Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Spikes on November 22, 2009, 08:14:50 PM
-
It's probably been discussed before, but the 82nd went on a run with the 91st 30K HQ raid running escort...the 91st flew 13 sectors up, 11 sectors back and landed (great job guys!). We upped D40s with full fuel and full DT's after much debate over which plane had the best fuel for maneuverability ratio.
We figured the D40 was more maneuverable than the N because it weighs less. Either way, way up there there isn't much turn fighting going, mainly pushing cons lower. However, for future reference, I'd like to know if the pony D with full fuel has more range than the N or M, or even 38J/L. Hopefully Pyro will add in the centerline DT for the M.
-
The M will never be in contention for this.
I believe the N has the longest legs for your purposes, but I could be mistaken.
-
N has more range than the P-51 D, P-47M and P-38J/L....
-
Rgr that, but in taking it you sacrifice maneuverability because of the heavy weight of the N, correct?
-
I think that the P47N is more maneuverable than the P51D; either way they're pretty close. All of the Jugs are monsters at high altitude.
-
Rgr that, but in taking it you sacrifice maneuverability because of the heavy weight of the N, correct?
Spikes, the N-Jug has always been able to outmaneuver the P-51D, and it's a heck of a lot faster at altitude.
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/newscores/genchart.php?p1=0&p2=83&pw=1>ype=0)
-
Ki-61 at 100% with DT's might get the most range of any fighter.
-
Ki-61 at 100% with DT's might get the most range of any fighter.
N jug on max cruise out ranges any fighter currently in the game.
-
Ki-61 at 100% with DT's might get the most range of any fighter.
Not at 30,000 feet...
-
The 47N is "less manuverable" when overloaded with fuel... Otherwise it's comparable to other P-47s. Its empty weight isn't too much more IMO. But at 30K in long-flight escort, you'll still be in good shape vs. anything that comes up to bother you.
The N has more wing area than the D, and that superb WEP really helps (especially at an alt where most planes have no WEP left)
-
N jug on max cruise out ranges any fighter currently in the game.
If that is true the game isnt modeling the P-51 properly. The N should have max range at 2200 miles and the D pony at 2300... which isnt much difference but it is a difference.
-
At 30,000 feet nothing with a prop can out-perform with the N jug. Some planes can match it in some aspects, but overall it is the best.
Assuming you don't get to the fight with 550 gallons internal fuel that is.
-
If that is true the game isnt modeling the P-51 properly. The N should have max range at 2200 miles and the D pony at 2300... which isnt much difference but it is a difference.
A quick look at Dean shows the P-47N with a maximum non-combat range of 2,800 miles. Allowing for warm-up, climb-out, 15 minutes of MIL power and 5 minutes of combat power, the P-47N is rating by the AAF as having a combat radius of 1,000 miles. Under the same criteria, the P-51D is rated with a 700 mile combat radius.
This USAAF table is found on page 600 of America's Hundred Thousand.
And there is this..
"The testing program included determining the maximum range of the fighter. This was done with various combinations of fuel loads and external drop tanks. Ultimately, a test flight was made from Farmingdale to Eglin Field in Florida. The XP-47N took off with two 315 gallon drop tanks hanging from the under-wing hardpoints. Usable fuel in these tanks totaled 600 gallons. Added to the internal fuel load, the N eased off the runway with 1,170 gallons of fuel (usable). At a gross weight of 20,166 lbs., the Thunderbolt headed south in company with a P-47D chase plane. Arriving off the coast, east of Elgin in 3 hours, 44 minutes, the external tanks were dropped. Another P-47D, already waiting at Elgin, took on the N in a mock dogfight that lasted for twenty minutes. The throttle was advanced to military power for 15 minutes of this time, with an additional five minutes in the War Emergency Power (WEP) detent. After these fun and games were concluded the N was turned around and flown back towards Farmingdale. Heavy weather over Long Island caused the plane to divert to Woodbine, New Jersey. Having flown 1,980 miles, total fuel usage was measured at 1,057.5 gallons. There was still more than 112 gallons of usable fuel remaining in the main fuselage tank, enough for another 330 miles @ 1,700 rpm in auto-lean."
Note also that the P-47N sometimes flew with the 165 gallon P-38 drop tanks, as is seen below with a 507th FG P-47N flying out of le Shima in 1945.
(http://home.att.net/~historyzone/Forrest463FS.JPG)
My regards,
Widewing
-
All around on that raid, both our group of B17's and the escorts were pushing the limits of the x2 burn rate. Off the original subject a bit, but toward the last bit of our return to base, we had to go to Normal power settings on the B17's. We originally took off with 75%.
-
Ok, so why did P47's not escort bombers all the way to the target?
From most if not all of what I've seen, heard, that didn't happen until the P51's got on the scene.
