Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
DAVIDICUS said:FLYBOYJ said, "as DAVIDICUS said, I would keep it below 30K"
I don't think it would be necessary to keep it below 30K against the Spitfire. The P-47N though has the advantage of a very good turbosupercharger that enables it to maintain power at high altitudes.
DAVIDICUS said:True, the armaments of each aircraft are roughly equal but the ability of each aircraft to sustain damage and continue the fight is not. Additionally, the F4U-4 has the capacity maintain fire for a longer period of time due to large ammunition stores.
The advantage here goes to the F4U-4.
Why are two 20mm's and two .50's better than six .50's?
At any rate, four .50 hits could cripple the Spitfire as well
The US Air force conducted tests late in the war and concluded that a single 20mm had the effectiveness of two .50's. The US Navy also conducted tests and concluded that a single 20mm had the effectivenss of 2.5 .50's.
Soren, who said anything about surface damage?
The .50 could easily penetrate into and penetrate critical areas. And yes, I was talking about .50 strikes in "key" spots such as the engine which I specifically referenced.
Six .50's firing at a rate of 850 rpm means 85 rounds per second that are set to converge within a three foot circle at 300 yards.
The F4U-4 has advantages it can draw on in a dogfight as well.