P-47 in the ETO

[pathfinder44]

Good reference here:

 

[P-39 Expert]

P-47 was a huge disappointment. Introduced in combat in April 1943 as an escort fighter with no capability for external tanks it had a combat radius of around 230mi. or the western border of Germany and a tiny sliver of France. Drop tanks were finally made available in August that allowed a radius of 375mi that was still 150mi short of Berlin. By the time the P-47 had enough internal and external fuel to go anywhere the battle for air superiority in western Europe had already been won. By January 1944 the decision had been made (not implemented) that the P-47 would be transferred to the 9thAF (tactical) for ground attack missions.

It was big, fast and tough but maneuverability was slow and climb rate was very average, about the same as contemporary FW190s but nowhere near a contemporary Me109G (or P-38H or P-51B). It was a bomber escort fighter with very short range, and later a turbocharged ground attack plane.

 

[pbehn]

P-47 was a huge disappointment. Introduced in combat in April 1943 as an escort fighter with no capability for external tanks it had a combat radius of around 230mi. or the western border of Germany and a tiny sliver of France. Drop tanks were finally made available in August that allowed a radius of 375mi that was still 150mi short of Berlin. By the time the P-47 had enough internal and external fuel to go anywhere the battle for air superiority in western Europe had already been won. By January 1944 the decision had been made (not implemented) that the P-47 would be transferred to the 9thAF (tactical) for ground attack missions.

It was big, fast and tough but maneuverability was slow and climb rate was very average, about the same as contemporary FW190s but nowhere near a contemporary Me109G (or P-38H or P-51B). It was a bomber escort fighter with very short range, and later a turbocharged ground attack plane.

It wasnt introduced as an escort fighter, there was no requirement for an escort fighter in April 1943. Drop tanks were made available when they were asked for, which was when the US finally accepted that escorts were required at all times, this was after April 1943.

 

[Denniss]

The P-47 paved the way for the P-51 by killing or disabling many Luftwaffe pilots. That amount of air combat and the losses in pilots was not sustainable by the Luftwaffe in late 43 to spring 44 while the USAAF had lots of a/c and trained pilots to cover losses. Then the P-51 came with its even longer range.
Yes, the P-47 was big and fat but it was fast. And the Fw 190 could not simply dive away form a P-47 as it could from many other types then in service.

 

[drgondog]

It wasnt introduced as an escort fighter, there was no requirement for an escort fighter in April 1943. Drop tanks were made available when they were asked for, which was when the US finally accepted that escorts were required at all times, this was after April 1943.

No - it was introduced as escort fighter in ETO. The only escort available for 8th AF after the three P-38 escort FGs were sent to Africa and stripped VIII FC of all FG's except Spit equipped 4th FG and a gaggle of 78th FG pilots without fighters - also P-38 equipped - but all aircraft were sent to N.Africa. Eaker was bitter but soldiered on. The P-47 did have greater range than Spits and P-39s and P-40s with much better bomber altitude performance.

Eaker was still optimistic that B-17 losses would remain acceptable if given an operational inventory of 600 bomber - said optimism was crushed during Blitz Week.

That said, until May 1943, the 4th, 56th and 78th P-47Cs were primarily used for Sweep and RAF provided escort to shorter range penetrations in France/Holland. A lot of errors were made - both by Materiel Command and by Generals Hunter/Eaker in expediting development of external combat tank - but the supply of P-38s was woefully under demand and it took the heavy losses of late July 1943 for Eaker and Arnold to re-prioritize the P-38 deployments back to ETO, as well as the P-51B.

 

[drgondog]

P-47 was a huge disappointment. Introduced in combat in April 1943 as an escort fighter with no capability for external tanks it had a combat radius of around 230mi. or the western border of Germany and a tiny sliver of France.

Combat radius of the P-47C and D until the use of the 205gal ferry tank at end of July 1943 was approx. 125-130 miles. Germany was reached on July 28 at end of Blitz eek.

Drop tanks were finally made available in August that allowed a radius of 375mi that was still 150mi short of Berlin. By the time the P-47 had enough internal and external fuel to go anywhere the battle for air superiority in western Europe had already been won. By January 1944 the decision had been made (not implemented) that the P-47 would be transferred to the 9thAF (tactical) for ground attack missions.