P47N released that much after the P51's?
-
At 30,000 feet nothing with a prop can out-perform with the N jug. Some planes can match it in some aspects, but overall it is the best.
Assuming you don't get to the fight with 550 gallons internal fuel that is.
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/newscores/genchart.php?p1=83&p2=40&pw=2>ype=0)
The TA-152 is significantly faster on mil settings than the jug on mil, not sure how they compare maneuverability-wise at that altitude though, you probably know far better than me. Personally i prefer the WEP on the 152 than the Jug - I think the N-Jug is a dumptruck without it.
Spitfire XIV is also faster on mil, and has better climbrate at 30k even without wep.
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/newscores/genchart.php?p1=83&p2=64&pw=2>ype=0)
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/newscores/genchart.php?p1=83&p2=64&pw=2>ype=2)
-
Ok, so why did P47's not escort bombers all the way to the target?
From most if not all of what I've seen, heard, that didn't happen until the P51's got on the scene.
P47N released that much after the P51's?
Yes, the P-47N is a 1945 bird.
-
I'd like to see how much gas that spit 14 has once it reaches 30k
:banana:
-
Ok, so why did P47's not escort bombers all the way to the target?
From most if not all of what I've seen, heard, that didn't happen until the P51's got on the scene.
P47N released that much after the P51's?
That's what I wondered, unless the Pony's upped from closer line bases...
-
There was a great website that I read a year or two ago about the history of the P-47, including opinions on why it was relegated to mostly attack roles towards the end of the war while the P-51s "got" to do the bomber escorts. Unfortunately I just did a few google searches and I wasn't able to find it again.
Most historical accounts will claim that the P-51 assumed the role of escorting bombers from the P-47 because it was the only aircraft able to stay with the bombers the entire time. But from what I recall, the web site I was looking for claimed that the Jug's fuel capacity was upgraded to allow it to escort just as far as the P-51s, around the same time that the long range P-51s arrived in Europe. So why did the US send their pilots out in the lighter armed and armored P-51s? The conclusion I came to, if the previously-mentioned was true, was cost. The P-47 was more expensive, both in cost per aircraft and cost in fuel consumed per mile, than the P-51. The lives of the pilots were either cheaper in comparison, or they weren't factored in.
As an aside, even if its true that the US didn't protect its WW2 pilots as much as it could by sending them out in a perfectly capable P-47 instead of the P-51, I would hesitate greatly before calling it a "mistake"... we were trying to win a war, and there was no guarantee that the war would be won when it was, or that the money and fuel saved wouldn't be important in the end.
-
I'd like to see how much gas that spit 14 has once it reaches 30k
:banana:
In reality? Plenty for its role. In AH? Not much.
-
Ok, so why did P47's not escort bombers all the way to the target?
Well, the C and D models 8th Air Force used early didn't have the range, obviously. As the war progressed, the later D models, using external tanks, could range targets in western Germany. The N model was an entirely different animal. It added a substantial amount of internal fuel in wing tanks, one to each side. Couple that with the ability to carry lots of external fuel, the P-47N was the ultimate long-range escort of the war, especially at the altitudes the B-29 was designed to operate at. It even included flip-down rudder pedals the pilot could stretch his legs out on and an autopilot to let the pilot fly those long missions more comfortably.
Those guys on Ie Shima were flying 12 hour missions up to Seoul and back, from Oki, self contained. That's an enormous capability.
-
The P-47Ds never had quite the range of the Mustang. Meanwhile, no P-51 ever absorbed punishment from ground-fire like the P-47 could. More important than either of these considerations, the P-51 was more maneuverable and performed better below 25K or so. Because the P-51 is significantly less maneuverable than the Jug in AHII, we tend to forget that in reality it was the better "dogfighter" according to both Allied and German opinion.
There was a great website that I read a year or two ago about the history of the P-47, including opinions on why it was relegated to mostly attack roles towards the end of the war while the P-51s "got" to do the bomber escorts. Unfortunately I just did a few google searches and I wasn't able to find it again.
Most historical accounts will claim that the P-51 assumed the role of escorting bombers from the P-47 because it was the only aircraft able to stay with the bombers the entire time. But from what I recall, the web site I was looking for claimed that the Jug's fuel capacity was upgraded to allow it to escort just as far as the P-51s, around the same time that the long range P-51s arrived in Europe. So why did the US send their pilots out in the lighter armed and armored P-51s? The conclusion I came to, if the previously-mentioned was true, was cost. The P-47 was more expensive, both in cost per aircraft and cost in fuel consumed per mile, than the P-51. The lives of the pilots were either cheaper in comparison, or they weren't factored in.
As an aside, even if its true that the US didn't protect its WW2 pilots as much as it could by sending them out in a perfectly capable P-47 instead of the P-51, I would hesitate greatly before calling it a "mistake"... we were trying to win a war, and there was no guarantee that the war would be won when it was, or that the money and fuel saved wouldn't be important in the end.
