Ready for the P-47D15-23 series

[Seadog36]

The 109G6 performance graph was not presented prior. I do stand corrected on that count, though no data other than Xavier's assertion for 109G6/AS performance is presented, which is undoubtedly slightly better with the larger DB603 supercharger  installed on the AS variants. I am surprised the G6 drops off so much above 22k, regardless, why would anyone fly a 109G6/AS with a 30mm over a K-4 with a 30mm which will fly 425 mph at 28k? Definitly have to keep that in mind for all those 30k dogfights.

What is the physical difference, sources sayit looks identical to the G-10. Is this for a MW, I have not been able to find any production #s for any AS variants, start a thread~ interesting but no less redundant.



Btw Karnak, the 47's Turbocharger achieved max rpms of 18,250 at 23,000 feet and remained constant through 35k though horsepower/manifold pressure is gradually lost at higher altitudes.
      Altitude        Turbo rpms  rate of climb
    
    15,000   14,050       2330
    20,000   16,450   2150
    23,400   18,250   2000
    25,000   18,250   1810
    30,000   18,250   1190
    35,000   18,250     570

[Xavier]

The 109G6 performance graph was not presented prior. I do stand corrected on that count, though no data other than Xavier's assertion for 109G6/AS performance is presented, which is undoubtedly slightly better with the larger DB603 supercharger  installed on the AS variants.

I presented you the maximum speed of both variants and you chose to ignore it and try to mock me. Good luck having anyone take you seriously in this thread from now on.

why would anyone fly a 109G6/AS with a 30mm over a K-4 with a 30mm which will fly 425 mph at 28k? Definitly have to keep that in mind for all those 30k dogfights.

Maybe, maybe for the same reasons a P-47 fanboy would take a D-11 over an M. The point stands: G6 vs G6/AS brings wildly different performance and a new airplane, D-25 vs D-23 does not.

[Karnak]

I am surprised the G6 drops off so much above 22k, regardless, why would anyone fly a 109G6/AS with a 30mm over a K-4 with a 30mm which will fly 425 mph at 28k? Definitly have to keep that in mind for all those 30k dogfights.

Nobody is talking about any of these, other than the Seafire Mk III, with anticipation of significant use in the MA.  A few dedicated P-47 fans, such as yourself, will use the P-47D-23 in the LWMA, but you know as well as I do that the M and the N will continue to dominate P-47 usage.  The same is true of the Bf109s and the K-4.  The /AS models, and I really don't care if it is a G-6/AS or G-14/AS, are needed for USAAF 8th Air Force vs the Luftwaffe settings because, as you noticed, the performance of the Bf109G-6 and Bf109G-14 fall off so sharply above 22,000ft, well below the altitude they need to fight at.  Kinda ironically, your P-47D-23 would be one of their classic opponents.

What is the physical difference, sources sayit looks identical to the G-10. Is this for a MW, I have not been able to find any production #s for any AS variants, start a thread~ interesting but no less redundant.

The Bf109G-10 has the same engine in it as the Bf109K-4 with the reduced performance being due to the draggier Bf109G airframe.  The Bf109G-10 would have significantly superior performance to the Bf109G-6/AS or Bf109G-14/AS.  The Bf109G-10 also entered service with the Luftwaffe a month or so after the Bf109K-4 did, many of them simply being reengined Bf109Gs of older vintage rather than new construction.

Btw Karnak, the 47's Turbocharger achieved max rpms of 18,250 at 23,000 feet and remained constant through 35k though horsepower/manifold pressure is gradually lost at higher altitudes.
      Altitude        Turbo rpms  rate of climb
    
    15,000   14,050       2330
    20,000   16,450   2150
    23,400   18,250   2000
    25,000   18,250   1810
    30,000   18,250   1190
    35,000   18,250     570

Gotcha.  I was just estimating off of the AH performance chart for the D-25.  As I said, P-47s not my strongest point.

[Seadog36]

I presented you the maximum speed of both variants and you chose to ignore it and try to mock me. Good luck having anyone take you seriously in this thread from now on.

I really couldn't care less about your opinion, your 3 mph rant when looking at D-21,23,25 data already discredits you enough. I'm just one of many who recognize this gap and want to see a late model razorback. Even to many for which this is not a priority, acknowledge the historical discrepancy and misrepresentation. This is an old and recurrent thread which won't go away and one that will most likely be rectified in the future.

Maybe, maybe for the same reasons a P-47 fanboy would take a D-11 over an M. The point stands: G6 vs G6/AS brings wildly different performance and a new airplane, D-25 vs D-23 does not.

The 109AS being "wildly different" is a delusion you will have to live with. It is common knowledge that a D-11 being the lightest in the game is the best knife fighter and is superior to the M in many regards when speed and climb rate is not the only criteria. It is the first choice among many who fly 47s in LW as well as MW where it is extremely competitive. I have no problem admitting a mistake and reformulating my opinion, your wiki knowledge does not impress.

