Author Topic: P47 Climbrate - incorrect?  (Read 1305 times)

Offline Murdr

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5608
      • http://479th.jasminemaire.com
Re: P47 Climbrate - incorrect?
« Reply #15 on: April 04, 2008, 05:46:53 PM »
The charts must be in an error then, as they list something around 2300fpm@25000 feet using WEP. I'm not surprised about it as most of the charts posted in the planes section of the main page must be a bit outdated after so many plane additions and ,probably, FM fixes.
Those charts, and the in game charts in the hanger are not canned.  They are real time from the flight model.

Offline RRAM

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 577
Re: P47 Climbrate - incorrect?
« Reply #16 on: April 04, 2008, 05:53:18 PM »
Those charts, and the in game charts in the hanger are not canned.  They are real time from the flight model.

Didn't know that, but I'm glad it's that way. I do use them quite a bit and always wondered if they could be trusted. Now I know they are, which is great :).

Offline VonKost

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 232
Re: P47 Climbrate - incorrect?
« Reply #17 on: April 04, 2008, 08:36:22 PM »
Ah, no it doesn't. You must consider where the P-47 was designed to fly and fight. Ideally, this is around 30,000 feet. Up there, it had no real competition in the Summer of 1943. However, let's limit altitude to 25,000 feet, which is well below the P-47's critical altitude and see how it compares to the Spitfires commonly in service at the time.

At 25k, the following climb rates were recorded using War Emergency Power:

Spitfire Mk.IX: 2,897 fpm
Spitfire Mk.XVI: 2,840 fpm (essentially, a Mk.IX LF)
Spitfire Mk.V: 1,654 fpm
P-47D-25: 2,622 fpm (heavier than Johnson's P-47D-5)
Fw 190A-5: 1,876 fpm
Bf 109G-6: 2,185 fpm

Note that the Fw 190 and Bf 109 aircraft contemporary to Johnson's combat tour cannot climb with the P-47 at 25k (not even at 22k), just as Johnson stated.

Added for effect:
P-47D-40: 2,798 fpm
P-47N: 3,038 fpm

Go up to 30k and the P-47D-25 climbs faster than the Spit IX.

Finally, there are factors that cannot be included in the game that are certainly relevant to this discussion. Bob Johnson was a friend of mine. His memory wasn't perfect, but I don't recall any penchant for exaggeration. Moreover, I find it distasteful for folks who play an online game as their reference to belittle a pilot who was considered by many to be the most talented fighter pilot to serve in the 8th Air Force.

Read what Johnson had to say to me, here: http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,27675.0.html

My regards,

Widewing





Well said Widewing! I would never presume to question the likes of Bob Johnson. You gotta remember that the 56th had the 47 from it's earliest to the very end. These guys knew how to make them run like no others. My favorite fighter group of all time.
« Last Edit: April 04, 2008, 08:52:46 PM by VonKost »

Offline AquaShrimp

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1706
Re: P47 Climbrate - incorrect?
« Reply #18 on: April 04, 2008, 08:44:42 PM »
Many P-47s in the ETO were field modified to produce significantly more horsepower than those right out of the factory.

Offline Wingnutt

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1665
Re: P47 Climbrate - incorrect?
« Reply #19 on: April 05, 2008, 12:21:18 AM »
D40 50% fuel plus centerline 75 gallon DT,  8 50s with the light ammo load..

almost 3,500 feet per min clim near sea level with WEP

not bad at all.

Offline bozon

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6037
Re: P47 Climbrate - incorrect?
« Reply #20 on: April 05, 2008, 09:41:30 AM »
Many P-47s in the ETO were field modified to produce significantly more horsepower than those right out of the factory.
Johnson claimed in widwing's interview that his jug could pull 72" manifold pressure. On a D-5 that would be close to the performance of the M model. What a beast.
Mosquito VI - twice the spitfire, four times the ENY.

Click!>> "So, you want to fly the wooden wonder" - <<click!
the almost incomplete and not entirely inaccurate guide to the AH Mosquito.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RGOWswdzGQs

Offline Hap

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3908
Re: P47 Climbrate - incorrect?
« Reply #21 on: April 05, 2008, 10:10:48 AM »
if the jug climbed even as good as a 51, i would fly it alot, its a very nice plane, but the climb just kills me.

Lose some iron.  Lighten her up.

Offline TimRas

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 560
Re: P47 Climbrate - incorrect?
« Reply #22 on: April 05, 2008, 12:24:13 PM »
...Bob Johnson was a friend of mine. His memory wasn't perfect, but I don't recall any penchant for exaggeration. Moreover, I find it distasteful for folks who play an online game as their reference to belittle a pilot who was considered by many to be the most talented fighter pilot to serve in the 8th Air Force.

