P-47 versus FW-190

[glennasher]

I recall his beef about the tail warning radar. But I do not think you could even tell the APS-13 was there. And it weighs nowhere near 400 lb; I have picked one up and it could not be more than 50 lb, probably less. They used two of them for altitude fuses for the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima.


View attachment 592299
.

I might have mis-quoted him, but I was sure that's what he wrote. It's been years since I read his book. I might have mis-remembered it, though, age will do that to a feller.

 

[Navalwarrior]

Hi Jeff

After looking at my sources, none of them have any dates as to when the different models entered operations. If I make some assumptions and match production numbers by type to total monthly P-47 acceptances by the Air Force, it looks like the first D-4's may have been accepted in July of 1943, D-10's in August, and D-11's in September. The first D-23's may have been accepted in March of 1944. Does anyone have an idea of how long it took from acceptance to operations?

Eagledad

Sources : Republic Thunderbolt by Roger Freeman
Army Air Force Statistical Digest
Major assumptions: the Air accepted the production in block number sequence, and Republic finished and delivered one block before production and delivery of the next.

 

[Navalwarrior]

Since the discussion is on the distribution of P-47 variants, I am interested in how the first wing pylon (-15 RE) drop tank Thunderbolt were distributed to FGs in the the ETO in 1944. For example, did they go to the 56th first, or the 78th? Once in the FG, did they equip one Squadron first? Bottom line, how quickly were they utilized in bomber escort missions? Thanks.

 

[eagledad]

Since the discussion is on the distribution of P-47 variants, I am interested in how the first wing pylon (-15 RE) drop tank Thunderbolt were distributed to FGs in the the ETO in 1944. For example, did they go to the 56th first, or the 78th? Once in the FG, did they equip one Squadron first? Bottom line, how quickly were they utilized in bomber escort missions? Thanks.

Navalwarrior,

I have no data on how soon the different variants went into service, or how they were distributed among the groups. For information, in the book Target Berlin Mission 250: 6 March 1944 by Jeffrey Ethell and Alfred Price, Appendex E gives losses of US aircraft,, and in some cases the serial numbers. It appears that the 56th FG lost 1 D-11, the 78th 2 D-2s, the 356th a D-11 and a D-6, and the 362nd 1 D-15.

 

[Navalwarrior]

Navalwarrior,

I have no data on how soon the different variants went into service, or how they were distributed among the groups. For information, in the book Target Berlin Mission 250: 6 March 1944 by Jeffrey Ethell and Alfred Price, Appendex E gives losses of US aircraft,, and in some cases the serial numbers. It appears that the 56th FG lost 1 D-11, the 78th 2 D-2s, the 356th a D-11 and a D-6, and the 362nd 1 D-15.

Resp:
Thanks much! March 1944 is earlier than I thought, although it doesn't necessarily indicate the numbers of 'wing pyloned' P-47D-15s in use. However, it is a tentative starting date. I know that the 78th took a big risk in late 1943 when they fitted 'bathtub' ferry tanks to extend their range in order to protect the bombers from enemy aircraft. I was hoping someone continued this forward thinking, as in allocating a batch to one FG and one FS to employ their use in long range escort ASAP.

 

[DarrenW]

Navalwarrior,

I have no data on how soon the different variants went into service, or how they were distributed among the groups. For information, in the book Target Berlin Mission 250: 6 March 1944 by Jeffrey Ethell and Alfred Price, Appendex E gives losses of US aircraft,, and in some cases the serial numbers. It appears that the 56th FG lost 1 D-11, the 78th 2 D-2s, the 356th a D-11 and a D-6, and the 362nd 1 D-15.

Just to add to eagledad's informative post, The Mighty Eighth (Freeman) states that this particular mission to Berlin was the 56th Fighter Group's "first fully effective use of the wing shackles holding the two 108 gallon paper tanks". From this I assume it was uncommon for the group to use the wing pylons on combat missions before this date.

Freeman also mentions that 1st Base Air Depot of the Eighth Air Service Command began fitting older P-47s with shackles and the necessary plumbing by mid-December 1943, and with help from the Ninth Air Service Command depots all aircraft in England were retrofitted by April of the following year. He further states that "by February 1944 P-47 groups were able to take full advantage of this fixture".

