Which is better: P-47 or Fw-190?

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

Those are figures for the "M" not the "N" model. I don't think they are off. Consider that the XP-47J also had that same "C" series powerplant. It's performance was as follows:

From: http://home.att.net/~historyzone/Seversky-Republic7.html

The XP-47M was, essentially, developed collaterally with the XP-47J. The J was fitted with a high output version of the P&W R-2800. Specifically, the R-2800-57. This engine made 2,800 hp @ 2,800 rpm at 35,000 feet. This is in War Emergency Power. The aircraft actually attained 507 mph at an altitude of 34,300 feet. 2,800 hp is 133% of rated power. At military power (100%), the XP-47J could sustain 470 mph. 435 mph was attained at 81% of it's rated power (1,700 hp). All performance figures were obtained at 34,300 feet. The J model was an especially good climbing fighter too. It had a climb rate at sea level of 4,900 fpm. At 20,000 feet, it was still rocketing up at 4,400 fpm, and got there in 4 minutes, 15 seconds. Time to 30,000 feet was only 6 minutes, 45 seconds. Now that's an interceptor! Yet it had a usable range of 1,075 miles. Rather impressive performance. Nor was this a stripped down hotrod. It was fully armed and carried ballast in the wings equal to 267 rds per gun. The aircraft was flown to a height of 46,500 feet and was capable of a bit more.

I offered ther "M" data purely for speculative purposes as I can't seem to locate any data on the "N" climb rates.
 
Thought you guys would like this pix...... five P47's patrolling the sky's over Chino, California.

You dont see this happen everyday.
 

Attachments

  • p47_s_in_flight_160.jpg
    p47_s_in_flight_160.jpg
    13.4 KB · Views: 611
Be still my beating heart!

What a treat that must have been.

On a related note, on September 10th and 11th, there will be a reunion of P-47's at Lunken Airshow in Cincinnatti, Ohio. The event is called, "Can You Hear The Thunder, A Gathering of P-47's"

I believe they are expecting six or seven aircraft and some will be flying. In addition, there will be a P-47 ace there too.
 
I took these pictures a few weeks ago at the Chino airshow.

Even when they're on the ground they look deadly
 

Attachments

  • p47_s_in_flight__2_118.jpg
    p47_s_in_flight__2_118.jpg
    10.3 KB · Views: 578
  • p47_s_on_the_ground_137.jpg
    p47_s_on_the_ground_137.jpg
    40.9 KB · Views: 577
Those are figures for the "M" not the "N" model. I don't think they are off.
Click to expand...

Sorry DAVID, but they are infact (from what I can tell) very much off.

Consider that the XP-47J also had that same "C" series powerplant. It's performance was as follows:

From: http://home.att.net/~historyzone/Seversky-Republic7.html

The XP-47M was, essentially, developed collaterally with the XP-47J. The J was fitted with a high output version of the P&W R-2800. Specifically, the R-2800-57. This engine made 2,800 hp @ 2,800 rpm at 35,000 feet. This is in War Emergency Power. The aircraft actually attained 507 mph at an altitude of 34,300 feet. 2,800 hp is 133% of rated power. At military power (100%), the XP-47J could sustain 470 mph. 435 mph was attained at 81% of it's rated power (1,700 hp). All performance figures were obtained at 34,300 feet. The J model was an especially good climbing fighter too. It had a climb rate at sea level of 4,900 fpm. At 20,000 feet, it was still rocketing up at 4,400 fpm, and got there in 4 minutes, 15 seconds. Time to 30,000 feet was only 6 minutes, 45 seconds. Now that's an interceptor! Yet it had a usable range of 1,075 miles. Rather impressive performance. Nor was this a stripped down hotrod. It was fully armed and carried ballast in the wings equal to 267 rds per gun. The aircraft was flown to a height of 46,500 feet and was capable of a bit more.
Click to expand...

Im afraid this seems to be yet another case of a biased website sending out wrong data.

Anyway as I found the data on your presented website very suspicious, I went looking in some of my books on the P-47 and its variants, and this is what I found:

Performance of the P-47M-1-RE:

Engine: Pratt Whitney R-2800-57(C) 2800hp /w water injection
Max. Speeds: 400 mph at 10,000 ft, 453 mph at 25,000 ft, and 470 mph at 30,000 ft.
Initial climb rate:3500 ft/min at 5000 feet, 2650 ft/min at 20,000 ft.
Wing area: 308 sq.ft.
Weights: 10,432 lbs empty, 13,275 lbs loaded, 15,500 lbs maximum.
Armament: Six or eight 0.50-inch machine guns with 267 or 425 rpg.
Range (clean): 560 miles at 10,000 feet.

Performance of the P-47N:

Engine: Pratt Whitney R-2800-57(C)/-77 2800hp /w water injection.
Max. Speeds: 397 mph at 10,000 ft, 448 mph at 25,000 ft, and 460 mph at 30,000 ft.
Initial climb rate: 2770 ft/min at 5000 ft, 2550 ft/min at 20,000 ft.
Wing area: 322 sq.ft.
Weights: 11,000 lbs empty, 16,300 lbs loaded, 20,700 lbs maximum.
Armament: Six or Eight 0.50-inch machine guns with 500 rpg.
Range (clean): 800 miles at 10,000 ft.

