"George R. Gonzalez" wrote:

"Cecil Turner" wrote in message
...

Make sure it also covers his work in the Pacific during WWII as a civilian
tech rep in
front-line units (flight test and profiling P-38s that resulted in nearly
double
operational range). Provides a bit of balance.

rgds,
KTF

I've always wondered about this..... I first read abot his range-enhancing
exploits in reader's Digest when I was about 13 yrs old, and it greatly
impressed me at the time.

Since then, I've picked up a few old airplane tech manuals, and at least in
the B-17, B-29, B-24, P-51 ones I've seen, they ALL have charts in the back
with all kinds of airspeed-vs-manifold pressure vs rpm vs range curves.
The B-24 manual IIRC even goes to great lengths explaining the right way to
lean out the engines, and several scary stories about the crews that never
made it back to base because they forgot to go to lean-running mode.

So did the P-38 go out to the pilots without any range vs airspeed vs rpm vs
mixture charts??

Or did the pilots ignore the charts, or what?

Methinks the Linberg story is a bit too neat to be totally correct.

No expert here, but I just saw a special on the History Channel where they covered it at
length. Apparently the settings normally used were fuel rich to avoid damaging the
engines (if they supplied the specifics I missed 'em). Lindbergh tested new profiles,
followed by a teardown inspection of the engines to look for damage (there wasn't any),
followed by charting same. Numerous interviews of pilots and mechanics who were there,
all gave glowing endorsements, and said he effectively doubled their range. Followed by
coverage of some long-range raids that were impossible before. It was convincing to me.

rgds,
KTF