corps chose other aircraft instead, phasing out the use of the P-38 in the ETO. I still firmly believe the P-38 remained as good or better than the aircraft like the P-51 as a individual aircraft with a skilled well trained pilot. Yet I will say something that seems contradictory, I would make the same call and choose to produce P-51s instead of P-38s. It wasn't that these aircraft that largely replaced the P-38 were superior aircraft, they were cheaper more cost efficient aircraft, and at the end of the day I would rather have 200 P-51s than 100 P-38s.
@@mikejohnson555... While appreciate your perspective, let me qualify my statement and see where we land... By "fighter", I was specifically referring to the air-to-air combat role and the bomber escort role in Europe. That said, the case can certainly be made that the P-38 is underestimated as a fighter, especially given its outstanding performance in the Pacific Theater where the cockpit heating and turbo issues and operation at low temperatures weren't particularly relevant, and zoom and boom tactics were very effective against the zeros, and you didn't need to get into turning dog fight with them. The P-38 had some of the best Firepower of any American fighter of the war, given that 20 mm Cannon and 4-50 cals right in the nose on the centerline, doesn't get much better than that! It was fast and had range, but needed a great pilot to really wring it out in a dogfight. And, here again, tactics, theater of operations and opponents in question are all relevant. The plane had a steering wheel instead of a stick and lacked both hydraulically boosted ailerons and dive flaps until later in the war which limited the roll rate and dive speed. It could have been an exceptional high-altitude Fighters if the turbochargers worked at the colder air the high altitudes a bomber escort Duty in the ETO oh, but it was not there yet. And then later on the 47's and 51's were better fits for that role with good or outstanding armament and in the case of the 51 even better range. But in terms of Versatility, arguably the P-38 could have been the best aircraft in the war from that perspective and Wyatt soldiered on to the end. And BTW, completely agree on the selection of the 51 given the economic considerations, and don't forget about the logistics of supporting and maintaining an aircraft like the 38 which had two of everything! So not only is the cost triple that of the 51 it's also twice as hard to maintain in the field! And as I said before it's always been my favorite aircraft of all time, and on my bucket list is to build a 1/3 scale radio control model of one! I'll get to that soon...
The P-38 is one of those planes that just looks the part. You know? You catch sight of those twin booms in classic profile and it just sort of makes you stop and admire it for a moment.
The sight alone becomes appreciated all the more when one knows the inner marvels of a P-38's harmonious components. They all work together to evoke a magical whole, a mystical composition unique in aviation history which few observers have learned to appreciate, unfortunately.
The P-47 was the first WW2 aircraft I fell in love with (figuratively speaking). Then I learned about the P-38 it became and still is my favorite WW2 aircraft. I got to get my mitts all over one at the EAA AirVenture Show in Oshkosh several years ago. The pilot, who wasn't the owner, said it was okay and we had a nice chat about her and what it's like to fly one. THAT was a great day for my son and I.
Thanks Greg, The P-38 is my favorite plane of WW2. When I saw how awesome and informative your P47, Fw190, and Bf 109 videos were I was really hoping you’d do a P38 series. Thanks again
I've grown up practically drooling over the P-38 Lightning since childhood and was taken aback learning of all the amazing feats it pulled in WWII! The amazing altitude it could reach, the speed, the nose guns... and there were even a few types that fired rockets! I was also surprised when I first learned that this was the plane used in "Operation Vengeance" over Bougainville in 1943 that shot down the bomber carrying Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto, the architect of the Pearl Harbor attack.
As a kid I used to love reading the WWII era "Flying Magazine"s that my Dad had kept from that time. The color photography in them was great as was the ad artwork.
For anyone specifically looking for a book about the P-38, I quite like The Lockheed P-38 Lightning by Warren Bodie. It's a fairly in depth treatment on the airplane, but also interesting glance into what was going on with Lockheed leading up to the development of the Lightning. It even has a endorsement and Foreword written by Kelly Johnson and Benjamin Kelsey. As Bodie did work for Lockheed, it admittedly reads with a bit of a homer slant. But it has a lot of good information, and (probably my favorite part about it) a lot of fantastic pictures and schematics.
