Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Aviation' started by Thorlifter, Aug 23, 2014.
Pretty cool comparison chart, I thought.
Wow she is a big one,great chart.
Never thought it was that much bigger than the 190.
I'd like to see it compared with a Typhoon/Tempest. I don't reckon there'd be much in it.
German single seaters were notoriously small. The Luftwaffe even developed a flying suit specifically for them, the 'Kombination, Winter, fur Flugzeug mit beschranken Raumverhaltnissen' (abbreviated as KW FL bR/40).
We have one of each to the Planes of Fame but I've never seen them parked together before. It does, however, drarf anything it is parked next to except the P-38 and the B-25.
What a hoss!
Check out B-36 at USAF Museum. That thing is a monster. XB-70 is pretty big also.
Wingspan: Typhoon 41' 7" P-47 D 40' 10" Tempest V 41' 0"
Length : Typhoon 31' 11" P-47 D 34' 10" Tempest V 33' 8"
Height : Typhoon 15'3" P-47 D 15' 7" Tempest V 16' 1"
Data from Mason (Typhoon/Tempest) and Dean's 'America's Hundred-Thousand' (P-47 D).
I'd check the scale on that super imposition. No doubt nonetheless that the P-47 was a BIG beast
It also makes you wonder which of these two (if either) is the more accurately scaled.
According to Wikipedia:
Vs. the Hellcat?
Length F6F-5: 33' 7" vs P-47D: 36' 1"
Wing Span: F6F-5: 42' 10" vs P-47D: 40' 9"
Height: F6F-5: 13' 1" vs P-47D: 14' 8"
Wing Area: F6F-5: 334 ft^2 vs P-47D: 300 ft^2
Max T/O Weight: F6F-5: 15,415 lbs vs P-47D: 17,500 lbs
AHT provides a P-47D length that is in accord with Steve's value. 34' 10"
The P-47 was a beast, no doubt but the Tiffy was a big girl, too...
I've always loved that Tiffy's Clutch Cargo chin!
...another way to look at it...
Suprisingly similar in size, but definitely built for two different purposes.
Isn't that pic a Tempest and P-47? Looks like Tempest with a mighty, if fast turning, Sabre ...
Yep. It's Hasegawa's 1/32 P-47 and PCM's 1/32 Tempest V. Dragged out of my display cabinet for a moment in the sun...or on my work bench
Obviously comparing models is not the same as comparing the real thing as I don't know how accurately scaled the two are. I doubt that either is miles out though.
Top views would be real interesting, as would adding the F6F and/or F4U
I was thinking the same…
vs. the Corsair according to AHT:
Length F4U-4: 33' 8" vs P-47D: 34' 10"
Wing Span: F4U-4: 40' 11.7" vs P-47D: 40' 9"
Height: F4U-4: 15' 1.25" vs P-47D: 14' 8"
Wing Area: F4U: 314 ft^2 vs P-47D: 300 ft^2
Max T/O Weight: F4U: 14,670 lbs vs P-47D: 17,500 lbs
So let me ask this question. WHY was the P-47 so large? I mean it had the same engine as the F4U and F6F, and while those planes are very similar it length, height, and wingspan, the Jug was heavier and had a much larger body. Was it for ruggedness? Was it to carry a larger payload? Was it to support the 8 x .50's?
The turbocharger is located behind the cockpit and the deep belly is all ducting to get the exhaust and fresh air toithe turbo and the compressed air back to the carburetor. The bottom 1/3 of the fuselage is pure ducting. Maybe that has something to do with the size.
The P-47N was a formidable opponent with heavy armamaent, high speed, and high altitude capabiilities.
As Greg has said it is to house the ducting for the turbo charger in part. It was to carry the extra pair of .50 cal guns (and ammo, 425rpg is over 250lbs for two guns) and in part the fuel. Early P-47s carried 55 gallons more than an F6F inside the plane.
Leaving external loads aside the P-47 was designed to carry a heavier war load at a higher altitude than the Navy planes.
Size of the airplane is determined by the initial engine, prop, useful load (weapons/fuel) and field characteristics. What they could cram in later with longer runways, 20-40% more power and better props had very little to do with the size of the airframe as designed.