P-38E/F - Super plane?!?

[rtrapasso]

P-38 or F4U-1 making "hit and run" tactics had nearly always success against very manuvrable jap fighters A6M or Ki-43 but this tactics was requiring good experience.

i'd have to disagree with this statement... dogfighting skills require good experience... Not much experience required for hit and run, but rather an adjustment of policy/tactics... the Brits actually didn't get around to this "change of policy" until much latter in the war compared to the US (at least in the CBI theaters, according to the Bloody Shambles series.)

[rominet]

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso

Perhaps, but this counts the P-39, P-40, and even the Wirraway... [8|]

Sure so for example, we could imagine that during real war, the odds were 1/4 instead of 1/3.
But in reality, there could have other factors which gave bonus to allied fighters:
*as Herwin said: better coordination (not simulated in witp)
*better experience (in 43 especially) (simulated in witp)
*radar (simulated in witp)
*allied numerical superiority (simulated in witp)

and so on ... .

So, with equal number and same experience, 1/3 seems to me quite good.[:D]

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: rominet

To my knowlegde (but it is only my knowlegde[8|]), the ratio in Salomons-New Guinea in 42-43 is about 1 allied fighter against 3 jap fighters.
P-38 or F4U-1 making "hit and run" tactics had nearly always success against very manuvrable jap fighters A6M or Ki-43 but this tactics was requiring good experience.
Some allied pilots tryied to engage ennemy fighter in dogfight; they generally lost the fight
and even some crashed on sea or on ground trying to follow jap plane diving (P-38 and especially Corsair were very heavy fighters).

I think in WitP, with same number and same experience (and without any special advantage), P-38 or Corsair should kill 3 A6M or Ki-43 for 1 losse.

Almost spot-on. Ignoring quality factors, I would expect P-38F/Gs to get 3-1 against A6M3s and A6M5s. Perhaps 4-1 against Ki-43s and early Zeros.

[rominet]

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso

i'd have to disagree with this statement... dogfighting skills require good experience... Not much experience required for hit and run, but rather an adjustment of policy/tactics...

It is true but a P-38 pilot who was trying to engage a Zero in dogfight was usually a rookie pilot.
Experimented allied pilots knew that the only good way to attack a jap fighter was "hit and run" tactics.
Hellcat will change this of course.

[rtrapasso]

ORIGINAL: rominet

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso

i'd have to disagree with this statement... dogfighting skills require good experience... Not much experience required for hit and run, but rather an adjustment of policy/tactics...

It is true but a P-38 pilot who was trying to engage a Zero in dogfight was usually a rookie pilot.
Experimented allied pilots knew that the only good way to attack a jap fighter was "hit and run" tactics.
Hellcat will change this of course.

Again, i disagree: the rookie will do what he is told*... if he is told to dogfight, he will dogfight (and against the Zero, will not do well)... if he is told to dive, shoot and run away, he will do that.

As soon as the USA realized the correct tactics, they pretty much implemented them... it did take a few months. Rookie pilots consequently were taught the tactics by veteran pilots both "on the job" and back in the US during training.

From my readings on the P-38 (maybe 7 books), the usual Zero to P-38 ratio was something like 6 or 7 to 1, unless the P-38s were jumped while bombing, but i almost never see players using P-38s as bombers in the game (then losses were around 3 to 1.)

And again, the WORST stats i've ever seen for the P-38 were in the Med, fighting outnumbered against more durable Luftwaffe planes, the ratio was 3 to 1.

EDIT: *in general - there are always exceptions.

[rtrapasso]

ORIGINAL: herwin

ORIGINAL: rominet

To my knowlegde (but it is only my knowlegde[8|]), the ratio in Salomons-New Guinea in 42-43 is about 1 allied fighter against 3 jap fighters.
P-38 or F4U-1 making "hit and run" tactics had nearly always success against very manuvrable jap fighters A6M or Ki-43 but this tactics was requiring good experience.
Some allied pilots tryied to engage ennemy fighter in dogfight; they generally lost the fight
and even some crashed on sea or on ground trying to follow jap plane diving (P-38 and especially Corsair were very heavy fighters).

I think in WitP, with same number and same experience (and without any special advantage), P-38 or Corsair should kill 3 A6M or Ki-43 for 1 losse.

Almost spot-on. Ignoring quality factors, I would expect P-38F/Gs to get 3-1 against A6M3s and A6M5s. Perhaps 4-1 against Ki-43s and early Zeros.

i strongly disagree (based on my readings and research).