Funny thing is, an F-35 has the same ground footprint as a P-38. Thing is, the F-35 fits into the box lengthwise while the P-38 gets turned to the side.
I was lucky enough to see Glacier Girl several times while she was being restored in Middlesboro, Ky in the early 2000's. Very cool plane and IIRC, Steve Hinton came to do the first flight after it was finished.
My favorite WW2 aircraft. First learned about this plane when reading Martin Caiden's book "The Fork-Tailed Deveil: P-38" back in grade school (8th) more than 25 years ago. He flew & tested in them so info was 1st hand. The combat scenes being of pilot's own accounts. One account of a pilot in Europe is after a tree-top level attack run he got too close to a pole & ended up leaving 8ft of a wing tip behind. Others were having an engine shot out & having to feather the prop to leave just 1 good engine. In one of these it was while engaged in combat. Of course they managed to make it back to base.
So glad you had a favorite fighter. I hope it makes you happy. Do you have a favorite insect too. If not, you consider having one. I think you could then share it on every comment that you make.
Seeing as how YT seems to not let all comments post. Sorry to disappoint. No favorite insect. Now I expect to see you copy//paste your rebuttal to everyone elses "xxxx favorite" I run across as well then? You seem to have missed a few others also saying as much on here. @@georgeburns7251🛩
Very competent and interesting reviews, love it. I am Swiss and my father told me that the Swiss company "Brown Boveri Company" located in Baden, Switzerland, produced turbochargers for American WW2 warplanes. However, when Switzerland became surrounded by the Nazis export halted.
This channel is the greatest. My father attended the CaseyJones school of aeronautics when it was in Newark NJ before WW2 and your lectures are spot on and beyond what he used to tell me when I was a boy Thank You!
My Mom is now 95 years old. Obviously she lived through World War II. Knowing nothing about airplane types in general, she still remembers seeing P-38's flying in the wartime skies of North Carolina. This was the only plane that she remembers. There is something primal in one sense, and iconic in another, that seems to set this aircraft apart from all other allied fighters. Nothing painted on a leather bomber jacket captures the feel and mystic of the WW2 years as does the image of a p-38 Lightning. Years ago I walked by the magazine rack in a grocery store. There on the cover of "In-Flight" magazine I was arrested by the photo of an olive drab P-38. In that moment I knew who flying it. And anyone reading this comment probably would guess it was Jeffrey Ethell. He had finally realized his lifelong dream by flying the same type of aircraft that his father flew during WW2. Sadly, as I called the magazine to check up on my friend, I was thunderstruck by the news that he had, 2 weeks previous, died in the second P-38 that he had been so privileged to fly. I can't see a Lightning without thinking about Jeff. But I am assured of this one thing, I will see him again.
I have loved WWII aircraft since I witnessed my uncle doing professional builds on models and photographing them for the box covers as a young boy. "Greg's Automobiles and Airplanes" gives a whole new level of insight for me - a person normally bored to tears by technical jargon. Greg makes it fun , not just informative. I have always had sources saying that "this fighter could out-turn or outgun that one" - but it;s really cool to be able to understand WHY that was !! Thanks Greg !
