WI: NACA Modified P-38

Ch.16 - The Next Lightning (Apr 1943)
20 April 1943
Burbank, California, USA


Beneath the elaborately painted canvas awning which stretched over the entirety of the Lockheed production facility, Ralph Virden walked among the rows and rows and freshly completed P-38’s. In the past few days the first few dozen P-38H’s had started to roll off the assembly floor and were now having their final checks and getting all of the little details added that they would need before delivery to the Army Air Force.

Today, though, Ralph would be flying AAF serial number 42-13566 which was the last of nine P-38G-15-LO’s that Lockheed kept as testing and development planes. The airplane had been part of the P-38H development group and so had previously been upgraded to P-38H-1-LO standards but had also recently been upgraded even further.

The modifications to meet P-38H-1-LO standards were extensive and included:
  • New Allison F-17 engines (V-1710-89/91)
  • A new War Emergency Power setting offering 60 in/Hg. of boost
  • Automated Coolant and Oil Radiator flaps
  • Automated Inter-cooler exit shutters
  • A new cabin heater and ventilation system
  • Minor improvements to the cockpit switch layouts
  • Re-designed magazine and ammunition feed for the AN/M2 machine guns
  • Removal of the spent cartridge ejection chute control from the cockpit
  • Removal of the manual gun charging handle from the cockpit
  • Combination of machine gun and cannon switches
In addition, the airplane was set to receive a new A/N-M2C 20mm Cannon by the Army as well as new radios, which allowed Lockheed to completely remove the low band aerial antenna and its associated wires which used to run from the tops of the vertical stabilizers to a post behind the cockpit. From what Ralph had heard, these were almost always removed in combat groups anyway since the military did not use low band radio in Theater.

The new heating and ventilation system was a great improvement over the previous models. Ralph had been involved with some of the testing several weeks prior after the order came down from the Air Corps to replace the existing system with one similar to that used in a P-39. Where the old heater system drew air through blast tubes on the upper nacelles and ran around the hot exhaust pipes to heat the air before ducts brought it under ram pressure through the center wing section to the cockpit, the new system consisted of a simple air-box placed directly behind the coolant radiators about half-way along the center wing span. The air boxes collect hot air from the radiator exit and pipe it directly into the cockpit with one vent on the cockpit floor between the rudder pedals and another vent stretching around the forward dash to blow hot air directly onto the front windshield to prevent any fogging or icing at high altitude. The engineers kept the old blast heat in place to continue providing heat to the armament compartment while the old cockpit floor heat duct was terminated in the radio compartment to reduce fogging on the rear canopy and minimize the risk of icing to the hydraulic regulator.

Cockpit ventilation had also been improved by moving the old cold-air inlet from the left wing-root farther outboard and mirroring the setup of the right side. The new vent inlets were now integrated into the leading edge slots and consisted of three inch flaps above the coolant radiator which could drop to form a small scoop up to three inches down into the air stream. The new heating and cooling vents were controlled together by two small levers on either side of the cockpit. The lever on the left controlled the mix of hot and cold to the floor vent, while that on the right changed the airflow mixture going to the windshield vent.

In testing at the end of March, Tony LeVier had reported flying an airplane with the new heat/vent system at 35,000 feet with an Outside Air Temperature of around -65°F (-54°C) for one hour and was able to keep the cockpit above 35°F (2°C) the entire time. At lower altitudes of between 25,000 and 30,000 feet Ralph himself was able to fly the airplane for more than two hours and maintain the cockpit at a cozy 60°F or warmer.

Another modification, made possible by the new heating system and the removal of the old floor heat duct, was the rearranging of the trim tab control wheels to a single location on the raised center console directly between the pilot’s legs. A transverse wheel at the rear controlled aileron trim, a longitudinal wheel to the left for elevator trim, and the same turn knob front and center for rudder trim control as always.

Not all of the desired improvements were available or ready by the time H-model production started either because of continued development or due to lagging production from the required sub-contractors; so, even though the Block-1 P-38H’s were only just starting to come off the line the production teams were already preparing for Block-5 production and were starting to test the final round of improvements for would be called Block-10.

The Block-5 airplanes were scheduled to replace the old electrical fuses from their hard to reach locations in the nose at the rear of the armament compartment and in the forward landing gear bay with a new electrical circuit breaker system in the cockpit to the pilot’s right directly in front of the flap control lever. The breaker system had already been tested in three different configurations on airplanes #41-13563, #42-13564, and #42-13566 and the final production models were expected to use the breaker boxes and arrangement from #566.