[rominet]

Perhaps you are right rtrapasso
but it is strange as i've read that in Germany, P-38 were clearly outclassed by Me and Fokke-Wulf.[&:]
To obtain air superiority above Germany, the Allies were waiting for P-47 and especially P-51.

[castor troy]

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso

ORIGINAL: castor troy

38:5 Zero/Lightning losses are still a bit high I would say as the Japanese pilots surely had a higher exp at this date than the Lightning pilots and in three of the original poster´s attacks the Lightnings even were on escort which should give them a disadvantage.

i count 24 Zeros lost not 38 - and the original poster (ny59giants) stated 24 as well. 5 to 1 does not seem all that much "out of whack" from historical data, esp. considering a few select engagements are used... i doubt someone playing the Japanese would post that P-38s are underpowered if the ratio was the other way... an ALLIED player might, but then it would be subject to the same kind of bias.

Heck, you could even argue that the P-38s should have gotten MORE kills given historical 11-1 kill to ALL CAUSE losses, but i won't go there. [;)]

He didn't state what the exp. of the Oscar pilots was, and didn't bring those into the argument - just the Zeros.

Again: for a player to pick a few battles he is upset about and bring them to the table as "this is (maybe) broken" is not much of an argument at all... i could just as easily take some consecutive battles out of my PBEM to "show" that the Japanese fighters are overpowered...

In order to really make an argument, you'd have to get all encounters for aircraft A vs. aircraft B and get data from BOTH sides (not just one), and then compare it to historical data (which is hard to sort out itself, and is woefully incomplete to researchers from what i can discover).

Maybe you could do it, but it would take MANY, MANY hours (or years, maybe).

I also included the 14 Oscars as they are absolutely comparable to the Zero in A2A except the range, which makes it 38:5 in losses which seems to high for me considering the date (which means the exp discrepancy). But it only shows a couple of engagments.

And I surely would express my doubts if the kill ratio would the other way around. No reason to accept "strange" results, no matter if you are an AFB or JFB.

[rtrapasso]

ORIGINAL: castor troy

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso

ORIGINAL: castor troy

38:5 Zero/Lightning losses are still a bit high I would say as the Japanese pilots surely had a higher exp at this date than the Lightning pilots and in three of the original poster´s attacks the Lightnings even were on escort which should give them a disadvantage.

i count 24 Zeros lost not 38 - and the original poster (ny59giants) stated 24 as well. 5 to 1 does not seem all that much "out of whack" from historical data, esp. considering a few select engagements are used... i doubt someone playing the Japanese would post that P-38s are underpowered if the ratio was the other way... an ALLIED player might, but then it would be subject to the same kind of bias.

Heck, you could even argue that the P-38s should have gotten MORE kills given historical 11-1 kill to ALL CAUSE losses, but i won't go there. [;)]

He didn't state what the exp. of the Oscar pilots was, and didn't bring those into the argument - just the Zeros.

Again: for a player to pick a few battles he is upset about and bring them to the table as "this is (maybe) broken" is not much of an argument at all... i could just as easily take some consecutive battles out of my PBEM to "show" that the Japanese fighters are overpowered...

In order to really make an argument, you'd have to get all encounters for aircraft A vs. aircraft B and get data from BOTH sides (not just one), and then compare it to historical data (which is hard to sort out itself, and is woefully incomplete to researchers from what i can discover).

Maybe you could do it, but it would take MANY, MANY hours (or years, maybe).

I also included the 14 Oscars as they are absolutely comparable to the Zero in A2A except the range, which makes it 38:5 in losses which seems to high for me considering the date (which means the exp discrepancy). But it only shows a couple of engagments.

And I surely would express my doubts if the kill ratio would the other way around. No reason to accept "strange" results, no matter if you are an AFB or JFB.

OK then - in my prior PBEM game, i was getting reversed results at least 1 to 4 ratio Zeros to P38 shot down... so we need to adjust P-38s up, right?

No, i do not agree with your reasoning: for one thing, the original complaint did not include Oscars, and i would think that is for a reason... i am guessing the Oscars did not have comparable experience, but it would be interesting to know.

Again: i don't think you can take one players complaint of what is arguably a string of bad luck to make adjustments to the game, esp. since the results do NOT seem unreasonable compared to historical results.

If you do like to do this, see my bad results with P-38s above.

[niceguy2005]

ORIGINAL: castor troy

It´s been some time since I´ve last had a BigB game going but from my memory I didn´t have that much problem to take on the Lightnings if I had high exp pilots.

