P-38 Lightning Mach Limits and Other Issues
Вставка
- Опубліковано 6 лют 2025
- The Lockheed P-38 Lightning was a formidable fighter, but as with most aircraft that pioneer new technology, it had its share of problems.
Some of these problems were overcome, some just couldn't be. Even so, it was a highly effective plane in demand in every theater of conflict during WW2.
The Official auto and Air Fan Store is Here!
gregs-airplane...
Please support this channel:
/ gregsairplanesandautom...
Paypal: mistydawne2010@yahoo.com
Doolittle said "It is the sweetest plane he ever flew". On June 6th 1944 he was flying one over Normandy. No other testimony is needed.
"Greetings, this is Greg"
- most authoritative introduction on the internet
The P-38 Lightning is by far, my favorite war-plane of all time. Even with all its flaws, and the price. I think this is a beautiful piece of workmanship. Thank you for posting this video series. I have greatly enjoyed it.
I couldn't agree more.
The biggest advantage of the P-38 to pilots in the Pacific theater: two engines. Must have been very much appreciated when flying long missions over vast areas of water and jungle.
I reckon turbosupercharger boost was helpful flying in tropical hot air of low density.
I'm not well-versed in the details of the system used by the various p-38s, but it was typical for allied fighters to have plenty of mechanical boost for low-altitude operations with the turbo providing extended high-altitude operation in low density air where the extra power in thinner air gave fairly draggy airframes enhanced speed and efficiency. I believe the p-38 designers started with the long booms to allow their structural and aerodynamic groups a head start, knowing there would be plenty of room to accommodate the mechanical bits which were still in development. Some other early fighters were forever limited by airframes which were too compact to allow for these systems. The p-47 was one of the other benefactors of this allowance for lots of extra plumbing. The p-38 must have seemed like a Cadillac of the air in tropical high-altitude long range operations.@@tonyz7216
Not to mention it had more area of horizontal flight surface making it capable of gliding or staying airborne even after sustaining heavy damage. There's been documented incidents where P38 pilots were able to land in planes nearly cut in half, like missing half of its tail and most of one wing.
If you're the pilot, I'm sure having a 2x cost plane with 2x engines gives you assurance over the Pacific. But having half the planes in the air might cost more lives in the overall scheme of things.
That said, the P-38 was the best we had in the critical early phase of the war.
If you are down to a choice between quantity and quality, then quantity often is better, depending on the sacrifices made. Once allied pilots understood the weaknesses of the zero (and Japanese tactics) the high rate of attrition outweighed the lower cost and higher production rates for Japan. You can often replenish planes, but skilled and experienced pilots may take years to replace.@@GeorgeOu
Keep on doing something different, Greg. The wealth of knowledge you share is unsurpassed.
Once agin another fine job and informitive video i would like to add that even with its later war drawbacks the Ge rmans refered to it as the fork-tailed devil im sure do c to causing them bigger issues then say range power or compressability lol keep up the good work
I dedicate this comment to The Algorithm. May He promote Greg's channel. 🙏
Carl, I have it on good authority the "he" is actually a "She"!
those danged algorithymns
no matter how you spell it it feels like a dance step
@@moss8448 Al-Gore-Rhythms
Amen Carl.
Let us all, denizens of Google as we are, pray to its benevolent wisdom; and that it should promote Greg's videos to more and more like minded aviation history nuts, such as ourselves.
What did the P 38 do?
It was a major part of the cactus air force (Guadalcanal).
Kept Morroco out of the war as well as Spain.
St. Valentine's Day Massacre and other interceptions of Luftwaffe Transports (North Africa 42-43).
Cleared the Mediterranean out of Bf 109 G's and Fw 190's (helped along with the P 40's)
Shot down Yamamoto.
Provided adequate bomber bomber escort in 43-44.
And was the mount of Richard Bong Americas highest scoring Ace.
The Plane Served Very Well.
The sight of her alone scared the hell out of our enemies.
Don't forget that it was also one of the major "Photo Joe" planes in the Pacific, which was of not insignificant importance.
I agree with of your points but others no.
The Spitfire with the help of the P40, P38 and P47 cleaned the Mediterranean. In that order.
What Spain and Morocco has to do with the P38 I have no idea.
The bomber escorts, didn't go so well until early 1944 when longer range P47 finally had the range to escorts the bombers all the way.
