LOCI(HEEDP-38 LIGHTNING

Other titles in the Crowood Aviation Series

Aichi D3A1/2 ValAvro LancasterAvro VulcanBAC One-ElevenBoeing 747Boeing B-29 SuperfortressBri tol BeaufighterBritish Exp rimental Turbojet AircraftConcordConsolidated B-24 LiberatorCurtiss SB2C HelldiverDe Havilland ometDe Havilland MosquitoDe Havilland Twin- Boom FightersDouglas Havoc and BostonEnglish Electric LightningHawker Typhoon, Tempest and Sea FuryHeinkel He 111Ilyushin Il-2 and Il-1 ShturmovikLockheed F-104 StarfighterLockheed SR-71 BlackbirdMcDonnell Douglas A-4 SkyhawkMesserschmitt Me 262

ieuport Aircraft of World War OneNorth American B-25 MitchellNorth American F-86 SabreNorth American F-100 Super Sabre

orth American T-6Petlyakov Pe-2 PeshkaV-BombersVickers VClVickers Viscount and Vanguard

Peter C. mithKen Delve

Kev DarlingMalcolm L. Hill

Martin W. BowmanSteve Pace

Jerry cuttsBarry Jones

Kev DarlingMarti n W. Bowman

Peter C. mithKev Darling

Martin BowmanBarry Jones

Scott ThompsonMartin W. Bowman

Kev DarlingRon Mackay

Yefim Gordon and ergey Kommi arovMartin W. Bowman

Steve PaceBrad ElwardDavid BakerRay angerJerry Scutt

Duncan CurtisPeter E. DaviesPeter C. SmithPeter C. mith

Barry JonesLance ole

Malcolm Hill

LOCKHEEDP-38 LIGHTNING

JERRY SCUTTS

1)~CIThe Crowood Press

AcknowledgementsFirst published in 2006 byThe Crowood Press LtdRamsbury, MarlboroughWiltshire SN8 2HR

www.crowood.com

Jerry cum 2006

All rights reserved. No part of thi publication maybe reproduced or transmitted in any form or by anymeans, electronic or mechanical, includingphotocopy, recording, or any information storageand retrieval system, without permission in writingfrom the publishers.

British Library Cataloguing.in-Publication DataA catalogue record for this book is available fromthe British Library.

ISB 18612677 3EA 9781 61267702

In putting tog ther this record of the P-38I would like to thank the following individ-ual to and organizations:

Aeroplane Monthly; Ian Carter; RichardFranks; Phil Jarrett; Lockheed Aircraft

Corporation; Alain Pelletier; Imperial WarMuseum Photographic Library; Richard L.Ward; the United tates Air Force and web-site data posted by the Smithsonian Institu-tion via John Anthony and Terence Geary.

ContentsAcknowledgementsIntroduction

1 BURBANK'S BEAUTY

2 ANGELS IN OVERALLS

3 ISLANDS OF FIRE

4 AN ESCORT OF P-38s

5 WEATHERING THE STORMS

6 SMILE FOR PHOTO JOE

7 ZERO FEET

8 SOUTHERN FRONT FINALE

9 KENNEY'S KIDS

10 PACIFIC SUPREMO

11 SPECIAL DUTIES

12 MEMORIES AND MEMORIALS

47

8

21

35

49

61

73

89

101

109

117

131

139

Typefaces used: Goudy (text),Cheltenham (headings).

Typeset and designed byD & PublishingLambourn Woodlands, Hungerford, Berkshire.

Primed and bound in Great Britain by CPI Bath.

Appendix IAppendix IIAppendix IIIAppendix IVAppendix VGlos aryIndex

P-38 Serial Number and VariantsP-38 Fighter Group and SquadronsF-4/F-5 Photographic Reconnais ance UnitsFate of RAF Contract Lightnings in the USAP-38M-6 'Night Lightning' Conversions From P-38L-5

150151153154156156157

When the prototype Lockheed XP-3 washown to the S press and public for thefwt time, in 1938, there was univer alprai e for it incredibly sleek lines. The U

rmy Air orps had never een anythinglike it; certainly no single-seat fight r waever that big. And when its performancewas announc d, the praise for Lockheedappr ach d adulation. To a great extentrhis faith in the company's product neverwaned, which in some ways cloud d judge-ment. Under the impetu of war and rapidrechnical advance the fact that the long-range P-3 could actually be outpaced by asll1gle-engine fighter took some time togra p. The Lightning could certainly cort

merican bombers to Berlin - it wa the

OPPOSITE PAGE:A magnificent study of 44-25415,one of the 2,520 P-38l-5s, the lastand best model of the lightning.The aluminium skin had at leastseven different tonal values,ex-factory. Lockheed

THIS PAGE:lockhead designed a fighter andalso turned it into the top USreconnaissance aircraft of thewar. leading here is an F-5B-1with a P-38J-5 behind. Lockheed

Introductionfirst American fighter to do so - but thetragic fact was that it could not always getback. This was not a flaw that could beattributed to Burbank's brilliant engineers,but a problem that was b yond anyone'scontrol; one that could literally be blamedon the weather. But ask any pilot posted tothe South Pacific and faced with flying forseveral hours over water, impenetrablejungle and murderous enemy troops whathe preferred, and the answer would comedown firmly on the side of Lockheed'stwin-boom killer.

From almost any angle the Lightninglooked the part; a deadly, menacing andpurpo ful warplane with a distinctive andunique layout. mall wonder then, that

7

on D-Day, in June 1944, the upr meCommander wanted P-38 to b fir t overthe ormandy invasion beaches, on theground that nob dy, not even the greenestnaval gunner, could fail to recognize them.

This narrative retells the P-3 tory withthe intention of bringing the reader a fewfact and figure , and photographs, thathav not been fully explored elsewhere.

ertainly the P-38 can stand furth r expo-sure, so deeply was it ingrained in th com-bat philosophy of the wartim US ArmyAir Force.

JERRY SCUTTSLondon, 2005

BURBANK'S BEA TY

HAPTER 0 E

Burbank's Beauty

of similar configuration to the P-3 ,name-ly the G.l of 1937. Although twin-fuselagedesigns had also been popular during theFirst World War, the configuration hadgenerally fallen from favour. The appear-an e of the prototype G.I at the 1936

alon Internationale de l'Aeronautique inParis was noteworthy, and it radicalappearance, with its attendant advantages,generated great interest.

But the radial-engined G-1 with it tail-wheel undercarriage looked pede triancompared with the graceful XP-3 ,whichwas an inspir d exercise in aesthetics andstreamlining. Her was a ompletely newfighter with an unconventional rather thanrevolutionary twin-boom lay ut u ing atricycle undercarriage. oneth I s, how-ever good the Lockheed fighter looked,and however great its promise, there stillremained the question of finding an effec-tive combat role for it.

As the P-3 and the Whirlwind had nosecond eat, the most useful role for a twin-engine type, that of nightfighter, was notseriously considered for either, at least atconception.

This did not prevent some Lightningbeing used in the nocturnal rol in thPacific as a Stop-g8[1 measur ,but th radar-equipped night interceptor was generallybelieved to be too demanding for one man

Epitomizing grace and streamlining, the YP-38s were real crowd-pullers when theywere rolled out of the old brewery building Lockheed had acquired to gain space atBurbank. IWM

lead. Let down by unreliable engines andub equently allowed to fall by the way-

sid, the Whirlwind never had its poten-tial fully exploited.

A first-lin fighter with twin booms likethe Lightning wa never seriously onsid-

r d in Britain for the RAF, although somemanufacturers, notably Miles Aircraft, hadexplored the configuration. umerousEuropean d igners, including AnthonyFokker, had proposed a twin-boom layoutas practical, insofar as it freed a short cen-tral fuselage nacelle or 'pod' for the pilot,who would be right behind a battery ofguns and therefore able to aim the weaponswith great accuracy. A central pod wouldalso provide adequate space for ammuni-tion stowage and, in some instances, thenosewheel of a tricycle undercarriage. Afurther advantageous factor in twin-boomd ign was ea e of ammunition replenish-m nt and gun a cess. A nosewheel config-uration was the 'wave of the future', andFokker went one stage further. The Dutchcompany's D.XXlIl wa the first fighter tomat a cockpit pod to both tractor andpu her engines. Unfortunately it existedonly as a prototype in 1939, and there wasinsufficient time to exploit its potentialbefore war came.

Fokker had previou Iy developed theone operational European fighter that was

III the torm'. The conceptoffighters escort-Illg ingle, poorly-armed photographic-H'LOnnaissance (PR) machines had beenl xplored over the trenche during the FirstWorld War, but very little had been done todetermine the practicality ofdeploying sub-tantial numbers of fighters to protect even

hrger formations of bomber. The fighter lrcuses' so favoured by th G rmans inthat conflict advanced aerial combat, andl1lU h of the tactical doctrine of the secondglobal conflict remained rooted in that ofth last year or so of the 'war to end wars'.

umerous expedient tactical ~ rmations,\ll h a the 'finger four', the Lufbery circle,mJ the Immelmann turn had emerg dduring the earlier conflict, and th trickwas to adapt these to a gen ration of farheavier and faster fighters. The doldrumsof the 1920s and 1930s and underfundingfor the military brought relatively fewLhange . Fighter speeds advanced, but thehlplane continued to be the yard tick and,.IS bomber performance al 0 improved, theh lief that 'the bomber will always getthrough' left the fighter without a definitrole outside short-range target defence andthe interception of hostile aircraft.

Not until Britain's perceiv d need fornightfighters materialized in the BristolBeaufighter did that country really have aclear picture of a primary operationalrequirement for a fast, well-armed twin largeenough to accommodate a crew of two.

everal other aircraft emerged that pro-vided ample space for a second or thirdcrew member, including the Bf 110, butLockheed was almost alon in providingits P-38 with but a single at.

None of a number of Fr nch and Italiantwin-engine designs featured single-pilotop ration, showing that the Americanapproach stayed the course when few otl1-er did so. Germany toyed with the Focke-WulfFw 187, but only in its early form didthi experimental type have a single seat.

In Britain, the nearest equivalent to theP-38 was the sleek Westland Whirlwind, apromising fighter design that proved thlethality of grouping a batt ry of heavyguns in the nose, ahead of the pilot. TheWhirlwind first flew in October 1938, andits concentrated firepower enabled it tostrafe with greater accuracy than wouldhave been pos ible if allowance had to bemade for the wider spread of wing-mountedguns. The Whirlwind's operational careerpointed the way for this class of aircraft. Itproved to be a useful fighter-bomber, andin this instance it took something of a

was this ideal ever achieved, most twin-engine fighter being forced to concede asuperior agility to smaller fry.