This new electrical system was, in turn, the pre-requisite for the improvements being worked on upstream for the planned Block-10 airplanes which would include a completely revised engine switch box including new unified energizer/mesh switches for each engine, an automatic engine primer combined with the oil-dilution switch, simplified engine master switches, and a new electro-mechanical fuel management system with automatic fuel booster pump switching.

Ralph knew from talking with Tony LeVier that the fuel management system, in particular, would be a great improvement but from his personal experience he was more excited about the starter controls. Flying the variations of the P-38 since the old YP-38’s nearly three years prior the biggest hassle for him had always been the lack of a third hand to get the engines turning.

Sitting down into the cockpit of the modified #566, Ralph reviewed the new controls before going through the revised pre-flight checklist and start up procedures. The most obvious visible difference is the new electric fuel control box on the lower left of the instrument panel where the old gun charging selector knob used to be and conveniently placed directly below the fuel gauges. This box was dominated by a single large four-position free-turning dial with each 90° position corresponding to a tank selection (clockwise from the 12 o’clock position): MAIN, RESERVE, EXTERNAL, and OUTER WING. Above this knob, at approximately the 10 o’clock and 2 o’clock location were two small fuel level check/warning lamps; while directly below it were two Fuel Selector Override switches, one for each side.

Looking down and to his left, next to the seat behind the landing gear lever, Ralph noted that the old manual fuel selector valves were still installed with a fifth position, CROSS-SUCTION between the MAIN and RESERVE positions. Behind these two valves was the Auxiliary Fuel Control switch box witch had the two Fuel Booster Pump Speed Control switches and a single Outer Wing Tank Low Level Check button.

Directly in front, beyond the offset yoke and at the bottom of the instrument panel, was the Main Switch Box. The new box had been re-organized to simplify start up and basic operations. The circular Ignition circuit was more-or-less the same with a central Ignition Master switch and two individual engine ignition turn switches which control the individual magnetos on each side.

Left of the Ignition control were the two new Fuel Pump/Dilution switches, one for each engine. These now operate by being OFF when all the way down, ON when locked in their center position, and when pressed all the way forward act as the Oil Dilution Switches which automatically return to ON when released.

These switches were directly related to the two starter switches. Where on previous airplanes there was a switch to energize the starters and separate switch to engage the starters, with one engine being activated when the switches were down and the other when the switches were up; the new switches now each controlled their own engine. When down the starters were OFF, when pushed halfway forward they energized the starters and (so long as the Fuel Pump switches were ON) automatically primed the engine, and when forced all the way forward through a resistant stop they engaged the starters. These new switches were designed to simplify engine start and enable simultaneous startup of both engines, something that was impossible with the only starter switches.

To the right of the starter switches was the Pitot Heat switch, the Position Lights switch, the Landing Lights switch, and finally the battery switch—all of which were simple OFF/ON type switches. Beyond this was the same Voltmeter that was installed.

On the front of the Main Switch Box were now only six switches in three circuits and two round rheostats. Each circuit had two switches for Left and Right sides and were, from Left to Right: Oil Flap Override, Coolant Flap Override, and Intercooler Shutter Override. These each operated the exact same way and enable the pilot to manually open or close the respective flaps and exit shutters separate from the automated system installed in all H-Model airplanes. The override switches were at AUTO when centered and the automatic system could control the flaps. Moving the switch up would override the automated system fully close the respective flap or shutter and, conversely, moving the switch down would override the system and fully open the appropriate flap or shutter.

Farther to the right, below the Voltmeter were the Cockpit light Rheostat knob and the Gunsight light Rheostat knob. There had been talk about moving the gunsight rheostat to the control column but from what Ralph understood this modification had been put on hold because there was a rumor of replacing the obtrusive off-set column with one of a different design.

Contrary to Air Force request, the individual Generator switches were kept as they had been on the lower Instrument Panel as Lockheed test engineers had determined it is easier for the pilot to check the generator when the switch is directly below its associated Ammeter.

After securing his harness and familiarizing himself with the fuel and starter controls, Ralph started the pre-flight checks and prepared to start the engines. He would be running this test without a battery cart, so he first switched the Battery switch up to the ON position and confirmed the Voltmeter was registering current.

Following the new procedures, Ralph’s first job was to test that the Low Fuel Level Warning lights were functioning by pressing directly on the lights themselves and forcing them deeper into their sockets. Both lights glowed amber, which meant the bulbs were good and the warnings working.

The next series of checks were unchanged from previous P-38 models, checking Oxygen pressure, moving the throttles ¾ of an inch open, setting propellers to INC. RPM, propeller constant speed switches to AUTO CONSTANT SPEED, propeller circuit breakers ON, and mixture was at IDLE CUTOFF for both engines. After that, Ralph checked that both oil radiator flap override switches were in AUTO, both coolant flap override switches were in AUTO, and both intercooler shutter override switches also in AUTO before switching on both generators and the inverter switch to his right.