 

[Navalwarrior]

Just to add to eagledad's informative post, The Mighty Eighth (Freeman) states that this particular mission to Berlin was the 56th Fighter Group's "first fully effective use of the wing shackles holding the two 108 gallon paper tanks". From this I assume it was uncommon for the group to use the wing pylons on combat missions before this date.

Freeman also mentions that 1st Base Air Depot of the Eighth Air Service Command began fitting older P-47s with shackles and the necessary plumbing by mid-December 1943, and with help from the Ninth Air Service Command depots all aircraft in England were retrofitted by April of the following year. He further states that "by February 1944 P-47 groups were able to take full advantage of this fixture".

Resp:
Your second paragraph inre to older P-47s was for a single belly tank (initially a 75 gal tank made for the P-39, with a larger 110 gal tanks coming later). Also, some sources give a time period prior to December (it may depend on which FG rotated their P-47s in for the retrofit).
Do you have a date for the Berlin mission where the 56th used two wing tanks?

 

[GregP]

From posts above, I have the P-47D RE with Fiscal year first order in 1942 and first delivery in 1942, with total being 3,963 aircraft. The next P-47D RE contract was FY 43 and first delivery in FY 44, with 2,546 delivered. The RE numbers are deliveries by Republic Farmingdale. The RA models (2,350 starting FY 42 and 3,743 starting FY 44) were built in Evansville, IN. But, the contracts do not specify the P-47D dash number. I'm assuming early dash number in the first contract and later, improved D models 2 years later. The N's weren't delivered until 44-45.

Typical lead times to get into combat were about 6 - 9 months due to building them, getting mechanics trained, run-in / breaking-in, delivering to service test squadrons, deliveries to training and, finally, deliveries to front-line units complete with trained personnel. If the change was "minor," you were looking at 2 - 4 months minimum between rolling off the production line and combat in some numbers. Recall, new airplanes had to have the initial inspection / acceptance, operation check and test flight, slow-time for basic break-in, ferry to base / delivery points in CONUS, and ferry to overseas locations, either by flying or by carrier / transport ship delivery. Just initial inspection and operation / test flight and correction of any squawks could take 2 weeks or sometimes more. Depends on what was wrong and the operational / test pilot / crew-chief pool as much as anything.

I've heard of lines of front-line fighters being ready for acceptance and test flying / delivery flights that sat there for longer than 2 weeks before anyone touched them.

In any normal case, you weren't going to see it off the line on Monday and in combat on Friday. Just wasn't in the cards unless it was something very special.

 

[DarrenW]

Your second paragraph inre to older P-47s was for a single belly tank (initially a 75 gal tank made for the P-39, with a larger 110 gal tanks coming later).

Actually Freeman was discussing dual wing pylons here (see page 119 of The Mighty Eighth). By this time the 75/108 gallon belly tank had already been in widespread use for several months (since September).

 

[DarrenW]

Do you have a date for the Berlin mission where the 56th used two wing tanks?

The date of the mission first referenced by eagledad (March 6th, 1944).

 

[Peter Gunn]

From posts above, I have the P-47D RE with Fiscal year first order in 1942 and first delivery in 1942, with total being 3,963 aircraft. The next P-47D RE contract was FY 43 and first delivery in FY 44, with 2,546 delivered. The RE numbers are deliveries by Republic Farmingdale. The RA models (2,350 starting FY 42 and 3,743 starting FY 44) were built in Evansville, IN. But, the contracts do not specify the P-47D dash number. I'm assuming early dash number in the first contract and later, improved D models 2 years later. The N's weren't delivered until 44-45.

Typical lead times to get into combat were about 6 - 9 months due to building them, getting mechanics trained, run-in / breaking-in, delivering to service test squadrons, deliveries to training and, finally, deliveries to front-line units complete with trained personnel. If the change was "minor," you were looking at 2 - 4 months minimum between rolling off the production line and combat in some numbers. Recall, new airplanes had to have the initial inspection / acceptance, operation check and test flight, slow-time for basic break-in, ferry to base / delivery points in CONUS, and ferry to overseas locations, either by flying or by carrier / transport ship delivery. Just initial inspection and operation / test flight and correction of any squawks could take 2 weeks or sometimes more. Depends on what was wrong and the operational / test pilot / crew-chief pool as much as anything.