@@samuelgordino
The Morocco thing was an incident involving Spanish He 112’s shooting down a P 38 that wandered into Spanish Moroccan airspace. In response the US Army Air Force flew everything through Moroccan airspace letting them know that they were not going to tolerate that sort of behavior, and it worked. It is more of a joke reference. Also the clearing of Tunisia, Sicily, Sardinia, and Corsica of Luftwaffe and Aeronautica Militare forces was the main air battle that the Axis Forces never recovered from for the rest of the war in the Mediterranean.
@@XDHannah
It wasn’t called Fork Tailed Devil for nothing.
DON'T change your format. It's unique and one of the best channels for in-depth content!
One serious logistical issue posed by the P-38 was that not only did it have two engines but that the engines were "handed", which is to say, the engines turned in opposite directions. That was good for the pilot because it eliminated the detrimental aerodynamic effects of engine torque on the aircraft's handling, but it also made the aircraft far more complicated to maintain. That was because, not only did each engine have two engines and propellors to maintain, but it had two DIFFERENT engines and propellors to maintain. Although both engines in the P-38 were Allisons, many of their parts were not interchangeable. That may not have been an issue at air bases back home, but it certainly was in more primitive conditions at the front lines, where access to spare parts was more difficult. Americans frequently compare British twin-engine fighters, such as the Mosquito and Beaufighter, unfavorably with the P-38 because they did not have "handed" engines. However, that was not because the British did not understand the aerodynamic advantage of "handed" engines, but because they deliberately opted for the logistic advantage of the relative simplicity of using two of the same engines over the complexity of having to maintain two different types of engines in each aircraft.
The Allison V-1710 was designed to be reversible-- not only for counter-rotating twin-engined airplanes, but to switch from a tractor configuration to a pusher one in airship applications.
Engine rotation was determined by which way you installed the crankshaft-- to convert the engine you flipped the crank around and re-wired one bank of sparkplugs into the correct firing order.
A left-handed engine had the same parts as a right-handed one, with maybe the addition of an idler gear on the accessory power train and a new starter to crank it the other way. But logistically speaking you can convert the motors over at the depot level or even in the field.
I was carried by a P-38 from Saipan to Tinian in 1945. The plane was so fast we flew into yesterday.
Hi 20. Doesn't flying into yesterday make the aircraft slow? But I understand that always flying into tomorrow especially fast either. It's a very nice aircraft either way.
@@roderickcampbell2105
Not in this case. The plane wasn't slow, I can tell you that.
@@20alphabet Hi 20. Oh, I knew that! Good stuff. I hope you were the best for it. Regards.
?
SR-71 crews experienced some type of similar phenomenon when flying from the base in England that they operated out of back to the States, I remember reading where one of the pilots said that they landed 7 minutes earlier than when they took off because they were flying faster than the Earth rotates, he also said that during one particularly long mission he observed something like 3 sunrises and sunsets during that one mission alone.
Greg’s straightforward presentation cannot hide his passion for these planes and the technology they embody. Plus, his keen historical sense puts it all into perspective and makes these videos without equal. Thanks.
If you like the style, check out hypohysterical history, he does exactly the same thing with battles in the Pacific. He's an Aussie so it's from that perspective but it's fantastic.
I'm not surprised that the P-38 was so widely in demand until late-war fighters became available in sufficient numbers; it had the range, speed, firepower, climb/dive rate, and maneuverability to fly missions WAY farther than any other fighter in the war and still perform them with great success. They made a whole slew of missions even possible in the first place. And in the theaters where operational range was such a decisive factor for whether or not entire strategies could be employed (Pacific and European especially), that's priceless.
If you love war birds, Greg's Airplanes and Automobiles channel is just the best content you can find on UA-cam. Thank you Greg.
No matter her troubles the P-38 will always be the most beautiful of US WWII fighters to me.
I appreciate your format. It is very respectful of others. No ambiance (they call a few bars music), no hype, just factual information clearly presented in a non boring fashion.
The concept of entertaining people by showing graphs and old pictures of aeroplanes with a talk-over is normally doomed to fail. But not here. All those countless hours of watching this channel have proven it to be quite the contrary. I´ve learned a lot. Many "myths" have been given an understandable, real-world explanation, just like here the reasons for favouring the P-51 over the P-38. Keep up your good work and keep videos coming. I´m here for the entertainment, but of course, it doesn´t hurt to know more about these beautiful machines either!
Your channel is the only one out of least a thousand that I subscribe to that I really look forward to new videos! You do such a great job describing these aircraft and make it very interesting and informative!! Thank you Greg!!!
Agreed. The only problem I have with Greg's channel is that he needs to quit having a life outside of UA-cam so he can generate more content. 😬
Him and Drachinafel and the Chieftan.
How do you subscribe to so many channels?