Since he would be flying with external Drop Tanks today as part of the fuel system tests he also turned the Bomb selector switches (with also controlled the drop tanks) ON and made sure they were SAFE just in case he needed to jettison them on takeoff due to an emergency.

Ralph ensured the Ignition Master switch and both engine ignition switches were OFF then called out of the open canopy for the ground crew to turn over the propellers while he set about checking the new fuel system. He first moved the old manual tank selectors to the recommended RESERVE position and checked that the Booster Pump Speed Controls were both at NORMAL. He followed that with confirmation that the Fuel Selector Override switches were both in the down, OFF, position and then turned the electric fuel selector knob to the 9-o’clock OUTER-WING position and moved both Fuel/Dilution switches to ON.

His fuel pressure gauges jumped up to hover between 6 and 8 pounds per square inch pressure, perfect. A flick of his fingers moved the Speed Control switches to EMERGENCY and the fuel pressure jumped up even farther, to about 18 pounds per square inch. After returning the speed controls to NORMAL, Ralph pressed the Outer Wing Tank Low Level Check Button and was happy to see that neither low level warning lights lit up, indicating there was at least five minutes of fuel in the tanks.

He then repeated the fuel pressure tests for the MAIN, RESERVE, and EXTERNAL to confirm proper operation of each of the new individual booster pumps. Although there was no way to gauge the fuel level in the external tanks, the MAIN and RESERVE tanks each had their own fuel gauges so there was no need to test levels through a separate procedure as there was with the outer-wing tanks. He left the selector on RESERVE and made one final confirmation that the speed selectors were at NORMAL.

Once he received the OK from the ground crew, he flipped on the Ignition Master Switch. Now was when he would test the new starter system and confirm that it allows both engines to start simultaneously as intended. With his left hand ready on the mixture controls, Ralph reached his right hand past the yoke, turned both Engine Ignition Switches to BOTH to equally share the load between the magnetos, and pressed both Left and Right Starter switches until he felt a resistant stop, indicating they were in the center ENER (Energize/Prime) position.

A familiar electrical hum started from both sides and starting building into a whining crescendo. After a few seconds the crescendo peaked and Ralph forced the starter switches through the stop until they were fully forward. The electric whine dropped in pitch but with a series of short pops the propellers jerked around in a few partial revolutions before both engines sparked to life. Ralph pushed the mixtures to AUTO RICH and the comforting roar of the big V-12’s filled his ears.

He released the starter switches, letting them spring back to their resting places, and watched the oil pressure gauges to confirm both engines were fully smooth and operational. As he let the engines warm up he made a note of the ease and success of the new startup procedure. He also took the opportunity to test his radio and hydraulic systems.

Once the engines had warmed up sufficiently, he increased to 2300 RPM and tested the propeller controls—finding he had to fine tune the right propeller a little to synchronize it with the left. Then it was the standard magneto checks, generator tests, as well as testing the radiator flaps and intercooler shutters before throttling each engine up to take off levels briefly to confirm the turbos were working and to adjust the throttle lever friction.

He was ready for takeoff.

* * *

Ralph’s flight tests today, with the starter procedure out of the way, was entirely related to fuel management. He was to test each tank through the electric control, the manual control, and to test cross-feeding between sides for all tanks, including the outer wing tanks which were now fully integrated into the main fuel tank selector valve.

His first tests were simply to go through the four different tanks with both engines drawing from their own side. The procedures for normal operation were very easy. He simply needed to confirm the Fuel Selector Override switches were both in the down, OFF, position, then turn the single fuel tank selector dial. Doing so changes a series of actuators on both sides to open fuel flow for the the selected tank. So, with both overrides OFF, moving the one free-turning knob to RESERVE switches both engines to draw from their respective Reserve Tanks and an electrical contact automatically turns on the Reserve tank booster pumps.

The way the engineers explained it to Ralph was that when the overrides are in the OFF position they activate the electrical circuits for the electrical fuel management systems and close a master valve actuator off the manual valve output line. The master actuator is set up so that when there is a steady low current flowing into it the valve remains closed and when the current ceases the valve automatically opens. The individual tank valve actuators--which are on bypass lines around the manual valve--are the opposite, so that their natural state is to be fully closed but when a tank is selected the valves for that tank remain open as long as there is current into the actuator. Therefore, the tank selector dial has a total of six contactors for each position—two to maintain current to the valve of the selected tank on each side, two which open the current to the fuel booster pumps on the selected tanks, and two more which connect the selected tanks to the Low Level Warning Lights above the selector knob.

