# Robert S. Johnson, 56th Fighter Group.



## GT (Mar 11, 2005)

Cancelled.


----------



## DAVIDICUS (Mar 11, 2005)

A truly impressive story. I fell in love with the P-47 as a young child in large part due to this and other stories regarding its ability to absorb damage and bring its pilot home.


----------



## GT (Mar 11, 2005)

Update


----------



## evangilder (Mar 11, 2005)

There were stories of P-47s brought home with multiple cylinders shot off completely! I muse that the P-47 was not a plane that could be shot down, just filled with so much lead, it was too heavy to fly.


----------



## KraziKanuK (Mar 11, 2005)

evangilder said:


> There were stories of P-47s brought home with multiple cylinders shot off completely! I muse that the P-47 was not a plane that could be shot down, just filled with so much lead, it was too heavy to fly.



Or made lighter with all that weight shot off that a damaged engine did not need all its power to keep it in the air.


----------



## Udet (Mar 11, 2005)

Sorry guys it is not my intention to botch the party, but twenty one 2cm hits sounds a bit like a taste of hollywood there.

While a full load of 7.92mm bullets might certainly not be enough to bring down a sturdy P-47, the alleged amount of 2cm shells absorbed by this gentleman´s Thunderbolt is far beyond the realms of reality.

The photos posted here, even while showing important damage, are clearly not the product of taking 21 of the 2 cm shells. I have seen Bf 109s with that sort of damage that made it back to base.

Some of the hits shown on the photos certainly come from 2cm shells but never to be 21, and he was lucky they did not hit the engine: a sole well placed 2cm shell on the engine of even the P-47 is a sure kill.

The Fw190As and the P-47s are surely the sturdiest and greatest damage absorbers of the war. Both had radial engines, while P-51, Bf109, Spitfires and Lightnings had liquid cooled engines and could not take very great damage.

German interceptos in many cases used 1/10 of the rounds Johnson´s P-47 allegedly took that day to shoot down a four engined heavy bomber such as the B-17 and B-24, which of course are heavier and far harder to destroy.

The P-47 if indeed capable of taking important damage did not demand, being generous, even 1/4 of the rounds you are saying he took that particular day.


----------



## DAVIDICUS (Mar 12, 2005)

I believe him. (Of course, I am a biased P-47 enthusiast) 

It generally took a lot more than 1/10th of twenty one 20mm rounds to take out a large bomber. From "The WWII Fighter Gun Debate: Defensive Armament":

The Germans concluded that in a head-on attack, four or five 20mm hits would destroy a bomber, while it usually required more than 20 hits when attacking from another angle.
----------------------------------


Not long before he passed away in December, 1998, Robert S. Johnson was interviewed by Colin D. Heaton, of Military History magazine. Excerpts of that interview follow:

Military History magazine: Pilots generally swear by their aircraft. Günther Rall and Erich Hartmann praised the Messerschmitt Bf-109, Erich Rudorffer and Johannes Steinhoff the Me-262, and Buddy Haydon the P-51 Mustang. I have to say after seeing all of the old photos of the various Thunderbolts and others that were shot up, I can't imagine any other plane absorbing that much damage and still flying. What is your opinion of your aircraft?

Johnson: This is very similar to the German debate. As far as the 109, all of the German pilots loved that plane, but the FW-190 was harder to shoot down. Just like the controversy over the P-51 and P-47. The P-47 was faster; it just did not have the climb and range the Mustang did. But it had speed, roll, dive and the necessary ruggedness that allowed it to do such a great job in the Ninth Air Force. As far as aerial kills go, we met and beat the best the Luftwaffe had when we first got there. It was the P-47 groups that pushed them back, as I said before. The P-51s had the advantage of longer range, and they were able to hit even the training schools, hitting boys just learning to fly. As the war dragged on, many of the old German veterans had been killed--so much of the experience was gone. As far as the 109 versus 190 argument, the 109 had the liquid-cooled engine whereas the 190 had an air-cooled radial engine, much like ours. One hit in the cooling system of a Messerschmitt and he was going down. Also, none of the German fighters were as rugged as a P-47. When I was badly shot up on June 26, 1943, I had twenty-one 20mm cannon shells in that airplane, and more than 200 7.92mm machine-gun bullets. One nicked my nose and another entered my right leg, where the bullet split in half. I still have those two little pieces, by the way; they went in just under the skin. I had been hurt worse playing football and boxing. However, I had never been that scared, I'll tell you that. I was always scared--that was what made me move quick. "Hub" Zemke liked the P-51 because it had great range, but he put one in a dive and when he pulled out he ripped the wings off that airplane--that was how he became a POW. Adolf Galland, who was a very good friend of mine and who I had known since 1949, flew the Me-262 and loved it, but he still swore by the 109, although it was still easier to shoot down. 