No, the 75 gal tank in August and 110 gal in September extended combat radius to 230, then 275 miles. 375 miles was not attainable until external racks and feed for wing were introduced late March/April 1944

It was big, fast and tough but maneuverability was slow and climb rate was very average, about the same as contemporary FW190s but nowhere near a contemporary Me109G (or P-38H or P-51B). It was a bomber escort fighter with very short range, and later a turbocharged ground attack plane.

You understate the importance and value of the P-47D prior to introduction of 370 gal internal fuel. 'Very Short Range' is appropriate for Spitfire, never for P-47 excet in comparison with medium altitude Allison Mustangs and P-38 and Japanese A6M. The success of 8th AF was very much complimented by utilization of P-47 for medium range Penetration and Withdrawal escort, to enable the relatively few Mustang and Lightning Groups in 1st half 1944. At high altitude its performance (P-47D-11 w/WI and Paddle Blade introduced in combat Jan 1944) exeeded Bf 109G and Fw 190A in climb, speed, turn and dive.

 

[drgondog]

The P-47 paved the way for the P-51 by killing or disabling many Luftwaffe pilots. That amount of air combat and the losses in pilots was not sustainable by the Luftwaffe in late 43 to spring 44 while the USAAF had lots of a/c and trained pilots to cover losses. Then the P-51 came with its even longer range.
Yes, the P-47 was big and fat but it was fast. And the Fw 190 could not simply dive away form a P-47 as it could from many other types then in service.

The comment, while correct in macroscopic study, overstates the contribution of P-47 operations in ETO in 1943. Both RAF and 8th AF attritted LW - primarily LuftFlotte 3's JG 2 and JG 26 as well as Lw Bfh Mitte deployed units to western Germany and Holland incl some JG 1, JG 3 and JG 11. The real attrition occurred as lw Bfh Mitte, then Luft Flotte Reich were steadily reinforced from Ost and Sud fronts - with experienced pilots in 1944. Additionally, the P-47 victims included high % t/e such as Bf 110, Me 210/Me 410, Ju 88 - both day and night fighter units.

 

[manta22]

Patton, in his book "War As I Knew It", stated that he could tell when Thunderbolts had operated in an area by looking at 50 caliber holes in the concrete highways.

 

[P-39 Expert]

Combat radius of the P-47C and D until the use of the 205gal ferry tank at end of July 1943 was approx. 125-130 miles. Germany was reached on July 28 at end of Blitz eek.

205gal ferry tank was a dismal failure and couldn't be used effectively in combat.

No, the 75 gal tank in August and 110 gal in September extended combat radius to 230, then 275 miles. 375 miles was not attainable until external racks and feed for wing were introduced late March/April 1944

So, combat radius was actually shorter than I said. Good. Regarding March/April 1944, the battle for air superiority had already been won by then. And the P-47 was still 150mi short of Berlin.

You understate the importance and value of the P-47D prior to introduction of 370 gal internal fuel. 'Very Short Range' is appropriate for Spitfire, never for P-47 excet in comparison with medium altitude Allison Mustangs and P-38 and Japanese A6M. The success of 8th AF was very much complimented by utilization of P-47 for medium range Penetration and Withdrawal escort, to enable the relatively few Mustang and Lightning Groups in 1st half 1944. At high altitude its performance (P-47D-11 w/WI and Paddle Blade introduced in combat Jan 1944) exeeded Bf 109G and Fw 190A in climb, speed, turn and dive.

Medium range penetration and withdrawal escort was no great feat and could have been accomplished by other planes.

 

[GrauGeist]

Medium range penetration and withdrawal escort was no great feat and could have be

Such as...?

 

[drgondog]

205gal ferry tank was a dismal failure and couldn't be used effectively in combat.

But it was. The 4th and 56th FG surprised the LW on July 28th when they attacked I/JG3 and I./JG26 from the East. That said it was strictly a brief bridge until the 75 gal combat tank arrived in numbers to replace all Ferry tanks.

So, combat radius was actually shorter than I said. Good. Regarding March/April 1944, the battle for air superiority had already been won by then. And the P-47 was still 150mi short of Berlin.

In March 1944, there were many air battles inside Brunswick/Stuttgart radius. The 56th was particularly effective in March 1944.

Medium range penetration and withdrawal escort was no great feat and could have been accomplished by other planes.

Lol. Like the P-39? Or Spit? or Typhoon? Medium Range Penetration and Withdrawal escort combat radius was far greater in Q1 1944, than 'deep' penetration in Fall 1943.