Fewtwins c uld hope to turn as tightlya a smgle-seater, bringing the distinctdrawback that the larger aircraft, needinga Wider turning circle, could be 'cut off' ina pursuit curve. This danger could be can-celled out if th twin's spe d c uld bemaintained long enough to pull away dur-mg the tum, or to outstrip an adversary ina hlgh- peed dive. These and other factorrepresented a sub tantial engineering chal-lenge for designer . The Lockheed AircraftCompany, in tendering for a United tatesArmy Air Corp (U AAC) requirem ntof 1937, decid d that a twin-engine layoutwould provid ad quate power for the300mph (480km/h)-plus interceptor fight-er required by the Air Corps.

Even before the econd World Warbegan, few service chiefs had clear idea ato how fighter would be deployed. Theimportant defence/offence role of the short-range single- eaters developed fairly rapid-ly, but twin were in many ways 'orphan

production of advanced powerplants layome time in the future. Therefore the use

of two relatively low-powered engine notonl y doubled the available horsepower,but enabled such a design to cope with thecorresponding increase in weight of a largerairframe. Al 0, there wa the undeniablecrew afety factor inherent in twin engines.

Th Zerst01'er's op rational debut provedto be rather les spectacular than Goringhad boasted. Few Bf 110 sorties were actu-ally flown ov r Poland, and those thatwere hardly met any challenge in aerialcombat. Moreover, Poland' fighter forcewas not equipped with the kind of fire-power that the opposing fighters of othernations would soon bring to bear on theZentorer crews.

A twin-engine fighter embodies thecla sic compromise of airframe weightbemg hopefully cancelled out by enginepowerful enough to maintain a contempo-rary (circa 1938-39) top p ed goal ofaround 300-350mph (480-560km/h) anda manoeuvrability on a par with that ofingle-engine fighters. Only in a few ca es

The twin-engine fighter enjoy d an impor-tant but som what chequered career as acombat aircraft in the inventory of thefighting powers during th econd WorldWar. Starting, operationally at least, withthe Mes erschmitt Bf 11 0 Zerstorer, the'heavy fighter' wa mythologized by Luft-waffe ommander-in-ChiefHermann Gor-ing as being so capabl that it would sweepall before it as an e sential element ofBliczkreig. When Germany attacked Polandin 1939 Hitler's propaganda machine hadsucces fully legitimized thi clas ofaircraft,but as it transpired this wa somewhat pre-mature. However, d signers around theworld were hardly surpris d at the Bf 11O'stestimonial, as th y had be n advocatingthe worth of such aircraft for some tim .

One reason why a twin-engin layout waspopular was b cause many aero engine ofthe pre-war period, irre pectiv of theircountry of origin, wer hard-put to pr _duc more than 1,000hp (746kW). Thep tential to obtain more power certainlyeXisted, and t st engine had been devel-oped and run in several countries, but mass

In. an age of transition ~he XP-38 had a huge impact on the US aviation scene, making even the radical BellAlracuda look pedestrian. The port Allison lacks a manifold fairing. Lockheed

8 9

B RBANK'S BEAUTY

:rhis ,view em~hasi~es the size of the VP-38. Among the guests are USAAC chiefHap Arnold (I~ w~lte ~at), lockheed company President Robert Gross and NationalDefense CommIssIon dIrector William Knudsen. The aircraft has small propeller bladecuffs and the twin 'machine-guns' are empty blast tubes. IWM

A VP-38 on test, probably being flown by lockheed pilot Milo Burcham, who put inmany hours at the controls of pre-production and operational lightnings. IWM

maintenance might have been very prob-lematical. But with the 1940s fa t approach-ing, the 010 t pr sing obstacl to lengthyd velopment became time it elf.

In realistic tests many proposed fight rdesigns failed to meet their promised per-formance becau e they relied on nginesthat were not fully developed. Often phys-ically larger than their pr decessors, suchpower units offered a potentially ignifi-cant increase in top speed; if and when theengines were proven and built. hartlybefore the war European interceptor fight-ers were operati ng at max imum speeds of300-400mph (480-640km/h) in levelflight, and while there was an understand-able de ire on the part of manufactur-ers to better that speed range by 20 percent or more, achieving it proved far moredifficult than many a ronautical engine rimagined.

Therefore, in selecting it new combataircraft, the AA tended to opt fordesigns that were conventional and a y tomanufacture. ingle- eater still generallyhad their engine in front of the pilot, arma-ment was housed in the mainplane , andthere wa a single fuselage and a recogniz-able tail-surface grouping with twin oringle fins. The use of twO wing-mountedngines allowed centrelin guns in the nos

of th fuselage, which thu had room for aon -, two- or three-man crew. Doubling thepower of available engines of around 950hp(710kW) hardly offered any urfeit of p r-formance, as the inevitable weight penalty

In the day when variable-pitch propellers,enclosed cockpit and self-s aling fueltanks wer all still relatively new, U com-panies gradually moved into the lead witha general acceptance of tricycle undercar-riages for certain categorie of aircraft, par-ticularly bomber. In fighters, Bell had takena national lead by in orporating a nose-whe I in its P-39 Airacobra, and Lockheedadopted a similar layout for its new twin-engine fighter.

The Mod In went through several quiteadvanced design tudie. Aviation was onthe thre hold of a new era, and many inno-vations wer thought to be practical forfuture combat aircraft for the armed force.Wind tunnel testing of models and exami-nation of mock-ups often proved that,while major departures from the 'tried andtested' formulae such a buried engines,propellers driven via extension shaft andflying-wing and canard layout would anddid work, ease of ma s production and field

Advanced Features

manufacturer submitting both conv n-tional and some very radical design withvery little contractural su cess.

Despite the e 'also-rans' falling by thewayside, keen competition and publicitynot only kept the industry in the forefrontof aviation development, but resulted inthe U A setting the tandards that therest of the world would eventually follow.

Kelsey's ruse paid off hand omely. TheArmy Iiked what it saw, and Lockheed wasrewarded with War Department ContractAC9974, company identification Modeln, military designati n XP-38.

By the late 1930s fighter speed weresteadily ri ing, enough to challenge thetheory that the bomber, owing to it size,speed and armament, was all but invulner-able to interception and destruction. Thatmythical invulnerablity, which was neverreally te ted out ide war games and exer-cises, wa gradually being eroded as eachnew interceptor prototype took to the air.By L940 Bell, urtiss, Republic and orthAmerican had all but cornered the Amer-ican market in single-engine typ s, other

Contract Issued

which to de ign a fighter had been built bythe Allison Division of General Motors.This wa the V-17 LO-C , which had noteven been run at 1,000hp (746kW) byFebruary 1937.

ompared with Bell's design submission,the XP-39, which was itself quite radical,Lockheed's Model n not only showedSimilar innovation but wa some thretimes larger. This appeared not to matterovermuch, as the competition was verymuch an open book. At that time theU AAC's Wright Field Pursuit Projects

ffice was headed by Lt Benjamin S.Kel ey. He had to resort to some sleight ofhand insofar as the can ervative Air Corpwas concerned. What the Air Corps need-ed was a fighter, but Kelsey reckoned thatcalling it an interceptor would open up thecompetition to encompas some new, excit-ing possibilities.

At Lockheed, Clarence 'Kelly' Johnson'steam under Hall L. Hibbard perfected theP-38 layout at Burbank after consideringeveral de igns, orne of which were quite

complex. Johnson and Hibbard consideredthemselves a-inventors of the Model n,and filed patent to that effect after the XP-38 had flown. Army chiefs wanted Lock-eed' fighter built in quantity; as many asthe factories could produ e as fast as possi-ble, and no wonder. Lockheed had turnedthe relatively slow 'heavy fighter' concepton its head and produced a fast andmanoeuvrable aircraft with the safety fac-tor of two engin s, which had always beena strong testimonial in such designs. The P-38 began to take on an aura a the veryembodiment of a fighter of the future,

Consolidated declined. Little i known ofthe rival propo al ; none progre sed as faras the prototyp tage.

Lockheed had established its reputationwith medium-capacity airliners, the mostfamous of which wa probably the Lock-heed 14. With war cloud looming inEurope, the company' management real-ized the desirability of bidding for lucrativemilitary contracts, particularly from Euro-pean nation. For ign ca h would helpfund the production fa i1iti s n ces ary tobuild aircraft in unprecedented quantities,and Lockheed moved quickly to adapt theModel 14 into a patrol bomber for theRAE The re ulting Hudson wa th fir t ofmany thousands of U aircraft to cross theAtlantic for war service with Britain andthe Allied nations. Projecting the milita-nzed airliner further, Lockheed developedthe larger PV-l Ventura and, ultimately,th drastically redesigned PV-2 Harpoon.

While the Model 14 derivative werenot new designs, but were based on triedand tested layouts perfected by Lockheedengineers, they wer all multi-seat aircraft.A singl -seat fighter was radi ally differ-ent, and in bidding to build such an air-craft the company took a gamble that itcould find a suitable engine and fulfil pro-ductton contracts, hould they materialize.The only po ible powerplant around

high altitude'. Thi wa Air orps pecifi-catton X-608, is ued in February 1937.Among the fairly broad requir m nt waa minimum true air speed of 360mph(580km/h) at altitude, and a time to climbto 20,000ft (6,000m) of under 6min.Armament was to be twice as h avya thatof exi ting fighters, a 25mm shell-firingcannon being mentioned, and the winningd Ign would be fitted with the 010 t pow-erful engines available, enabling the air-craft to fly at full throttle for over an hour.. Despite the enormous challenge of meet-109 th sp cification without the existenceof an engine capable of the 1,600hp(l ,lOOkW) requ ired for such an aircraftLockheed decided to bid. The company'~assoCiation with what became the light-nIng b gan at that point, with several rivalconcerns also bidding for an X-608 con-tract. In the standard procedure of thetime, a design competition would decidewhich submi ion had the most meritunder a point y tern. In reality there waslittle direct competition for Lockheed.Bell submitted its single-engine XP-39proposal, and Vultee offered its XP-I015(Experimental Interceptor Pursuit), atwin-engine de ign that apparently pro-gres ed no further than the 'paper' stage.Boell1g, urtiss and Douglas were invitedto take part in the X-60 competition, but

Into the Unknown

to handle effectively, at I a t in the earlyyears of the war. The British in particularnever really explored the singl -pilot,multi-duty philosophy, despite an experi-01 ntal in tallation of a Mk IV airborneinterception (AI) set in a Hawker Typhoonand, reportedly, in a handful of Hurricanein 1941.

