P-47 Movie (26 mb)

[Anonymous]

Enjoy!

=S=

Lunatic

 

[evangilder]

WOW! RG, that was awesome! It's a large size, but well worth it. Thanks for posting that. 8) I know a WWII P-47 crew chief that is going to enjoy that.

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

when i get broadband i'll try an get that one.............

 

[Udet]

RG:

That is an extremely interesting video!

What i find a bit strange though, is that on my guncamera footage collection i have the shot showing the Fw190 getting hit (the only one shown on this video). I wonder if it really was the guncamera of a P-47 from that specific fighter group.

I have detected many of these mistakes. For example, on one book I have, there is a series of photos from a guncamera showing "a Bf 110 getting pounded by a RAF interceptor during the Battle of Britain". Later on, i would discover it was in fact a P-38 getting shot down, when by a big coincidence i had the opportunity of seeing the actual guncamera recording! (The film was not of best quality, perhaps contributing to confuse the ones who made the book)

By the way, that particular shot shows how capable of absorbing damage the Fw190 was; play it many times and you´ll see it took three or four hits at very close range without showing any dramatic damage.

 

[DaveB.inVa]

Lots of errors take place like that in books, movies and documentaries all the time. About 3/4 of the stuff you see on the History channel has errors like that in it. My big peeve is seeing whats supposed to be the Enola Gay and it has turrets and Hamilton Standard props.

 

[polebrook351st]

Great film,would like to see some more.

 

[Anonymous]

RG:

That is an extremely interesting video!

What i find a bit strange though, is that on my guncamera footage collection i have the shot showing the Fw190 getting hit (the only one shown on this video). I wonder if it really was the guncamera of a P-47 from that specific fighter group.

I'm pretty sure the footage is from the P-47 group that had color cameras installed all over the plane to capture the action in 1945 just before the end of the war. It can be seen in full in one of "The Color of War" episodes, which show frequently on THC.

I agree that guncam footage is probably from earlier in the war, and may not even be from a P-47.

I have detected many of these mistakes. For example, on one book I have, there is a series of photos from a guncamera showing "a Bf 110 getting pounded by a RAF interceptor during the Battle of Britain". Later on, i would discover it was in fact a P-38 getting shot down, when by a big coincidence i had the opportunity of seeing the actual guncamera recording! (The film was not of best quality, perhaps contributing to confuse the ones who made the book)

By the way, that particular shot shows how capable of absorbing damage the Fw190 was; play it many times and you´ll see it took three or four hits at very close range without showing any dramatic damage.

Well, as pointed out above by both of us, we really don't know when that footage was gathered or what kind of gun is hitting the plane, I highly suspect this is BoB footage from .303's. Also, it is very hard to assess damage from such images unless something major breaks off the target or it bursts into flames or explodes. Furthermore, I'm watching "Target Berlin" on the Military Channel right now and it has numerous clips of the wings popping off the FW's after only a fraction of a second of fire (perhaps 5 hits?). If you look at the wing structure of the FW below, it really is not built that tough - it has little redundancy and the axial runners are quite minimal in terms of structure (they're completely hollow twin "bows" which will loose integrity on almost any hit), as compared to those of the US fighters which are solid except for access holes. The FW wing was made to be rigid, but it really was not made to absorb a lot of damage.

The FW190 was certainly a tough plane when compared to the 109 or the Spitfire. But you really cannot compare it to the P-47 or F4U. The following cutaway's show the construction of several planes for comparison:

FW190A-8

P-47C

F4U-1

P-51D

Spitfire Mk.I

A6M "Zero"

As you can see, the structure of the FW is less than even the P-51, but more than either the Spit I or the Zero. Both the Corsair and the P-47 have tremendously more solid construction than the FW. Also, both use steel spars where the FW uses an aluminum spar, and sheet aluminum is "double thick" as compared to much thinner aluminum on the FW (which requires a special stepping spot to avoid damage to the wing).

Overall, not counting cooling system vulnerability (a big issue), I'd say the FW was much tougher than the Yak, Zero, or 109, a little tougher than the Spitfire (varies with model), perahaps a little tougher than the La5 or La7 (this could be debated), about the same as the P-51, and much less tough than the P-47, F4U, F6F, Typhoon, or Tempest.

In the end, the weight of a fighter usually gives a very good idea how tough it was.

=S=

Lunatic

 

[CharlesBronson]

Some of the drastical failures in FW-190 that you named, probably was caused by the 50 cal API that punctured one or more 20 mm shell of the wings guns causing a internal deflagration of stored ammo. Also one explosion of unarmored oxigen bottles can cause a similar efect

This fenomen can be seen more often in FW-190 than BF-109 wich have a simplier wing estructure.

One of his advantages is that Focke-Wulf have a much better pilot armor.

 

[Anonymous]

Some of the drastical failures in FW-190 that you named, probably was caused by the 50 cal API that punctured one or more 20 mm shell of the wings guns causing a internal deflagration of stored ammo. Also one explosion of unarmored oxigen bottles can cause a similar efect

This fenomen can be seen more often in FW-190 than BF-109 wich have a simplier wing estructure.

