"The case for the P-47 Thunderbolt being the greatest fighter of the Second World War "

[Thumpalumpacus]

Being required to pay for your own development is an impediment or disincentive.

I'm sure you will agree.

Being disincentivized is a far cry from being banned, which is what "NOT AT LIBERTY" certainly implies.

 

[pbehn]

Needed rest confirmed.

That's how you draw conclusions is it? I am in UK, not tired at all. I think you suffer the same malady, drawing the wrong conclusions from what you think you have seen. The first mission on August 17 1942 consisted of 12 aircraft escorted by 4 squadrons of Spitfires. It was hailed as a complete success. 2 aircraft returned damaged, 3 enemy aircraft were seen but generally kept their distance and bombing said to be accurate.

This was completely wrong, it was a surprise raid on Rouen which is only a few miles inland from the western French coast
The bombing wasnt accurate, it was good but some bombs hit the outskirts of the town, bombing in ideal conditions, you couldnt extrapolate the bombing of two flights of six aircraft to what a box of 300 would do
Two bombers were damaged from 12, that is 16%. with 4 escorts to each bomber. You cannot draw any conclusion as to how a deep penetration raid into Germany would do from that. There is no possibility of surprise, they were over German airspace for hours and a formation of 300 bombers needs 1200 escorts to have the same cover.


This sort of thing went on for a long time, when losses were low, the system worked, when losses were high some excuse was found like the formation was too small so there wasnt enough mutual defence, or we will get the timing better next time It took a long time for the truth to dawn on everyone especially those at the top that unescorted bombers didnt work. You cannot blame any fictional bomber mafia though, they were servicemen given a job. Escort was provided y the RAF where they could reach up to April 1943 and then with P-47s. Why didnt the "fighter mafia" have escorts available? Well basically because it isnt that easy.

 

[Deleted member 68059]

This thread is now designated a parody thread, as I think its gotten so silly the clock has gone right the way round the dial.

 

[33k in the air]

According to the producer this configuration was available as from November 1943 and provided a range of about 450/475 statute miles((dependent on the figures/settings used in the range charts) - enough to reach Berlin.

There is an obvious problem with the above. It is about 550 miles from Cambridge to Berlin as the crow flies. So you're about 75 to 100 miles short of Berlin according to your own stated range figures (which I presume are meant to be combat radius figures, not range).

 

[Snautzer01]

Needed rest confirmed.

 

[special ed]

 

[GrauGeist]

P.S. In earlier years, like 1986, I graduated with an Accounting degree.

I find this statement rather interesting.

It's my understanding that most accountants have fairly good reading comprehension.

Arnold's directive was intended to have manufacturers develop their own drop tanks, not the cash-strapped Air Corps.
Many manufacturers developed aircraft OOP in the hopes that it would land a government contract. Some succeeded, many did not.

Why is this such a hard thing to understand?

Also, I find it quite entertaining that you're arguing here with several authors and historians that have years of experience and many thousands of hours of research to their credit.

So by all means, carry on

 

[pbehn]

There is an obvious problem with the above. It is about 550 miles from Cambridge to Berlin as the crow flies. So you're about 75 to 100 miles short of Berlin according to your own stated range figures (which I presume are meant to be combat radius figures, not range).

Crows would make hopeless mission planners, if you fly as the crow flies from Cambridge to Berlin you go directly over Amsterdam Wolfsburg and Hanover. One of many reasons that range isnt a simple calculation is the route had to avoid such places

 

[Deleted member 68059]

I find this statement rather interesting.

It's my understanding that most accountants have fairly good reading comprehension.

Arnold's directive was intended to have manufacturers develop their own drop tanks, not the cash-strapped Air Corps.
Many manufacturers developed aircraft OOP in the hopes that it would land a government contract. Some succeeded, many did not.

Why is this such a hard thing to understand?

Also, I find it quite entertaining that you're arguing here with several authors and historians that have years of experience and many thousands of hours of research to their credit.

So by all means, carry on

Not true I`ve been totally debunked on this very forum! Everyone knows I`m a nitwit.

 

[33k in the air]

Crows would make hopeless mission planners, if you fly as the crow flies from Cambridge to Berlin you go directly over Amsterdam Wolfsburg and Hanover. One of many reasons that range isnt a simple calculation is the route had to avoid such places

Which of course only makes the shortage of distance in the stated figures worse. The straight-line distance is already 75 to 100 miles short; factor in routing as you noted, as well as time taken up with formation assembly, and the distance shortage is exacerbated.

 

[drgondog]

The point, again, is that the P47 did not fly with drop tanks until after the first 171 were built, which ended up being in September 1942 as per the video.

Wrong again - I know that is your comfort zone. Maye I missed 'Greg's' reference to this, but the FIRST P-47 equipped with C/L ack was P-47-2-RE.

That would be after XP-47B (1), RP-47B (170), P-47C (57), XP-47E (1), P-47C-1 (55). Perhaps your accounting skills to summarize to 'first' actually equipped to install the 205 gal Ferry tank? It did not have production keel, but all were modified to accept the Keel kits in ETO - when available

P-47C-2 RE 41-6178. The P-47D-2 RA was first to be equipped with Oz contracted 200 gal Brisbane tank for SWP combat ops.

 

[GrauGeist]

Not true I`ve been totally debunked on this very forum! Everyone knows I`m a nitwit.

That would never have happened if you had a video channel!

 

[PAT303]

What I find disappointing about these arguments about this plane is better than that plane is it could all have been avoided if the Americans didn't waste time money and resources on P47's and P51's and simply focused on building the best single engined fighter they ever had, the magnificent P39, it's an obvious fact to anyone in the aeronautical world.



Forget my coat, I'm out the door already.

 

[PAT303]

Not true I`ve been totally debunked on this very forum! Everyone knows I`m a nitwit.

There's a good book written by a bloke named Callum which is full of good information, have you heard of it?,


I'm out the door again.

 

[SaparotRob]

Not true I`ve been totally debunked on this very forum! Everyone knows I`m a nitwit.

I'd be delighted if my nits were half as witty.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Its getting a lil snippy in here. Let's not let it get out of hand.

 

[PAT303]

Its getting a lil snippy in here. Let's not let it get out of hand.

It's turning into ground hog 2.0

 

[SaparotRob]

If only.

 

[WARSPITER]

This is what happens when an argument is based on P-39.

Document that is..... Postscript - 1939.

 

[at ease]

There is an obvious problem with the above. It is about 550 miles from Cambridge to Berlin as the crow flies. So you're about 75 to 100 miles short of Berlin according to your own stated range figures (which I presume are meant to be combat radius figures, not range).

The (small) problem is solved by converting 475 nautical miles to statute miles = 550.