http://home.att.net/~historyzone/Johnson1.JPG

http://home.att.net/~historyzone/Johnson2.JPG
-------------------------------------------------------

From his autobiography, "Thunderbolt!":

There are twenty-one gaping holes and jagged tears in the metal from exploding 20mm cannon shells. I'm still standing in one place when my count of bullet holes reaches past a hundred; there's no use even trying to add them all. The Thunderbolt is literally a sieve, holes through the wings, fuselage and tail. Every square foot, it seems is covered with holes. There are five holes in the propeller. Three 20mm cannon shells burst against the armor plate, a scant inch away from my head. Five cannon shell holes in the right wing; four in the left wing. Two cannnon shells blasted away the lower half of my rudder. One shell exploded in the cockpit, next to my left hand; this is the blast that ripped away the flap handle. More holes appeared along the fuselage and in the tail. Behind the cockpit, the metal is twisted and curled; this had jammed the canopy, trapping me inside. The airplane had done her best. Needless to say, she would never fly again.


----------



## GT (Mar 12, 2005)

Update


----------



## DJ_Dalton (Mar 12, 2005)

Udet said:


> Sorry guys it is not my intention to botch the party, but twenty one 2cm hits sounds a bit like a taste of hollywood there.
> 
> While a full load of 7.92mm bullets might certainly not be enough to bring down a sturdy P-47, the alleged amount of 2cm shells absorbed by this gentleman´s Thunderbolt is far beyond the realms of reality.
> 
> The photos posted here, even while showing important damage, are clearly not the product of taking 21 of the 2 cm shells. I have seen Bf 109s with that sort of damage that made it back to base..



Agreed,

Its a nice story. The Han's Philip part is a bit of a stretch also. I had always read he had been damaged by bombers and what became of him after that was debateable. The photos certainly dont show 21 explosive shell hits....lol

The accurate part of the story is the "bouncing" bomber attackers part. Thats how the U.S. won the Air War. They bounced the bouncers and the bombers did their share to faciliate it. Johnson was right, a Jug had an advantage bouncing a gondola winged 109 from above in numbers. The escorts outnumbered the bomber attackers. Thats the way it went. You got to give them credit though, the U.S. are the ones that wore Germany down, not the RAF.


----------



## GT (Mar 12, 2005)

Update


----------



## mosquitoman (Mar 12, 2005)

The RAF held the Luftwaffe while destroying it's cities, the USAAF made the strikes with the bombers going for factories. This would bring up the Luftwaffe up into the waiting bullets of the P-51s and P-47s waiting for them


----------



## Udet (Mar 12, 2005)

GT:

"Besserwissers"...uuuuuhhh, how strong.

The fact of the matter might be clear within your mind mister, but i find all the info and evidence on this particular case wanting. Do not fret, if you are convinced a P-47 could take twenty one 2 cm shells and keep flying then rest your case and let the besserwissers continue to have their very reasonable doubts.

There will be the day when allied sided guys will come up affirming Thunderbolts took 88 Flak hits in the engine and still made it back to base.


----------



## DJ_Dalton (Mar 12, 2005)

Udet said:


> GT:
> 
> "Besserwissers"...uuuuuhhh, how strong.
> 
> ...