-
Is anyone else surprised that the P-51 was retained for ground attack in Korea instead of the P-47?
-
"Most historical accounts will claim that the P-51 assumed the role of escorting bombers from the P-47 because it was the only aircraft able to stay with the bombers the entire time."
The P-51 was the fighter that could fly all the way to Berlin - but they didn't stay with bombers all the way there and back.
Individual fighter formations didn't remain with the bombers all the way on long-range raids in Europe, the escort groups took off in relays; five relays involving three different types of escort fighter were involved in the 8th USAAF's first major raid on Berlin. First lot up (P-47s) covered the bombers from the form-up to about halfway to the target and turned for home once their ammo was expended. Next lot in (P-38s and P-51s) took over from the first relay and turned back about 50 miles from the Big City. Those detailed as escorts over the target (P-51s) cruised directly there, covering the bombers only on their approach to the start of the bomb run and their exit from it. Fourth relay (P-51s) covered the surviving bombers for the next crucial 150 miles and the last relay (all three types) came out to relieve them. There was overlap when each relay took over from the previous one and some fighter units flew twice to cover the mission.
:cool:
-
Is anyone else surprised that the P-51 was retained for ground attack in Korea instead of the P-47?
Not at all. There were more P-51s when Korea came around because at the end of the war most of the P-47s and P-38s were tossed into dirt and covered over. F4Us were tossed into the ocean.
-
Simba, you forgot to mention the Spitfire escorts on the initial and final legs. ;)
The Mustangs were based west of the Mississippi (ANG units) and overseas, ANG P-47 units were based east of the Mississippi, with a few exceptions. Mustangs were closer to the action in Korea.
-
Not at all. There were more P-51s when Korea came around because at the end of the war most of the P-47s and P-38s were tossed into dirt and covered over. F4Us were tossed into the ocean.
That begs the question, doesn't it?
-
That begs the question, doesn't it?
Duh, gross waste is one of any government's favorite hobbies Anax, you know that.
-
The answer to the question is that a P 51D cost around $50,000, and a late P 47D/N was not quite twice that, but around $85,000 . By the time Korea came around we still had plenty of 51s around to allow for attrition/replacements. Not so with the T-Bolts.
-
P-47D-11 ... $59,936
P-47D-25 ... $80,000
P-47D-40 ... $83,500
P-47N ... $87,000
P-51B ... $47,500
P51D ... $50,000
From two months of research....
These costs are actuals.
-
Did we have to PAY Britain for each Merlin we put in the 51, or was there some sort license deal worked out? Aside from that, is a radial engine for complex than an inline water-cooled?
-
Every engine is different... But generally speaking the radial was less complex, and the inline (water cooled) had more components..
HOWEVER, the giant radial on the jugs had more metal in it, more weight, and a giant, large, complex turbosupercharger, whereas the P51 had a simple 2-stage supercharger.
Not just engines dictate costs, though... Sheer weight is on the Jug's side. That weight is made up of metals, composites, millions of things that had to be built and installed. That's all part of the cost.
-
The answer to the question is that a P 51D cost around $50,000, and a late P 47D/N was not quite twice that, but around $85,000 . By the time Korea came around we still had plenty of 51s around to allow for attrition/replacements. Not so with the T-Bolts.
Keep in mind Australia was making P51's as well so those would have been cheaper again than the US made aircraft & they didn't have as far to haul them to get them in to combat. I am not sure if USAF units used Australian made pony's during Korea or not?
-
...
The TA-152 is significantly faster on mil settings than the jug on mil, not sure how they compare maneuverability-wise at that altitude though, you probably know far better than me. Personally i prefer the WEP on the 152 than the Jug - I think the N-Jug is a dumptruck without it.
Spitfire XIV is also faster on mil, and has better climbrate at 30k even without wep.
The N is an afterburner bird. Without it, it is not much different from an early 1944 bubble top model (slightly better roll rate and more fuel) and performance is very similar to the 1943 razorbacks. It is mostly the mega-WEP that kicks it forward. With WEP, at 30,000 ft it is over 20 mph faster than the spit 14 and 10 mph faster than Ta152, which is the only plane that is really close in range and performance.
Also, keep in mind that the numbers in AH performance charts are with 100% internal fuel. To get an impression of how much fuel this is - it is enough to fully fuel 5 109s and have some to spare. The internal fuel load of Ta-152 is half of the Jug-N (260 vs. 550 gal). Jugs are incredibly inefficient in fuel usage. I am reading a book about De-Havilland and it is amazing how concerned they were with optimizing miles times ordnance weight per gallon. The N jug is a brute force solution to a problem. Enough brute force works sometimes.