Although the Americans later provedthat such an arrangement was perfectly fea-sible (and practical in operation) in theGrumman F6F Hellcat and Vought F4U

or air, the pilot's workload on a relativelyshort-range patrol was marginally less inthese aircraft than it would have been whenflying a twin. In the latter ca e the pilot hadto monitor the performance ofboth engines,navigate, observe the sky around him at alltimes, maintain contact with a ground con-troller and watch a tiny radar screen thatwas prone to static and other 'clutter'. Andhe could never afford his let his attentionbecome too fixed on the cope.

. Playing it afe when adapting the light-nIng Into a nightfighter as the P-38MLockheed engineers eventually opted t~ll1troduce a second seat for a radar opera-tor. Without radical redesign, room wafound for the operator in the barely ade-quate space b hind the pilot where radioequIpment was Installed In the tandaldsIngle- eat P-3

Earlier model P-38s had painted theway to the M version. Units in the fieldhad found that a econd occupant couldsqueeze into the space behind the pilot'sseat, normally taken up by the radio. Withthe et removed and a rudimentary seat111 tailed, the so-called 'piggy-back' light-nIng proved a u eful liaison aircraft andserved a a pattern for the nightfighter.

WIth the Lightning, Lockheed cr at dthe world's only single-seat, multi-enginefighter to go into mass production and staythe cour throughout the crucible of com-bat. That alone endowed the P-38 withalmost mythical qualities and made itsomething very special.

In cornman with numerous other aircraftmanufacturers the world over, Lockheedhad never built a fighter (and had builtvery few military aircraft at all from theground up) before it r sponded to a circu-lar proposal for an experim ntal pur uitintended for 'the tactical mission of inter-ception and attack of hostile aircraft at

7077

One of the first batch of 'castrated' lightnings after completion. British serials weregenerally retained as call signs for the P-322s used as trainers in the USA. P. Jarrett

At the roll-out ceremony the 'hand-built'XP-3 looked extremely sleek, dramaticallyfuturistic and huge for a fighter, dwarfingevery other 'pursuit' type then in inventory.Its dimensions were closer to those of a con-temporary twin-engine attack bomber, a itwas only about 13ft (4m) less than a Hud-son in span, and some 6ft (1. m) horter.

Having announced its new baby to theworld, Lockheed disassembled 37-457 andloaded it on to three trucks. hrouded bycanvas cover, th aircraft was driven toMarch Field, wh re it arrived in the earlyhours of ew Year's Day, 1939. By 9 Janu-ary it was reassembled and ready for its fir tflight, and Ben Kelsey prepared for an hIS-toric take-off.

certain flight condition that would haveproved difficult, if not impos ible. Pilotswere also well aware that baling out of anaircraft of the P-3 's configuration carriedthe inherent ri k of striking th tailplane.

Extremely snug cowlings enclosed each960hp (716kW) Alii on V-1710 engine (a1710-11 and a 1710-15 were initially fltt d).The external lines tended to belie the hid-den power of each V12; in fact, the highlypolished XP-3 r sembled a racing aircraftrather than a warplane. The USAACnational insignia was applied, including theunderwing wording 'U.S. Army', and thethen- urrent red-and-white stripe adornedthe rudders.

ladder was provided in the rear of thecentral nacelle. The pilot could thu gainaccess by stepping acros the trailing-edgewing root. However, it wa still, as onepilot put it:' ne hell of a way to get Illtoan airplane'.

limbing into the machine was onething, but the problem that preoccupied agreat many would-be pilot wa how to getout of it in a hurry. The top sectIon of thecanopy hinged open sideways in early air-craft, but even with the later rear-hingedroof section the Lightning was not the eas-iest aircraft to exit in an emergency. Therecommended procedure was to roll theaircraft on to its back to enabl the pilot todrop out of the top of the canopy, but under

cumbersome design, which reflected the'muscle power' required to haul the P-38around the sky, wa later replaced.

Entry to the aircraft entailed the pilotclambering up via a pull-down fuselage, tirrup' and dropping sideways and downinto the eat over the rolled-down sidewindow. ome attempts to enter the cock-pit by thi 'direct' route ended in anembarrassing tumble back on to the tar-mac, e pecially if the would-be pilot waencumbered with a parachute. Pilots soonlearned to throw their 'chute up on to thewing root first, but the Lightning remaineda difficult aircraft to get into. 0 n afterproduction began, a retractable three-step

olingl.ockheed made every effort to keep theXP-38' airframe surface ultra-smooth and.IS uncluttered as possible by drag-inducing,\If intakes. The supercharged Allisonsrequired no onventional ejector exhausts,only small bullet- haped intakes on eachslJe of the cowlings being neces ary. A fur-ther intake rammed air into the carburet-tors on top of each boom, and to pr ventthe engine oil from overheating the XP-38had retractable cooling scoops below eachengine nacelle. mall radiator air scoopswere fitted into the side of the tail boom,there being a separate, retractable port forthe exhausts on the top of each boom.When all the air coops were 'closed' theairframe was indee I remarkably smooth,but as subsequent events showed, Lock-

he~d had perhap been toO conservative inthis respect.

Each unit of the tricycle undercarriageretracted rearwards into it respective bayin the central nacelle and each fu elageboom, the main legs being of the singleoleo-pneumatic, shock-absorbing type. Thenosewheel was self-centreing, and therewere brake on the main wheels. The Cur-tiss metal three-bladed propellers were ofthe constant-speed, fully-feathering type,with opposite rotation to counter torque.Lockheed figures put the empty weight ofthe XP-38 at 11,507lb (5,nOkg), andmaximum loaded weight at l5,4161b(6,993kg).

The Model 22 prototype differed in sev-eral re pect to subsequent examples, partic-ularly in the cockpit area. The fir t canopyincluded a framele s, rounded windscreenattached to a humped centre section. Inproduction P-38s a flat bulletproof wind-screen with additional bracing was fitted,and a wind-down window section wa pro-vided on each side of the pilot's seat to aidentry to the cockpit. Each side window haddistinctive cross-bracing.

Inside, the cockpit was dominated by alarge half-wheel device that the pilot usedto control the aircraft. Thi somewhat

I .tachable. Each fuselage boom was a 37ftlOin (11.53m) long all-metal structureWith tressed-skin covering and incorpo-r.ltll1g the fins, the rudders and the fabriclllVered elevator. A sheet-metal coveringwas oon adopted for the control surfaces,(hough the elevator and rudder trim tabwere made of metal from the start.

Swinging the compass of aP-322-B at Burbank. Seen toadvantage are the intake fairingsbelow the engine nacelles. whichwere different from those of theVP-38s. P. Jarrett

What emerged from the old brewery build-ing purchased by Lockheed a part of anexpansion plan at Burbank wa an aircraftwith an all-metal structure and a singl -main-spar wing with a double-'!'- ectionbeam box at the centre s ction and a single'I' beam member in the outer panels. Thewing spanned 52ft (15. 5m) and had anarea of 327 .5sq ft (30.4sq m). The entireairframe was covered in a mooth, flush-riveted light-alloy mes ed skin. The wing,which were built in three main sections,had harply tapered leading and trailingedges and incorporated Lockheed-Fowler-type split trailing-edge flap in four ec-tions, between the ailerons and b oms andinboard of the nacelle. The wingtips were

Structure

so much d1at a twin-boom layout was almo tthe only logical way to go.

To minimize the effects of engine torque,which could induce a dangerous swing toright or left on take-off in other twin-engine aircraft, Lockheed chose to fit theP-38 with propellers that counter-rotatedoutwards. This ef/; ctively dampened anytendency for the aircraft to wander off-lineduring take-off before sufficient speed hadbuilt up for the flying controls to take effect.

On 23 June 1937 the USAAC issuedContract 9974, authorizing Lockheed tobuild one XP-3 prototype. This was somefive months ahead of the Bell XP-39 AiTa-cobra. onstruction of the Lockheed air-craft began in July 193 ,and it was com-pleted that December. It was allocated themilitary serial number 37-457.

The Model 22's twin booms were stream-lined but made deep enough to providespace for a separate turbosupercharger (asagainst the integral, mechanical type) andintercooler aft of each engine, as well ascooling intake and the neces ary internalducting to feed air to the turbine. Themain supercharger housings, with theirharacteristic turbine-wheel cores, were

installed on top of the boom at approxi-mately the mid-point of each wing.

The industry considered upercharg-ers to be e sential for sustained high-altitudeflight, and Kelly Johnson later commentedon this philosophy insofar as it affected d1eP-38. He stated that by the time the engi-neers had strung together long turbo uper-charger ducting, added radiators and theundercarriage bay, the de ign had stretched

Boosting Power

pod ontaining th ockpit and the fixedweapon. Long twin 'fu elage' boom spreadthe weight and calTied the tail surfaces.

The M din wa an inspired design,practical in operation and me ting thede ire of engineers and airframe d signerswho wanted the company tamp on some-thing ju t radical enough to stand out fromthe crowd. Lockheed achieved that inconsiderable measure.

The design team opted to u e two super-charg d, 12-cylind r Allison V-171O Iiq-uid-cooled in-line engines for the newfighter. This choice was also something ofa gamble, for it had till not achieved a us-tained 1,000hp output by 1938, though ahigher output was promised.

For the Model n Lockheed managed tocounter the omnipresent weight spiral byhaving a single cockpit in a hort fuselage

Lockheed Progress

of a larger airframe and as ociated militaryequipment had to be absorbed.

Although official conservatism in pro-curement was often criticized it provedsound enough, and for another half-decadeafter 1940 most of the world's air armsrelied on aircraft powered by reciprocatingengines in conventional airfram s fittedwith 'straight' rather than swept wings. Allof that was und rst od at Burbank, but, ifhe could, Kelly Johnson wanted to exploreother possibilities.

Much brainstorming led to the finalconfiguration of th Model 22, whi h wachosen from ix layouts put forward byJohnson. These encompassed a convention-al single-fin aircraft with elongated enginenacelles and the pilot positioned right for-ward in a bomber-type no econe; a imilarlayout, but with extremely lim enginenacelles that were not carried aft of thewing; a twin-boom, twin pusher with twoendplate vertical fin; twin booms with thepilot's cockpit in th port- ide boom, theother being 'clean'; and twin booms with acentral nacelle incorporating tractor andpusher engine. The ixth exercise wasunmistakably the P-3 configuration, andwas the on cho en by the USAAC. Thelayout favoured by John on was not theleast complex of his six ideas, but was quitedistinctive and unlike any previous fighterdesign accepted for production.

