Best piston engined fighter of 1945?

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

I'm wondering where the fuel to run the engines longer than to start up and taxi out for takeoff goes. I'm guessing it goes where the piston engine used to go, perhaps with an external spigot so you could fill up heating tanks in winter.

If it has enough fuel to actually take off, can it fly farther than around the pattern?

If they actually put a guy in the nose, where is the armament?

I know, stop with the pesky questions already. It obviously would have been the best fighter ever.
 
GregP said:
If they actually put a guy in the nose, where is the armament?
Click to expand...
I can only assume the mighty punch of those four .30 cal in the wings was thought adequate to dispatch any victim.

Looks like a experiment in making people airsick, as far as the radar operator is concerned. I've felt sorry for those poor chaps in the nose of a P-38 Droop Snoop or the EW version but the P-39 RO looks to be far worse off.

 
Last edited:
If the P-51H and P-47M are allowed, I'll take the F4U-4B/N Corsair - available in both day and night versions, with 4x20mm cannon.
 
GreenKnight121 said:
If the P-51H and P-47M are allowed, I'll take the F4U-4B/N Corsair - available in both day and night versions, with 4x20mm cannon.
Click to expand...
F4U-4 production began in December 1944, the F4U-4B began production in April 1946 and any F4U-4 night fighters were conversions. Production F4U night fighters began with the F4U-5N in March 1948.

All 5 F2G-1 were accepted in 1945, along with 3 out of 5 F2G-2. The 5 XF2G-1 prototypes were accepted in 1944.
 
Last edited:
And as I mentioned, that's sort of a problem with this list in terms of scope. Like for example, the P-51D was a top performer and was available in huge numbers (the D alone was built in larger numbers than some whole aircraft series). The P-51H was an even better performer, but entered service just before the Japanese surrender, hence missing the European Theater, and as far as is known, none saw combat in World War II (or ever, they were used by the USAAF/USAF post war, then were transferred to the ANG/USAFR starting just before the Korean War). The P-82B didn't enter production until just before or just after VJ Day, the USAAF didn't get their first production example until Oct 1945, and the pretty much identical XP-82 didn't have its first official flight until June 1945.

The P-47M was built in few numbers (for the same reason the XP-51F and G were cancelled and the design was morphed into the P-51H and why the XP-72 went nowhere, the USAAF wanted escort fighters, not really pure interceptors). And for the XP-51F/G and the XP-72, see previous sentence.
 
BarnOwlLover said:
The P-47M was built in few numbers (for the same reason the XP-51F and G were cancelled and the design was morphed into the P-51H and why the XP-72 went nowhere, the USAAF wanted escort fighters, not really pure interceptors).
Click to expand...
The P-47M was intended to be an interceptor, designed with the V-1, Me163 and Me262 in mind.

The last 130 P-47D-30-RE aircraft were converted to a P-47M-1-RE configuration in late 1944.
They entered service in Europe in April 1945.
 
And it also doesn't help (though rarely used as an interceptor) that the P-51D, especially on higher boost levels, was a better climber and had higher speeds, especially at lower altitudes (the P-51B/Mustang III on 81" could top 410 mph at Sea Level in RAF use for V-1 interception, one would have to assume that the D would've done similar performance).

The P-47M and N had the edge on the P-51D at higher altitudes as far as speed, but the H would've closed the gap and been even better down low (even though the H had a high altitude rated engine--the -9 being a beefed up -3 V-1650 Merlin).
 
GrauGeist said:
The P-47M was intended to be an interceptor, designed with the V-1, Me163 and Me262 in mind.

The last 130 P-47D-30-RE aircraft were converted to a P-47M-1-RE configuration in late 1944.
They entered service in Europe in April 1945.
Click to expand...

Didn't the 56th FG, as the OG 8th AAF P-47 unit, (& eventually as the sole 8th AAF FG to retain Thunderbolts throughout the ETO air war),
essentially have a defacto role to spearhead the P-47 in air combat development?

(As fighter aircraft - primarily for air-to-air superiority duties - compared to the bulk of ETO P-47s - doing tactical ground attack duties).

Anyhow, they worked hard on de-bugging the new C-series R-2800, which could make good high-altitude speed (turbo-duct seals permitting)
- but no operational Thunderbolt really had the low-level performance needed for V1 cruise-missile interception duties, not even the P-47M.
 
The 56th FG was assigned the P-47M for work up.

Not sure about not being able to intercept a V-1, the P-47M could make 470mph at 30,000 feet, the V-1's max. speed was about 400mph at an average altitude between two and three thousand feet.
 
GrauGeist said:
The 56th FG was assigned the P-47M for work up.

Not sure about not being able to intercept a V-1, the P-47M could make 470mph at 30,000 feet, the V-1's max. speed was about 400mph at an average altitude between two and three thousand feet.
Click to expand...
USAAF testing shows the WEP (2800HP/72"Hg/ADI) performance of the P-47M - as "367mph at S.L." & "384mph at 5,000ft".
 
J.A.W. said:
USAAF testing shows the WEP (2800HP/72"Hg/ADI) performance of the P-47M - as "367mph at S.L." & "384mph at 5,000ft".
Click to expand...
Which P-47M test results are these?

These results appear to be the early P-47D-27-RE conversions with the R-2800-57C engines before the new 13' Curtiss prop was installed.

With the Curtiss C542S-B40, the YP-47M's performance changed considerably and was the basis of the production version.
 
The figures are from the USAAF Air Materiel Centre Wright Field tests, dated 6th October 1944, and comply with SAC figures as below:

 

Reading the AMC test reports, it would appear the P-47M is a pre-production P-47N, fitted with P-47D wings?
Could the P-47D fuselage accommodate the 'extra fat' R-2800-C with its upsized turbomachinery?
 
I would go with p51, p47, F6F, the Corsair. All American, but what do you expect from such a dominant superpower.

P47 better all rounder and more survivable than P51, but it is half the price.
 
gruad said:
I would go with p51, p47, F6F, the Corsair. All American, but what do you expect from such a dominant superpower.

P47 better all rounder and more survivable than P51, but it is half the price.
Click to expand...
P-47 was referred to as a 'rolling crematorium' when at the end of a mile-long strip, bung-full of juice, gasping with turbo-surge,
& still not airborne, or so's the Mustang jockeys would have tell.

I'd reckon this one is pretty slick, if you'd care to check it out, it was kept in good order for a decade by the factory, then scrapped!

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

Best piston engine(s) for fighters of 1945?
5 6 7
Replies
130
Views
12K
spicmart
S
M
Pinnacle of Piston fighter: XP-72 vs Spiteful Mk XVI?
3 4 5
Replies
83
Views
5K
Jugman
J
W
The scarcity of fighter to fighter FW-190A pilot combat accounts...
2
Replies
34
Views
2K
Engineman
E
Best "general purpose" prop fighter also capable of best high altitude performance
2
Replies
31
Views
3K
PAT303
P
A
Best Axis four engined bomber?
Replies
9
Views
2K
dedalos
D
Menu
Log in
Register