Originally Posted by Astro14
Too much airplane for the pilots at the time...
Probably, but some pilots also stated that it was the best pure fighter airplane in the hands of an experienced, above-average pilot. I love the P/F-51D too, and perhaps it was a better overall aircraft for most pilots. But the definitive versions, the P-39J-25 and P-38L, were excellent fighters. Think the article is decent, but leaves out a few things:
Quote
In the European Theater,
P-38s made 130,000 sorties with a loss of 1.3% overall, comparing favorably with P-51s, which posted a 1.1% loss, considering that the P-38s were vastly outnumbered and suffered from poorly thought-out tactics. The majority of the P-38 sorties were made in the period prior to Allied air superiority in Europe, when pilots fought against a very determined and skilled enemy.[104] Lieutenant Colonel Mark Hubbard, a vocal critic of the aircraft, rated it the third best Allied fighter in Europe.[105] The Lightning's greatest virtues were long range, heavy payload, high speed, fast climb and concentrated firepower. The P-38 was a formidable fighter, interceptor and attack aircraft.
In the Pacific theater, the P-38 downed over 1,800 Japanese aircraft, with more than 100 pilots becoming aces by downing five or more enemy aircraft.[102] American fuel supplies contributed to a better engine performance and maintenance record, and range was increased with leaner mixtures. In the second half of 1944, the P-38L pilots out of Dutch New Guinea were flying 950 mi (1,530 km), fighting for fifteen minutes and returning to base.[106] Such long legs were invaluable until the P-47N and P-51D entered service.
Wiki
I would also argue it was a mistake to mothball the P/F-38L in favor of the F-51 Mustang at the end of the war. Whatever it's shortcomings as a high altitude escort, it would've been a better post-WWII strike aircraft in Korea than the Mustang because of its dive flaps and twin engines (dive bombing and survivability)...