Whats more velnerable P-38 or P-47 in ground attack

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


Senior Airman
Mar 21, 2005
In a ground attack role, which would be safer to be in whenm there's incoming flak, 20mm and small arms fire.?
P-47D i would say. I like the radial engine, even though the P-38 has the dual-engine layout. The P-47 seems like it has a safe cockpit to me, with the more width between the pilot and the bottom of the airframe, offering more protection. Also the P-47 has better side/down view, so you can better avoid a threat because you can see it.
tough question twin engines with liquid cooled engines with a smaller profile or radial with with larger profile i like the 38 because of smaller frontal profile
I personally dont think it is much of a difficutl decision. The P-47 was designed for it, the P-38 was not. The P-47 was a better ground attack aircraft and I think history has proven this.
The P47 was designed as a high altitude fighter. The ground attack role was not a consideration when it was still on the drawing board.

The P38 was designed as a bomber interceptor. Again, the ground attack role wasnt even a consideration.
I would rather be in something without a radiator. But, air cooled radial engines do have oil coolers, and a hit in the oil cooler is just as bad.
The internal frame of her belly was reinforced and constructed specificaly for wheels up crash landings.

Users who are viewing this thread