I wish I had that much time.
My dad lived near the San Gabriel River not far from Burbank and he'd watch P38s practice diving over the riverbed. As a retired Mechanical Engineer from Rockwell, Downey, I can appreciate your discussion of compressibility and Mach limits.
whoooo, this day went from boring to amazing. love your content Mr. Greg
Greg is his first name, dude. It's Mr Airplanes and Automobiles.
I’m a young man who has studied enough aviation history so that by the time the other formulaic 12 minute aviation UA-cam videos broke out into UA-cam these last 5 years, I essentially already know more than they do. This is one of the only spots on UA-cam where I can continue to learn in one of the most relaxing ways possible. I wish I could financially contribute but I’m hoping these comment helps the algorithm
You’re welcome Greg, it’s a privilege to be a part of the 80k.
You beat them all by 3 things: 1 you are a pilot. 2 you.also an enthusiast and 3 a great teacher. Thank you so much for taking. The time to do this
I and at least 80 thousand other people appreciate the interesting content Greg.
It is refreshing how down to earth you are. Funny, considering you make your regular living in the air.
Keep it up! :)
Greg:
As a non-pilot aviation enthusiast, I think I've learned more from your channel than any other source. You've helped me see airplanes like the P-38 and P-47 in a completely new light, as well as gain a much deeper, richer understanding of the engineering that went into making them.
One request: Please do something about NACA, and the role that it played in bringing aeronautical engineering to the heights it reached. As late as the 1990s automobile makers (apparently bereft of their own wind tunnels) were putting "NACA ducts" on their cars to provide a source of low-drag air inlets.
Love your channel, many Thanks!
A video ON the NACA ducts themselves would be great and an excellent crossover for automobile enthusiasts to find Greg's work!
I have been curious about the science behind them and how it was worked out myself.
NACA ducts are still used in high performance cars today. For exaple, the Porsche GT2 RS has them. They're not super common now on cars' exterior, but many still use them for secondary ducts on the floor.
NACA ducts were originally designed as inlets for subsonic jet aircraft. When mounted close to the nose, they can reduce parasitic drag compared to a conventional ("pitot") inlet, because they avoid the protrusion of such an inlet (hence their origianl name of a submerged inlet) and the associated increase in wetted area. They're also lighter.
However, as a jet inlet they are inferior to a pitot inlet, because the ram pressure recovery is much lower (about 90% for a good NACA duct, nearly 100% for a pitot at subsonic speeds), and they can't supply high mass flow like a pitot.
They are suitable for applications where pressure recovery isn't very important (so not for feeding an engine, yes for cooling air), and where mass flow isn't very high.
You are doing extremely well with running the channel differently from others aviation channels. That`s why I consider you a pinnacle from factual and technological perspective. Thank you for another amazing video.
My uncle was a "38" capt. in the 475th. I now have a better appreciation for his ability. Because of this video, I can ask some educated questions when I meet with his children at our family reunions, if not I will ask him in heaven. Your video was factual, again thanks for the enrichment. cr
Another great presentation Greg. As a former USN officer & WWII history buff, I did enjoy your Dauntless and Corsair series. I attended classes at the Naval War college that were not as detailed as your presentations. Keep up the great work.
Sorry, I ment to say Thunderbolt
The appreciation goes both ways. Thank You for the fascinating history and context of the engineering involved with these incredible air*craft
Helping the algorithm here. You are my go to reference when conversations about WW2 aircraft come up. I find extra benefit by your detailed explanations of engineering considerations which far exceed ground school material taught to private pilots.
Taken in total the U.S. was highly successful in adapting fighters to every imaginable mission set, and commanders were informed/wise enough to quickly allocate those resources where they were best suited. It’s easy to criticize an aircraft when a 5-to-1 kill-to-loss ratio (as the P-38 enjoyed in the Mediterranean Theater) becomes the standard for a failed design.
Re: the end of your video. I'm here exactly because your videos Are longer and more in-depth. I've already read the Wikipedia and I'm always hungry for more information. You deliver.
As an aside, wwiiaircraftperformance has a really interesting article on the 38, especially regarding the carb air temp issues. It seems that Lockheed may have been excessively conservative in their 50°C rating, and that there may have been significant headroom for further manifold pressure (at low alts) and carb temp, even on the old intercoolers.
Can't agree more, I'm here because your videos get into the nitty gritty aspects of aircraft design.
Tech details. Good dessert.
Wikipedia is good for basic facts. Like any encyclopaedia, it a) can be incorrect, and b) doesn't do research.
All the channels I follow have something new or original to say.