Am very happy to see this series of Analysis of a great WW2 Warbird. I served in the 49th fighter Squadron in the 15th AF, Foggia, Italy. As an armorer I saw firsthand the work needed to keep them operational and listened to the pilots relate to their experiences. The J model I worked on had most of the upgrades to AC and engines including Hydraulic flaps. The L model Had the dive flaps that removed the dive restrictions. Your analysis of the beginning design intention and limitations are showing the P-38 was a major factor in our war effort. Your audio seems clear with only a small amount of echo. My hearing aids limit my ability to judge objectively.. (For what it's worth)... I look forward to you additional videos
Many moons ago I was at a park on the outskirts of Austin, Tx. I noticed it was right along side a municipal airport as their were some hangars and planes parked out on a tarmac in a fenced in area. Was messing about and doing various activities when at some point I heard a loud, "CHUG CHUG CHUG CHUG", and billows of black smoke coming from the paddock. My eyes focused on a twin engine prop plane that was sitting out in front of what was now an open hangar door. My eyes turned to dollar pieces at the realization I was staring at a beautifully restored P-38 doing some engine run-up test/tune. I'd seen countless documentaries of the plane and it had never dawned on me just how big this plane was in real life. It props towered over the nearby Cessna's and such. I just plopped down and sat there for a good hour to hang out and watch them work on it.
As a kid, even as a Brit, I loved the Lightning, the P47, along with the Mosquito, the Typhoon/Tempest and P-61 Black Widow. I liked the planes with grunt and robustness. Having said that, I will still tip my hat to the day bombing raids by the US forces in the European theatre: bravery beyond measure, knowing the casualties until the P51 could escort them,
The P-38 did a good job of escorting them. For a long while, it was the only fighter with the range. In the beginning, it suffered from not being fully developed. The Army also resisted improvements that would slow production, even badly needed ones. So solutions that were developed quickly often took a long time to reach the combat theaters. Even with a green airplane, green crews, and not fully mature tactics and strategy-not to mention P-38 flights being outnumbered for much of the early campaign in the ETO-the P-38's helped the bombers get through. As all of the above mentioned factors improved along with the airplane itself, the kill to loss ratio improved. The Germans could afford the losses even less than the Allies could, and attrition took the Luftwaffe to pieces. By the time the P-51's came along, the air war was already being won. Ironically, by the time the P-51's with Merlins came along, the late J and L P-38's were available, but a lot of pilots never flew them because they were handed P-51's instead. The P-38 played an indispensable role in winning the air war in the ETO, and evolved in to a fighter as good as any in the air. But in many misguided histories is portrayed as second banana to the late coming P-51, and the shorter ranged P-47.
The protection of bombers from enemy fighters actually came about later, when allied pilots, mostly flying P-51s by then, were ordered to destroy enemy fighters. (Instead of "defend the bombers"). - They went from flying top cover, and being reprimanded for chasing enemy fighter down to the ground, to being ordered to chase them down and shoot them any chance they had, especially on the ground. And when they were forming up for an attack before they were prepared. This change it tactics literally wiped out the entire Luftwaffe in a matter of a few weeks. After almost four years of playing games. The concept of defending an enormous bomber fleet from a mass attack of cannon armed fighters is somewhere between completely ineffective and criminally incompetent.
My neighbor (sadly, passed), flew p38's in the pacific. Lots of interesting stories. I mentioned Lindberg and his efforts at fuel conservation and he replied that he had met him.
@@harsep Mr. Leed was a beloved neighbor. He did not elaborate on Mr Lindberg. He did relate that on one of the islands they were flying out of it was customary to sleep under the wing. One night a snake was killed in their midst. When they saw the snake they started sleeping on the wing.
@@davidervin7345 Its amazing to see like on the History channel interviews being done in color of these retired fighter pilots while still being in their 50's, 60's but at least its being preserved forever now. You are lucky to be able to talk to one of these legends while they are still alive.
Fantastic start on the P-38, Greg! You should take a look at the NACA report conducted to help the 38 increase its Mach number. To my memory, recommendations were to move radiators to leading edge of wing, a la Mosquito, and to extend back the pilot gondola a bit past the wing to help reduce shockwaves over the tail at high speed - also to rake back the windscreen a few degrees more. My research indicates that the War Production would not allow the P-38 to be taken off line for the time necessary to make the tooling changes - the judged that demand for the 38 was too great relative to the speed that would be gained.