The reason there are so many Ligthtnings is the fact that Brian has put two squadrons of them onto the West coast and the read me stated that those should be left there... [;)]

From my reading this would be historically accurate.

[niceguy2005]

ORIGINAL: castor troy

38:5 Zero/Lightning losses are still a bit high I would say as the Japanese pilots surely had a higher exp at this date than the Lightning pilots and in three of the original poster´s attacks the Lightnings even were on escort which should give them a disadvantage.

Look at the odds on most of those engagements. The zero is almost always outnumbered. Japan should be able to achieve air supremacy in Feb 1942 over most areas of the Pacific, but this is partly achieved by overwhelming the enemy with numbers. The Allies had few fighters in the south and southwest pacific.

[niceguy2005]

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso

ORIGINAL: rominet

To my knowlegde (but it is only my knowlegde[8|]), the ratio in Salomons-New Guinea in 42-43 is about 1 allied fighter against 3 jap fighters.

Perhaps, but this counts the P-39, P-40, and even the Wirraway... [8|]

The P-38 was also extensively used as a fighter bomber or even pure bomber (it was sometimes fitted with a Norden bombsight)... the times the "kill ratio" of the P38s in the Pacific/CBI fell to around 3 to 1 was when it got jumped during these types of missions... normally it was much greater. As i have mentioned, even against the Luftwaffe when it was fighting on the wrong side of the odds, its A-to-A ratio was around 3 to 1.

EDIT: Personally in my PBEM, the P-38 might get a 1-1 ratio against Zeros, but i doubt it even does that well... but the war is yet young. [:D]

In our Threadwar game we have a couple of squadrons of P-38Cs iirc. Honestly I don't think the C was even operational in the war...but you use what you've got I guess [:'(]...but I could be remembering that wrong. THey usually are lost at about 2:1 against the zero...but we're usually heavily outnumbered.

[rtrapasso]

Thought those were Ds, not Cs... but i'll check later...

There were a couple squadrons of early P-38s deployed in the Pacific early in the war (which is why they are in the game), but they were historically stationed in the Aleutians... we've got them in Oz and SoPac in Threadwar instead.

[ny59giants]

The Oscars were pulled after the first engagement. The losses for these five days were 7:2, 6:0, 1:0, 4:3, and 6:0. So even though I'm over my own base with anywhere from 15 to 20 advantage in experience, the losses were pretty high except for one day. I pretty much had to lose a whole daitai of Zero to wipe out the Flying Tigers in this PBEM game. This is only my second game as the "dark side" and I just wondered if this results were normal this early in the war, not re-hash the old P-38 vs Zero debate.

[rtrapasso]

i've never gotten anywhere near these results with P-38s, but i've never played Big B... we are currently playing CHS (which is sorta like Big B i'm told) but we are using NikMod which really cuts down the "bloodiness" of the air-to-air.

As mentioned, in stock, even with more advanced P-38s later in the war, i got about 1-3 to 1-4 results with P-38s... on a good day i'd get 1-1.

[Hard Sarge]

my question is, why are these two ETO FG's on the west coast for the OOB ? (both may of been based on the West Coast, trained on the West Coast, but they headed to NA soon)

[rtrapasso]

ORIGINAL: Hard Sarge

my question is, why are these two ETO FG's on the west coast for the OOB ? (both may of been based on the West Coast, trained on the West Coast, but they headed to NA soon)

No, not all the FG headed to North Africa/ETO - MOST did, but originally (as mentioned) after 7 Dec almost every unit with P-38s was sent to the West Coast (except for one training unit in Louisiana, iirc.) They were stationed there until the panic died down, then sent MOST to Britain or North Africa.

i'd have to go back and pull my files (at home) but there were a couple of squadrons sent into combat (at least one in the Aleutians and a second went to Oz a bit later), and some more units stationed on the West Coast that were not moved for some time... they eventually were released to the Pacific.

[Hard Sarge]

the 1st and the 14th went to the MTO, they may of been stationed on the west coast, or trained on the west coast, but not really should not be part of a PTO OOB

[Yamato hugger]

Im going to guess that in this mod the Zero was moved also thus doing away with the "Zero bonus" which would further lopside it in the allies favor.

[ny59giants]

Im going to guess that in this mod the Zero was moved also thus doing away with the "Zero bonus" which would further lopside it in the allies favor.

You are correct. I had some emails with Brian about this after I looked in the editor and saw the Zero had moved slots to disable the bonus. I forgot what his reasoning was on this as my old computer died recently.