I'm not gonna bad mouth the P-47. That was an exceptional airplane. It did the brunt of the fighting and had a very good kill to loss ratio. It was just purely an all around airplane. You wouldn't want to get caught 1 on 1 vs. a GE plane in it without scads of altitude and they didn't. They knew how to fly it. High and in huge numbers and it would go high. 

The Johnson story is more proof of fabrication in telling war stories. That P-47 was hit by 2 maybe 3 high explosive shell. One directly in the tail end of the fuselage and one near the canopy. If there were other unbelievable damaged areas you'd have seen them portrayed in the pictures. I wish Johnson was still alive and I could talk with him I'd ask him: "Who the hell told the whoppers and said you said so"

An interesting anecdote regarding the P-47 and Johnson is that he had a mock dogfight with a RAF ace in a IX. I can't remember the precise details but it started even and then Johnson got in trouble and put his Jug into that Mass Energy dive they did. He extended on the Spit and then zoomed above him and got guns on before the Spit could acquire enough control to alter direction. The P-47 was a better plane than the Spitfire.


----------



## GT (Mar 12, 2005)

Update


----------



## cheddar cheese (Mar 12, 2005)

Thats pretty amazing.


----------



## DAVIDICUS (Mar 12, 2005)

I believe the holes in the propeller were from 7.92mm rounds.

On another note, let's keep in mind the following. This isn't a situation where a pilot was in a situation where he was the only witness and has made a claim that sounds incredible. For instance, this isn't a situation where a pilot claims that he hit the speed of sound in a dive. 

Here, Johnson's plane made it back. His claim of the number of 20mm cannon round hits was readily observable and verifiable by many others. I have never heard anything regarding an assault on his claim by anyone who was a witness, and thus in a position to do so, or anyone who spoke to a witness.

How could such a claim persist without evidence to the contrary
by any of the many witnesses if it was indeed just a wild fantasy completely out of the bounds of reality? Perhaps anything these many people said that contradicted Johnson's claim was never recorded in print. Perhaps no one who ever spoke to an observing witness whose account contradicted Johnson's version ever had their story recorded in print. Perhaps those who observed his aircraft were part of a large conspiracy or mass hallucination. 

Perhaps Johnson's story is true.


----------



## DJ_Dalton (Mar 12, 2005)

DAVIDICUS said:


> I believe the holes in the propeller were from 7.92mm rounds.
> 
> On another note, let's keep in mind the following. This isn't a situation where a pilot was in a situation where he was the only witness and has made a claim that sounds incredible. For instance, this isn't a situation where a pilot claims that he hit the speed of sound in a dive.
> 
> ...



You only need look at those pictures above to realize theres something rotten in Denmark. Not only do the pictures fail to depict 21 20 mm shell hits, they fail miserably to depict 200 7.92 round hits. The poster tried to pawn off 5 20 mm PROPELLOR hits and 9 unobservable wing hits for an unobservable total of 14 of the 21 ....please. Wherever a 20 strikes the propellor it shears it off at that location.

I think it far more likely that the plane was hit by a total of 21 rounds. TOTAL. Why would the U.S. fabricate or grow the story bigger than it was? In wartime, they are always concerned with Morale and Johnson a leading ace was undoubtedly missing and concern arose. What better way to assauge that concern than proclaim "Here he is and his plane brought him home despite being shot to shit". Morale. Those pictures and DT's breakdown of the damage defy credibility. I guess they'd have you believe 180 machine gun hits are in the wings despite the fact the FW190 has them housed in the fuselage. So something is wrong. The question is why? You'll find siimilar in almost all the accounts of the victors. The facts don't jive with the rhetoric.

Lies and the Lying Liars who tell them.


----------



## DAVIDICUS (Mar 12, 2005)

DJ_Dalton said: "Why would the U.S. fabricate or grow the story bigger than it was? In wartime, they are always concerned with Morale and Johnson a leading ace was undoubtedly missing and concern arose. What better way to assauge that concern than proclaim "Here he is and his plane brought him home despite being shot to s**t". Morale." 

So I assume that you are going with large conspiracy by the government. Have you ever noticed those black helicopters that follow you around? 