Read what Johnson had to say to me, here: http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,27675.0.html

My regards,

Widewing



Key line: "His memory wasn't perfect"

Read also one thread which was one reason of one the members of this community (who actually had a grasp of physical realities) to leave this forum.
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,102381.0.html
« Last Edit: April 05, 2008, 12:26:52 PM by TimRas »

Offline Anaxogoras

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7072
Re: P47 Climbrate - incorrect?
« Reply #23 on: April 05, 2008, 01:22:48 PM »
Quote
Bob Johnson was a friend of mine. His memory wasn't perfect, but I don't recall any penchant for exaggeration. Moreover, I find it distasteful for folks who play an online game as their reference to belittle a pilot who was considered by many to be the most talented fighter pilot to serve in the 8th Air Force.

Widewing, it's possible that Johnson was an exception to the rule, I'll give you that.  Please don't suggest that the only reference point I have is AH when I said that he could've been exaggerating.  That's far from the best way to interpret my beliefs or opinions.  Moreover, the attribution a near-universal character trait to Johnson, e.g. exaggeration, belittles him no more than saying that he exhibited confirmation bias, or whichever non-rational psychological habit you prefer.  Lastly, whether or not Johnson was a talented pilot does not tell us if he exaggerated. 

I have read a lot of aviation and combat history, and being prone to exaggeration about the capabilities of their own aircraft is shown by nearly every pilot.  This was the sense in which I suggested the Johnson could be exaggerating, and it's also the reason why we have test pilots to produce hard data like you provided for us here.  I can almost say that it's never reliable when a pilot makes a blanket, universal statement about the comparison of two aircraft that were belligerents, or even which flew together against opposition.  The pilot is thinking or remembering specific scenarios and specific events, which occurred at certain altitudes, in some kind of whether, etc.  And the similarities to AH really far apart when we remember that ETO pilots considered 20k feet to be low altitude.

On the other hand, it's never blameworthy to expect some kind of correspondence between the performance of AH aircraft and the real thing, because that's what this simulation is supposed to deliver.  That would seem to be the expectation of the original post, and I think it has been answered well.
« Last Edit: April 05, 2008, 01:26:07 PM by Anaxogoras »
gavagai
334th FS


RPS for Aces High!

Offline Messiah

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 927
      • http://www.theblueknights.com
Re: P47 Climbrate - incorrect?
« Reply #24 on: April 06, 2008, 07:55:16 PM »
Testimonials will never beat hard scientific evidence.
Messiah(The O.G.)
The Blue Knights

Offline Oldman731

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9495
Re: P47 Climbrate - incorrect?
« Reply #25 on: April 06, 2008, 09:27:58 PM »
Testimonials will never beat hard scientific evidence.

True enough.  The problem is that the "hard scientific evidence" people throw around in here isn't all that hard.  It's composed of numbers compiled by test pilots, who could have been talented or not, having a good day or not, paying attention or not, using well-calibrated instrumentation or not.  (See, for example, the previous discussions of the Hellcat's true airspeed.)  So I don't think that the factory figures on a plane's performance are necessarily more accurate than those of a guy who flew the plane for a year or two with his life depending on his knowledge of the aircraft's performance.

- oldman
« Last Edit: April 06, 2008, 09:29:43 PM by Oldman731 »

Offline bozon

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6037
Re: P47 Climbrate - incorrect?
« Reply #26 on: April 07, 2008, 01:58:25 AM »
Add to that that planes of that era were un-standartized. Each had its own quirks and character already as it came off the production line, each had its own crew that serviced and tweaked its performance differently. Add to that the constant upgrading on the field as new improvements came out and the end result is that no two planes were alike. You had P47D-5 with and without WEP, with and without a paddle blade, some over boosted some not, some fitted with hard points, others without, etc.
Mosquito VI - twice the spitfire, four times the ENY.

Click!>> "So, you want to fly the wooden wonder" - <<click!
the almost incomplete and not entirely inaccurate guide to the AH Mosquito.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RGOWswdzGQs

Offline Anaxogoras

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7072
Re: P47 Climbrate - incorrect?
« Reply #27 on: April 07, 2008, 09:31:14 AM »
So I don't think that the factory figures on a plane's performance are necessarily more accurate than those of a guy who flew the plane for a year or two with his life depending on his knowledge of the aircraft's performance.

Not necessarily....  we all agree with that.  But just as testing aircraft performance is a matter of empirical induction, so is the judgment that these tests are more reliable than one individual's anecdotal reports.  So, whether it's necessary that tests are more reliable than anecdotal reports kind of misses the point; it is a contingent fact that they are.
gavagai
334th FS


RPS for Aces High!

Offline Stoney

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3482
Re: P47 Climbrate - incorrect?
« Reply #28 on: April 08, 2008, 01:51:59 AM »
Read also one thread which was one reason of one the members of this community (who actually had a grasp of physical realities) to leave this forum.

Obviously you never got put on his ignore list for simply challenging him with the same outright derision and smugness that characterized his normal "sit down Junior" condecension.
"Can we be incorrect at times, absolutely, but I do believe 15 years of experience does deserve a little more credence and respect than you have given from your very first post."

HiTech

Offline TonyJoey

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1953
Re: P47 Climbrate - incorrect?
« Reply #29 on: April 08, 2008, 06:15:53 PM »
Widewing, when Bob talks about the move when he had a 109 close on his 6 with somewhat same E situation I really didn't understand the move. Could you explain this a litlle more. :salute

Great interview. :aok