Thanks Greg. It's nice to see that your work is appreciated!
@@AndrewBlucher Also with current issues and their "no original research"-rule it makes them heavily dependant on either media reporting or tertiary sources.
If either is Biased and the editors do not take care to add balanced research, articles can be at the least one-sided, if not flat out wrong.
And the Wikipedia leadership has shown political bias in recent years.
@@LupusAries Political bias?
Please expand on this point.
I suspect that depends on one's politics :-)
Brilliant narration, concise, well researched, I learnt a lot about the p-38's "difficulties" compared to it's American rivals.......especially good was the development timeline, and how the P-38 fulfilled earlier requirements but newer aircraft were built to "later" requirements......BRAVO, great effort Greg, thank you.
I feel that the reasons the P38 suffered so badly from compressibility go beyond simply Lockheed encountering it first and not having the knowledge on how to solve it - rather the P38's own layout unfortunately exacerbated the compressibility issue.
The transonic area rule tells us that a smooth variation in cross sectional area from nose to tail gives us the lowest transonic drag by minimising shockwave formation. While no WW2 plane was particularly stellar in adhering to area rule, which had not been discovered at the time, the P38 diverges from it extremely badly due to that very long straight wing as well as all the engines and associated bulges occupying roughly the same cross sectional plane. This would result in a really large shockwave blanketing the entire wing at a far lower Mach number than conventional layouts, and is something that couldn't really be solved without knowing about area rule.
it really desperately needed thinner wings too
The area rule is about reducing drag in the transonic range to facilitate acceleration past that range. Lack of area rule is not the source of the P-38 control issues under compressibility., and no WWII fighters were designed to the area rule The thickly cambered airfoil section of the P-38 lead to early formation of a normal shock wave and its attendant effects. Also, reportedly the venturi effect between the gondola and the engine booms accelerated the airflow even more than the airfoil section alone would have. Ironically, thinner lower drag airfoil sections were available for use by Lockheed, but according to Warren Bodie they chose the thicker airfoil in order to meet the challenging time to climb requirement of the Army P-38 specification.
I do agree that while the P-38 may have been the first practical design to encounter a compressibility limit, NACA was aware of compressibility in the early 1930s and I can't believe Kelly Johnson was completely unaware of the phenomenon. Designing to control it was certainly not yet ingrained into the art of airplane design.
@@gort8203 I understand that the area rule is to ensure low wave drag, and that you can point to specific locations which are easy shock formation regions. But seeing as wave drag is a result of shock formation, isn't departure from area rule a good rule-of-thumb indicator for how intense shock formation around the airframe would be?
@@dsdy1205 I don't know that the "intensity" of shock waves is affected by area rule, but intensity of the shock is not the issue for the P-38 -- the issue is the airspeed at which the shock begins to form, AKA the critical Mach number.
The effect of area rule is to reduce interference drag. I do not know that it retards the normal formation of shock waves -- it just allows them to cause less drag. Area rule solves a power-required issue rather than a controllability issue, which is what we are talking about with P-38 compressibility. Maybe someone out there with more expertise can elaborate.
"Compressibility" was a known issue in WWI. No kidding.
Id rather watch an hour long video than any of those other channels 12 minute summary videos.
Keep up the great work Greg, your videos are better than anything out there.
One fact that the P-38 has that it was still competitive in 44/45 against newer planes. For design that was very cutting edge in the 30's that is a testament to Lockheed's design team. They created a great design for the 30's that could be updated so it staid competitive at the end of WWII.
Its just the question of which P38 variant (or which Bf109 for that matter).
Designed by "Kelly" Johnson who also designed the SR 71 Blackbird
@@karlvongazenberg8398 Or Spitfire. All were 1930 fighters that fought in 1945.
@@Nastyswimmer Now there is an amazing career for you... Kelly Johnson. First plane to exceed 400mph in level flight and hit compressibility... and his last flew so fast it heated up and lengthened in flight by how many inches?! To the point it it was fueled like a leaking tea kettle and didn't stop leaking until it was supersonic... Now there is some serious perspective on the evolution of technology!
@@karlvongazenberg8398 Although the earlier variants up to the "J" made up the early planes, the J and L made up the most volume. I have read that the J-25 and L variants were by far the best versions of the P-38 at all altitudes and conditions. I'm assuming that is true for the BF109 and the FW190 although development for them likely slowed as the war progressed.
your video's are better the real numbers from actual authentic period sources that allow real unbiased comparisons, the only channel that I've ever found that I can say that about. The 38 is such a unique design, a personal favorite, I've been looking forward to one of you're videos about it, always wanted to know if it was really possible for a "fighter" this big to really compete with say a Mustang or a 190
Other channels may get more views, but IMO this channel is better.
