P-43 vs P-47

Discussion in 'Aviation' started by Shortround6, May 22, 2014.

  1. Shortround6

    Shortround6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2009
    Messages:
    9,761
    Likes Received:
    793
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    retired Firefighter
    Location:
    Central Florida Highlands
    From another thread

    "That depends on your objective. You could turn a state of the art lightweight fighter aircraft into a flying brick like USA did with the P-43 to P-47 evolution.

    P-43A. R1830 engine. Empty weight = 5,982 lbs.
    P-47D. R2800 engine. Empty weight = 10,000 lbs."


    A bit of hand picking numbers and a lot of BS.

    The P-43 as a "state of the art lightweight fighter aircraft"???

    from Joe Baughers web site.

    "However, by 1941, the Lancer was already outdated by the rapid advances in air combat technology that had taken place in Europe. It suffered from poor maneuverability and climbing performance, and lacked such modern innovations as armor protection for the pilot and self-sealing fuel tanks."

    Weights for a P-43 " were 5996 pounds empty and 7435 pounds gross. Maximum takeoff weight was 8480 pounds" which while light by P-47 standards was hardly light by world standards.

    The P-43 was hardly state of the art being pretty much a 1935 P-35 with a turbo-ed engine and modified landing gear and it was hardly "light weight" as it weighed clean about what a Spitfire MK IX or Griffon powered powered MK XII did while carrying less firepower and a less powerful engine.

    The P-47 "flying brick" was only about 35-70mph faster than the P-43 depending on altitude, had about 5-6,000ft more ceiling and carried double the number of guns.
     
  2. T Bolt

    T Bolt Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2010
    Messages:
    9,724
    Likes Received:
    194
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Bridge & Highway Construction Inspector
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    The only reason there were as many P-43 built as there were was that the Air Corps wanted to keep Republic’s production line going until the P-47 was ready to mass produce. None were used by the US in combat and many were given to the Chinese through lend lease. Some of these made it to the AVG who also did not use them in combat considering the early P-40C’s they had superior. The gas tanks leaked so bad that shortly after the 23rd FG took over they were all grounded, and this at a time when there was a despite need for fighters in China.
    The best that can be said for the P-43 is that it led to the development of the P-47.
     
  3. wuzak

    wuzak Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2011
    Messages:
    4,179
    Likes Received:
    167
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Hobart Tasmania
    And less armour.

    I wonder if the RAF would have considered actually combat ready.
     
  4. Shortround6

    Shortround6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2009
    Messages:
    9,761
    Likes Received:
    793
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    retired Firefighter
    Location:
    Central Florida Highlands
    BTW, weight for a bare "B" series turbo charger as used in the P-43 is 132-144lbs depending on exact model while the weight of a "C" series turbo as use in the P-47 is 230-235lbs. Weight difference between the engine used in a P-47 and the two stage engines used in the Navy planes is 215lbs. Ducting and inter-coolers not included.

    Weight difference between the engine used in the P-43 (1450-1473lb) and two stage engine used in F4F-4 Wildcat (1560lbs) is 87-110lbs. Ducting and inter-coolers not included.
     
Loading...

Share This Page