While this system means that there is a constant low electrical drain to keep the master valve closed and the selected tank valves open, it does ensure that in the event of electrical failure or even just failure of the electric fuel management system all tank valves on the bypass lines automatically close and the master opens allowing fuel to flow from the old manual valves to the pilot’s left. Likewise, moving the override switch for one side to ON interrupts the current for the entire circuit on that side which causes all associated valves to close and that side's master to open and fuel can then be managed by the manual valve.

For the flight the airplane had been only partially fueled so Ralph could test not only the fuel tank selection but also the low level warning. This system, which was just an expansion of that put in place for the outer wing tanks in previous models, was designed to automatically ignite the Low Level Warning lights for the selected tanks on each side when there was only 5-6 minutes of fuel remaining in the tank, based on normal consumption at Maximum Cruise, or about six gallons of usable fuel. The idea was to give an obvious and visible warning to the pilot that his selected tanks were about to run dry with enough time for him to switch to a tank with more fuel. The hope was that this would dramatically reduce the number accidents resulting from fuel starvation when a pilot failed to switch tanks.

Once the tests for normal operation were complete, Ralph start testing the ability properly draw fuel across the airplane by cross-feeding the fuel from a single tank on one side to the engine on the opposite. To do this, he first moved the tank selector dial to desired tank, then turned the manual valve for the engine which would cross-feed to the CROSS SUCTION position, then simply switch the Fuel Selector Override for the cross-feeding engine to ON.

Ralph moved the tank selector dial to EXTERNAL and with his left hand moved the right engine manual fuel valve to CROSS SUCTION. With that set, he just reached forward and moved the right side Fuel Selector Override switch up to ON. He flew in this condition for ten minutes to confirm the cross-feed was working properly, then turned fuel selector dial from EXTERNAL to OUTER WING. The change happened without difficulty and he was relieved to discover that both engines continued run without interruption.

He flew on the left outer wing tank for about 25 minutes before the left Low Level warning light started to glow a soft amber. Ralph then switched on to the MAIN tanks, with the right engine still in CROSS SUCTION. He made a note of when the warning light turning on—when he landed the test engineers would check the fuel remaining in the tanks and those tanks when he switched off when the light came on should each have around five gallons of fuel.

Ralph repeated this process, draining the left MAIN tank down, before he switched the right side Fuel Selector Override back down to OFF. He ran on both MAIN tanks until the left warning light once again started to glow, it being drained before the right because of running both engines off it for a while. When the waning light turned on, he turned left manual selector valve to CROSS SUCTION and flicked the left override ON. Immediately the warning lamp turned off as fuel began to flow to the left engine from the right MAIN tank for a moment before he turned the selector dial down to EXTERNAL.

The plane flew for a good 10 minutes on the right drop tank before Ralph once more made the switch to the OUTER WING. This time, the fuel flowed form the right wing to right engine and through the cross suction valve to the left. He flew like this for another 20 minutes before the right low level warning light began to glow and he was forced to make a switch to run both engines from the right MAIN.

Half an hour later the right low level warning once more turned on and Ralph knew the flight testing was done. He turned the selector RESERVE, flicked the left override OFF, and turned back toward Burbank.

* * *

Later that day the engineers reported back the fuel levels remaining in each tank. Ralph had only run each drop tank for 10 minutes, they started with only 50 gallons each and after landing it was discovered that left tank had 31.4 gallons and the right 30.7 gallons which meant they each lost just under twenty gallons—exactly as expected for running both engines for ten minutes at 2300 RPM and 35 in/Hg. manifold pressure.

Both MAIN tanks and both OUTER WING tanks had been run down until the low level warning light came one and they were found to have (from left to right) 5.6, 5.2, 6.1, and 5.8 gallons. The RESERVE tanks were used to fly in and were not run dry but had 14.2 gallons in the left and 12.7 gallons in the right.

In the end, Ralph and the engineers all agreed that the test was a resounding success. If they could get the new switches and new fuel management system produced in bulk and be allowed permission to interject them into the production they could only hope these improvements could arrive to the front by mid-summer.
 
Last edited:
Incidentally, this last post and the modifications described may have just butterflied away the Jeff Ethell crash in 1997. So, to date, the modified P-38 has already saved at least Ralph Virden, 2Lt. Robert Elliot, 2Lt. John Mangus, and 2Lt Donald Hilgert--and those are just the ones in the narrative. I would expect many other similar saves have happened "off-screen" so to speak, and now the butterflies may just save a modern pilot as well far beyond the scope of the central narrative.
 