You are saying that he was "undoubtedly missing" and that in order to "assuage" concern over this "leading ace's" absence, they "produced" some P-47, apparently damaged it themselves and then said, "Here is his plane that brought him back" even though he was still missing? Huh? Wouldn't his return "assuage" any concern over his being "undoubtedly missing" irrespective of the condition of his plane upon return?

Why stop there. Let's continue with your government conspiracy reasoning per your logic. When Robert Johnson did come back, it wasn't Robert Johnson at all. Obviously the U.S. government, being interested in "assuaging" concern over a missing leading ace produced another pilot and proclaimed, "Here he is" and no one who knew differently ever said anything just like how no one who knew differently ever said anything about his plane not having taken 21 hits from a 20mm.

It's fair to say that neither of us is going to change the other's mind so we'll just have to agree to disagree. (If you are the real DJ_Dalton and not part of a neo-Nazi conspiracy to disparage Robert S. Johnson)


----------



## DJ_Dalton (Mar 12, 2005)

DAVIDICUS said:


> It's fair tyo say that neither of us is going to change the other's mind so we'll just have to agree to disagree. (If you are the real DJ_Dalton and not part of a neo-Nazi conspiracy to disparage Robert S. Johnson after his death when he can't defend himself.)



I'll rest my case on the photos shown and the photos not shown. I don't know what Robert Johnson said for sure or what he was stated to have said, but this P-47 is in a lot better shape than scores of others I've seen photos of. It may be the story broke well after the war.

Case Dismissed.


----------



## Udet (Mar 13, 2005)

Davidicus:

With all due respect I do not think the very particular topic on this thread is a case of learning to disagree.

It is rather a case where the evidence flatly fails to prove what has been told by the allied boys.

The parts of the P-47 shown on the photos here not only show only two or three 2 cm shell hits at the most, they also fail to show the two hundred 7.92 mm hits.

You might dislike Dalton here, but a good point was made when saying that if unbeliavable damage had been endured in parts other than the ones posted here, we will be seeing them, but there are none.

Guys I praise the P-47. It is my favorite USAAF fighter (by far). Being repetitive is somewhat necessary in on-line forums: it was fast, excellent roller and diver, and (again) it could take a good deal of punishment.

Still, no matter how sound and sturdy it was: there is not enough surface on the P-47 to take twenty one 2cm shells, keep flying and getting back in time to base for dinner.


----------



## DAVIDICUS (Mar 13, 2005)

Udet, DJ_Dalton said, "That P-47 was hit by 2 maybe 3 high explosive shell." He also said, "I think it far more likely that the plane was hit by a total of 21 rounds. TOTAL." (by total, he meant both 7.92mm and 20mm rounds)

Obviously, you agree with this assertion. This thread contains the recorded accounts of Johnson as well as pictures. I think you would agree with me that making it back to base with "2 maybe 3" 20mm hits along with 18 or 19 7.92mm hits would have been an unremarkable event at best. Moreover, his aircraft would not have been scrapped as a result which is what happened.

I don't know what more could be said. We just disagree. For example your assertion that, "German interceptos in many cases used 1/10 of the rounds Johnson´s P-47 allegedly took that day to shoot down a four engined heavy bomber such as the B-17 and B-24, which of course are heavier and far harder to destroy." I disagree. 

On another note and for the record, I don't at all "dislike" DJ_Dalton or anyone else who disagrees with me for that matter.


----------



## evangilder (Mar 14, 2005)

DJ, while I question the number of his as well, let's keep in mind that when the incident occurred, Johnson was not yet an ace! So a missing ace story would not be correct. However, it depends on when the story broke. Was it just after it happened, later or even post-war? I have heard the story in multiple versions, some say 21 20mm hits, while some say 21 _holes_ from 20mm hits. The quote was _There are twenty-one gaping holes and jagged tears in the metal from exploding 20mm cannon shells._ Is the claim 21 shells or 21 holes from shells? There is a big difference. 

Either way, I do believe that there is some embellishment to this story, and none of us can see the airplane today to look.