Great to find some love for an excellent versatile and too often under appreciated craft. I'm amazed someone involved in designing this also designed the SR-71.
I think I built that kit around 1972 or 73. Loved all those Revell kits. Sad to say the ones I built back in the day long gone now. May have to pick model building back up as a retirement hobby!
Excellent again from Greg, the emphasis on how early the P-38 design was is usually missed. There is opinion that the design was partially fixed in this relatively primitive state by the government to maximise production output and Lockheed were prevented from implementing desired major airframe upgrades. The P-38J onwards liquid cooled intercoolers were the biggest engineering improvement.
Greg, your production quality and attention to detail never ceases to impress and this is no exception. The P38 is my all time favorite machine of any kind, and you still managed to uncover details that lightning nuts like me never knew about. I'm really looking forward to the rest of this series.
My Grandfather moved to California in 1942 and worked at Lockheed building Lightnings. He was new to that industry, he was a carpenter back in Minnesota and had 4 little kids so a stack of deferments. Anyway, he worked his way up to foreman. He didn’t talk much about it, I now wish I would have asked all kinds of questions. One thing he did say, when he first got there, everything was done to very high standards of fit and finish. By then time they were getting close to the end of the war, they were cranking them out so fast, the standards of craftsmanship had gone way down. Gaps, misalignment ect. He was glad to leave that industry and Moved back to Minnesota at the end of the war. Another thing he told me, He had some personal power tools at home, electric saw, drill ect. The gov. actually required these to be registered.
As a pilot, engineer, jet engine designer, etc - I loved this presentation! The thought process that goes into decisions (that are not always obvious or seems to make sense) has always fascinated me. Great job.
One of my very favorite warbirds, Greg, thanks! I'm really looking forward to the next episode. My cousin, Maj. Milton Joel, was shot down over Bremen, Germany in WW2 as he was escorting a bombing mission in 1943, commanding the 38th FS of the 55th FG. He was, at the time, the youngest Major in the USAAF. His remains were never recovered. He used to call my father "Little Buddy" and when Pop enlisted in 1944, he wanted to join the USAAF, like his older cousin, but Pop's eyesight issues prevented that so he ended up as a supply Sgt in the 3rd Army. Cousin Milton always wanted to fly and had studied aeronautics going back to the 1930s when he was in high school in Richmond, VA.
Thank you for making this series, I really enjoyed the P-47 series. My grandfather flew the P-38 (among others), so I'm really looking forward to more Lightning videos!
Large as the plane was, the P-38 was a very 'flat' machine. Most single-seat airplanes, the pilot is sitting atop a fuel tank or the wing box. The P-38 put the pilot, fuel tanks, engines, and guns all on the same horizontal level. This made the P-38 a _smaller_ target than most in the head-on and side-on aspects.
Kelly Johnson seems like about as close to a friendly mad scientist as you can get for an aircraft engineer, considering the sorts of solutions he and his team came up with to problems people didn’t even know they had Also, I absolutely love this plane just for the way it LOOKS, before even getting into was a bizarrely smooth ride it was for a twin engined aircraft: it just looks like a classical Golden Age Superhero, somehow, beaming with idealism and patriotism. It’s also incredibly symmetrical in its design, thanks to the counter rotation meaning they don’t need to build in aerodynamic features to counter torque. That also makes it one of the few aircraft I can understand how to fly in simulators, and the significant “shake” at the edge of stall certainly doesn’t hurt when it comes to learning how much “pull” you can get away with
Looking forward to this one. When writing Touched with Fire I ran into a very interesting article by David Ostrowski written for October 1996 issue of "Skyways - The Journal of the Airplane 1920-1940." The title is "Early P-38 problems." The author summarized a major internal report written for Lockheed HQ in 1944, so it's pretty blunt. The P-38 had its share of teething trouble as we all know. According to this report, in 1940-41 when Lockheed was beginning serious work on the 38 they also received huge orders for the "Hudson", a militarized version of their Electra airliner. To get the Hudson out the door, many of Lockheed's top engineers and production specialists were shifting away from work on the complex P-38 to work on the Hudson. To be fair, Lockheed was nearly broke in 1939, and considered big orders to be needed for what was clearly going to be a war ahead. However, because the P38 team was given many inexperienced men and was over worked, the "teething" troubles were protracted and solutions delayed. Lockheed's report concluded that because of the emphasis on the Hudson (a journeyman light bomber at best) the successful debut of the P-38 was set back by at least nine months. In other words, had things gone differently, the Bettys inbound to Henderson Field in August 1942 might have been met by USAAF P-38s instead of a few P-400s. Or 38s could have been defending Port Moresby in the spring of 1942 instead of P-39s and P-40s. Nobody has ever fought a perfect war I guess.