Thanks. I have noticed that the formula for getting view is to make a short video with facts from Wikipedia and add some mood music to the commentary. I'm amazed that works.
Your in depth vids are simply great. They are what make the web so much fun. And besides they are intelligent.Keep up the great work.
“The primary goal was to destroy the Luftwaffe, so they couldn’t oppose the D-Day landings.” Spot on. And not just on D-Day. The Allies had learned from observing Germany’s conquests in Europe from 1939 to 1941 that air supremacy was crucial to the success of a modern army’s ground operations. Victory in Europe would necessarily require utter destruction of German air power, so that’s what they did. Greg did an excellent job of explaining this in the P47 series. Also, the excellent book “Masters of the Air” goes into some good detail on this topic.
I think you should definitely keep doing this channel your way. This type of fact-heavy, leave-no-stone-unturned type of channel makes for such an important historical resource.
The only suggestion I might make is that the audio quality could be better, although I’m no expert and please take that with a pinch of salt.
Greg, you are the best. Your research, analysis, and objective opinion are first rate. As an aging Boomer who made numerous Monogram, Lindbergh, and Revell models of WWII Fighter Aircraft, learning the details of their development, performance, and strengths & weaknesses is most enjoyable for me. Thank you.
I'm a docent at the Mighty 8th in Pooler, GA, and this channel has corrected or expanded on information I had been taught or had read over many years. How might have the Regansburg/ Schweinfurt gone if the P-47s had a full complement of tanks VS what happened? Thanks to you Greg I found out that this disasterous raid's losses didn't need to be as bad.
Thanks for your kind words. I have heard the Mighty 8th museum is really good. Had the 47's had drop tanks losses would have been a lot lower, I would guess they would have been at least 50 percent lower, probably more.
@@johnbrewer8954 You should probably watch some of his other videos
@@johnbrewer8954 another butthurt brit
Suddenly I became an addict to watch a long video from a guy giving a detailled technical description of WW2 planes.
Thanks Greg for your great and simple explanation of this nice plane and its problems.
According to Martin Caidin in Fork Tailed Devil, the major problem in the wing mounted intercoolers was any backfiring could warp the leading edge of the wing. So the J model scrapped that and extra fuel tanks were fitted into that space.
This video made me recall an article by a pilot who flew P-38's in the ETO. He said the two things that bothered him the most were the lack of cockpit heat that required him to wear three pairs of gloves and a roll rate similar to a pregnant whale. Thanks!
About that last segment, yeah, don't change a damn thing. It's incredibly nice to be able to just listen about WW2 aircraft engineering with zero distractions. Keep up the great work!
I first learned of the P-38 in a book i read in elementary school titled Great American Fighter Pilots of WW2. I would credit that book with starting my interest with military history and particularly WW2 american fighter planes. Your channel is fantastic to watch and listen to.
Greg, your channel outclasses the others by a wide margin. In fact I’ve seen your videos used as sources on many WW2 aircraft discussion forums. Keep up the good work!!
What's not to like? I appreciate accurate, unbiased information set in proper historical context. And, you cover the classic aircraft that interest me. You've earned another subscriber.
I appreciate that, I am trying hard here.
You are indeed doing something different, and those of us who appreciate reading and seeing information that is thoroughly researched and not regurgitated are glad you are doing what you're doing and hope you continue to do so. It's clear your motivation is the love of the topic not subs are ad revenue.
Don't ever stop making content like this. You are revolutionizing the general understanding of warbirds and engines.
"Forked Tailed Devil" by Martin Caiden. A book that was originally released in 1974. Updated several times. A good account of the P-38 in ETO and PTO.
Speed of sound changes with temperature, not altitude..... mind blown. Do not doubt the Greg!
Great video, as always.
It is amazing how quickly aviation was changing in the ‘30s. Airplanes went from world-beater to obsolete in just a few years.
Knowing that the P-38 wasnt allowed to reach her full potential at the time because of bureaucratic decisions irritates me to no end. But here I am 80ish years later, using my 20/20 hindsight.
Fantastic and very informative video as usual. Keep up the great work
To be completely fair, you have to keep in context the issues of cost, logistics, training, and the availability of better platforms at the time for a given role. Some things definitely seem to be bureaucracy, but I'll guess many are borne of having to make difficult choices with limited resources. Just my two cents worth...
I don’t care how the “Discovery Channel” style UA-camrs do it. Keep doing it your way.