There were zero fighter excort in Allied inventory that had more range/combat radius for daylight escort save the P-51B/P-38J in Q1 1944. Period. The P-51B would not have been as effective wihout P-47D doing the intermediate escort.

 

[drgondog]

Patton, in his book "War As I Knew It", stated that he could tell when Thunderbolts had operated in an area by looking at 50 caliber holes in the concrete highways.

Concrete highways were also runways in east and south Germany. Stomping grounds for P-51 and P-38 strafing in 1944 and 1945, particularly when Patton was driving through SE Germany. He may have been unaware that other US fighters also had 0.50 cal.

 

[P-39 Expert]

But it was. The 4th and 56th FG surprised the LW on July 28th when they attacked I/JG3 and I./JG26 from the East. That said it was strictly a brief bridge until the 75 gal combat tank arrived in numbers to replace all Ferry tanks.

One mission is not a success. The 205gal tank was a failure.

In March 1944, there were many air battles inside Brunswick/Stuttgart radius. The 56th was particularly effective in March 1944.

Still 75 miles short of Berlin.

Lol. Like the P-39? Or Spit? or Typhoon? Medium Range Penetration and Withdrawal escort combat radius was far greater in Q1 1944, than 'deep' penetration in Fall 1943.

There were zero fighter excort in Allied inventory that had more range/combat radius for daylight escort save the P-51B/P-38J in Q1 1944. Period. The P-51B would not have been as effective wihout P-47D doing the intermediate escort.

My point exactly, the P-47 wasn't needed for medium range escort when there were long range escorts available. They could do their own medium range missions.

 

[pbehn]

No - it was introduced as escort fighter in ETO. The only escort available for 8th AF after the three P-38 escort FGs were sent to Africa and stripped VIII FC of all FG's except Spit equipped 4th FG and a gaggle of 78th FG pilots without fighters - also P-38 equipped - but all aircraft were sent to N.Africa. Eaker was bitter but soldiered on. The P-47 did have greater range than Spits and P-39s and P-40s with much better bomber altitude performance.

Eaker was still optimistic that B-17 losses would remain acceptable if given an operational inventory of 600 bomber - said optimism was crushed during Blitz Week.

That said, until May 1943, the 4th, 56th and 78th P-47Cs were primarily used for Sweep and RAF provided escort to shorter range penetrations in France/Holland. A lot of errors were made - both by Materiel Command and by Generals Hunter/Eaker in expediting development of external combat tank - but the supply of P-38s was woefully under demand and it took the heavy losses of late July 1943 for Eaker and Arnold to re-prioritize the P-38 deployments back to ETO, as well as the P-51B.

Sorry, with the date April 1943 I thought he was talking about first operations from UK. The first P-47s started arriving around November 1942, which means they were being made and shipped before the USA themselves had started operations with B-17s. I must confess the thing has me flummoxed, while most missions had escorts with Spits and then P-47s as far as they could reach there were people arguing that they werent needed. The British had a similar bipolar situation, Wellingtons would shoot down German fighters as soon as they came up, but Spitfires and Hurricanes would repel any attack.

 

[drgondog]

One mission is not a success. The 205gal tank was a failure.

Define failure? Did it not extend range > 50 mi? Did the employment of the 205 gal Ferry tank contribute to a tactical success? Was there an alternative available? was it retired as soon as the 75 gal combat tank became oprational? Was the P-47D with 205gal external tank capable of escort rnges 2x over P-39?

Still 75 miles short of Berlin.

And yet 300+ miles further than P-39, Spitfire, P-40?

My point exactly, the P-47 wasn't needed for medium range escort when there were long range escorts available. They could do their own medium range missions.

But 'medium range' missions to Schweinfurt, Stuttgart, Hanover, Brunswick, Halberstadt were all options for P-47D as TARGET escort, giving 8th AF Planners a variety of options. It may have eluded you but P-51B/P-38J equipped FGs in April 1944 were only enough (combined) to escort one-two combat wings from each Bomb Division.

 

[pbehn]

My point exactly, the P-47 wasn't needed for medium range escort when there were long range escorts available. They could do their own medium range missions.

If you have 800 P-47s use of 800 Spitfires, 100 P-51s and 100 P-38s how would you put together a mission?

 

[P-39 Expert]

Define failure? Did it not extend range > 50 mi? Did the employment of the 205 gal Ferry tank contribute to a tactical success? Was there an alternative available? was it retired as soon as the 75 gal combat tank became oprational? Was the P-47D with 205gal external tank capable of escort rnges 2x over P-39?

