Supreme long range escort of the war - P-38L or P-47N?

Discussion in 'Aviation' started by Sal Monella, Nov 10, 2005.

  1. Sal Monella

    Sal Monella Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2005
    Messages:
    223
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Occupation:
    Administrative Assistant
    Location:
    Redwood City
    I can see strong points for each. What do you think?
     
  2. syscom3

    syscom3 Pacific Historian

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2005
    Messages:
    12,631
    Likes Received:
    309
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Orange County, CA
    P38L for very long range missions. Just having two engines is better for morale of the pilot when flying over long stretches of water.
     
  3. book1182

    book1182 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2005
    Messages:
    75
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Occupation:
    Training Coordinator
    Location:
    United States
    I agree, the P-38L has the twin engines for reliability and the great armament of 4x.50cal and 1x20mm. I love the hitting power of a 20mm.

    Here's my but...

    P-47N 8x.50cal??? Pretty good armament also. The P-47N would have better maneuverability over the P-38. You would lose the reliability of the twin engines but, you have a big radial engine in front of you that can take a punishment.

    Winner P-47N: I think you need the ability to maneuver with the enemy to be able to keep them away from the bombers
     
  4. Jank

    Jank Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2005
    Messages:
    679
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    18
    That N model is one fast ship. 467mph.
     
  5. syscom3

    syscom3 Pacific Historian

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2005
    Messages:
    12,631
    Likes Received:
    309
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Orange County, CA
    But when you have to fly 800 miles over water back to your airbase, Id take the two engines over the single one.
     
  6. Aggie08

    Aggie08 Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,012
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Occupation:
    Student
    Location:
    Texas
    467, wow that is pretty damn fast. The two engines would be nice but in terms of performance and armament i'd have to go with the thunderbolt.
     
  7. Jabberwocky

    Jabberwocky Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2005
    Messages:
    1,090
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    Teacher
    Location:
    Japan
    The P-47N was a big steep up for the whole Thunderbolt family.

    It added a new wing and more fuel to the uprated R-2800 that came in on the P-47M. It was actually a better dogfighter than the P-47D as well, rolling better and turning better than the previous models.

    As for VLR escorts, well the P-51B/C, P-51D, P-38L, late build P-47D models and the P-47N all fit well into the category. It is really swings and round-abouts as to which was better or "the best". Do you take the speed of the P-47N, the twin engined reliability of the P-38L or the better dogfighting capability of the P-51?

    The USA was really the only nation to build an effective long range escort fighter, with the only other contender being the A6M. Most other long range fighters were two man twin engined planes, that had real trouble competing against single seaters.
     
  8. lesofprimus

    lesofprimus Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2004
    Messages:
    19,162
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    Communications
    Location:
    Long Island Native in Mississippi
    Home Page:
    Im not overly impressed with the whole "dual engine safety" thing... The performance issues weigh heavier in my opinion.... And u gotta love having that badass radial infront of u....

    Talk about a HUGE moral booster....
     
  9. Sal Monella

    Sal Monella Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2005
    Messages:
    223
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Occupation:
    Administrative Assistant
    Location:
    Redwood City
    [​IMG]
    Now that's a burly ass kicker. No pansy ass tea and crumpet eating "Tiffy" lad behind the stick of this machine. :lol:
     
  10. syscom3

    syscom3 Pacific Historian

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2005
    Messages:
    12,631
    Likes Received:
    309
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Orange County, CA
     
  11. RAGMAN

    RAGMAN Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2005
    Messages:
    79
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Occupation:
    ----
    Location:
    vancouver ,B.C.
    the P47 is better in my view,radial engine for damage,speed.Agility is not bad either,it won't be confused for a Spitfire MK 1 but it could hold its own.8 machine guns is not too shabby either. 8) Did the P47 ever have 20 mm cannons installed? :confused:
     
  12. syscom3

    syscom3 Pacific Historian

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2005
    Messages:
    12,631
    Likes Received:
    309
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Orange County, CA
    The center located MG's on the Lightning were just as effective as the eight fifty's on the -47. So I would say its a draw.

    Although the radial engine was was one tough machine, it to could be damaged in a multitude of ways. Think of this. Could the -2800 suffer significant damage and still bring the plane home to an airbase 600 miles away? Remember, if the engine fails, the pilot is going into the sea.

    The P38 and its twin engines proved time and time again in the PTO, that in some instances, 2 engines are definatly better than 1
     
  13. Gnomey

    Gnomey World Travelling Doctor
    Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2004
    Messages:
    41,790
    Likes Received:
    519
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Doctor
    Location:
    Portsmouth / Royal Deeside, UK
    Home Page:
    Agreed.

    So would I.

    Good points I agree with them.

    This is what is boils down to for me.

    For extreme range missions I would take the P-38L as well as for long missions over water. I would then use the P-47N for slightly shorter missions over land/small stretches of water. They are both pretty equal in my view, but for long range escort 2 engines are better than 1 even if that one can take a fair amount of battle damage.
     
  14. RAGMAN

    RAGMAN Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2005
    Messages:
    79
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Occupation:
    ----
    Location:
    vancouver ,B.C.
    From what I have read on this site, I thought that the Allison Engine,being a liquid cooled engine was more prone to gunfire than a radial engine.But that being said, I can see the benefits of two engines than one.But the 2800 engine was legendary for bringing pilots(in Europe I know) back to Allied land at great distances. On one of the stories I have read here,(in another thread)a pilot was raked by gunfire from a German(FW190?) plane and he crouched in his armour plated seat and lived to fight another day. :shock:
     
  15. DerAdlerIstGelandet

    DerAdlerIstGelandet Der Crew Chief
    Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Messages:
    41,772
    Likes Received:
    687
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    A&P - Aircraft Technician
    Location:
    USA/Germany
    I go for the Jug. Both aircraft are great and 2 of the best of all times but I have always loved the Jug. Something about how rugged she is and I love the radial engine.

    We all do know that the P-51D though was the escort fighter of choice for the USAAF. I am not a fan of the P-51D and I do not think that it was that it was cracked up to be but it was the aircraft that took the fight to the Germans.
     
  16. syscom3

    syscom3 Pacific Historian

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2005
    Messages:
    12,631
    Likes Received:
    309
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Orange County, CA
    In the PTO, for short range missions, Id take the P47N.

    But for anything over water for more than a couple of hours, Id go for the P38L
     
  17. DerAdlerIstGelandet

    DerAdlerIstGelandet Der Crew Chief
    Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Messages:
    41,772
    Likes Received:
    687
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    A&P - Aircraft Technician
    Location:
    USA/Germany
    They did fine in the Pacific on long range flights with Corsairs and they were single engines.
     
  18. cheddar cheese

    cheddar cheese Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    20,349
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    Student
    Location:
    WSM, England
    P-38L, for the twin engines and superior range. The big tough radial is good, but I'd rather one failing engine and one working engine, that one engine thats had a few hits. If it fails, youre down and out - on the P-38 if the knackered engine fails you can make it back on the good one.
     
  19. syscom3

    syscom3 Pacific Historian

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2005
    Messages:
    12,631
    Likes Received:
    309
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Orange County, CA
    But Corsairs didnt fly on the 1600 mile trips between Balikpapen and Biak.
    Nor fly from Guam to Iwo Jima.

    When it came to long long range flights, it was the P38.
     
  20. DerAdlerIstGelandet

    DerAdlerIstGelandet Der Crew Chief
    Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Messages:
    41,772
    Likes Received:
    687
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    A&P - Aircraft Technician
    Location:
    USA/Germany
    Yes that is true.
     
Loading...

Share This Page