P-47N VS P-51D

[BnZ]

Of all the jugs and hogs, unperked that is, what plane has the best views?

Why ask a rhetorical question Steve? You know as well I do the advantage goes to the Jug here. Not as nice as the P-51D though, what with that large head rest behind the jug pilot's head. Hogs aren't exactly death-traps because of the rearward view though, what with adjustable head positions and check6 on tap.

But you also darn well know at the tree-top altitudes where the fight typically ends up, an F4U-1A can do more a more about the infinite zombie hordes of Spixteens and other planes than the D40. Both in terms of speed and E retention, AND in terms of maneuverability. Whereas the only non-perk planes (that present any difficulty in the hands of the average) fast enough to catch a P-47N with a full head of steam in a low footrace are the La7 and 109K4. And they don't have as much advantage in maneuvering as many think they do.

[Stoney]

I swear I read it had 9 min  but I rechecked my sources, I stand corrected..

Considering the D40 i is 20ENY and the N is 5 with no appreciable improvement in 90% of circumstances, I seldom fly the N

The P-47N actually had a water tank that would hold 35 gallons of water.  At the consumption rate of the water injection system, this meant 15 minutes of available water at 72" of MP.  And, at MP's between 54" and 72", the water consumption increased or decreased proportionally.  So, again, theoretically, at 60" of MP, you would have more than 15 minutes of water available.  Of course, the engine was still limited to the 5 minute of continuous WEP, meaning you couldn't, theoretically, run all 15 minutes of water through the engine in one shot, as you would risk damage to the engine. 

The important thing to note is that the AH FM for the American water-injected planes works independent of what the real-life capability was, so we still only get 5 minutes of continuous WEP, even though theoretically we should have 15 minutes available.

[BnZ]

Yes, of course in practice you could usually run the R-2800 well beyond these limitations without failure, although you would shorten engine life. I suppose since we have 0 concerns about engine failure on our NEXT flight in a sim, it is fair to limit our WEP usage to that extent.

[Stoney]

Yes, of course in practice you could usually run the R-2800 well beyond these limitations without failure, although you would shorten engine life. I suppose since we have 0 concerns about engine failure on our NEXT flight in a sim, it is fair to limit our WEP usage to that extent.

Agreed.  I suppose I should have worded that 2nd paragraph differently, as it could be construed that I was lobbying for 15 minutes of WEP in-game.

With some qualified exceptions that are irrelevant to this discussion, I think the P-47N engine performance in-game is just fine as is...