Putting the P-47 back into production?

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

Dark Matter said:
The P-51 was faster becuase it was lighter and not as good of quality.
Click to expand...

Please prove where it is not good quality.

Dark Matter said:
CHEAP PEICE OF JUNK!
Click to expand...

You have no clue about aircraft design. Your posts make that very evident...

Dark Matter said:
Why do you think teh P-47 was like 40,000 dollars more expensieve?

And dont give me teh answer "Becuase it was 3,000 pounds heviar!
Click to expand...

See my answer above.

Dark Matter said:
Because I study it all friggen day long for the past 6 years!
Click to expand...

6 years of research is not showing up very well here...

Dark Matter said:
The P-47 did make a difference and was and is far better then the P-51!


It didnt need mods becuasei t was so freaking great!
Click to expand...

What? Please explain. If you actually did research you would see the P-47 was modded and their were different versions because it had to be made better.

Dark Matter said:
It was kinda junk.

It wasnt totaly hopless but it was junk.

It was only designed in 120 days!
Click to expand...

You are an idiot...

Please go someplace else.

I really do not want to resort to calling you such a thing, but I am tired of your trolling on this forum. If your opinion is that the P-47 was a better aircraft that is fine, but don't call it fact, and then not back it up with facts. You do not present a good argument as well, as it is not made up with facts.

In my opinion the P-47 was a better aircraft, but that is because I like its role better and its design better. However:

1. The P-51 was a marvelous aircraft. Your arguments will never prove that.
2. You are a troll...

So please go find someplace else to troll.

Dark Matter said:


I joined that forum with the username'Moderater' and they never let me on.
Click to expand...

They were smart, you are a troll. Either you quit your BS, or I will remove you from this forum faster that you can go and cry to your mother!

Until then, I present you with your diploma:
 

Attachments

  • TrollLicense Dark Matter.jpg
    81.4 KB · Views: 146
Last edited:
Bud Anderson, who actually flew the P-51 in combat said:

I will take a statement like that from an experienced combat pilot over someone who claims to have "studied aircraft for 7 years".

Anyone who calls the P-51 a "piece of junk" clearly has a lot more reading to do.
 
The P-47 is superior when youi think about it.

I'd choose the P-47 anyday.


Just do some research and you will soon find out...
 
Do some research?!?! You have provided no facts that make up your opinion, yet you want ME to research this? I have been giving aircraft presentations to the public and writing articles about aircraft since before you were a gleam in your daddy's eye.

You have given nothing but your own opinion, with no facts to back it up.
 
Dark Matter, that's is from the website I posted. That was all what someone else thought! Plus the one about the landing gear being wide is irrelevant because the P-51 had exceptionally wide landing gear!
 
What the *$* the point of digging up a design that's well over 65 years old, complex and costly to build, big, heavy, very inefficient by today's standards, noisy, and needs lots of room for take offs and landings. And that's before mentioning the servicing requirements and time. And 500 mph - at low level??
This was tried, as someone mentioned, with the P51, as a COIN aircraft which, although capable and successful for it's intended role, was too expensive, in relation to a new, modern design, and not as efficient in it's use of current materials. If an air force or army wanted such an aircraft as you envisage, I don't think they'd be looking at such an old design, just the same as they wouldn't regurgitate a 'modernised' King Tiger, just because it looks 'cool'!
Those air forces who still had P47's until the 1960's changed, not because the P47 was not a good aircraft, but because it was old, outdated and not as efficeient in it's required role in a modern world, as newer designs.
And by the way, the P51 wasn't a 'Cheap piece of junk', it was one of the most technologically advanced and efficeient aircraft of it's day, to which a lot of modern designs owe much. Or did the USAAF get something wrong??!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

M
The Oscar Goes Back Into Production
Replies
7
Views
1K
MIflyer
M
M
Stinger Missile Goes Back Into Production
Replies
4
Views
775
MIflyer
M
M
Beta Starts Electric Aircraft Production
Replies
0
Views
427
MIflyer
M
B
NOS P-2 Neptune Parts
Replies
0
Views
298
Bigmerle
B
M
Launch the Alert Fighters ....And Grab the Xbox Controller
Replies
1
Views
312
Denniss
D
Menu
Log in
Register