7273

The diff.erences between. the P-322-B and production P-38s can be fully appreciated in this view of AE979The main changes were In the engine cowlings and exhausts the P-322s lack' h .

, Ing superc argers. Lockheed

flight did not go according to plan. A hewaited in the landing pattern the XP-38'

ngines had to be throttled back. learedto land, Kel ey shoved the throttles for-ward, but there was no respon from theAllisons. Try as he might, he could notgain enough power or speed to clear trein his path. He touched the trees at around100mph (l60kmjh) and the aircraftdropped on to its belly, wheel up, lidingalong on golf-course turf rather than therunway that was a mere 2,000ft (610m)away. Kel ey had to sit and wait until theprototype Lightning lost momentum andfinally ground to a halt. The aircraft wawrecked in the forced landing, thoughKel ey was able to climb out unhurt.

The 10 of a valuable prototype greatlyannoyed th Lockheed engineers, who hadbeen apprehensive about the r cord flightfrom the outset. and they could hardlykeep the event out of the pres althoughthey tri d to steer reporters away. At therash sc n the news hounds were implored

not to publicize the demi e of the XP- 8,but to no avail. The accident made h ad-line news.

Despite thi setback, Kelsey' flying timewas impre ive. It was poorly timed offi-cially, but worked ut at 6hr 58min withtwo en-route stops. Hugh had flown non-top in a specially prepared 'flying fuel tank'o the XP-38 had performed admirably.

The above figures were Kelsey's own; theU AA set the flying time at 7hr 2min,but even so the record had been beaten bythe prototype of what was to be a standardService aeroplane. The investigation intoKel ey's crash determined that th nginefailure had resulted from idling back onthe throttles and con equent carburettoricing.

It seemed, however, that Lockheed wouldnow face an enormous setback, but the cra hindirectly brought the company ome un x-pected comp nsation. In April 1939 anArmy order was pia ed for thirteen YP-3evaluation aircraft (39-689 to 9-701) andone structural test air/i'am , valued at

2,1 0,725. It was believed that, had theprototype not been d stroyed in uch a spec-tacular fashion, the initial order would havebeen delayed until a full flight evaluationhad been completed. 0 the fact that, for atime, Lockheed had no aircraft to how forits efforts, was not th disaster it may at firsthave seemed. One drawback was that,although Burbank later tool d-up to com-plete P-38 contracts as fast as po ible, theYPs had to be practically hand-a embled.

Prestige FlightBen Kelsey took off from Wright Field andet course for ew York. He made his land-

ing approach lIhr 2min after leaving Bur-bank. Unfortunately the final pha e of the

H. 'Hap' Arnold this was decided upon.Th Air Corps chief thought that a com-pi t transcontinental dash by the XP-38would make ome great headlines andshow the world that the U aviationindustry had ucce sfully weathered yearof i olationi t neglect. Millionaire HowardHugh had set the previous record in Jan-uary 1937 with a coast-to-coast' time of7hr 2 min. Arnold felt there was no bett rway than beating Hughes's record todemon trate that the USA could designand build world-cla fighters and, moreimportantly, to convince ongre s toincrease funding for the USAAC. Therewa reportedly some reluctance by Lock-h ed to let a valuable prototype loose onwhat amounted to a publicity stunt, but'Hap' was the boss. As for the stir it wouldundoubtedly create, look alone wouldhave sold the XP-3 to the most die-hardcritic of pur uit aviation.

Specification - XP-38 (lockheed Model 22)One Allison V-l7l 0-11 (portl and one V-17l 0-15 (starboardl providing 1,150hp (860kW) each fortake-off and l,OOOhp (746kW) at 20,OOOft 16,000ml.Empty 11.5071b (5,220kg); gross 13,500lb (6,120kg); maximum 15,4161b 16,993kg).Span 52ft Din 11585m); length 37ft lOin 111.53m); height 9ft 6in (2.90m); wing area 327.5sq ft(30Asq mi.Maximum speed 413mph (655km/hl at 20,000ft 16,000m); cruising speed 350mph 1563km/h) at16,000ft (4,880ml; time to 20,OOOft (6,000m) 65min; service ceiling 38,000ft 111 ,580m).None.Armament:

Powerplant:

Performance:

Wights:

Dimensions:

r IIr h.ld 7sq ft (0.65sq m) greater areath form of tub tailplane outboard of111\I Ill' the teething trouble Kelsey

I ,Irly delighted with the XP-3 andr II lin a letter to Wright Field, whicht r 11Ic~ted performance figures: 'It goes

It II and flie swell'. It was just whatr lIn at L kheed beli ved.

It Ivmg taken the aircraft up veral11m's, Kelsey gradually overcame the

I' that ari e with nearly all prototype.rl' flight were conduct d with a very

I 11\ .lInrame virtually devoid of paint,It I lut thi time black anti-glare panelsr painted on the nose and the in ide

of 'a h nacelle directly in the pilot'sof sight.It r Shr flying at March Field the XP-

\ .IS ready for a move to hio for itste t . Kelsey took off at 06.12hr

11 ebruary and headed ea t. He land-I 10 refuel at Amarillo in Texas, whichlk 23min. It was 03.07hr Eastern tan-

tn lIme before K I ey touched down atright Field, having flown at an av rage

tr I .ur peed of 360mph (579kmjh).h' po ibility of flying on to Mitchel

II Id. ew York, had previously been putrward, and in di cu ion with Cen Henry

Parked on the Boscombe Down grass, P-322-B (AF106) awaits either another testflight or ferrying to an Eighth Air Force depot. The ultimate fates of the three RAF testLightnings are unknown. AUlhor

which was easily repairable. He had notretracted the undercarriage during the34min flight, and none of the plann dobjectives had been realized.

On 5 February Kelsey took the XP-38 upfor a s cond time. A hand pump for thbrakes had been installed, plus new Ruscobrake linings. The flight lasted 36min andwas far more positive than the firstalthough the incr ased brake pressur~could still not completely cope with thethrust of th Allisons. Flight three alsorevealed some longitudinal instability.Kelly John on attributed this to insuffi-cient area of the tailplane, which hardlyextend d outboard of the vertical urfaces.This was soon rectified, and all ubsequent

project on which he had worked cea eless-Iy ~ rome thirty months. Al 0, the XP-3was brim-full Huel, worrying for the pilotif any fire dev loped, but lethal to anyoneon the ground if the pilotles aircraft couldnot be directed away from any re identialarea into which it might cra h. Kel eybrought the XP-3 ufficiently under con-trol to slow it right down for a landing.WOlTled that the brake might fail, hadopted a steep, I8-degree angle of attackand eased the aircraft in with the c ntrolwhe I pulled right back. As it touched, theXP banged its fin bumpers in a shower ofspark, but held its ground run in a traightIme. Once the aircraft had stopped, Kelseyclimbed down and inspected the damage,

Maiden FlightWeather and brake problem delayed thefirst flight of the XP-38 until 27 January.Kelsey actually lost braking power on onete t and ran the aircraft into a ditch, butth reafter all went smoothly. Kelsey taxiedout and took off for the maiden flight.Almost immediately he sen ed trouble.Both sets of flaps began to vibrate duringthe climb-out; all but one of four alumini-um support rods had failed. This allowedthe flap to extend out to their stop andflat! up and down, trying to tear them-selve 100 e in the slip tream. Kelsey con-Sidered abandoning the aircraft, but imm _diately reconsidered. After all, this wa the

14 15

16

Foreign OrdersAs was common before the war, foreign gov-ernment ,most notably tho e of Franc andBritain, went hopping abroad for aircraft.With it own aviation industry undergoingan upheaval in a emi-nationalized state,France appeared to be in a dangerous posi-tion hould Hitler's Germany declare warbefor curl' nt production orders at homehad been fulfilled. Modern war materiel wasbadly needed to in rease the strength of theFrench armed forces, and numerous aircraft

wing, tailplane, fuselage and centre- ection,forward booms and aft boom, undercar-riag and powerplant. Alternative noseections, primarily those intended for the

reconnaissan e role, became an eighth fac-tory sub-section.

At the start of P-38 a embly the Burbankplant employed a conventional rolling linwith each n ar-complete aircraft beingmoved out of the covered area on its wheels.A three-track line wa introduced a theproduction tempo increa ed and more p 0-pIe w r hir d to work shifts, enabling P-38sto be built round the clock. Lockheed wasfortunate in that the Californian climateallowed much of the final fitting-out to takeplace in the open air without fear of corro-sion through exc sive rainfall, for example.During production of the P-38F a conveyorsystem was installed at Burbank wherebya 'crawler' cradle carried each su pend dLightning along to permit easy acces to theaircraft' und r ide. This proved to be a con-venient way of completing the final fitting-out of each aircraft.

BURBA K'S BEAUTY

17

XP-38. Although not all of the YPs werefitted with guns, they were the first to havethe nose section cut to take the barrels oftwo 0.50in and two 0.30in machine-gunsand a single Oldsmobile 37mm cannon.Developed by Madsen of Denmark, thecannon was licence-built by the US com-pany more usually associated with auto-mobile manufactur .

The ammunition quota for the YP-3 'smachine-guns and cannon was a variable200,500 and 15 rounds respectively, storedin 'vertical' magazine acce sed by twohinged door that fully expo ed the feedmechanism and working parts of theweapons. .

The 37mm gun did not last long as a pn-mary P-38 weapon, mainly becau e thecalibre of ammunition wa to a non-USstandard siz . Wid ly b liev d by UnitedStates Army Air Corps ( SAAC) plan-ners to be useful for a number of aircraftinstallations, the big cannon had also beenearmarked for the Bell P-39 Airacobra andexperimental versions of t1ie Douglas XA-26 Invader. In the event it proved morepractical to substitute a lighter and small-er 20mm weapon in the YP-38. The 37mmcannon wa reI gated to 'experimental'taws and was only fitted (and actually

used in combat) in one front-line US air-craft, the Bell P-39 Airacobra.