when i was much younger about maybe 10ish years old i even then loved the P-38 and i had the great opportunity to sit and speak with a P-38 pilot from WW2...i remember listening so intently and being on the edge of my seat. now as an older man i had the opportunity to work on a P-38 and when i was able to run my hand across the cowl covering that 1710 i actually started to tear up a bit and wish my father who was an aircraft fanatic was around to see his son who works on T-6's, seafury's, and others regularly work on my dream aircraft. only thing left on my bucket list for this plane is to take the yoke and go for a ride i can't even imagine what it would be like for me to fly one...probably would run it out of fuel not wanting to come down lol. on a side note...strange thing fate, when i was younger and my father who like i said loved aircraft (mostly WW2), we were only able to experience them at air shows like EAA. never any thoughts of flying, working, or even touching the real deal. Now i look back and say if you'd have told me 20 or 30 years ago a lot of these old warbirds would be part of my everyday life i'd have for sure called someone full of it. just figured this is a story that some of the people watching this type of video could relate or appreciate.
In WW2 my Grandpa was in a workshop company in New Guinea, he made a model P 38 out of scrap aluminium, with matching ashtrays made from cut down 37mm shell casings. I still have it. P 38 was a real moral booster in the Pacific.
You know what I like about this channel? Aside from the fact that I've always found aircraft to be fascinating, Greg does such a good job of explaining what you might call the economics of combat aircraft- the needs, the solutions to the needs, and how those solutions were found and developed and implemented. That's an education.
Corsair and the P-38 were My favorite WW2 fighters. My Uncle worked for Lockheed in Atlanta and I had all kinds of info and pictures on the C141 and C5 as they were built. the P- 38 flown by Bong and McGuire were interesting reading when I was a boy. Not just to mention how cool it looked. My reading said the 38's Allison engine suffered in the cold air over Europe. I am really interested to hear your detail knowledge on the subject.
Your videos are outstanding. No distracting background music, just interesting, very well researched information, delivered in a friendly and articulate voice.
Can you imagine what incredible progress his entire career spanned? From the P-38 to the SR71 Blackbird... From the first plane to achieve 400mph in level flight into unheard of altitudes and Mach numbers... They didn't understand compressibility when it was first encountered it in a dive on the 38... And 35 or so years later imagine dealing with the Blackbird that gets so hot at speed it actually lengthens?? Talk about engineering challenges. There's a man I'd love to have a few drinks with...
"Yippee," I echoed in response to the title plane... a new vid from Greg! And I've pointedly asked for Mosquito vs. P38 years ago (not to say that Greg wouldn't have made this on his own volition, indeed I'm sure he did) so this is a particular treat for me.
this video answered my question on why the P-38's twin boom design, i was enamored by it's difference to other fighter aircrafts that i've seen in my grandfather's aircraft book. i really love these sort of videos, props to you Sir Greg.
