Glider
Captain
I'm not an expert in air racing but I understand that a few Sea Furies were raced and a Sea Fury is basically a naval version of a Tempest II
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Oh that's right!!I'm not an expert in air racing but I understand that a few Sea Furies were raced and a Sea Fury is basically a naval version of a Tempest II
I'm not an expert in air racing but I understand that a few Sea Furies were raced and a Sea Fury is basically a naval version of a Tempest II
Dude - you're spouting all this opinionated fecal matter with no references, most of it is your personal opinion!
So post it!!! Back up your rants!!!!
No one is saying it would have performed "better." The fact is it would have performed.
Actually not true. Bill Odom raced the 1947 Bendix with a P-47M. He did not finish
View attachment 500211
Having worked and crewed an aircraft at Reno, the P-47 would not have done well in a Pylon Circuit.
Personal opinion...dude you spew Personal opinion with out facts...
Mine are easy to validate...even gave you a few to look up.
Aside from Bill Odom the P47 one time in1947 was not used in Reno!
I get the feeling you are an advocate of the p47 over everything else.
The Mustang was a far better performer than the Thunderbolt.
War statistics validate my comments.
Actually I'm not and I never had a dog in the fight. I've always accepted and supported the P-51 was the better aircraft. This started with your very simplistic and mis-informed statement that the P-47 "could not get off the ground to support missions in Korea." Yes the P-51 was the way better aircraft but the P-47 was not junk and performed its role quite well.I get the feeling you are an advocate of the p47 over everything else.
The Mustang was a far better performer than the Thunderbolt.
War statistics validate my comments.
So at the end of this, where is your reference for the "3 day engine change"???
Back to drag. The 47 compared speed wise above 30,000 feet because the R-2800 blower was more efficient than the Merlin above 25,000 feet (for the -7)
That all depends on the wing's planform and how much lift it will provide in the thinner atmosphere.I'm no scientist, but isn't there less drag at higher alt? Less dense air I would surmise to have less friction and more wing area would be good to have at high alts.
That all depends on the wing's planform and how much lift it will provide in the thinner atmosphere.
Add to that, how well the engine is performing at those altitudes.
You can have the best wing in the world and it won't mean a thing unless the engine is able to move it up there...
Indeed!Not forgetting the propeller.
I think your post captures it in a nutshell. Depends on the mission which is better. Long range high altitude escort straight there and back, I'll take a p51. Medium or short range escort mission where your going down on the deck on the way back to pound an airfield heavily defended by anti aircraft and I think youd have to be insane not to pick the p47.Depends: If I'm just doing air-to-air stuff, I'd probably be inclined to pick the P-51; if I was doing a lot of air to ground stuff I'd probably take the P-47.
I think your post captures it in a nutshell. Depends on the mission which is better. Long range high altitude escort straight there and back, I'll take a p51. Medium or short range escort mission where your going down on the deck on the way back to pound an airfield heavily defended by anti aircraft and I think youd have to be insane not to pick the p47.
Not going to make a bit of difference!
And says it takes 3 days to change a QEC engineSays the guy who does not know the difference between one reciprocating engine from another...
And says it takes 3 days to change a QEC engine