Hi Greg. You were asking about more sources concerning the leading edge intercoolers of earlier P 38. You will find everything about the development of the V-1710 in this outstanding book: Vee's for Victory. The story of the Allison V-1710 Engine from 1929 -1948 from Daniel D. Whitney. On page 143 you'll find a picture with all the plumping to and from that intercooler.
Well the 35 minute videos are the biggest selling point... plus the detailed information. That is the reason i am here.
Hi Greg, thanks for another great video! Thought you might like to know that a fully P-38L could be purchased at McCelland AFB at the end of WWII for $5000 US. Minus GFE (guns, critical special instruments, etc). All you had to do was show up cash in hand and you could fly one away!
Thank you, thank you, thank you! I'm proud to be a Patreon, Greg. Terrific video.
ME TOO!
This is a terrific video by Greg for viewers interested in facts and analysis presented in a fair and thoughtful way. It is the only one I have seen that comments upon the very high price of the P-38, which is a proxy for resource inefficiency that tends to lose wars. The only thing missing here is commenting upon resource trade in terms of both cost and kill to loss achieved. Over Europe the P-38 had a poor kill to loss ratio of 1.43, which includes enemy aircraft destroyed on the ground. The Mustang, which cost less than half the price, had a kill to loss of 3.6. It was 2.5x better per plane and 6x better per budget. With better kill ratio and longer range, the P-51 had less than half the bomber losses on its escort missions. It's total effect on the war in Europe had to be better than 10x per budget than that of the Lightning when the saving of bombers and better allowing bombers to complete their mission of destruction to ground targets is taken into account. Even if the Lightning had far less mechanical and aerodynamic problems, it would have still suffered from the fact that it was a heavy fighter. The most important element in fighter design is to enjoy surprise advantage, since about 80% of kills are achieved by surprise (see Wikipedia article on Light Fighters). Big fighters are visible farther away, so they lose surprise advantage. The next most important element is numbers, and the Lightning is a terrible loser here since the same budget buys half the Lightnings as it would superior lightweight resource preserving P-51's. These disadvantages have greatly hampered almost every heavy fighter ever built, at least in the high volume day air to air fighter role. The generals go into the war thinking big fighters are going to run over little fighters, like the boxing maxim that "a good big man beats a good small man". But, that does not hold when the small man is packing a gun and knows how to shoot. In the air war case, surprise advantage, twice the numbers, and enough guns on a small fighter to destroy a big fighter, means that the small fighters win. Germany found that out the hard way with the heavy Bf 110 in the Battle of Britain, then Britain found out with the Beaufighter and Mosquito (as day fighters, they were good as night fighters where they lost no surprise advantage due to size), then the U.S. found out with the P-38 over Europe, and then the U.S. again found out the hard way with the F-4 over Vietnam. The main thing heavy fighters consistently do well is to generate twice the profit per plane sold, which is probably the biggest reason why they are pushed by plane manufacturers.
👍👍
Most importantly, the '38 was the coolest looking fighter plane on the planet!
still is
I've learned more from your videos in 2 months than from other sources in the last 40 years, thanks.
Your videos are fantastic. They are probably the most factually based and interesting videos on UA-cam for WWII airplanes. Thank you for what you do and keep up the amazing work.
You deserve every subscriber Greg. What surprises me is that probably most are not even pilots and this is pilot talk stuff.
Just found this channel from the previous video on the P-38. Pretty cool video, ended up finishing it just in time for this!
My mother-in-law worked as a riveter on P-38's at the Lockheed factory south of S.F. Just aft of the trailing edge of the wing. Great video and info on the Lightning.
This Ole lady asked and answered a lot of questions from the time pencil was first put to paper till it became moot point.
I wonder how many pilots limped one home with an engine out that had they been in a single engine aircraft might not have made it?
Thanks Greg!
I had a book about the Pacific Theater as a kid. One of the pictures showed a p-38 with a dead engine and feathered prop on one side...and a hole big enough to see the Japanese home islands thru in the other wing. Twin-engine redundancy must've been greatly appreciated over the vast shark-infested waters.
@@paulslevinsky580 Just have Red West stick a few beer cans in the holes and she will be fine!
*props to anybody that knows where that visual comes from.
@@sadwingsraging3044
Black Sheep Squadron, originally called Baa Baa Black Sheep until it's syndication when it was changed to Black Sheep Squadron.
And Red West was a member of Elvis' "Memphis Mafia" along with sharing some song writing credits on a few of his big hits.
@@dukecraig2402 where do I mail your cigar?!!?