In my opinion, the P-38 is the first step in the Kelly Johnson chain that lead to the SR-71. Twin engines, pushing the performance envelope for the era, and unconventional to fly
@Bogey The Bear yeah I know a thing or three about the P-38, a bird so far ahead of it's time it's often accredited wrongly which kinda erks me, the fully modern controls is something that blows my mind Everytime I see it still, personally I consider it a souped up Mosquito that's better in nearly every way lol a Corvette to a sedan, and as deadly as a Corvette to the unskilled, though I personally think the great majority of P-38 kills as in kills BY them was NOT turn n' burn stereotypical dogfight, more like swoop behind them at high speed and blow their ass outta the sky with the most accurate burst of lead in the sky, you know the law of the sky, there's aces and those that get shot down by aces, nothing in-between
@@whydoyougottahavthis Although it was certainly better in a knife fight than most of its twin engined brethren: I’ve even heard some people exaggerate and say “it turned inside a zero”
Thanks Greg. One thing that really was a factor was it's 1937 design. There's an article somewhere that talks about the transition between fuel efficient flight and combat flight. If I find it I'll come back and post the link. In any case - if a P-38 escorting bombers got jumped, there was a specific series of tasks the pilot had to perform - _in a specific order_ - to make that transition. The ergonomics of the controls used to do that on the P-38 left something to be desired. The P-51 on the other hand (which was developed later and with the benefit of more experience) - had some of these functions combined and also had them located more ergonomically. Thus - there was a marked difference between the time it took a pilot being jumped by enemy aircraft to transition from cruising speed to combat speed in a P-38 and a P-51. Another factor in this - was that the P-38 was a multi-engine aircraft and the P-51 was a single engine aircraft. Single Engine Aircraft are much easier to fly. For the new pilots coming right out of flight school this made a real difference. Yet another factor here - was that the early P-38's - which being a pre-war aircraft - were there for the US right at the start - was that in Europe they were going up against all those Luftwaffe Experten who'd been flying a lot longer than they had. By the time the P-51's came out - a lot of those guys were dead - thanks in part to the P-38's and P-47's. As to it's armament - there are two schools of thought on WWII gunnery. 1) Was that you had the guns in the wings - and they had to be harmonized to all impact the same area at a specific range. Thus the pilot wanted to fire his weapons when the target was at that range. Closer or farther away - you were somewhat spraying the area, as in Spray and Pray. 2) If you had your weapons (at least the main ones) mounted in the fuselage - they all shot straight ahead and could be _aimed_ at a target which was at any distance within the guns range. The Epitome of this was Hans-Joachim Marseille en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans-Joachim_Marseille whose highly developed deflection shooting - using the MG-151/20 firing through the prop hub of his Me-109f made him a phenomenon. Now here - you start getting into a difference between societies that believe more in elites and those which are more egalitarian. Mass produced air crew would benefit from spraying the area whereas more elite air crew would benefit from being able to aim their weapons accurately. Thus - if you look at most US aircraft - they have the guns in the wings and their mass produced pilots can Spray and Pray their way to ... getting some hits. The British also put their guns mostly in the wings. The Germans and the Russians - mostly - put the main weaponry for their fighter planes in the fuselage. I'm not sure what to say about the effects of communism on this. The thing about the location of the P-38's weaponry that Lockheed so touted - was that with it's fire power all concentrated in one column of fire - _which you could aim_ - and if you hit something with that column of projectiles - you could put a really big hole in it. The Downside - was that you had to hit it - which was easier to do with weapons that sprayed their ammunition over a larger area. You will see this again and again in the story of the P-38. In the hands of a veteran pilot who could take advantage of the aircraft - it could work wonders - but - in the hands of a novice right out of flight school ... a P-40 would be a lot easier for him to fly. .
Many, many thanks for working up the P-38. It has always been my favorite US fighter of WW II. I look forward to hearing about the problems in Europe vs the comparative success in the Pacific. Did the P-40 have a turbocharger. I didn’t think that it did until they were testing the P-40 Q? (with the bubble canopy), and then the performance wasn’t any better than the P-51 so they just stopped making P-40s near the end of the war.