-
Did we have to PAY Britain for each Merlin we put in the 51, or was there some sort license deal worked out? Aside from that, is a radial engine for complex than an inline water-cooled?
The Merlins in the P-51 are built by Packard under license.
-
A quick look at...
What a monster! I may have to spend some time with this toy! :D
-
there is a lot of mythology about the escorts in WWII that basically cover up the infighting between bomber command and fighter command.
when the first P47s came to the ETO (C-5s and D-5s thru D10s) there wasnt any real provisions for external tanks. that naturally cut the range down to the minimum.
the PTO was crying for fighters and took any being offered. they got some of the early P47s. being in the pacific, they needed longer range for the fighters so a lot of 'battlefield' mods were created using P38 tanks.
even then DTs were limited to center line moungtings - the wings have to be strengthened to take the weight. a side benefit was being able to hang bombs from those new stronger wings.
by the time Jugs were fitted with three DTs the job was being transfered to the P51s and the Jugs were switching to the tactical ground support role.
so, you can see that a Jug not being able to escort the bombers 'all the way' has many shades and 'truths' to it.
high command made the decisions and the bomber crews had to live with it.
-
P-38s are mentioned escorting B-29s and of course the P-51s but I have not seen anything on P-47s at Tinian or Saipan
-
P-38s are mentioned escorting B-29s and of course the P-51s but I have not seen anything on P-47s at Tinian or Saipan
The Jugs used in the Marshalls were D models. P-47Ns used to escort B-29's were based on Iwo Jima and Ie Shima.
-
Yes of course I didnt really think they operated out of the tiny Islands the B-29s did. For one thing there just isnt room.
(http://www.nps.gov/archive/amme/wwii_museum/air_offensive/b29s_on_taxiway_spn_lg.jpg)
-
Don't the Pony's use somewhere around 1/2 the fuel over the same distance that the 47's do? I feel like that would be a pretty big factor. Also isn't the 47's cruise speed about 1/2 that of the Pony's?
I'm just asking, I'm unsure if that is still true at those altitudes, never actually taken a 47 up there in-game. However I think this seems to be true around 15k.
-
Fuel goes further by altitude and airspeed goes up. The P-51s in AHII are usually at full power while in TRW they would usually be no higher than 50" hg and in cruise power no higher than 41" hg. The average fuel burn on the P-51D should be 60 gph. The P-51 actually has a fuel return line running either to the left wing tank or fuselage tank with up to 10 gph of unburned fuel being fed back to that tank so you would chose that tank first or fuel would be streaming behind you and causing a hazard for you. Also the plane has control reversing with the fuselage tank above the 25 gallon level and so with either that tank full or external tanks you would not be doing any heavy turns (although once you get used to the control reverse its not hard to fly it is uncomfortable and wears you out over time). So you burn the fuselage tank down to 25 gallons and then burn external tanks and when they are empty your fuselage tank should have as much as 50 gallons (considering 75 gallon externals).
I do not believe this is what happens online but I have not tested it to make sure. Hitech may have modified the fuel burn rate instead of incorporating fuel return I dont know.
-
the P47 also has a return line to the main tank.
SOP is to run off the main for about 10 mins every hour to keep it from filling and losing fuel out the overflow dump.
the P47-N with both wing DTs and the centerline DR had a longer range than a P51-D with drop tanks.
however the P51 had a higher cruise speed than the P47.
-
This can be confusing, heheh. It seemed that in the defensive role of the buff run, there were a lot of Ponies, P47M's, and 152's. Since we were in D40's, we had a bit less range. While I was gliding back to base (ditched 3 miles short) a 47N whizzed by me clearing me of enemy fighters. Maybe next time I will try the 51D for escorting long range, though.
-
Dont know how this applies to RL, but in an N, once alt is reached, leave manifold at max, but drop rpms down 2200 or so....lose lil bit of speed, gain TONS of range
-
If you go as high as 30000 ft you will need full power in either plane but you can reduce rpm to conserve fuel.
-
If you go as high as 30000 ft you will need full power in either plane but you can reduce rpm to conserve fuel.
Have ever flown an N? I took one (75% gas, at full power, 42 minutes at takeoff) from a 15k base in DA map..went up to 30k...leveled...wepped for 5 min... turned off wep for a few....evened out at 250 indicated (about 410 ground) burning 580 gallons per hour. Dropped rpm's from 2800 to 2200... (NOW at 354 gallons per hour) 5 min later...lost an astounding 2 miles per hour
-
I have flown it but not enough yet... well maybe enough for me. I have Flight Training Manual for the Thunderbolt P-47N and it came with fuel burn tables just like every other AAF Manual. I cant find it at the moment though or I would scan one of the tables and post it.
I keep the P-51 tables handy even though I dont need to refer to them much.