----------



## DJ_Dalton1 (Mar 15, 2005)

evangilder said:


> DJ, while I question the number of his as well, let's keep in mind that when the incident occurred, Johnson was not yet an ace! So a missing ace story would not be correct. However, it depends on when the story broke. Was it just after it happened, later or even post-war? I have heard the story in multiple versions, some say 21 20mm hits, while some say 21 _holes_ from 20mm hits. The quote was _There are twenty-one gaping holes and jagged tears in the metal from exploding 20mm cannon shells._ Is the claim 21 shells or 21 holes from shells? There is a big difference.
> 
> Either way, I do believe that there is some embellishment to this story, and none of us can see the airplane today to look.



I tried to find an article about this story I read. It stated that every square foot of the plane was riddled with bullets. Thats clearly not the case. You are correct though. I don't think Johnson had a single kill at the time of the incident. Good point, my bad. My guess now is that the story broke years after the event and time and good sales technique embellished it more than the government. Not that embellishment is beyond the Pentagon.


----------



## DAVIDICUS (Mar 15, 2005)

Actually the quote is, "Every square foot, it seems is covered with holes." That's different from your claim that the statement said, "[E]very square foot of the plane was riddled with bullets."

By analogy, the former is like a pilot saying, "The flak was so bad, it seemed like you could walk on it" and you then proclaiming that he said, "The flak was so bad, you could walk on it."

Do you see the difference? The former in both the actual quote and the analogy that follows is indeed an embellishment. When you see the words "seems" and/or "like", that should tip you off that it's an embellishment.

I am sticking to my belief in the story. Neener Neener.


----------



## Anonymous (Mar 15, 2005)

Udet said:


> Sorry guys it is not my intention to botch the party, but twenty one 2cm hits sounds a bit like a taste of hollywood there.
> 
> While a full load of 7.92mm bullets might certainly not be enough to bring down a sturdy P-47, the alleged amount of 2cm shells absorbed by this gentleman´s Thunderbolt is far beyond the realms of reality.
> 
> ...



That's the reported number of confirmable 20mm strikes Udet, along with "over 100" 7.9 mm hits. There was also a P-40 that made it home with over twenty 20mm hits in the MTO. I admit this was not typical, but there are many cases where P-47's and Corsairs are known to have survived well over a dozen 20mm hits and managed to carry their pilots significant distances from enemy to friendly territory - some managed to land, others were crash landed or bailed from.

=S=

Lunatic


----------



## DAVIDICUS (Mar 15, 2005)

RG_Lunatic: "There was also a P-40 that made it home with over twenty 20mm hits in the MTO. I admit this was not typical, but there are many cases where P-47's and Corsairs are known to have survived well over a dozen 20mm hits ..."

It sounds like you are of the opinion that a P-47 could in fact sustain such an onslaught of 20mm cannon fire. (I realize that such an opinion doesn't go to the veracity of Johnson's plane as indicated by the photos.)

Do you have any specific information on that P-40 or any other aircraft that took devastating hits and kept flying?

It's a fascinating subject and I will post a new topic for it.


----------



## Anonymous (Mar 15, 2005)

I've seen photos of Johnson's P-47, and I could clearly see at least a dozen 20mm hits, and scores of 7.9mm hits, espeically on the wings.

Before you go saying that the P-47 could not take 21 x 20mm hits, look at the damage this P-47 took from Japanese AA fire (much more potent than an MG151) and still flew home!

http://368thfightergroup.com/rife.html

Also, remember that typically only 2 in 5 of the 20mm rounds were HE, only one of those was maybe a "mine" round, and 1 in 4 HE rounds were duds. So of 21 20mm hits, typically about 4 would have been HE, and only 3 would have detonated.

=S=

Lunatic


----------



## Anonymous (Mar 15, 2005)

DAVIDICUS said:


> RG_Lunatic: "There was also a P-40 that made it home with over twenty 20mm hits in the MTO. I admit this was not typical, but there are many cases where P-47's and Corsairs are known to have survived well over a dozen 20mm hits ..."
> 
> It sounds like you are of the opinion that a P-47 could in fact sustain such an onslaught of 20mm cannon fire. (I realize that such an opinion doesn't go to the veracity of Johnson's plane as indicated by the photos.)
> 
> ...