Snuck in to fish his bass pond as a kid a few times! Had some nice fish he did.
@@sadwingsraging3044
Oh wow, no kidding.
Him and Elvis had that falling out over him writing that tell all book, but the very things he exposed Elvis for in it and had tried to put an end to, namely being addicted to pills, were the very things that were his undoing and ultimately led to his death.
Didn't West have a brother who was also a member of the Memphis Mafia?
The background buzz on your audio is quite comforting to me - it sounds exactly like a Fender Super Reverb amp on standby and that's a good thing. I could never afford the lifestyle that allows for a Fender amp but I had a friend in 1969 who owned one. Some folk might find it annoying. Life is unfathomable.
without a doubt the best informative channel re ww2 aircraft and various automotive subjects, A1 Greg!!!!!! Off subject but I believe a vid on aftermarket ECU mapping re turbocharging automotive engines ( ie a follow up to the water/methanol injection vid ) would be of great benefit to many. Keep it up mate, Luke
I just found this video and the last somehow about the P-38. The 38 has always been my favourite WWII aircraft, yet there are few videos on it that actually go indepth on it as opposed to "look at this plane; it is cool." Thank you very much for this; I am looking forwards to viewing your backlog
33:50 those 12 minute format UA-cam channels are great for getting new and younger individuals interested in the history. As you can see there are quite a few channels in that niche. On the flip side there are very few if no other channels which provide such in depth long format content presented as more of a college level discourse.
to be fair, I agree; when I see a six hour special Q&A, or a two hour video, I do tend to shy away... horses for courses I suppose.
The other thing those 12 minute formats all seem to have in common is a computerized voice.
The History Guy is a good example of that, his videos are 100% accurate and don't just repeat myths like so many shorter videos do while not boring someone to death.
I can watch an hour and a half long video on myths of WW2 that basically is just a speaker at the George Marshall Center but I get where someone half my age (or worse ⅓rd my age, yikes) wouldn't make it through something like that.
YOU ARE the analyst us mechanical minds like to listen to Because you put things in and HONEST and COMPLETE perspective👍 Keep up the good work , love you man.
There is a P=38 Lightning Association which publishes a newsletter several times per year . Very informative . Thanks for this video as there was so much more here than I knew and I have been a Lightning fan forever . USAF veteran
Thank you for being a source of good information, and not a money making channel.
I do make some money on this channel. Thankfully, otherwise the wife would think it's a waste of time.
@@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles even if you did it for free, it would never be a waste of time in my eyes. Persuading your wife might be the hard bit. But I totally agree - rehashed videos with mood music are never going to be as good as material that involves primary research and a real understanding of how things fly. Just finishing an Airfix 1:72 Lancaster B.III enlightened by your B-17 video.... and sighing a little :-(
Not sure why you don't have 850k subs (granted I just found you too through random youtube algorithm). I haven't looked at aircraft history in 20 years until I saw that beautiful P-38 last week.
Your depth of information, your references to the research, and your consistency of admitting when you are making an assumption due to lack of source material to pull from put you into a category missing from todays media.
Refreshing. I'll be catching up on your older stuff as time allows.
Excellent analysis Greg. Thanks for doing these. I'd love to have you do one of these on the P-39, another perhaps misunderstood fighter. Interestingly they did well in the post war air races.
This sort of video with facts, figures and technical explanations is far superior to the typical ones in terms of info. It caters to those of us that like the technical explanations, nitty-gritty and mechanical stuff. And there are plenty of people that like this kind of info. I'm also subscribed to a few other channels that do this kind of videos on other machines.
Thanks Greg, I appreciate your videos specifically for that care you take in synthesizing a view from primary sources, and being clear about the limitations of that knowledge. Please keep it up. Cheers!
What a gem of a channel!
Yet another informative video Greg.
During the 1942/43 time frame in the Mediterranean Theatres and in the Pacific, the only land based airplanes around in number were the venerable Spitfire Mk-V, P-40, P-39s and maybe a few Spit Mk-IXs. The P-38 was a great aircraft during a difficult time for the allies.
Congrats on 80K subs as well. You have earned everyone of them.
Maybe some Spitfire VIII which had a greater range than the Spitfire IX. The Spitfire IX was a spitfire V with a Merlin 61 engine whereas the Spitfire VIII was purpose built.
Your channel is a treasure, Greg. Now I need to find someone exactly like you who discusses WWII tanks. I've read published authors (on tanks) who don't do half as good a job as you do here. In a few years, I expect you'll publish a book or two yourself, and make up for anything you missed due to youtube's algorithm. A channel with 80K subscribers will put many publishers into a very agreeable mood.