Assembly-line con truction took vari-ous form depending on th manufacturer,the size of aircraft and availabl space inthe plant. In the case of P-3 fighters(referred to as 'armament hip' in techni-cal manuals, to di tingui h them from PRconvel' ions) Lockheed eventually opted tobuild them in seven major subassemblies:

During their Service test period the YP-38s received fin numbers in the style seenhere on the first aircraft so identified. P. Jarrett

Compressibility

n the Army Air Forces demanded ever-higherrformance from anew breed of aircraft in the early

lOs. aviation engineers were cast on to the horns01 dilemma. The better they did their jobs. the moretrouble they got into. for every extra mile of speednd every thousand feet of altitude revealed new

frontiers of unknown and unconquered elements ofuniverse. They ran into laws of physics that no

Irr.raft had then touched. as no pre-war type was ableto fly high enough or fast enough to encounter them.

A prime example was compressibility, the strangehavlour of air when it is moving at somewhere near

the speed of sound. This does not mean that the aircraftIt elf must be going at 700mph (l,125km/hl, for com-pressibility can occur at much lower speeds. When theair forced upwards by awing meets the air forced asideby the fuselage, these two converging air masses arecompressed as though they were passing through anozzle. The only way that the air can get around thiS400mph (640km/h) bottleneck is by accelerating to700mph (l,125km/hl, thus creating compressibility atthe fillet which joins the wing to the fuselage.

At that point the engineer was in trouble. as Lock-heed found with the P-38. because he had first todiagnose the problem. which no one had encoun-tered before, and then fix it. He encounters new lawsof aerodynamics. One of them is that air. at slowspeeds. acts like water. which is noncompressible,but at ultra-high speeds it behaves like air. There is aregion between these two extremes in which the airburbles from one behaviour to another or is utterlyIawless. and this is the compressibility range. WhileIt is burbling past the wing/fuselage fillet the force itexerts on the fillet may change from pressure to suc-tion, and back to pressure again, hundreds of timesper second. Unless the fillet is sturdily built it willtear away in that 700mph reversible gale. Build it sufficiently heavy to remove all doubt and the aircraftwill not fly fast enough to encounter the phenome-non, or win the war, but if the fillet problem is solvedthe aircraft may gain enough extra speed to run intocompressibility somewhere else.

Guns

SOURCE: Frank J. Taylor and Lawton Wright. Democracy'sAirArsenal, 1947.

The YP-38 airframe was lightened com-pared with that of the XP-3 by 1,5001b(680kg) apr the U AAC requirement,and mated to more powerful Allison 1710-27 and -29 engines of 1,150hp (860kW)each. Alterations were made to the cowl-ings, and on the under ide the characteri .-tic 'step' where the two kidney-shaped all'intakes were located was retained on allsubsequent models up to the P-38H. TheYPs also had their handed propeller rotat-ing outwards instead of inward, a in the

under tanding and, perhaps, a solution.Wind tunnel tests could reveal only somuch, and were no real sub titute for actu-al flying tim.

The plain fact wa that the P-38 and itsrecipr cating-engined contemporari s werethe last of their kind. They had to have abrake put on their potentially lethal divep rformance before they were battered tode trLlction and their pilot killed by forcesthat wer barely understood. It would takean entirely new form of propulsion tothru t them afely through these invisible'barrier' in the atmosphere.

Later it wa realized that only wrboj thad the punch to take such aircraft throughthe compre sibility and 'sound' baniers.While design that could do so existed evena the early P-38s were being te ted, Lock-heed and other manufacturer had to supplyconventional piston-engined aeroplane fora war that demanded ever-greater perfor-mance, preferably without killing ervicepilots en masse. Kelly John on and hi coun-terparts faced an almost impo sible compro-mise at the most significant technical cro _road in aviation history.

Lockheed only partly overcame the com-pres ibility problem with a gradual und r-standing of the force at work on a fast-diving aircraft and the introduction oftemporary rem dies that protected it underextr me c nditions. The quickest way wasto impo e ever performance restrictionson the aircraft, particularly with r gard tohigh-speed dive at teep angle. It was notthe ideal way to introduce a warplan intothe demanding combat arena of the ec-ond World War, but how easy i it to over-come the unknown?

The dark brown. dark green and sky RAF scheme of the early P-322s conformed wellto directives regarding camouflage patterns. APN

having a total of 686 fighters to build anddeliver when work on the pre-productionaircraft had barely started.

Testing HazardsTest flying has always carried hazards forpilots, and the development of the P-38was no exception. On 4 ovember 1941Ralph Vinden was kill d in a crash follow-ing high- peed-dive tests in a YP-38. Com-pressibility or 'shock tall' wa the uspect-ed cau e of the aircraft shedding its tail,though few people under tood why theaccident had happened, or what could bedone to prevent a recurrenc .

Modern (1940s) military aircraft such asthe P-38 were entering a hitherto unex-plot'ed regime of high-speed flight. Thesemachines could ea ily exceed 550mph(885km/h) in a dive and encounter airpressures that normal aircraft control sur-faces could barely overcome. Designerswere at the beginning of a learning curve,and only experienc would provide orne

Specification - YP-38 (lockheed Model 122)One Allison V-l710-27 (port) and one V-1710-29 (starboard) providing 1.150hp (860kW) each fortake-off.

Empty 11.1711b (5,067kgl; gross 13.5001b (6.120kg); maximum 14.3481b (6.508kg).Span 52ft Din (15.85m); length 37ft lOin (11.53m); height 9ft lOin (JOOm); wing area 327.5sq ft(30Asq mI.Maximum speed 405mph (652km/h) at 20.000ft (6.000m); cruising speed 350mph (563km/hl; timeto climb to 20.000ft (6.000m) 6min; service ceiling 38.000ft (11,580ml; range (normal) 650 miles(1.050km); range (maximum) 1,050 miles (l,850km).One 37mm cannon. two 0.50in maChine-guns, two 0.30in machine-guns.

Powerplant:

Weights:

Dimensions:

Performance:

Armament:

1i oling for mass production a uch did notexi t. And although the YP undoubt dlybenefited from the data Lockheed had accu-mulated from the XP-38 te t flights, this waincomplete and there were sev ral unan-wered que tions.

Ev n though the Army order wa encour-aging, the crash of the protoype meant aconcurrent los of development time withactual hardware. Burbank was in vitablyhort of full data on the performance of the

new fighter, and this, according to somereport, put the whole project back bysome eighte n months to two years. To addto the company's problems, the YP-3proved demanding to manufacture, andthe fir t example of the pre-productionbatch did not fly until Mar hall H adletook it up on 17 September 1940. It was tobeJune 1941 before the thirteenth aircraftwas d livered to the Army. By September1939 the Anny had increased it order bysixty-six aircraft, covering the P-3 , XP-3 A and P-38D.

However, building the YP-3 gave Lock-heed valuable experience; several improve-ments were made, despite the aircraft look-ing externally imilar to the prototype.These change included adding ma s bal-ance above and below the el vator tocounter the effects of flutter. Some tail buf-feting had occurred during test flight, andalthough the balance provided ome rea _surance they apparently did not cure theproblem completely. Kel ey always main-tained that they were superfluous, anyway.The tail buffeting was later eradicated byfitting larger wing-root fillets. (It wasargu d by Kelsey and others, however, thattail buffeting was never really a problemwith the P-38.)

The P- 8 order book increased again inAugust 1940, the Anny tequiring410 P-38Eand -F fighters and F-4, FAA, F-5 and F-SA PR derivatives. That created a ratherintere ting ituation at Burbank, Lockheed

B RBANK'S BEAUTY

79

being built for the U AAC, one reasonwhy American fighter quadrons did notreceive more than a few dozen examplesbefore the end of 1941.

The Model 322-B's tricycle undercar-riage and cockpit design were praised byBritish pilots, particularly the engine con-trols, which were colour-coded in green andred for easy readability. This may have beena precaution temming from some per-ceived confusion with French control lay-out and op ration.

The balance of the initial batch of 143Lightning Mk I intended for Britain (22aircraft serialled AE97 AE999, and 121identified a AFlOO-AF220) were complet-ed at Burbank with the originally French-specified Alii on V-1710- CIS engines.

When the Briti h order wa cancelled,these aircraft were absorbed by theU AAC/U AAF under the de ignationLockheed RP-322 (R for Restricted). The524 Lightning Mk I1s (AF221-AF744) fol-lowed suit and were brought up more or Ie sto P-38F standard and p wered by tur-bocharged Allison V-1710-F5Ls and -F5Rs.

In the meantime, three of the originalproduction Lightning Mk Is, AF10s, AF106and AFI08, were hipped to England byea, arriving in March 1942. It appear that

the Royal Aircraft Establishment (RAE) atFarnborough was the earliest recipient,carrying out unspecified trials with AFl08.This aircraft wa passed to the U AAF inBritain on 2 December 1942. unliffe-Owen took deliv ry of AFI 05 and similar-ly pas ed it to th U AAF on 1 July 1943.

On 30 April 1942 AF106 arrived at theAeroplane and Armament Exp rimentalEstabli hment (A&AEE) at Bos ombeDown, Wiltshire, for brief handling trial.The aircraft wa unarmed and carried aspeed I' striction of 300mph (480km/h).Flight trials were brief, a the RAF had lit-tle further interest in the type, but pilotreports were generally positive, tating thathandling wa pleasant, though el vatormovem nt was described as heavy. The air-craft stalled at 7 mph (12skm/h) with flapand undercarriage down, the approach tothe stall being de cribed a straightforward.Single-engine flight down to a peed of115mph (l85 km/h) was also recorded acomfortable. With the trial completed,AF106 was also transferred to th U AAF,on 10 July 1943. Furth I' use (if any) of thitrio of hybrid Lightnings in the UK appearto have gone unrecorded.

Mo t, if not all, of the P-322s had beengiven green/brown/sky camouflage at the

When Lockh ed had completed the firstfew Model 322-Bs, British te t pilots had achance to examine the aircraft. The dateof this encounter has gone unrecorded, butit appears that the company initiat d pro-duction of the foreign-ord I' aircraft atmuch the same time as the YP-38s were

Three to Britain

the P-38 exhibited unacceptable 'high-altitude/high- peed characteristics', whichseems a contradiction in terms for an inter-ceptor fighter. Had their comments I' ferredto high-altitude flying without the b nefit ofsuperchargers, it might have been w1der-standable, although other drawback can-not be ruled out. The Lightning was poten-tially very fa t ~ I' its day, ro the point wheresome doubts weI' raised as to whether thepilot could control it under all flight condi-tions. Thi also strikes a somewhat discor-dant n te, a the aircraft wa 'red-lined' at amodest 300mph (4 Okm/h). The I' portedcomment may have reflected Lo kheed'sapprehension over th effects of compress-ibility, which, a was later confirmed, couldprevent a propeller-driven fighter from afe-ly exceeding 500mph ( OOkm/h) in a divewithout airframe modification or some formof aerodynamic braking.

