Unlikely Matchups: Mosquito VS. P-38

[Robotic Pope]

Originally Posted by Doktorwzzerd

Ha, well pilot performance being equal, the Mosquito just wasn't designed to be a fighter, she was designed as a light bomber, whereas the P-38 was intended from the beginning to be a fighter. I mean just look at them, its like proposing a dogfight between a F-111 and an F-15.

Exactly my thought. The mosquito was primarily a bomber. It was only because it was such a great plane that it could be modified to do other jobs (night fighter and invader). It was never used as a dogfighter though so it would probably lose against the P-38. The DeHaviland Hornet on the other hand WAS designed and built for the same role as the p-38 (long range fighter bomber). Based on the Mosquito but with a heavily redesigned plywood fuselage including a single seat cockpit, new wood/metal wings and four 20mm cannons. The Hornet was lighter, more manuvurable and with a top speed of almost 500mph was a lot faster than the Mosquito.

The Hornet V Lightning would be a much fairer comparison, and the Hornet would win by a large margin. Only problem is that the hornet was built in 1944 and WWII ended before the first planes could be delivered to the RAF.

[Voyager]

Well, wandering over to Il-2 Compare, the P-38L Late shows a best turn time of ~25 seconds (with flaps), while the Mosquito FB MkVI can only manage 31 seconds (no improvement with flaps). The P-38 has a 20-30km/h speed advantage up to 4km, at which point its advantage increases rapidly, and it climbs better throughout hte entire flight regime.

Basically, the Mosquito has excellent performance for a medium bomber, but the P-38 is a purpose built fighter.

On the P-38 in Europe, to my understanding the P-38 had issues with icing, and dives, and as both cold, and diving opponents were prevalent in Europe, it wasn't very well suited to conditions there. Most of the 109 and 190 variants have comparable or better performance in most respects, and because the elevators stopped responding at high speed, if the P-38 got the upper hand, the German fighters could just dive to disengage.

In the Pacific theater, the Japanese fighters tended to rely more on agility, so the Lightning could play to its strengths more, and the nature of the theater demanded much longer ranges than the ETO, which was another major P-38 strength.

On match ups I would like to see, P-47N vrs Yak-3P. The P-47N has a 2,800hp engine, and was more agile than the previous Thunderbolts, due to it's enlarged, clipped wings, but the Yak-3P will turn loops around it if it lets itself get caught in a furball, and will bite hard with 3xB-20's. What makes it more fun is, until about 4km, the Thunderbolt would have only a small edge in max speed. It will be a real battle over who can control the energy fight.

Even a squadron level fight of that would be something to see: the Yak's cannons mean you can't just "drag and bag" the way you can against Zeros, or (to a lesser extent) 109's, but the Yak's construction isn't enough that it can shrug off a hail of heavy MG either.

[Swagger7]

Originally Posted by Voyager

Well, wandering over to Il-2 Compare, the P-38L Late shows a best turn time of ~25 seconds (with flaps), while the Mosquito FB MkVI can only manage 31 seconds (no improvement with flaps). The P-38 has a 20-30km/h speed advantage up to 4km, at which point its advantage increases rapidly, and it climbs better throughout hte entire flight regime.

Basically, the Mosquito has excellent performance for a medium bomber, but the P-38 is a purpose built fighter.

On the P-38 in Europe, to my understanding the P-38 had issues with icing, and dives, and as both cold, and diving opponents were prevalent in Europe, it wasn't very well suited to conditions there. Most of the 109 and 190 variants have comparable or better performance in most respects, and because the elevators stopped responding at high speed, if the P-38 got the upper hand, the German fighters could just dive to disengage.

In the Pacific theater, the Japanese fighters tended to rely more on agility, so the Lightning could play to its strengths more, and the nature of the theater demanded much longer ranges than the ETO, which was another major P-38 strength.

On match ups I would like to see, P-47N vrs Yak-3P. The P-47N has a 2,800hp engine, and was more agile than the previous Thunderbolts, due to it's enlarged, clipped wings, but the Yak-3P will turn loops around it if it lets itself get caught in a furball, and will bite hard with 3xB-20's. What makes it more fun is, until about 4km, the Thunderbolt would have only a small edge in max speed. It will be a real battle over who can control the energy fight.

Even a squadron level fight of that would be something to see: the Yak's cannons mean you can't just "drag and bag" the way you can against Zeros, or (to a lesser extent) 109's, but the Yak's construction isn't enough that it can shrug off a hail of heavy MG either.

Best analysis so far, in my opinion.

[Swagger7]

Originally Posted by Rhah

Don't be so sure.. The typhoon is incredibly manoeverable at low speeds, plus, with a 27mm cannon all it would take would be a quick burst and the camel would be disintegrated.

Fair point about the IR missiles, but if they fail, there's always Radar guided.....


Anyway, back to the topic.... Mossie would win, purely because its cooler. And as for it being more vunerable to cannon shells due to the wood construction.... correct me if i'm wrong, but I thought that durin the BOB, Hurricanes were found to have excellent durability against the 109's cannons, as the shells tended to pass through the wood without detonating (as often)?

What exactly are the radar guided missiles supposed to lock onto? Wood & canvas doesn't have that great a radar return, and I'm not sure if the engine would provide enough of a return to lock onto.

[Leweegibo]

Originally Posted by Spitfire23

How about a sopwith camel vs Eurofighter typhoon?

that reminds me of an event I helped set up, we had a P40 warhawk flying in formation with an F18 hornet (maybe super hornet).
The thought if it still makes my spine tingle!
What a sight that was, if I had the equipment to get video from analogue tape to pc I'd YouTube it

[ButcherBird]

Originally Posted by Voyager

Well, wandering over to Il-2 Compare, the P-38L Late shows a best turn time of ~25 seconds (with flaps), while the Mosquito FB MkVI can only manage 31 seconds (no improvement with flaps). The P-38 has a 20-30km/h speed advantage up to 4km, at which point its advantage increases rapidly, and it climbs better throughout hte entire flight regime.

Basically, the Mosquito has excellent performance for a medium bomber, but the P-38 is a purpose built fighter.

On the P-38 in Europe, to my understanding the P-38 had issues with icing, and dives, and as both cold, and diving opponents were prevalent in Europe, it wasn't very well suited to conditions there. Most of the 109 and 190 variants have comparable or better performance in most respects, and because the elevators stopped responding at high speed, if the P-38 got the upper hand, the German fighters could just dive to disengage.

In the Pacific theater, the Japanese fighters tended to rely more on agility, so the Lightning could play to its strengths more, and the nature of the theater demanded much longer ranges than the ETO, which was another major P-38 strength.

On match ups I would like to see, P-47N vrs Yak-3P. The P-47N has a 2,800hp engine, and was more agile than the previous Thunderbolts, due to it's enlarged, clipped wings, but the Yak-3P will turn loops around it if it lets itself get caught in a furball, and will bite hard with 3xB-20's. What makes it more fun is, until about 4km, the Thunderbolt would have only a small edge in max speed. It will be a real battle over who can control the energy fight.

Even a squadron level fight of that would be something to see: the Yak's cannons mean you can't just "drag and bag" the way you can against Zeros, or (to a lesser extent) 109's, but the Yak's construction isn't enough that it can shrug off a hail of heavy MG either.

very good analysis, but its also imprtant to remember that the P-38 was also prefered in the Pacific theater due to having 2 engine reliability. Lets face it, almost every engagement and missions in that theater invloved long flights over a vast ocean. Wouldnt you want an extra engine to limp home on if need be.