P-47D "Jug" Thunderbolt vs Spitfire(any variations)

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

wuzak said:
I was reading about the P-47 in America's Hundred Thousand, where it stated that the P-47's roll rate was poor. That may be another area where the Spitfire was ahead..
Click to expand...

Possibly depends on which versions, I suspect the thread title is so broad to make discussion difficult.

AFDU report #66 (23rd March 1943) on IX vs P47 states that roll rates basically so similar that the difference in real terms is inconsequential. It said in turning it took four
circles for the IX to get onto the 47`s tail, and that in level flight acelleration in the IX was better, but in diving the 47 was superior in acelleration. Max speeds
basically the same up to 28,000ft above which the IX superior. Sadly the test was only done to 30,000..... I guess as they thought that was about
the likely limit to which any actual dogfights might occur - but that wasnt explicitly stated and is my assumption.

AFDU.png
 
Last edited:
We know that the turning radius and roll rate for the XIV were the same as for the IX.

We also know that the XIV had higher performance than the IX, particularly at high altitude.

If the IX could match the P-47 to 30,000ft, the XIV must be significantly ahead?
 
The P-51B,C&D/K were cleared for 72-75"Hg very soon after the introduction
of the P-51D/K in June 1944. This made all the Merlin Mustangs true 445-455
mph. vehicles at their full throttle height.[/QUOTE]

I just realized this statement is misleading and somewhat inaccurate. The increase
in boosting 72-75"Hg of the V-1650-7 engine did not necessarily increase the
absolute maximum speed of the aircraft, what the added boost did do was to
lower the full throttle height and allow the maximum speed to continue over
a greater range. At 67" the maximum speed in high supercharger was 24,500 ft. to
26,000 ft. At 72-75" the FTH height dropped to around 21,000-22,000 ft. and when
the British tested the Mustang at+25 lb. (80.1") the FTH dropped to 17,000-18,000 ft.

:), Jeff
 
Last edited:
The interesting thing about the Fw190D, was that the Ta152 was an improved version of that type.
So then we're left to wonder how the P-47N would have performed against the Ta152, since they never (to the best of my knowledge) engaged one another.
 
GrauGeist said:
The interesting thing about the Fw190D, was that the Ta152 was an improved version of that type.
So then we're left to wonder how the P-47N would have performed against the Ta152, since they never (to the best of my knowledge) engaged one another.
Click to expand...

The P-47N would probably have knocked it out. Sorry for not having a source on the Ta 152, but IIRC the max speed of the Ta-152 being 472 mph was only attainable with methanol boost, while its regular top speed was around 440 mph. In the link I posted, the P-47 could top at 470 mph, without any boost at all.

Also, would anyone happen to know why none of the P-47 models ever had a single .50 cal in the nose? Figured it would help for accuracy and power.
 
My belief is that the P-47N would be at a serious DISadvantage against a Ta 152 or a late FW 190D.
The reasons are the following:
The difference in firepower if there is one is really a preference thing. I don't believe in fighter versus fighter combat that either one is lacking.
The P-47N has the highest roll rate of any of the Thunderbolts but that doesn't put it anywhere near what the FW 190 in just about any model could do. I figure the FW 190D / Ta 152 would have about 50% higher roll rate.
The P-47N has a very high maximum speed but is quite heavy and acceleration is not particularly fast.
Note that when the early P-47M was introduced in Europe, one pilot (Wonderful Winnie?) would challenge P-51 Mustangs to races and win, but he would get left behind in the initial scramble because of slower acceleration.
The wing area is a bit larger than other Thunderbolts, but it is also a LOT heavier than other Thunderbolts which were not noted for particularly good turn performance while the FW 190D was noted as being better than the radial engine FW 190 versions.
Another thing worth remembering is that the P-47N actually LOST the dive recovery flaps that were introduced with the later P-47D, so it was probably no different from the early models in a high speed dive.

FWIW, The P-47D actually describes quite a large variation of aircraft. The early models were not great performers and not much different from a P-47C, but they got progressively better. The 205 Gallon Fuel Tank in front of the cockpit was only in the early models. Starting with the D-25, that tank was increased in size to 270 Gallons which was also installed in later models.

- Ivan.
 
ThomasP said:
Hey guys,

If we are going to use the Ta 152 and P-47N maybe we should use the Spiteful?o_O
Click to expand...
The most notable dogfight involving a Ta152H, was against a Tempest (which could be compared to the P-47) with less than a month remaining in the European war and the Spiteful (with less than 20 airframes manufactured) never entered combat.
 
I know the Spiteful never entered combat, but it had about as much in common with the earlier late-Spitfire Mks as the Ta 152 had with the FW 190. The P-47N had more in common with earlier models (I think). And the title of this post says "(any variations)".
 
ThomasP said:
I know the Spiteful never entered combat, but it had about as much in common with the earlier late-Spitfire Mks as the Ta 152 had with the FW 190. The P-47N had more in common with earlier models (I think). And the title of this post says "(any variations)".
Click to expand...
Well, so far the discussion has been about types that actually saw combat, although the P-47D (as Ivan pointed out) had considerable changes under the "D" designation, going from a razor-back to a bubble-top during that type's production run.
But the Ta152 is actually a Fw190D evolution - it is literally the same airframe with several changes that entered combat (albeit late in the war) while the Spiteful, being an iteration of the Spitfire, did not.
You don't see anyone mentioning the P-47H or the P-47J variants, right?
 
Hey GrauGeist'

Maybe read the original post again? The part where it says "For those wondering why I chose a specific model for the Jug and not for the Spitfire ....". It also does not specify that the spitfire variant had to have seen combat. Maybe you should tell DerGiLLster that he picked the wrong parameters?:)

Also, I am not eure what you are trying to say about the Ta 152/FW 190 lineage. Yes, the Ta 152 was descended from the FW 190, and the Spiteful was descended from the Spitfire, so .....???
 
Last edited:
Just clearing up a misconception that I have seen posted here. The
following information comes from a report dated 17 September 1946
of P-47N No. 44-88406.

" The P-47N airplane has performance and handling characteristics very
similar to the early P-47 airplanes, but due to heavier weights caused by
greater fuel capacity, performance is lower when using equal power
settings. The rate of roll is slower, due to the weight being farther from
the longitudinal axis of the airplane."


F-47N STANDARD AIRCRAFT CHARACTERISTICS 17 May 1950
By authority of Commanding General Air Materiel Command,
U.S. Air Force:
Just to clear up the discussion of climb rate of the P-47N it was CLASSED as
3680 fpm/S.L., 3700 fpm/10,000 ft., 3280fpm/25,000 ft. at a weight of 15,123 lb.

I'd go into greater detail but the title says P-47D.:)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

Domobran42
Spitfire vs Me-109
Replies
3
Views
220
PAT303
P
S
Fw 190D-9 vs. Spitfire Mk. XIV, same engines
Replies
8
Views
778
dedalos
D
J
Ki-84 vs P-51 engagemants 1945
Replies
13
Views
2K
CHen10
C
C
Any Japanese claims on 10 July 1945?
Replies
0
Views
348
CHen10
C
slaterat
Tropical performance of Hurricane and Spitfire
Replies
18
Views
1K
EwenS
E
Back