Doubts were also voiced as to how a tri-cycle-undercarriage aircraft would take tooperating from the traditional Briti h gra srunway, but thi may have been a thinly-veiled excuse ro mask the conclu ion thatnobody in the BPC really seemed to likthe Lockheed Lightning.

Added ro this general relu tance weresome ontractural difficulties with Lock-heed, which 1 d to Britain finally cancellingthe entire Mod 1322 order. Here one canympathize with the cu romer's reluc-

tance, as before the pa sing of the Lend-Lea e Bill of 1941 Britain would have hadto pay millions of pound in hard currencyfor a substantial number of French-derivedP-38s it had not actually ordered, and in aconfiguration it did not really want.

Th U AA emerged the clear winnerfrom the European P-38 episode. It gainedplenty of new fighters that became usefullow-altitude trainer, aircraft that wouldhave been time-consuming and costly toadapt to US front-line standards. In addi-tion, the P-38 acquired its enduring name.It was originally to be called the Atlanta,but Lockheed opted for the British-favouredLightning, a mor appropriat choice.

British te t pilots had apparently com-mented somewhat negatively on Am ricanflight-test reports (pre umably for boththe XP-38 and YP-38) and decided that

Too Hot?

lIniss H. lA Tomahawk, which both111ntries had ordered, but Lockheed

Ihllllght thi a poor arrangement. One canI'reciate the sc pticism. The company

h I I Je igned a potentially good high-alti-1\ I fighter that was gradually bing com-I Iltni ed for a completely different role.

l verthele s, the early 'export' examples1111 nded for Britain became kn wn by theI Ignation Lightning Mk I, and weI'

ltnplet d at Burbank as pecifi d.Although e timates had suggested that

\ Model 322-61 would have performed11 en ugh without uperchargers below

2 ,000ft (6,OOOm), a subsequently proved" he the ca e, actual tests apparently

t futed the fact. Poor higher-altitude per-nrmance figures were not 10 t on Britain's

t presentatives, who noted that the Model\22-61 was said to be particularly disap-

lInting when fitted with the specifiedllison CIS engine.Had the perceived technical difficulties

I en overcome, the RAF would almo t cer-I linly have at least attempted ro fit thelightning into its order of battle, although11 i difficult to envisage quite how, givenIhe situation Britain faced in 1940. While,Iwaiting the tum of ev nt and the buildingIlf a Fighter Command ground-attack forcem late 1940-41, there might well haveI 'en room for a second fa t, well-arm dtwin-engine fighter as a companion to theWestland Whirlwind, but it was not ro bethe Lockheed Lightning. Had the RAF1,Iken d livery, the first 143 Model 322Lightning Mk Is would have been followedhy 524 Lightning Mk lIs, fitted with super-charger and counter-rotating prop llers.

Although the lack of turbocharging hasheen cited as on of the reasons for non-,lCceptance of the P-3 by Britain, they werenot pecified by France. A srory also wentround at the tim that the Am rican werereluctant ro hare their turbocharge,r tech-nology with a foreign power, or could n tproduce enough of them to fit foreign air-craft, but thi has no basis in fact either.More reali tic was the possibility that Gen-eral Electric would have been hard-put rosupply enough turbochargers ro equip all theLightning Mk Is and American P-38s.

The armistice left the Model 322-F withouta replacement customer, but French enthu-siasm for the aircraft had led the BPC toarrange for flight te t (th details of thesedo not appear to have survived) and forrepor];!>. on the YP-38 to be made availabl .With the war on the C ntinent goingalarmingly against the Allie, Britain furtheragreed, on 5 June 1940, to purchase all 667export model order d jointly with theFrench. This I venth-hour transfer of allFr nch and Anglo-French order to Britainwa completed by payment of a ymbolic 1.

As Lockheed 322-61 , these 'castratedLightnings', a they were disparaginglyknown at Burbank, were unsuperchargedand had both propeller rotating in theame (right-hand) direction. The latter

feature came about because Britain andFrance had de ired gearing commonalitywith the Alii on engine fitted into the

British Interest

Before Germany attacked France and theLow Countries on 10 May 1940, Americanfactories attempted to meet a backlog ofEuropean order, but the 'Phoney War' wasabout to end. France was still awaiting manyUS aircraft when the German onslaughtbegan, and the nation quickly provedunable to counter th enemy's Bliczkreigtactics. From America the Armee de i'Airhad received the Curtiss Hawk 75, Martin167 Maryland and Douglas DB7 lightb mber in time to see combat in 1940, butthese, plus some excell nt indigenous war-planes, proved inad quat to the task.

A scant nin months since the war'sbeginning had proved far too short a time forUS industry to gear up for ma productionon the scale required. Lockheed's promisingnew fighter became an incidental casualty ofthe Battle ofFrance, a no Model 322-Fs hadbeen built, let alone shipped, before Francwa obliged to agree an armi tice with Ger-many on 22 June 1940. Lockh ed and othercompanies had gained from foreign orders,as these early ca h al funded the begin-nings of the 'ar enal of democracy' thatbecame so vital to Allied victory.

Time Runs Out

B (for 'Britain'), alias Mod 1322-61-04 orsimply 322-61 in Lockheed records. Theshorter and more convenient designationP-322 wa ub qu ntly used.

78

Busy AprilWhen the French Commission vi itedLockheed in April 1940 it wa able to eYP-38 production at first hand. Had a com-plete example been available the ban onforeign pilots flying new and 'secret' U air-craft may not have prevented a French te tpilot from flying the YP-38, but member ofthe Commission were apparently able togather enough data to confirm that the P-3 could serve their country well. In anyevent, the Frenchmen clearly liked whatthey saw and heard. It was unfortunate thatnone of the visitors, or their Americanhosts, had any clear idea of the time avail-able for the completion and d liv ry of air-craft to Europe. All that was certain wasthat Hitler would make a move and proba-bly strike in the West against France. HadLockheed been aware of what was to hap-pen the very next month, it w uld almostcertainly not have had any French visitorthat April.

Had there been no French order, for igninterest in the P-3 would not nece arilyhave evaporated. During that ame Aprilthe Briti h Purchasing Commi sion (BPC)igned a joint agreement with the French

to purchase a combined total of 667 P-3 .The examples intended for Britain wereordered under the designation Model 322-

might 0 ten ibly have been th opti n fthe engine having int gral (m chanical)supercharger, a in Briti h pra tic, thoughAlii on did n t produ e any such engineduring the war. The French vel' ion, whichhad a faired air-intake cover fitted in placeof the turbine wheel, wa given the uffix'F' for 'Franc ' and further identified byLockh d a the Model 322-61-03. Thepowerplant chosen for the French exportversion comprised two Alii on V-I 710-ISs, rated at 1,090hp ( 10kW) at 14,000ft(4,250m) and driving unhanded propellers.Thi c mbination wa 'guaranteed' by Lock-he d to provide a top speed of 400mph (645km/h) at 16,900ft (5,150m). The aircraftwere to be fitted with French radio, arma-ment, instrumentation and engine throt-tle operation, which fun tioned in theoppo ite manner to American practice.

War had broken out in Europ in ep-tember 19 9, but there wa a lull in thefighting after Poland capitulated and thereappeared to b a breathing pace for thecombatant powers in Western Europe totake delivery of US equipment.

types were ordered from Ameri an c mp -nies, among them the P- 8, which had beenof intere t to the Cornice du MaceTiel and theEeac Major ince the pring of 1938. Frenchpurcha ing of US aircraft had begun earlier,on 26 January that year, with 115 MartinMaryland medium bombers. By the end ofthe year th I'd I' bo k had welled to over2,000 aircraft.

The French mission unwittinglyannoyed the Americans, who faced a dilem-ma. On the one hand they were very pleasedto except for ign funding to boost theirindustry, but n the other they wanted toen ure that the U AA had 'first refusal'on new projects such as the XP-38. Thecountry wa al 0 neutral, and until Francewas actually at war the ban on foreign saleswa publicly adhered to. Th re were ways tocircumvent the ban, provided the Fr nchwent through the proper channels and keptPresident Roo evelt fully informed. Thepre ident, alth ugh mindful f the threat ofwar in Europe, continued to face a powerfuli olati ni t lobby, and the tricky situationwas not helped by the fatal crash of the Dou-glas DB-7 prototype on 23 January 1939. Itwas revealed that one of the victims was aFr nch ob rver who had been on boardwithout anyone' knowl dge of the fact.Then, on 1July, the French aviation journal[;Air published a silhouette and full detailsof the XP- 8, which Lockheed and theU AAC felt was premature, at the veryleast. 'Hap' Arnold I' mained of the opinionthat new aircraft should not be sold over eauntil his own force had been re-equipped,and that would take time. 0 amount ofFrench money could speed up the process ofaircraft manufacture, and there was limitedcapacity to build the hundreds of fighterand bombers on order in the timescalrequired by France.

However, the French government sawth P-3 a omething of a cornerstone ofa future Armee de i'AiT inventory. It wasenvisaged as an eventual repla em nt forthree types, the Breguet 700, Potez 671and Sud-Est S.E.100 twin-engine fighter,all of which were then under develop-ment. These types were designed to meetthe C.2 (two-seat fighter) and .2 (two-seat nightfighter) government requir-ments and none had yet flown.

The Almee de i'Air further anticipatedoperation by P-38s taking place at low tomedium levels, one reason why the Frenchdid not specify the fitting of the Gen ralElectric turbosuperchargers that were asignificant feature of the design. There

BURBA K' BEAUTY

Herman R. 'Fish' almon and ick Nichol-son, Lockheed production test pilot. MiloBurcham remained chief production te tpilot for Lockheed throughout the P-38programme, and Ben Kelsey stayed at Bur-bank until he entered the Service and wentto England. Also hired on a temporaryondment were USAA pilot, most ofwhom were drawn from the initial erviceunit, the 1st Pursuit Group. Major ignaGilkey of the USAAF also undertooknumerous early test flights.

Further from home for much of the warwere the company's field representative,who advised on any technical changes

Sergeant H. L. Southwood feeds ammunition into the magazine of a P-38F-1at the Goxhill press day on 29 July 1942, while Cpl Warren C. Grider shouldersthe belt. IWM

27

Test-Pilot TeamLockheed needed a mall army of produc-tion test pilots to fly every P-38 that cameoff the line before d livery to the customer.Among the intrepid souls who undertookthi work were Avery Black, CharlieBrennen, Tom Kennedy, Jimmy Mattern,

basic fighter/fighter-bomber role, but mostof these would be overtaken by events. Theaircraft was to ee service only as a land-based fighter and the U AAF's principal PRaircraft for the duration of the war.

