![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Mike Williamson wrote:
Guy Alcala wrote: snip Even assuming that the problems (engines, turbo controls, cockpit heat, dive flaps; the boosted ailerons were a 'nice to have') had been fixed earlier, was it possible to produce enough P-38s in that period to supply the needs of the PTO, MTO _and_ ETO? It seems unlikely, given the relatively low production totals of the P-38 compared to the single-engine a/c, and cost -- both the P-47 and P-38 cost about double the P-51 to build in money, materiel and man-hours; fuel requirements were also about double. Given the production totals achieved with other aircraft, the US COULD have ramped up production of the P-38, but the war production board didn't approve second source production until very late (IIRC about 120 P-38s were eventually produced by Vultee-Nash, but likely none of them ever made it to the combat theaters). that production could havebeen increased I dont deny. that it could have been increased to the extent posible with the p-51 and to a lesser extent the P-47 seems unlikely, given that the P-38 wasnt originally designed for mass production. I realize that Lockheed had done considerable re-design to improve its mass producibility, but the a/c manhours required are still far higher than a single. The P-47 being an exception, but then Republic never seems to have had management as good as their designers - their a/c were always expensive, heavy and late, but generally excellent. If the engines had been swapped out for two-stage Merlins, the turbo and early intercooler problems would have been eliminated, at the cost of some fuel efficiency, and Lockheed submitted a proposal for this, although politics prevented this. Assuming the Merlin swap would have solved the major problems, it still would have taken considerable time to do. Look how long it took between the Mustang X and the P-51B achieving IOC. That the P-38 was developed to US specifications before the war resulted in the Allison engine use, and the US focused on turbosupercharging for inline engines. Of course, at that time, the Merlin didn't have two-stage supercharging either, so the turbo was really the only practical way to go for high altitude performance at the time. The Allies had their share of bad production decisions, but the greater industrial capability tended to make these decisions less than critical to the final outcome and not as noticed in the overall picture. True, although in this case the lack of sufficient numbers of long-range escorts available earlier was most definitely noticeable. Guy |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
regaining night currency but not alone | Teacherjh | Instrument Flight Rules | 11 | May 28th 04 02:08 PM |
Did the Germans have the Norden bombsight? | Cub Driver | Military Aviation | 106 | May 12th 04 07:18 AM |
Why was the Fokker D VII A Good Plane? | Matthew G. Saroff | Military Aviation | 111 | May 4th 04 05:34 PM |
Night of the bombers - the most daring special mission of Finnishbombers in WW2 | Jukka O. Kauppinen | Military Aviation | 4 | March 22nd 04 11:19 PM |
Why did Britain win the BoB? | Grantland | Military Aviation | 79 | October 15th 03 03:34 PM |