-----------------------------------------

I still wonder how they could even hope to let us to believe the -47 would climb at 4900 ft/min ! That's an insane number for such a heavy a/c !

Anyway for the D-9 vs -47M arguement:

Lets look at the numbers...

P-47M:

Loaded weight: 13275 lbs.
Max. Power: 2800 hp.

=Power loading: 4.74 lbs/hp.

Fw-190D-9:

Loaded weight: 9480 lbs.
Max. Power: 2240 hp.

=Power loading: 4.23 lbs/hp

Thats very close, however the P-47 uses a wing-airfoil that is "flipped over" in shape (Kartveli-designed airfoil). The Kartveli-designed airfoil doesn't induce as much drag as a regular shape airfoil, but not as much lift either, which means an increased max speed but also a decreased climb rate. In any case the D-9's climb rate advantage over the -47M would be very small.

The Fw-190D-9's climb rate is rated at 3660 ft/min.
 
Soren, I'm not convinced that it isn't the data you have provided that is off.

I too have seen the 3,500fpm figures on various sites and believe them to be mistaken. The "D" model had an initial climb rate of 2,770fpm. The paddle bladed prop modification increased that by 400fpm to 3,200fpm. Do you really believe that the "M" model's climb performance was but 300 additional feet per minute?

From :http://home.att.net/~jbaugher1/p47_4.html

Beginning with production blocks D-22-RE and D-23-RA, a larger (13- foot diameter) paddle-bladed propeller (either a Hamilton Standard Hydromatic 24E50-65 or a Curtiss Electric C542S) was fitted to make full use of the additional power provided by water injection. It added 400 feet per minute to the climb rate, but during landings and takeoffs there was only a scant six inches of clearance between blade tips and the ground. Takeoffs and landings must have both been hair-raising.

The figures you have provided list the "N" model literally at the "D" model's pre-paddle bladed prop figure. That can't be right. What do your sources list as the initial climb rate of the "D"? The "D" got the paddle blade in March of 1944 and it gave an impressive 400fpm increase to the initial climb rate.

The "N" model had the paddle blade. It had the "C" series engine shared by the "M" model and the XP-72. The "N" model's top speed was 467mph. The "M" model's top speed was 472mph and the XP-72's top speed was 504mph.

The only difference between the "M" and the "D" was the "C" series engine and about 1,200 pounds of weight. If the top speed increased from 429mph on the "D" model to 472mph on the "M" model (it is reported that it actually went as fast as 488mph) , is it really conceivable that the rate of climb really only increased by 300fpm over the "D" model?

I don't think you are taking issue with the climb rate of the XP-72 which boasted a top speed of over 500mph. Given the performance of that aircraft which featured the same wings and engine as the "M" model and same engine as the "N" model, and the 3,200fpm climb rate of the paddle bladed "D" model, the 3,500fpm figure appears to be the figure that is off in my estimation.
 
that sounds like an epic battle between heat and cold beer you had there........

and MM, there's only one flying in Europe (belonging to the fighter collection, duxford), obviously there's more in america........

and that looks amazing, all those P-47s together.........
 
I wish I had known about that airshow in Chino. I may have to travel all the way to Ohio now to see some P-47's.

I have never seen a P-47 in flight. I have seen only one on static display.

I would love to hear one do a flyby up close.
 
The requested stats:

P-47D-25-RE :
Initial climb rate: 2780 ft/min at sea-level, 1575 ft/min at 30,000ft.

P-47D-35-RA:
Max initial climb: 3120 ft/min.
 
My pleasure to post the pix for you. The Planes of Fame Museum always has a good airshow. Heres their web page. Start planning to be there next May for their 2006 airshow.
http://www.planesoffame.org/

The sound of the Jugs flying by isnt what you would expect.They make noise for sure, but its muffled. Remember that the exhaust is routed through the exhaust manifoldss into a pipe that feeds the turbocharger. Even though the turbo isnt installed anymore, the piping and ductwork is.
 
Nice site! I like the Virtual tour. I see theyhave a Ba-349 and an Me-163 there. Thats on my list of places to go for sure 8)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

S
HELP A NEWBIE - FW 190's on Drive to Leningrad
Replies
8
Views
839
sopwith21
S
tomo pauk
Fw 190 performance
2 3
Replies
46
Views
4K
tomo pauk
tomo pauk
S
Why no Fw 190H but the Ta 152H?
2
Replies
38
Views
1K
tomo pauk
tomo pauk
Demopan78
Fw 190 D-9 VS P-51D 1945
2
Replies
22
Views
2K
drgondog
drgondog
S
Fw 190D-9 vs. Spitfire Mk. XIV, same engines
Replies
7
Views
415
GregP
GregP
Back