The business end of a P-38 in England, showing to advantage the groupingof the gun barrels. The central white spot in the panel below the nose capwas the gun-camera port on early aircraft. Aeroplane

CHAPTER TWO

Angels in OverallsThe heading for this chapter was a sloganIIseJ during the Second World War tol'mphasize the P-38's 'maid-of-all-work'.Ibility to undertake various roles painted111 the drab USAAF camouflage universal-ly adopted for combat aircraft in 1940.These roles increased when Lightning pro-duction got into its stride after a slow start,hoosted by the first overseas order. At atllne when military aviation was makingrapid advanc in both passive and offen-sive capability, all US companies put in alot of work to stay competitive. Lockheedattempted to broaden the base of the light-ning by exploring various alternatives to the

stricken from USAAF charge (' urveyed'in American nomenclature). In mo tin tances this meant a short delay in a jour-ney to h smelters, and although numer-ous 'Limey Lightnings' did survive to theend of hostilities in 1945, they too wereunceremoniously scrapped.

19 Feb 1937

27 Jan 1939

11 Feb 1939*

27 April 1939

1July 1939

20 Sept 1939April 1940

10 May 1940

5June 1940

22 June 1940

30 August 1940

17 Sept 1940

March 1941

31 March 1941

8 April 1941

June 1941

4 Nov 1941**

Dec 1941 - March 1942

30 April 1942

Significant Dates, Early P-38s

20

German invasion of France

AC Type Specification X-60B issuedFirst flight (XP-3B)Coast-to-coast dash (XP-38)First USAAC YP-38 order (13 a/c)Model 22 details published in France

First USAAC order (66 a/c)French order for Model 322-F

British 'to purchase' Model 322-B

France signs armistice

Follow-on USAAC order (41 0a/c)First flight of YP-3B

First YP-3B delivered to USAAF

Total P-3Bs in US service (4)BPC views P-3BE at Wright Field

Last YP-3B delivery

YP-3B lost in dive test

RAE tests (of AF1 07)A&AEE tests of AF1 06 (from)

Prototype destroyed Test pilot Ralph Vinden killed

Out to grass in 1945-46, an appropriately numbered early P-38 awaits its inevitablefate at the hands of the scrap dealers. On the right is P-38F (no suffix) 41-7524.WTL via R.L. Ward

offront-line units, an I by late 1943/early1944 the Arizona base was the USA's onlyremaining P-38 flight school.

When their part in the supply of combatpilots had been compl ted, some of theStateside training unit clo ed down in1944, and most of the Lockheed twi ns were

factory and had RAF round I and erialnumbers applied, the latter marking bingretained for some time, even after the Unational in ignia was substituted. The eaircraft were almost unique in the Uinv ntory in having no U AAF s rialnumber identification, although othertypes, such as Airacobras and P-40 , car-ried thi indicator of their 'foreign order'origins. British erials were retained on theP-322s and used as radio call ign. Thisfurther stamped them as being a bit differ-ent, and when they were later repaintedduring their ervice as trainers the serialscontinued to be used, though there is orneevid nce that a numerical sy tern was laterintroduced, in line with standard U AAFpractice.

Worthy TrainerBy all account the castrated Lightning, farfrom being a widely-reported dud, was a'hot ship' that proved very valuable in thlow-l vel-training role, a role that USAAFfighters increasingly adopted as the natureof the tactical war changed in th variousoversea theatres. Joining some of themany unit attached to the U A-ba ed1 t, 2nd, 3rd and 4th Air Force the RP-322s ended up in locations as wide apart as

an Bernardino, California, yracuse,ew York, and Williams Field in Arizona

(see Appendix 4). The early 'RAF' Light-nings erved mainly with advanced flyingtraining quadrons, an assignm nt thatorne individuals, particularly instructors,

would hav viewed as tougher than com-bat on occa ion.

Pilots ~ und the RP-322 signifi andylighter compared with other P-38s and con-siderablyea ier to handle. It wa an unu ualsituation, wherein cadet Service pilots weregiven the chance to fly a fighter unham-pered by weighty GFE (Government Fur-nished Equipment) that was the norm whenthey reached a combat unit. The RP-322sdisplayed the fine handling characteristicsu ually experienced and enjoyed only by testpilot. Their lighter weight was pardy due tothe reduced armament of two 0.30in andtwo 0.50in machine-guns, no cannon beingfitted, reportedly.

At William Field tudent pilot general-ly flew the orth American AT-6 and twin-engine urtiss AT-9 Jeep before transition-ing to the RP-322 to complete the course asfighter or PR pilots. The training curriculumchanged in line with the requirements

side. Distinguished by a 'step' in the lead-ing dge to enable access to the film mag-azin , this modified pylon wa later fittedto all subsequent P-38 models. Earlier air-craft had the gun camera mounted in theextreme nose, but the film suffered fromvibration wh n the gun were fired, hencethe change in location.

elf-sealing fuel tank w re in tailed, anda low-pressure oxygen sy tem was fitted, aswas a circular landing light that retractedinto the underside of the port wing.

The P-38D's engin w re Alii on V-171O-27/29s with the arburettor air coopsstill covered by fairings forward of theturbo wheel on top of each boom. Normalfuel capacity remained at 2l0U gal(79511'1'). Maximum internal fu 1capacitywas reduced from 410 to 300U gal (1,552to 1,13611'1'). Most of the thirty-six P-3 Ds(40- 774-40-809) were deployed a com-bat trainers in the U A under the desig-nation RP-3 D.

Lightning production remain d fru -tratingly slow. By 15 August 1941 onlythirty-nine aircraft had been delivered tothe USAAF despite a gradually expandingworkforce at Burbank. [n ept mber thLightning was nevertheless available toparticipate in the important rna no uvresheld by the Army in Louisiana to test cur-rent U AAF tactic and equipment.

By the time of P arl Harb rth U AAFinventory of front-line combat aircraftincluded sixty-nine P-38Ds, some of whichwere issued to the 1st and 14th FGs a anexpedient mea ure.

With the USA at war, Lockheed furtherimproved production rate to produce theP-3 E. In ovember 1941, shortly beforethe 'Day oflnfamy', the company wa able,undoubtedly with some relief, to announcethat an E model had become the one-hun-dredth lightning off the production line.

P-38E

Specification - P-38D (Lockheed Model 222)One Allison V-17l 0-27 (port) and one V-17l 0-29 (starboardIproviding 1.150hp (860kW)each for take-off.

Empty ll,780lb 15,343kgi; gross l4,4561b (6,557kg).As previous models.

Maximum speed 390mph (628km/h); time to climb to 20.000ft (6,000mI8min;range (normal) 400 miles (640km).One 37mm cannon, two 0.50in machine-guns, two 0.30in machine-guns.Armament:

Powerplant:

Dimensions:

Weights:

Performance:

to be a useful x rci e, yielding valuabledata for the XP-39. Joe Towle undertookmanufacturer's trials between May ando c mber 1942, after which the XP-38Awas pa ed to th U AAF 0 appreciableadvantage was envi aged in fitting a pres-sure cabin to standard P-38s, however.

23

P-38B and P-38C

triving to off; I' the P-38 a a true combat-worthy fighter, Lockheed initiated produc-tion of the P-38D in August 1941. Thi vari-ant, differing from previous models only ininternal equipment, derived further benefitfrom combat r p rt from the war in Europe.A 20mm A -Ml cannon (Hi pano-Suizapattern, licen e built by Bendix) wainstalled in place of the heavier 37mm gunin the P-38-L . This change enabled themod st fifteen-r und ammunition load ofthe larger cannon to be incr a ed to a muchmore practical 150 round.

The gun were sighted via a LynnIn trument Company Model L-3 opticalI' fl ctor gun ight, and a Type A - -6gunsight-aiming point camera wa mount-ed in the bomb shackI pylon on the port

P-38D-LO

These designation wer re erved for twoversions proposed by Lockheed in ovem-bel' and October 1939 respectively, but nei-ther wa proc eded with. It appears thatb th variant w uld have failed to conformto US War Department criteria as combataircraft, and LoclJleed passed on l' the 0model, which was a step towards that goal.

The introduction of the '0' designator isunder tood to have been an attempt by theU AAC to id ntify everal early modelsof U warplanes such as the P-38D, Con-olidated B-24D and Republic PA7D asuitable for combat operations. This

would help xplain the 'mi ing' P-3 Band - designation.

P-38A was not uncommon with initial produc-tion runs of US aircraft, Lockh d builtthe first batch of P-38s without any suffix,lpart from the company designator. Thusthe next twenty-nine aircraft built (40-744-40-761 and 40-763-40-773) after theYP were known imply as P-38-LO. 0change in powerplant was made, the Alli-son V-I 710-27/29 installation of the YP-3 being r tain d.

The one-piec 'cl aI" wind cr n of theYPs gave way to a framed section whichcurved round at the sides, forward of theroll-down id windows. A part of the addi-tional 'combat quipment' a eparate bullet-proof windscreen was add d ub equ ntly,this being set inside the screen directly infront of the pilot. The very pointed spinnersof the YP-3 were slightly rounded off tomake them ea ier to manufacture.

The armam nt fitted to the P-38 com-prised a 37mm cannon and four 0.50inmachine-guns. Armour plate, bullet-proofgla and fluore cent in trument lightingfor night flying were al 0 added. 01'int nded for combat, the P-38 were giv nan RP (Restricted Pursuit) prefix in 1942.

One interesting experiment with thefir l' P-38, 40-744, concerned an asymmet-ric cockpit I cation. With the turbocharg-er removed there was just en ugh room toinstall a cockpit in the port boom. In thisunique aircraft the second seat was usuallyoccupied by a flight surgeon, who was ableto monitor the occupant of the tandardcockpit in the central nac lie. Only oneconversion was carried out.

lontrols, but very few aircraft would haveIncorporated these after the need for themexpired.

