Warbird Information Exchange

when reading about fighters of WWII, almost everybook praises the mustang and how it won the airwar in Europe and the Pacific.Yes it is a great plane,very elegant,had the range and came to dominate the skies.However,over the years,as I have gotten a little wiser and more into self preservation.I have come to the conclusion that if I had to fight over enemy territory and count on a machine to get me back,The P-47 Thunderbolt would likely be the best choice.It was big,heavy,didnt have the range and wasnt as pretty as a Mustang.However it had a monster of an engine that would run with bits shot off of it.It had 8 50 caliber browning MG's that would chop up and spit out almost any target.Its airfrme is built like a Mack Truck and could allow you to survive horrendous crashes and if you got in over your head,you could firewall the throttle and dive away from anything flying at you.the gun camera footage of them destroying Trains,ships ,tanks,troops,planes and any other target of opportunity show how incredibly effective it was as a gun platform.as more than a few pilots found out in WWII and Korea,The mustang has that vulnerable cooling system for the merlin and one little nick in the radiator would leave you with a siezed and overheated engine over very unfriendly territory.People you just shot up tend to cop a bad attitude about you and they kinda want a little payback after you belly in. it is an incredible machine and was really quite the brute.Posted this after the various ranting going on about the virtues of other prop fighters. I remember to this day,a color guncamera scene of a p-47 strafing troops and it is so low you can make out facial expressions on the guys as they are bailing off of their carts,trucks,kubelwagens and diving for cover as they are getting chewed up.looks like no fun. just my opinion(worthless)

_________________
"WHAT ME WORRY?"

Of course there is no settling of this argument but you have valid points. I remember something the Thunderbolt ace Robert S. Johnson said about the P-47N to the effect that if the N models development had come a little earlier no one would have heard of the Mustang since the N had the range for deep escort.

Another point I only learned a year or so ago. Thunderbolt pilots learned that if they could fire at a panzer from the right angle they could ricochet .50 cal bullets off the ground and impact the tank in the unarmored belly penetrate the interior and set the tank on fire.

_________________
"I can't understand it, I cut it twice and it's still too short!" Robert F. Dupre' 1923-2010 Go With God.

I asked my Uncle who was a Fighter-Bomber Wing Commander in WWII which of the airplanes he flew-38,51,47- he liked best. He said the 51 was top of the list, unbeatable in every way, unless someone is shooting at you; then you want to be in a P-47!

Tough choice but I agree that it sounds like if you are getting shot at, the 47 could take the shots......turn around and dish it out....then bring you home.

_________________
"Thirty seconds....We went like this, he went like that. I said to Hollywood, "Where'd he go?" Hollywood says, "Where'd who gooooooo?"

The advantage of being in a P47 over a P51 while being shot at is because with a P47 you could unstrap the harness & run around the cockpit dodging the bullets

_________________
Those who possess real knowledge are rare.

Those who can set that knowledge into motion in the physical world are rarer still.

The few who possess real knowledge and can set it into motion of their own hands are the rarest of all.

[quote="ZRX61"]The advantage of being in a P47 over a P51 while being shot at is because with a P47 you could unstrap the harness & run around the cockpit dodging the bullets [/quote]

You beat me to it.

The story goes that was what RAF Hurricane pilots converting to the Thunderbolt in Burma used to say.

After reading in "Citizen Soldiers" about how much the Germans feared the Jabos, I'm convinced the P-47 is the aircraft I'd most want to go to battle in. Anyone who has read Robert S. Johnson's book has an idea of what kind of damage the Thunderbolts could endure and still keep you in the air. I'd want to go to battle in an aircraft that could take the hit and stay in the air.

_________________
Matt

Back when I was a boy in "This here now Air Force", I worked for Capt. Larry Grimm, who had flown P-47s and P-51s in WWII. He said he'd take the P-47 every time. Claimed that the P-51 just had better PR. Said that a flight of four, P-47s could take down a 2 story building, in one pass and that they did...often.

Mudge the nostalgic

_________________
Land of the free because of the brave

Yes the P-47 was great, but if you watch the old PBS documentary "A Fighter Pilot's Story" (IIRC), they sure lot a lot doing ground attack work.

Anyone know if the Jug did any better in terms of survivability than the Mustang during low level ops...despite having the supposedly less-vunerable radial?

_________________
Remember the vets, the wonderful planes they flew and their sacrifices for a future many of them did not live to see.
Note political free signature.
I figure if you wanted my opinion on items unrelated to this forum, you'd ask for it.

fewer parts to break or leak always means better chances of not failing. just one less part to fail can make all the difference in the world

_________________
"WHAT ME WORRY?"

The thing to remember with ground attack, is it only takes one lucky bullet to take down a P-51 (hit that coolant system and you are on your way down, just a matter of when and how fast.) Once you are that low, any yahoo with a rifle could possibly hit the radiator or lines to and from the radiator.

A question for the A&Ps... is the question still in the FAA books about liquid-cooled engines being more vulnerable to ground fire than air-cooled?

I agree and appreciate that...but my comment was simply to note that having an air-cooled radial did not make one immune from the dangers of AAA.

_________________
Remember the vets, the wonderful planes they flew and their sacrifices for a future many of them did not live to see.
Note political free signature.
I figure if you wanted my opinion on items unrelated to this forum, you'd ask for it.

only the deflector shields on the starship enterprise can make any craft immune to AAA

_________________
"WHAT ME WORRY?"

I would rather be in the P-47.


A P-47 from the 353rd FS, 354th FG, 9th AF. One of the planes own 500 pound bombs broke loose on landing at Asch Airfield,Belgium and exploded. The pilot survived and was returned to fight status.

I've also read some info that says this was a 389th FS, 366th FG plane being flown by 1stLt. Karl T. Hallberg.


A P-47 flown by Lt. Richard Sulzbach of the 364th Fighter Squadron, 350th Fighter Group, 12th Air Force on April 1,1945. Lt. Sulzbach had a little run-in with some trees while on a strafing run over Italy. He was able to fly the plane 120 miles back to base and land safely. It's a real testament to how tough the P-47 was.

Republic P-47D-30-RE Thunderbolt
s/n 44-21054
364th Fighter Squadron, 350th Fighter Group, 12th Air Force

_________________
I was gratified to answer promptly, I said "I don't know". - Mark Twain

"When you run out of Thunderbolts, you run out of fighters. When you run out of glycol, you run out of Mustangs" The P-47, hands down would've been my choice.

_________________
"According to the map, we've only gone 4 inches."