I'll try to find the accounts. However, please don't mistake me, such occurances were the exception, not the rule. A lot of luck would be involved. But again, remember typically 5 types of cannon ammo were loaded, with only 2 being HE, only one of which might be a mine round, and 1 in 4 fused rounds were duds. In both Johnson's case and that of the P-40, it is entirely possible that no HE rounds were loaded, or that the batch of HE rounds had a higher than normal proprotion of duds or weak loads - again that's "luck".

In general, I'd say that the P-47 could probably sustain 20 x 20mm hits only if they mostly struck the wings, tail, and the fuselage behind the canopy. The wings of the P-47 are triple redundant in most respects, and could take a lot of hits. The fuselage rear of the cockpit does not have a lot of critical components and the armor plate will stop most MG151/20 cannon rounds from penetrating to more critical systems.

In the description of Johnson's ordeal, the FW sat on his dead six and shot him up. From that position, it would be very likely that the hits would indeed be mostly to the wings, rear fuselage, and tail.

As for the photos... we really don't have a good set of photos. We cannot see any of the damage that was probably inflicted on the wings, the most likely place for hits. I've been looking but have not found any more photos.

=S=

Lunatic


----------



## DAVIDICUS (Mar 15, 2005)

Holy sh*t!

http://368thfightergroup.com/rife.html 

That's beyond impressive RG. Without photos, such a description of damage would be clearly out of any reasonable bounds of reality and thus unbelievable.


The story indicates that the AA fire damage was inflicted by the Germans.


----------



## Anonymous (Mar 15, 2005)

I see you are correct, it was the Germans. I didn't read the story, the site I located it through indicated the photo was from the PTO.

Still, you see my point I hope. The P-47 could take tremendous damage, especially to the wings, and keep on flying. In fact, the only parts of the plane that are particularly vulnerable are the cockpit, which is well shielded from the front and rear by armor and the engine, and the fuel system, including the turbo-charger which runs along the belly of the plane from the engine back to just behind the pilot.

=S=

Lunatic


----------



## DAVIDICUS (Mar 16, 2005)

I do indeed see your point. I never doubted it for a second. You'll notice that I have been a defender of Johnson's claims on this thread.


----------



## DJ_Dalton1 (Mar 16, 2005)

RG_Lunatic said:


> I see you are correct, it was the Germans. I didn't read the story, the site I located it through indicated the photo was from the PTO.
> 
> Still, you see my point I hope. The P-47 could take tremendous damage, especially to the wings, and keep on flying. In fact, the only parts of the plane that are particularly vulnerable are the cockpit, which is well shielded from the front and rear by armor and the engine, and the fuel system, including the turbo-charger which runs along the belly of the plane from the engine back to just behind the pilot.
> 
> ...



Yes, That Jug took huge damage and flew home. I've seen other photos as bad or worse. The key to my mind is that they show the damage when its there. If Johnsons wings were as remotely shot up I tend to think in photos specifically taken to show damage, they would have showed the extent of it. Other than the canopy damage and fear of the flash fire and no ability to retract the canopy, which must have scared him to death, the plane is not very badly shot up. 

Post war where did Johnson rank as far as a living ace? 

http://www.acesofww2.com/USA/USA.htm

Bong was dead in a flying accident. McGuire was dead out of glory seeking. Preddy was dead. I think Gabby was alive. Johnson was #4 living ace. I think they had a book to sell.


----------



## Anonymous (Mar 16, 2005)

DJ_Dalton1 said:


> Yes, That Jug took huge damage and flew home. I've seen other photos as bad or worse. The key to my mind is that they show the damage when its there. If Johnsons wings were as remotely shot up I tend to think in photos specifically taken to show damage, they would have showed the extent of it. Other than the canopy damage and fear of the flash fire that must have scared him to death, the plane is not very badly shot up.
> 
> Post war where did Johnson rank as far as a living ace?
> 
> ...



I hope his descendants have photos to prove otherwise and sue you for slander


----------