There was no P-3 A model a uch. How-ever, the nineteenth P-38, 40-762, becamethe XP-38A, with which Lockheed soughtto increase the high-altitude capability ofthe lightning by adding a pre ure cabin.Powered by Alii n V-1710-27 and -29engines, the aircraft was modified to offsetthe weight of the pressurization equipmentby increasing the length of the tail booms.It was planned to I' place th 37mm can-non with a lighter 20mm weapon in thivariant, but in the event no armament wasfitted. Under the direction of project engi-neer M. Carl Haddon the project proved

XP-38A

former epicyclic type, which required thengine thru l' line to be raised. Twin ellipti-

cal cooling intake replaced the lip intakeof the XP-38's much slimmer cowlings, thaircraft consequently taking on the famil-iar shape of mo l' of the early Lightningmodels. The radiator intakes on each sideof the tail booms were also widened andgreatly enlarged to incorporate the turboexhausts. The originally pecified armamentinstallation of a quartet of 011' Browning0.50in machine-guns wa changed to two0.30i n (wi th 500 round p r gun (rpg))and two 0.50in machine-guns (21 Orpg) plusa 37mm cannon with fifteen rounds. TheYPs were fitted with armament during alengthy programm of Service test flying,m st of thi being undertaken by theArmy. The s cond YP-38, 39-690, went tothe ational Advisory ommittee forAeronautics ( ACA) test site at Langley,Virginia, on 27 ovember 1941, andremained there until 4 February 1942.

P-322

Wider-spaced teardrop or 'pen-knib' intakeswith distinctive fairing w re a feature ofthe foreign-contract P-322s, which wereoth rwise externally similar to the YPs butwere power d by the Allison 'C' seriesengine. The new cowlings introduced athird re-contouring of the Model 22 in thiarea. everal internal change includingthe French-derived instrumentation andthe specified 'reverse' action of orne of the

XP-38

number weI' changed only when theextent of modification of the basic de ignwas significant enough to warrant it. Thusseveral similar variants were covered byone model number. Th breakdown was:Model 22 (XP-38); Model 122 (YP-38);Model 222 (P-38D to P-38H); Model 422(P-38J and P-38L). Model 322 covered theFrench/British contract aircraft, and the'one-off' XP-38A wa the Model 622. Atype-by-type breakdown of P-3 variantsfollow.

tartlingly futuristic by 1939 standards, theXP-38 was powered by Allison V-I7l0-1l1-15s enclosed by extremely clo e, tap ringcowlings that terminated in pointed spin-ner . Below each nacelle was a retractable

il-cooler intake, and the mall straight-edg d boom intakes for th superchargerswere Ie than half the size of the bulbouunits fitted to ub equent model. A sepa-rate pipe for th turbo exhau l' wa situatedon the top of each boom, to the rear of theturbine wheels.

YP-38

ompared with th prototype, the thir-l' en pre-production YPs differed in severalre pects, though the change were subtland virtually indistinguishable. The V-1710-27/-29 engine had B-2 uperchargerand spur reduction gear instead of the

22

that combat unit might have wanted tomake to the P-3 . Th Lockheed 'techreps' worked, often with their counterpartfrom engine manufacturer Alii on, toensure that any revision to configurationwere within d sign limitati ns and wouldnot endanger pilots or aircraft.

Lockheed's tech rep in England waTony LeVier, who was a great a set to thecompany a both an engineer and pilot.LeVier joined Lockheed as a test pilot in1942, making his fir l' flight in a P-38 on 1July that year. By combining technicalknowledge and flying skill LeVier made anideal company representative, though thidual ability created a small problem forhim. As tech reps were not usually pilots,LeVier occupied a unique position, one hecomplicated further by gaining first-handknowledge of lightning operations.Spending a period with the 55th FighterGroup (FG) in England, h fl won at leastten combat mis ion. While he was over-eas LeVier also developed the habit of

saluting everyone of rank to avoid awk-ward questions about exactly who he waand what he did, as an individual wearingU AAC uniform devoid of any insigniainevitably cau ed a few rai ed eyebrow!

Model NumbersLockheed allocated six separate modelnumbers to the P-3 programme, plus onecovering the XP-3 A. In general, model

In flight. the VP-38 looked every inch the war winner the lightning would eventually be. but it took timeto get it into service in the required numbers. Aeroplane

cure for aeronautical mysteries, confirmedthat 'tuck-under' (a strong tendency for adive to steepen, especially at high Machnumbers, that wa a manifestation of com-pressibility) OCCUlT d only wh n the P-38was dived at Mach number above 0.6.The wind tunnel test results further howedthat the problem wa due to the build-upof hock waves on the wings and fuselage,and Lockheed introduced redesigned wingfillets a a remedy.

The 100 P-38F-5s completed all hadprovision to carry drop tanks or bombfitted as standard. The racks could alsocarry a 'smoke curtain' installation usual-ly consisting of a teardrop- haped M-1smoke (or cylindrical M-33 chemical)canister on each wing rack, the nozzles ofwhich were able to lay a dense creen whendispensed from low altitude. Despite thiscapability, th actual use of smok tankwas limited.

P-38F-5s also had revised landing lights,desert (tropical) equipment and oth rchanges, in luding the -3B gunsight,which wa to remain th standard ightinginstrument up to the P-3 J-5. From thismodel onwards three identification lightscoloured amber, green and red, readingfrom front to back, were set in arm vablein peetion panel in the fuselage underside.White navigation lights were et into theouter face of each fin surface and wereretained on all models. The twenty-nineP-3 F-Us and 121 P-3 F-15s were theremaining ex-British-order Lightning Mklls (Model 322-60-19 ) brought up to 'Ftandard in term of equipment, withuperchargers and handed propeller.

The P-38F-15 als introduc d an 8-d gr e flap p sition. Thi o-called'manoeuvre setting' for the Lo kheed-Fowler flaps wa an actuator modificati nthat enabl d the flaps to be deployed atindi at d air sp ed of up to 250mph(400km/h) thereby inducing a significantincr ase in the machine' ability to turnwithout tailing. The P-3 wa r nownedfor its gentle turn characteristi s, and couldbe wracked r und impre sively tightly tomaintain the turn at 1,000ft (300m) alti-tude with a little as 100mph (l60km/h)'on the clock'. Th aircraft gave plenty ofwarning when on the edge of a stall, andrarely, if ever, napped into a spin.

The opening top section of the cockpitcanopy was provided with a rear hinge dur-ing the latter end of P-3 F production, thewind-down side windows r maining theame a before.

25

to carry twO 155/165U gal (5 6/625Itr)drop tank or two 1,0001b bombs n thewing-cen tre-s ction hardpoints. The F-1wa fitted with an N-3 gun ight and, as itbecame standard practice to update radio,the P-3 F-l was fitted with R-5 5 and

CR-522 ets incorporating identificationfriend or foe (IFF).

Seeking an answer to the compr ssibili-ty problem that, at very least, wa damag-ing the reputation of the P-38, ACA'sAm s Aeronautical Laboratory at Moff ttField, California, took delivery of P-3 F-141-7632 on 30 Dec mber 1942. ubject-ing th aircraft to a thorough serie of testin the laboratory's 16ft (4.9m) windtunneldid not yield a sur remedy, but the figuresgained added weight to the pra ticality ofinstalling dive flaps in later-m del light-nings. Ames' engineers, who had no magic

Empty 11,880lb (5,389kgl; gross 14.4241b (6,643kgl.One 20mm cannon, four 0.50in machine-guns.

Weights:

Armament:

Specification - P-38E (lockheed Model 222)AS FOR P380 EXCEPT

Having revised the P-38 as a result of com-prehensive tests of early models, Lockheedturn d its attention to what was to be thefirst of the breed to see widespread combat,the P-38F. A the P-3 F-LO, the first air-craft, 41-2293, made its maiden flight inMarch 1942, and d liverie started imme-diately. Orders totalling 527 aircraft om-prised 377 ordered by the AAF and 150of the ex-French/British ord r aircraftbrought up to this standard.

All of the P-3 F were powered by1,325hp (988kW) Allison V-1710-49/53sand had standard armament, though fur-ther detail changes necessitated five differ-ent production blocks. There were 128 P-38F-LO, followed by 149 P-38F-1-LO ,the latter being modified after completion

P-38F

The cockpit of the early P-38s changed little. with the half-wheel control dominating.A cannon button is on the right arm, above the dive-limitation warning chart.Aeroplane

4,6 and 2in (25, 101, 152 and 50mm). Thisallowed a more direct feed for the beltedammunition and alleviated the jammingsometimes xperienc d on earlier models.

everal E models were among the firstLightnings to be made capable of carryingexternal fuel tanks on Inter tate D- 20bomb shackles attached to the main par,the necessary pylons being fitted under theinboard wing panels and stressed to takeoverload tanks of up to 300U gal(l,U6Itr), which wer often fin- tabilized.

rmal xternal tank capacity wa155/165U gal (586/625Itr) Wing pylonswere among the mo t important modifica-tion introduced for the P-3 , and theextra fuel brought total fuel tankage up to410U gal (l,552Itr).

Individual P-3 Es were used for a vari-ety of manufacturer' te t , including the'beard' radiator configuration adopted forth P-38J. The P-38E u I for th radiatortests was 41-1983, which also flew withother items of equipment later incorporat-ed into the P-3 J and the ole P-3 K pro-totype. One P-38E, 41-1986, wa adaptedwith a raised tailplane in connection withthe ea Lightning f10atplane proposaldescribed later.

Another P-38E, 41-204 , was radicallymodified to gather data on laminar-flowwing sections. The central nacelle wastretched to accommodate a second seat,resulting in the only Lightning to have fulldual controls. The wing and fuselage mod-ification brought about the name 'Sw rd-fish', a also de cribed later.

Although Britain had cancelled its 'mainorder' for P-38s, its association with theaircraft did not end completely. An exam-ple of the then-current production P-38Ewa made available to th BPC at WrightField on 8 April 1941. While the resultswere by then of little more than academicinterest, the British view of the P-38 appearsto have become more po itive. In part, there ulting te t report stated that th air-craft exhibited pleasant-enough handlingcharacteristics, and although the eleva-tor appeared heavy, the stall at 7 mph(l25km/h) with flap and undercarriageextended was traight~ rward. ingle-engine flying with the installed Allison V-1710- ISs was also stated to be 'comfort-able'. Even if the British tests had beeneven m re po itive, it is doubtful wh the I'the RAF would ever have flown the P-3in action, principally because of the diffi-culties Lockheed would have faced insupplying it in sufficient numbers.

A

24

production P-38Es. Radio communicationwas by an S R-274N set.

All models up to and including the P-3 E had a right-hand, sideways-openingtop canopy section, but thi wa hinged atthe rear on all subsequent model. Thepitot head was still mounted under thefuselage nose in the E model, before beingmoved out below the port wing on the P-38F. The P-38E wa al 0 the la t model tohave the original long no ewh el doortha