That was an enjoyable read. Seeing the list of improvements in the P-38H Block 1 was like looking at a Christmas list come true. Great job on the cockpit heating too. :)

The new fuel management system is really an impressive piece of work. When reading the first description of it I was puzzled and I didn't understand the functions. Then you had Ralph Virden test fly the airplane and in the course of the test flight the new system with its functions was explained in detail. A very well thought out bit of writing.

My take on the new fuel management system is that it simplifies that task almost down to a single engine airplane level for almost all flying situations. But it still retains the ability to deal with battle damage or component failure and the occasional odd external load like a drop tank under one wing and a bomb under the other. Simple but still flexible. They should have done this for real 75 years ago.
 
EverKing, I just notice your join date. Can I say something? As good as this is, I wish you'd joined years ago. (It's getting late, so comment on the update tomorrow, when I can think straight.:))
 
That was an enjoyable read. Seeing the list of improvements in the P-38H Block 1 was like looking at a Christmas list come true. Great job on the cockpit heating too. :)
Thanks! Most of the improvements are based on either actual improvements that were incorporated to the H and J models (which both started production spring/early summer of 43) or those which were recommended by the AAF. The heating system is essentially the same system we had discussed a few weeks ago and was designed to be as simple as possible.

A very well thought out bit of writing.
I wish I could claim good planning on this one...but the truth is it just fell together as I went along.

Simple but still flexible. They should have done this for real 75 years ago.
The fuel management problem was really bugging me and I was finding it difficult to provide a simple solution. So much so, in fact, I almost skipped it all together. But the other day I was looking the old Flight Manual again and that massive gun selector jumped out at me. Knowing they got rid of it in OTL once they improved the gun reliability I recognized usable space in the right place. From there it was just figuring out how to make work. The biggest problem was building it to withstand electrical failure which is what led me to the system described.

I wish you'd joined years ago.
Heh. I had considered it, to be honest. I didn't join earlier because I was content just reading and never felt I had much to add. I am glad I am here, now, and thank you for following and being so active in this TL! It really is a lot of help to bounce ideas around and talk details.
 
Last edited:
EverKing I do like the new single fuel selector control however I think it needs a fifth position. That of the fuel off selection. Unless I missed seeing that fuel setting in the update just posted. I think that is a necessary and required function. Other than that the new fuel system is just about perfect.

The booster pump speed control emergency setting is needed to ensure adequate fuel flow for the new WEP setting? Could that also compensate for other fuel system problems?
 
EverKing I do like the new single fuel selector control however I think it needs a fifth position. That of the fuel off setting.
Fuel off for each engine is handled OTL and ATL by moving the mixture control to IDLE CUT OFF and turning off the engine ignition. This allows cutting fuel to a single engine while still allowing cross flow from the tanks on the dead side to those on the good engine.
The booster pump speed control emergency setting is needed to ensure adequate fuel flow for the new WEP setting? Could that also compensate for other fuel system problems?
These were added OTL around this same time and are there to supplement fuel pressurization in the event of engine driven fuel pump failure. Similarly, in ATL, it serves the same purpose but will also aid fuel flow for WEP if needed. One modification I had considered but didn't discuss in the TL is to use these manual switches for emergency override only and have the fuel booster speed normally handled by adding a switch inside the engine control unit so when the throttles are advanced to Military power or beyond it automatically activates the higher speed of the booster pumps. This may still be included in the future, likely if/when the engine controls are replaced with a synchronized system to control throttle, RPM, and mixture in a single lever per engine.
 
Last edited:
Yes, I was clumsy with my description. What I meant was the British-blended fuel. The P-38 had numerous engine and induction problems during this period but there was/is a train of thought that the way the British had blended the lead additives to the fuel was improperly handled for a time which caused an large increase in engine trouble and detonation as a result of the overly-cooled charge air removing the lead from solution. Kelsey had ordered the units to field to experiment with covering part of the inter-cooler intake with cardboard to see if it helped and from what I have found it did, but the AAF would never approve it for combat use (too low tech apparently). This was really only corrected when the AEAF introduced Grade 100/150 fuel ...