I've heard of lines of front-line fighters being ready for acceptance and test flying / delivery flights that sat there for longer than 2 weeks before anyone touched them.

In any normal case, you weren't going to see it off the line on Monday and in combat on Friday. Just wasn't in the cards unless it was something very special.

Sort of an addition to this excellent info, I read this story years ago and here it is, Eisenhower and Pete Quesada were being escorted by the 354th Mustangs and the C.O. didn't fly his tried and true B model. Instead he took up a brand new D because his crew had worked all night to get the new fighter ready so he didn't want to disappoint them. Turns out they forgot to hook up the oil pressure gauge. 354th Fighter Group During WWII

 

[Navalwarrior]

Actually Freeman was discussing dual wing pylons here (see page 119 of The Mighty Eighth). By this time the 75/108 gallon belly tank had already been in widespread use for several months (since September).

Resp:
Interesting @ the pylon kits. In reading about the initial kit installation it was my understood that just plumbing and fitting for a centerline tank was a major undertaking. So doing the same X 2 in the wings seems like a major undertaking. Do you have a second source besides "The Mighty Eight?" Thanks.

 

[DarrenW]

Resp:
Interesting @ the pylon kits. In reading about the initial kit installation it was my understood that just plumbing and fitting for a centerline tank was a major undertaking. So doing the same X 2 in the wings seems like a major undertaking. Do you have a second source besides "The Mighty Eight?" Thanks.

I can't think of another source which directly supports his assertions but Freeman did add that the modifications would most likely have taken nine months if the Ninth Air Force didn't get involved in the process.

 

[Navalwarrior]

I can't think of another source which directly supports his assertions but Freeman did add that the modifications would most likely have taken nine months if the Ninth Air Force didn't get involved in the process.

Resp:
Thanks much. I will get Freeman's book.

 

[DarrenW]

Resp:
Thanks much. I will get Freeman's book.

Your'e welcome Navalwarrior. It's really a great reference book and one that is a cornerstone of my library. Roger Freeman really did his homework on this one and it has never steered me wrong during my studies. The facts pretty well match those provided by the accepted "experts" on this forum.

 

[MIflyer]

In the August 2020 issue of Flight Journal there is an article on the FW-190 as compared to the F6F and F4U by a pilot who did some test flying relative to that subject during WWII.

The most interesting observation is, "The FW-190 is not a dogfighter." The Hellcat and Corsair both outmaneuvered it easily. The F4U was mostly faster than the FW-190 and the F6F was just as fast at low altitude and a bit slower at higher altitudes. He said the best performance out of the FW-190 is that it would climb best at 165 mph while the F6F and F4U's best climb was about 130 mph. So the FW-190 could run a way in a climb then dive and use hit and run tactics but had to take care not to mix it up with more maneuverable airplanes.

So this is not really different than the findings relative to the P-47.

 

[Navalwarrior]

In the August 2020 issue of Flight Journal there is an article on the FW-190 as compared to the F6F and F4U by a pilot who did some test flying relative to that subject during WWII.

The most interesting observation is, "The FW-190 is not a dogfighter." The Hellcat and Corsair both outmaneuvered it easily. The F4U was mostly faster than the FW-190 and the F6F was just as fast at low altitude and a bit slower at higher altitudes. He said the best performance out of the FW-190 is that it would climb best at 165 mph while the F6F and F4U's best climb was about 130 mph. So the FW-190 could run a way in a climb then dive and use hit and run tactics but had to take care not to mix it up with more maneuverable airplanes.

So this is not really different than the findings relative to the P-47.

Rep:
Not to be disagreeable, but is this article based on the 1944 Joint Fighter Meet at Elgin Field, FL? If not, I must ask:
1. Who did the testing and at what altitudes?
2. Where was the testing?
3. When was the test done?

 

[MIflyer]

Based on the authors recall, his memory jogged and reinforced by a document from the Patuxent Naval Air Test Center, "Report of Comparative Combat Evaluation of the Focke-Wulf FW-190A-4"

 

[Navalwarrior]

Based on the authors recall, his memory jogged and reinforced by a document from the Patuxent Naval Air Test Center, "Report of Comparative Combat Evaluation of the Focke-Wulf FW-190A-4"

 

[Navalwarrior]

Resp:
I believe that I read this same report. It may be listed: wwiiaircraftperformance.org