When I was younger I used to think that the choice of the twin boom design was aerodynamics, as I got older I started to think about this, packaging is a perfect reason. Well put together video.
The weapons package. Watched a documentary on The History Channel (showing my age) where a former P-40 pilot described what he loved in the P-38. Because there was no converging fire he was able to elevate the nose to increase range. Picked off the TEC on a schwarm of ME-109's on a mission doing just that.
In War Thunder as in IL2 GB, a properly handled P-38 is one of the most dangerous opponents one could face. Particularly the later J models with boosted ailerons. With its sole poor spot in agility, its poor roll rate solved it becomes very, very dangerous. A splendidly informative introduction to the P-38 Lightning.
I love it in war thunder. I call it a sleeper turnfighter, because with those fowler flaps you have insane lift. Specially at altutude, where your enemy might have reduced power but you're at 100% power thanks to turbocharging.
Yep, a well flown P-38 is dangerous on it's own, and given the very favourable Battlerating in War Thunder, especially in "Sim Battles", where it mostly faces 109 F and early Gs, it can really dominate a match. I've seen a lot of terrible US Pilots in WT, mostly in T-bolts and Mustangs though, but also some very good P-38 Pilots, and those are nearly untoucheable. Us Fighters overall are experts aircraft, you have to use them right, but if you do....they are very, very powerful. But even if you put the P-38 against contemporaries, like in IL-2 1946 or Great Battles, the P-38 really shines, and is my favourite US Fighter. Somehow when you come in at 28-32,000 ft, everyone at high altitude suddenly "vacates the premises", and it can fight toe to toe with a 109 or 190 in a dogfight. If you know how to use the rudder, fowler flaps and dogfight geometry that is. ;) One of the key things that helps against 109s is to never fly just a horizontal turn, always put a vertical element into your turns. And the gun arrangement is something that Lockheed can be justifiably proud of, nose mounted guns are the best arrangement, good tight grouping of shots that do damage in a smaller area instead of the damage being spread out and no convergence problems make shooting at 600 meters no different from shooting at 100, safe for lead and the ballistic curve! ;) How the hell Gaijin thought that a P-38L needs a BR of 4.0, the same as a 109 F-4 I'll never understand.
I am very happy to see that this plane is going to get a treatment from Greg! It really is a plane worth examining, and one of my favorites. Next we have to see if he wants to look at the F-14...
Check out Ward Carroll's channel for that, he was a RIO on the F14 for years and gives some pretty good insights into it and it's technical capabilities both flight wise and with it's systems.
Check out the little known Lockheed L-133 proposed jet fighter in 1939, it would have had the same basic wing shape as the P38 and the P80 Shooting Star, apparently that was Lockheed's go to wing shape back in those days.
The problem with most of the P-38's contemporary twin-engine fighters is that the others were usually designed as "heavy" fighters, often with heavy guns and 2 or even 3 crewmen. Extra weight does not a good fighter make. The fact that the P-38 was designed as an interceptor and not a heavy fighter meant that it escaped being burdened with extra size and crew. The fact that Kelly Johnson was a genius helped too.
Greg, I appreciated the fact that you showed some of the sources of information you used so that we could pause and read. A step forward in utube videos. Cheers!
I adore the P-38. I'm convinced that only the best of the best were assigned to it because it was a beast of a craft. That is absolutely and assumption though
Request for subject matter--- the background and quality of us pilots of the mid to late 30's to pearl harbor.. army, navy and marines. I think we had well trained and seasoned pilots but lacked bleeding edge aircraft in large numbers. Thanks for the great vids Greg!