The train of thought that indirectly accuses Britsh was a convinient way to sweep the techincal, operational and training issues made in the USA and/or USAAF under the rug. Allison was testing the new intake during the summer of 1943, ie. much before the P-38J entered between rock and hard place in the ETO. The new intake was also installed on non-turbo V-1710s from 1944 on.
The P-38J needed the 'high boost, low RPM' cruising technique (thus keeping the fuel/air mixture as a mist in the intake), that will be problematic for the P-38H with it's low capacity intercooler. Also, the 'low RPM' part invokes problems with just a single generator, that might not be able to generate enough of power in that way.
British, or rather British controlled rafineries, were making the blends by exact standard, not by their whim. Again, no lead separation until advent of 100/150 grade fuel, and it was a minor thing to fix.
We can also recall that other turboed and 2-stage supercharged aircraft have had no problems flying in freezing conditions of European winter of 1943/44 at 25000 ft and up.
 
The train of thought that indirectly accuses Britsh was a convinient way to sweep the techincal, operational and training issues made in the USA and/or USAAF under the rug. Allison was testing the new intake during the summer of 1943, ie. much before the P-38J entered between rock and hard place in the ETO. The new intake was also installed on non-turbo V-1710s from 1944 on.
The P-38J needed the 'high boost, low RPM' cruising technique (thus keeping the fuel/air mixture as a mist in the intake), that will be problematic for the P-38H with it's low capacity intercooler. Also, the 'low RPM' part invokes problems with just a single generator, that might not be able to generate enough of power in that way.
British, or rather British controlled rafineries, were making the blends by exact standard, not by their whim. Again, no lead separation until advent of 100/150 grade fuel, and it was a minor thing to fix.
We can also recall that other turboed and 2-stage supercharged aircraft have had no problems flying in freezing conditions of European winter of 1943/44 at 25000 ft and up.
You seem much more knowledgeable than me regarding these issues but I think we may be confusing the conversation by conflating several separate issues into one.

My understanding was that the manifold redesign on the Allisons came about largely as a result of manifolds cracking and failing in flight due to sudden changes in pressure when accelerating from cruise to combat condition and due to the increased power requirements of the later engines.

The issues with suspected lead separation was unrelated to the manifold and was instead a direct result of over-cooled charge air removing the lead additives used in Britain from solution thereby reducing the octane rating of the fuel and causing detonation. This started to happen OTL in late '43 when the P-38J was introduced to the 8AF. The problem wasn't strictly because of failures on the British side--I am sorry if that is how my previous comments were read because it was not my intent--but rather was due to the combination of an overly-efficient inter-cooler and the way they increased octane rating of low-grade lend-lease fuel in Britain through simple mixing of Tetraethyl Lead (TEL) to the base fuel, often right in the barrels at the fuel depots. This is why P-38J's in other theaters of operation did not experience the problem; the fuel supplied to these units came directly from US refineries and used a different octane boosting conditioner (the name which escapes me at the moment but I believe it was some form of benzene). The problem, indeed, only manifested in the P-38J's and wasn't universal and it all depended on the flying conditions and the quality of the TEL solution.

The issues with the 100/150 grade fuel were different and pervasive to all aircraft types: lead fouling, rather than lead separation. While it is certainly possible (and expected) that lead separation continued in the P-38 after introduction of 150 octane fuel the bigger concern was fouling, especially when under prolonged low power settings. This would cause lead to build up on the spark plugs and in the cylinder heads leading to rough running engines and eventually cylinder and even whole engine failure. The solution was to occasionally increase power to blast out the lead build up during long flights, but even so plugs would need to be completely replaced every couple missions. Again, though, this was a problem for all aircraft running 150 fuel regardless of what engine they used. This was reduced with the addition of ethylene dibromide, a lead scavenger, to the fuel; but, as I said, it created its own issues unique to the Merlin engines (both Packard and R-R) in that it would erode the valve seals.

The P-38J did not require low RPM high Boost settings for good engine operation. In fact, it was believed that such settings would be unsafe and lead to engine failure (quite likely if done in an engine with the old manifold). The low rpm/high boost settings were developed in the summer of 1944 when Charles Lindbergh was helping the pilots of the 433rd Fighter Squadron get the most range possible out of their airplanes. It had nothing to do with engine reliability issues, lead separation, or lead fouling. Considering low power/high boost was only really used in the P-38J and later airplanes which already had the second generator installed anyway, the issue of a single generator being insufficient in these conditions is moot...even more so in the ATL where the second generator has been installed since nearly the beginning.

Again, though, this is just my understanding of the issues OTL from disjointed, sometimes anecdotal, sources. I have limited access to primary sources where I am at, so if you have these handy, please correct whatever I have misunderstood. I am always looking to improve my knowledge and any corrections and clarifications can only help improve the quality of this timeline!