Thanks Jon. I might talk about tanks at some point. I do touch on them in some of my videos.
@@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles My pleasure. I wonder if you've read Hubert Raymond Allen's book "Who won the battle of Britain?" It's an insightful analysis of the battle by someone who fought in it (written in 1974), and is willing to ask tough questions about what fighter command did well and what it did poorly. It touches on everything, and there's also a few pages on the question of armament, which agrees very much with your analysis. If by some chance you haven't read it (though you do seem exceptionally well-read on this subject) you might find it interesting to read the thoughts of someone who lived through the battle, and asks exactly the same questions you do. It's so much better than the usual books, which mutter a few words about the courage of the men and the quality of the machines, and move on to the next exciting anecdote.
Your videos fill a hole that has needed to be filled for some time now, Greg. I am so grateful for the information you share. It’s things I’ve wanted to know my whole life and now it’s here.
I remember reading in the Len Deighton novel Fighter (about a P-51 squadron operating from England) some of the pro P-38 and P-47 advocates having it pointed out that it wasn't just the cost of those planes, it was also their weight. Concrete landing strips had to be thicker to accommodate them etc. The cheaper, lighter P51 was logistically a better choice if you wanted to expand an air force quickly. And as the Luftwaffe discovered - quantity is a quality...
Great job as usual Greg! I have no idea how you find this information, but I'm sure glad that you do find it, digest it, and present it here for the rest of us.
One of the best channels, period.
Really appreciate your depth of technical knowledge and presentation skills. Being a non-aviator, its a steep learning curve for me. Surely one of the big advantages of the P38 was the safety aspect of having two engines especially when fighting over the vast Pacific Ocean?
Love your work. All of it. Many, many thanks.
Yes to everything you said, but I add this: on a bad day in combat, that other engine might not be shot up as much as the now-deadstick one.
I love your format and detail, please keep on doing these
Don't change a thing about what you're doing, you're already doing great work. You're pretty much the only one doing this type of in-depth deep dive into primary sources about these things. Keep up the great work!
More excellent information from Greg that captures my complete attention without mood music.
I think we all appreciate the fact that your videos are longer because they are full of great information not available elsewhere. There is no downside from our perspective so please continue to inform us in the manner that you have done so well with. This was a great video, thank you.
Congratulations on passing 80k subs! I've been watching you for quite a while and I will say when I was skeptical in the first few minutes with the lack of video and such but by the end of that first video I knew you were doing things right! Unlike lots of other aircraft channels I've never felt the need to correct a horribly obvious mistake they've made because they're just trying to make videos and money. Normally they are not even an aircraft enthusiast let alone someone like you who really knows what their talking about!
I’m surprised Greg’s sub numbers are that low. There are many crappy channels that cover this topic, with way more subs, i don’t get it.
@@dennyhooper8987 I'm obviously on a way smaller scale but with my channel I can't understand what will get a few thousand fews and what will get less than 100.
A fascinating study of how a design progresses to its limits under many competing requirements, many yet to be learned along the way. The fury of the work to solve the problems matched the fury of the war itself. Great work, Greg.
I'm not aware of another channel that even tries to do what this one does, and I really appreciate the content here. Thank you, Greg.
Do you think you might eventually make an equivalent of the "P-47: Range, Deceit, and Treachery" video for the P-38?
Super insightful...My 9 year old has been asking me a lot of questions about the P-38 vs P-51 vs P-47 the past week...This answers a lot of them
Been looking forward to this video. Thank you Greg for all the great content.
Bill Ryan
Greg. Just found your channel. Great content & well done. My dad was a p-38 crew chief with the 34th photo recon squadron from England to end of the war in Europe. He had some interesting stories. They had a recon plane come back with the 1" rivets around the rudders pulled out. The pilot had to dive from high altitude to out run an me109 that was diving on him. His buddy in a p-38 taking low altitude photos of the same area warned him of the 109 so he had to dive away to survive. The plane suffered major problems & was not flown again Lockheed did inspect it for stress problems. The air speed indicator went past the red line & half way around according to the pilot. It was early in the war as they were still in England. Their squadron was never more than 15 miles from the front all across Europe. Looking forward to seeing more of your content.
Thank you Greg for your very unique, incredibly intelligent well researched content. There is no other channel that competes with you for aviation history. I'm an A&P and an IA and I can make all kinds of pilot jokes .......but not for you!!!
You don't have to understand it to appreciate the quality here.... so you go on. ..... and it's so good .... you understand it!