One of his advantages is that Focke-Wulf have a much better pilot armor.

It is certainly possible an ammo hit caused the wing to pop off, but there are also films of the tail poping off after taking just an instant of .50 fire (from 6 guns).

As for armor, the FW armor was "fair", but certianly not great.

FW190A-4

Armor on the FW-190 is located in the following areas: the pilot is protected by the engine and 60 mm armored glass. Nose of the plane enclosing the oil radiator is made of 5 mm armored plate; the rest of the nose is 3 mm armor.

There is also an 8 mm armored seat that covers the pilot up to the shoulder level. There is an indent in the sear for the parachute. A 5 mm armored plate behind the pilot seat fills the full fuselage profile except the area for the parachute indent. 12 mm headrest protects pilot's head and shoulders. There is no armor protecting pilot from the side or below.
http://luthier.stormloader.com/SFTacticsIII.htm

None of this armor can stop a .50 M8 API round at 90 degrees +/-30 degrees at ranges of 400+ meters, except possibly the headrest if the angle is near the limit (30 degrees). The A-8 had a little more armor, but only the 20mm plate on some variants would stop a .50 API round, and that armor only protected the pilot from the rear.

=S=

Lunatic

 

[CharlesBronson]

I will aswer you in the Air-to-Air Weapon topic.

 

[The Jug Rules!]

This just proves my point... THE JUG RULES!! \/ \/ \/

 

[cheddar cheese]

Yeah it was a great plane 8)

 

[Soren]

It was great plane because i toulk longer to shoot it down ?

I would like to see how one would fair against a Bf109K-4

 

[Soren]

It was a great ground attack aricraft though !

 

[cheddar cheese]

Ah I think a P-47N would defeat a Kurfurst 8)

 

[Anonymous]

It was great plane because i toulk longer to shoot it down ?

I would like to see how one would fair against a Bf109K-4

As long as the P-47 kept the speed high and did not make a foolish goof, it should win that fight. It rolls much better, it's faster (a P-47D-RE-20 in combat trim or especially an M or N), it can maintain high speed much longer, it has a better gunsight, and better guns.

One on one it might be a relatively close fight, but in numbers, even with the 109's having few more, the P-47's would have the edge.

=S=

Lunatic

 

[Soren]

The P-47's highest top speed was 433mph, the Bf109K-4 451mph

Also the P-47 would bleed energy much quicker And the Bf109K-4 would turn inside a P-47 any day at any speed

I'd go for the Bf109K-4 !!

 

[Anonymous]

The P-47's highest top speed was 433mph, the Bf109K-4 451mph

Also the P-47 would bleed energy much quicker And the Bf109K-4 would turn inside a P-47 any day at any speed

I'd go for the Bf109K-4 !!

No, the highest top speed for the P-47 was M version, which could manage about 475 mph. The N model could manage 467 mph. The Bf109K-4 was far from the best manuvering 109, and it would have a hard time turning inside the P-47 at high speed, and would probably be out-turned at high speed and high altitude. It would have no chance of rolling with it, at just about any speed or altitude. Factory specs for the P-47D-RE20 were about 430 mph level speed. But factory specs were for 2350 HP, where combat planes were tweaked to about 2700 HP.

The 109k could attain 451 mph for about 1 minute before overheating, the P-47M or N could sustain this speed for 11 minutes (the duration of Water injection). Furthermore, 109K top speed involves the use of GM1 SEP power, which was not very useable in combat situations (it was intended for fast climbing).

The 109K has about 10 seconds of cannon fire and about 45 seconds of 13mm fire, as opposed to about 40 seconds of .50 caliber fire from the P-47. The effective range of the 109K guns are about 100-150 meters for the MK108 and about 300-350 meters for the very weak MG131's, and its cannon is prone to jamming, especially when fired under G loads. The P-47 guns were effective to ranges well beyond 600 meters (using the K-14 gunsight), and were excellent for dogfighting.

The likelyhood of landing a MK108 round on a P-47 in mutually aware combat were quite poor. The MG131 13 mm rounds were so weak they'd have a hard time seriously hurting a P-47. On the otherhand, 8 x .50's would be easy to score with and would tear up a 109 in short order.

=S=

Lunatic

 

[CharlesBronson]

Lunatic :

A little correction concerning the MG-131.

The gun fired at 840 rpm in sincro mode, this is 14 shot per second, with the 300 rounds belt Bf-109 K-4 have, give us 24,5 second of continuos fire.

 

[Anonymous]

Lunatic :

A little correction concerning the MG-131.

The gun fired at 840 rpm in sincro mode, this is 14 shot per second, with the 300 rounds belt Bf-109 K-4 have, give us 24,5 second of continuos fire.

Hmmm... I thought the 109K held 475 rpg. Perhaps that is the figure for the Dora9 and I messed up?

The thing about the MG131 is it had to fit, with little rework, where the MG17 fit. This meant it had to work off of a single mounting point (most HMG's require two), and be rather small. As a result it fires a medium velocity round of only about 34 grams, making it very weak for its caliber.

Thanks

=S=

Lunatic