EDIT: Here a select few of the references (secondary and tertiary sources mostly) regarding lead separation...
http://www.ausairpower.net/P-38-Analysis.html
P-38 Analysis said:
Fuel too, was a source of trouble, it is believed by many knowledgeable people that the majority of fuel used in Britain was improperly blended, the anti-knock lead compounds coming out of solution (separating) in the Allison's induction system at extreme low temperatures.

http://www.aviation-history.com/lockheed/p38.html
Aviation History / P-38 said:
At 30,000 ft. (9,144 m), the intercoolers separated the lead from the fuel lowering octane and resulted in fouled plugs, thrown rods, and swallowed valves.

http://www.historynet.com/p-38-flunked-europe.htm
HistoryNet said:
Improperly blended British fuel exacerbated the problems: Anti-knock lead compounds literally seethed out and became separated in the Allison’s induction system at extreme low temperatures. This could cause detonation and rapid engine failure, especially at the high power settings demanded for combat.
 
Last edited:
@tomo pauk, I want to add that I really appreciate your historical and technical critiques. Even when we seem to be reading the history differently the simple fact of having my conceptions challenged forces me to refine my understanding and re-examine my viewpoints which can only lead to improvements. Please, keep helping me make this TL better!

This goes for everyone else, as well, of course! I just wanted to call out Tomo Pauk specifically since we are amidst the discussion of Allison engine and fuel troubles.
 
we may be confusing the conversation
This was reduced with the addition of ethylene dibromide, a lead scavenger, to the fuel; but, as I said, it created its own issues unique to the Merlin engines (both Packard and R-R) in that it would erode the valve seals.

Actually, valve seats, not seals.
 
@tomo pauk, I want to add that I really appreciate your historical and technical critiques. Even when we seem to be reading the history differently the simple fact of having my conceptions challenged forces me to refine my understanding and re-examine my viewpoints which can only lead to improvements. Please, keep helping me make this TL better!

This goes for everyone else, as well, of course! I just wanted to call out Tomo Pauk specifically since we are amidst the discussion of Allison engine and fuel troubles.

Thank you for the kind words, and another 'thank you' for the excellent time-line.
As for the technicalities of the P-38 and V-1710, I'm puling out most of the data from 'Vee's for victory' and 'America's hundred thousand' books.
 
I am not a mechanic but isn't eroding valve seats an even bigger problem than eroding valve seals?
It would be, except there are no seals. The valves just close & seal themselves. That's why erosion of the seat, where the head of the valve sits, is such a problem: it means gas flows past & combustion is interfered with. (Am I being pedantic? Hell yeah, it is bad.) Now, IIRC, there is a solution, but IDK if it's period correct: using harder valve seats & Stellite valves. It's what hot rodders ended up doing when they got seat erosion.

One other thing on the valves (& this may rely on knowledge not available then, either): given the comparatively low rpm these engines run at, do you know what the base angle of the valve job was? I'm guessing 30 degrees. Funny thing is, below about 5000rpm, 22 actually produces better flow over the rev range. (Which may be more suited to a "Better V1710" thread....)

Now, on the update: wow. A wealth of detail, & never a break in the character's POV: everything just like Virden would have noticed it (that is, you tell it as if he's telling it, seeing it). That's a very nice job, indeed. More than that, though, you're giving a look at how the changes are affecting the aircraft, & that's even more interesting.

The idea of energizing the shut valves had me a bit confused at first, til you explained the loss of power issue: with possible battle damage (my first thought), you fail safe. Nice job, again.

On Jeff Ethell: if you're right, good on you for that, too. I can't speak to the others, but I had a chance to watch Jeff Ethell do a TV show for awhile, & he seemed like a really great guy--somebody worth saving, if it was possible. Thx.
 
Last edited:
After a bit of thought & reflection, I've realized my remark about the valves seating was mistaken. There are seals involved... The issue of seat erosion, tho, remains the bigger one. The erosion can be addressed with better, more durable seals (never a bad idea). If the seats go, it might be possible to re-grind the seat for a bigger valve (slightly larger head diameter), tho that would (obviously) be a non-standard item, which could create supply headaches; you might also get interference issues (tho I'd guess even the 4v system had a bit of growth in valve sizes in it).

That said, EverKing, can you confirm something? I'm looking at the WP page on the V1710, & says it used a single 2bbl Stromberg. Is that true? For a 1700ci V12? (OTOH, if it could provide enough flow, it'd be great for hot rodders in the '40s & well into the '60s: it'd surely be enough for the 392, favored by Top Fuel racers...)
 