Failure means it wasn't adopted as a regular drop tank in the 8thAF inventory. One or two missions doesn't mean success. Why are you bringing up the P-39? We've beaten the combat radius of the P-39 and P-47 to death in other threads.

And yet 300+ miles further than P-39, Spitfire, P-40?

Why bring up the P-39 and P-40? P-39 with a 110gal drop tank and 120gal internal had about the same combat radius as a P-47 with a 110gal drop tank. A clean 1943 P-40N could not even climb to 25000' much less escort bombers at that height. With drop tanks it would be lucky to get to 20000'.

But 'medium range' missions to Schweinfurt, Stuttgart, Hanover, Brunswick, Halberstadt were all options for P-47D as TARGET escort, giving 8th AF Planners a variety of options. It may have eluded you but P-51B/P-38J equipped FGs in April 1944 were only enough (combined) to escort one-two combat wings from each Bomb Division.

Your big escort fighter didn't have the range for escort. In only 8 months (May-Dec 1943) it would be destined for the 9th AF and ground attack missions.

 

[pbehn]

Your big escort fighter didn't have the range for escort. In only 8 months (May-Dec 1943) it would be destined for the 9th AF and ground attack missions.

During big week the vast majority of escort fighters were Spitfires and P-47s

 

[drgondog]

Failure means it wasn't adopted as a regular drop tank in the 8thAF inventory. One or two missions doesn't mean success. Why are you bringing up the P-39? We've beaten the combat radius of the P-39 and P-47 to death in other threads.

It may have escaped your attention that the 205gal tank was a FERRY Tank and widespread adopted for successful FERRY ops. It was a desparation move to employ it in combat because of its' proclivity to blow up when hit by enemy fire. In the very risky deployment to extend range and surprise the LW, it was 100% success. It was immediately retired in favor of 75gal, then 108 gal combat tank. End of story. As to mentioning the P-39, it was strictly for amusement.

Why bring up the P-39 and P-40? P-39 with a 110gal drop tank and 120gal internal had about the same combat radius as a P-47 with a 110gal drop tank. A clean 1943 P-40N could not even climb to 25000' much less escort bombers at that height. With drop tanks it would be lucky to get to 20000'.

Very funny and equally delusional. The P-39 with a 75gal drop tank and 120 Gallons of internal fuel had a decent FERRY Range of approx 700mi at 10,000 feet- don't (continue) confusing Range with Combat Radius.

The clean P-40N had about the same altitude peformance as the P-39Q - meaning 'not much' above 18K - but with full internal combat load and same 75 gal external combat tank had a range of approx 1000mi at 10,000 feet.

W/L for both about the same with P-40 about 2% higher. The Breguet Formula for Range =f(W/L), f(n) propeller efficiency and f(fuel consumption). All things equal I would give a very slight edge to P-39 if Fuel quantity at takeoff same - but P-40 internal fuel 30% greater. Placing P39 on Range Suck List - at the very bottom of USAAF Fighters. Your attempt to graft silk ears to a 'range hoggette' reminds of Don Quixote in days of olde.

That said, the P-47C/D Range on 305 gal fuel is approx 200 mi greater than P39 on 120 gal internal fueland approximately 50mi less than P-40N with 75 gal combat tank.

Your big escort fighter didn't have the range for escort. In only 8 months (May-Dec 1943) it would be destined for the 9th AF and ground attack missions.

???? my 'big escort fighter' is the P-51B (compared to P-40 and P-39 and Spitfire). Sadly your grasp of history regarding fighter operations is too lmited for useful exchange of facts. It may elude you that the P-47M with 56th FG was ot flying CAS and in fact routinely escorting and weeping into east Germany/Czechoslovakia in 1945? The question was never that the P-47D failed to achieve near parity with P-51B/D - only that it was too late for pre-D Day escort fighter battles past Brunswick and Stuttgart.

 

[Howard Gibson]

The clean P-40N had about the same altitude peformance as the P-39Q - meaning 'not much' above 18K - but with full internal combat load and same 75 gal external combat tank had a range of approx 1000mi at 10,000 feet.

The P-39Q would just about be the diametric opposite of any P-47. It was pretty quick down below 10,000ft, and just about useless over 15,000ft. How do you get "the same altitude performance" bit?