Nice start to the P-38 series. Glad to see you debunk a common misconception that this airplane could not turn with other fighters. I think people get this idea from the fact that the Army specification for the airplane used the term "interceptor" for the first time, a term too many people seem to associate with airplanes not designed to turn. According to Warren Bodie, Ben Kelsey wrote the term "interceptor " into the specification only because the Army had prohibited expenditure of funding on development of twin engine fighters. Kelsey believed the performance he desired would only be achievable with two engines, so he invented the term to dodge that bureaucratic restriction. It was an inspired design that, as you said, was just a little too early to benefit from aerodynamic developments that would benefit later aircraft. I see the low critical Mach number as the congenital defect that kept the P-38 from being an outstanding fighter after its other technical issues were resolved. I believe Bodie also said that Lockheed would have preferred a more "high speed" airfoil section, but the airfoil and aspect ratio settled on were necessary to meet the time to climb requirement of the Army design specification.
Along the lines of the use of "interceptor", the computers manufactured by Digital Equipment Corporation weren't "computers", they were Programmed Data Processors. DEC absolutely insisted on this definition, because they wanted to sell to a bunch of government agencies that at the time had prohibited expenditures for "computers".
Yeah, it's strange to see that misconception still exist after we've had flightsims for over 30 years and representations of the P-38 in it for more than 23 years, European Air War was the first one that showed it, but the IL-2 series from Forgotten Battles: Aces Expansion Pack onwards really showed how good it was. I mean if you're really interested in this, you have the option to check the aircraft out for yourself, why aren't more people using it? It does have limitations, but compared to some books and even some academic readings they aren't that bad. Funnily, when we got the IL-2 (GB) Battle of Bodenplatte addon, there were still a lot of green new pilots that were very suprised when they saw a P-38 really move for the first time! Me and a few friends who all love the P-38 did a number on some 109 and 190 Pilots who were a bit too cocky.....and well once we went up to 32,000 feet and cruised down the map, everyone "vacated the premises" at high altitude. ;)
@@LupusAries It has become interesting to see the extent to which the legends of some aircraft are tarnished by negative narratives while others are burnished by laudatory ones. People actually dismiss or admire aircraft due to narratives that are based on repetition rather than fact. Unfortunately, I sometimes suspect that performance of some aircraft in a flight sim may also be based on common narratives simply because actual data was not available to the coders.
One aspect you could touch on in future episodes is these planes were sold to the British and they were very unimpressed. Mainly because for some reason they did not have the engines turning in opposite directions but the same direction. Apparently there was torque issues that the found difficult to counter act. Plus they were tricky to bale out of due the potential to be injured by the knife like elevator, it was recommended to invert the plane then bale out. Also at high speed they had what they called compressibility which they managed to overcome. Good show keep it up.🇦🇺
No BPC had seen the P38 with the Turbos and were impressed and put an order in. In the mean time the US Govt put a ban on the sale of the secret Turbo-Supercharger Lockheed then tried to sell the earlier version without the turbo-super and the BPC rejected it.
I imagine the statement about 90% of aerial photography would be for the American Forces only as the Brits had their own aircraft for the task including Spitfires and Mosquito's and had been carrying out this task throughout the war and in all theatres.
We will cover that in detail later in the series. Right now, I'm still on explaining the plane itself. The final episode will go over effectiveness in various roles.
Chino Air Museum flew P-38 painted in markings of Ace Perry Dahl recently. Years ago he spoke at our symposium on air combat. Thanks for best WW2 channel on warbirds
It's a shame they didn't have the time to finish developing the turbo system for the P39, it could be that the P51 never would have been designed if that was the case.
I loved looking at the Viet Nam era "Push/Pull" 337. I thought it was beautiful and maybe developed into something really fast. I talked to a post Vietnam war veteran who was an airframe mechanic. He told me that, in the cockpit, between the two engines, was incredibly loud. He told me that one of the biggest issues with thith plane was that it would come back to base "bent" as pilots needed to exceed design limits to survive ground fire.
@@antonferreira483 Dick Bong was America's Ace of Aces. An airfield named after him was never completed, and it became the Bong SRA. The best part is that the Bong SRA is actually awesome. The highway sign just reads "Bong Recreation Area."