One other thing on the valves (& this may rely on knowledge not available then, either): given the comparatively low rpm these engines run at, do you know what the base angle of the valve job was? I'm guessing 30 degrees. Funny thing is, below about 5000rpm, 22 actually produces better flow over the rev range. (Which may be more suited to a "Better V1710" thread....)
I checked the trusty old Allison Operation and Maintenance Handbook (it is technically for the later E-Model Allisons used in the P-39/P-63 but they are internally identical to the F-series Allisons as used in the P-38)...
upload_2017-7-28_8-44-6.png

Note that we are now talking Allisons, while the issue of eroding Valve Seals or Seats (not sure which at this point) happened to the Merlins.
 
That said, EverKing, can you confirm something? I'm looking at the WP page on the V1710, & says it used a single 2bbl Stromberg. Is that true? For a 1700ci V12?
I found a manual for the F-series which includes the F-5 and F-10 engines (P-38F & G). It states that the engines use Bendix-Stromberg PD-12K series of carbs, which are, indeed, only double-barreled. Each barrel is 3 15/16" diameter but the carbs are "pressure" carbs rather than float carbs, which makes it sort of a halfway point between traditional carburetors and true fuel injection. It also states that the carb is attached to "the supercharger inlet." I am not sure if that means it is between the supercharger and the manifold or if it means it is on the upstream side of the supercharger.
 
Valve seals are valve stem seals which prevent oil from running down the stem into the combustion chamber, and become bad by wearing or hardening, causing various problems due to oil burning where it doesn't belong. Merlin valve seats erode due to the material used , Silchrome, which has tremendously superior properties and qualities except for reaction to one fuel additive.
 
Ch.16a - Diagram of Modified Fuel System
The idea of energizing the shut valves had me a bit confused at first, til you explained the loss of power issue: with possible battle damage (my first thought), you fail safe. Nice job, again.
I was looking at my design and I realized I made a pretty big mistake with this. The original idea was to shut of the fuel flow upstream from the manual valve but still route all the fuel through the manual valve. The problem is, if the manual valve is at, for example, RESERVE and the electric selector is on MAIN then the MAIN is open and RESERVE closed on the electric valves but the MAIN is still being blocked by the manual valve.

The right way to do it would be to "Y" each fuel line where it enters the manual valve. The line which bypasses the manual valve would then have the electrically controlled valve actuator but of the type which is closed at rest and open when energized. Coming off the manual valve output line would be another, master, shut valve which is open when off and closed when energized. Downstream of this is where the bypass lines and the manual valve output lines reconnect. Another "Y" exists here to supply fuel to the Cross-feed line to the other engine [EDIT: I realized it would be easier to have two crossfeed lines rather than one with check valves, after all this is how it was done OTL].

This allows all the functions to work properly. When the electrical system is powered on, the manual valve output line closes and the valve for the selected tank opens on that tank's bypass line. When a different tank is selected on the electric selector dial in the cockpit, the previous tank valve closes and the newly selected tank valve opens. When the electrical tank selection control is powered off (either by turning the Override ON or as a result of electrical failure) the individual tank bypass line valves all close and the manual valve output line shut-valve opens, allowing all the fuel to flow freely through the manual system. This simplifies the selection dial as well because instead of twelve contactors per position it now only needs six: two to close the circuit for the selected tanks and open the valves, two to turn on the tanks' booster pumps, and two to connect the tanks to the Low Level Warning lamps. Plus, now the only actuators which need steady current are the shut-valves off the Manual Valve Output lines and the ones to open the valve of the selected tanks.

Cross feeding is handled as described in the narrative: selecting the tank on the dial, turning the manual valve to CROSS SUCTION, and turning the cross feeding side's Override switch ON. This closes all of the individual tank valves on the bypass lines for that side and opens the manual valve output shut-valve. Fuel then flows from the other side's cross-feed line into the manual valve of the cross feeding side where it is now free to flow out to the engine.

Another consideration I had was that by removing the Outer Wing LE tanks from this system and keeping them controlled by their own electrically actuated valves feeding directly to the engine as they were OTL and as they have been in ATL up until now, then the entire electrically controlled system with all the bypass lines and new valves can be designed as a single package and can therefore be retrofitted into existing airplanes. Of course, this means that the LE tanks cannot be cross-fed and also that they cannot be used after electrical failure. One option would be to integrate LE tanks into this for future production models, but exclude it from the field upgrade kit. OTL and ATL up to now, the LE tanks have their own switches to turn open them to the engines rather a position on the tank selector valve. Integrating these tanks to the manual valve would require running a fuel line all the way from the tank to the tank selector valve in the center nacelle and requires a five position manual valve rather than the four position that would have been used up until this point.

Here is a rough diagram of the Right Hand side to help [EDIT: I changed the CROSS SUCTION and removed the unnecessary check-valve]:
FuelSystem.png
 
Last edited:
Top