[Xavier]

I really couldn't care less about your opinion, your 3 mph rant when looking at D-21,23,25 data already discredits you enough.

Rant? You said the D-23 was faster, climbed better and handled better. We checked the facts, it was 3 mph slower. If you want to call it a rant, it's ok. The fact stands.

The 109AS being "wildly different" is a delusion you will have to live with.

That's an opinion, and I prefer facts. The AS is 26mph faster at 28K.

I have no problem admitting a mistake and reformulating my opinion

 

your wiki knowledge does not impress.

[bozon]

Rant? You said the D-23 was faster, climbed better and handled better. We checked the facts, it was 3 mph slower. If you want to call it a rant, it's ok. The fact stands.

D25 does not matter. D-22/23 performs significantly better than the other razorback the D11.

The point stands: G6 vs G6/AS brings wildly different performance and a new airplane, D-25 vs D-23 does not.

Then wish for a 109G6/AS. What has a 109 submodel got to do with a P47D22/23 wish?

[Xavier]

D25 does not matter. D-22/23 performs significantly better than the other razorback the D11.

Back then it was argued that the D-23 didn't add anything to the game since it had the same performance as the D-25 we already have.

Then wish for a 109G6/AS. What has a 109 submodel got to do with a P47D22/23 wish?

While it would be nice to have the 109G6/AS, I personally feel that a lot of aircraft have more preference than another 109 version. The Beaufighter, for example! Or Pe-2, or the Boomerang, He-177, J2M, Ki-44...

[Seadog36]

Rant? You said the D-23 was faster, climbed better and handled better. We checked the facts, it was 3 mph slower. If you want to call it a rant, it's ok. The fact stands.

(Image removed from quote.)

Do you realize the D-22RE and D-23RA are the exact same plane, same motor same prop? Of course you don't because you never bothered to read this thread.

As previously stated, the RE denotes it was built in the Farmingdale, NY plant the RA denotes it was built in the Evansville, IN plant.

You are cherry picking the D-23 top speed which is probably off to make your point. According to the chart the D-22 is 6 mph faster than the D-25! So your argument again is wrong~ and one D-23 could just as easily be 3-6mph faster in another trial on a different day. It is just statistical variation, but even the lowly D-11 is 4mph faster than the D-25.

They are all identical in every mechanical aspect except the D-25 was given slightly more internal fuel and a bubble canopy which 1) makes it heavier and 2)makes it more unstable. So unstable in fact that subsequent bubble tops were fitted with fillets to provide more stability. Why don't you look at rate of climb for another "wildly different aircraft type" notice how the D-25 climbs at 1,575 ft/min and the D-22 climbs at 1,850 ft/min. It is also a huge improvement from the 1,375 ft/min over the D-11 and other small propped 47s which were wholesale refitted with larger props.

The D-25 had a whopping 384 total examples built. It was virtually a prototype bubbletop, only built in the Farmingdale, NY plant. The D-30 was the most numerous bubble top which had even more internal fuel added and should be the only other bubble top 47 aside from the N and debatably the M. The D-40 was a Pacific variant and was also another smallish run which never saw service in the ETO or MTO.

The speed of 47's in the game is already artificially depressed to factory standards. Their R-2800 engines were routinely cranked up to achieve 70"hg manifold pressure making even earlier Ds perform closer to Ms in the field. The significant increase in rate of climb and superior handling is yet another reason why the D-25 misrepresents the vast majority of 47's in the game.

[Karnak]

D25 does not matter. D-22/23 performs significantly better than the other razorback the D11.

The D-25 matters because it is a suitable stand in for the D-23.  The razorback vs bubble canopy alone is not enough of a difference to make it a priority.  The significance of the difference is much less than that between the Spitfire Mk Vb that we have and the Spitfire Mk Vc that was the majority of Spit V production because there is a significant performance difference between those Spit Vs, but not between the D-23 and D-25.

[Xavier]

Do you realize the D-22RE and D-23RA are the exact same plane, same motor same prop? Of course you don't because you never bothered to read this thread.

I didn't even mention them  

They are all identical in every mechanical aspect except the D-25 was given slightly more internal fuel and a bubble canopy

And there you have it! Slightly more fuel and a bubble canopy. That's all the difference between the D-23 and the D-25 that we already have. If you think the D-23 deserves a higher priority than the Pe-2 or Do-217 you're just delusional.

The jug has the densest version coverage by year of the whole planeset. I highly doubt another P-47 is what Hitech has in mind for now.

[Seadog36]

The D-25 matters because it is a suitable stand in for the D-23.  The razorback vs bubble canopy alone is not enough of a difference to make it a priority.  The significance of the difference is much less than that between the Spitfire Mk Vb that we have and the Spitfire Mk Vc that was the majority of Spit V production because there is a significant performance difference between those Spit Vs, but not between the D-23 and D-25.

You are so cute Karnak the way you keep this thread going by throwing out random aircraft on a regular basis to compare the D22/23. 109, Seafire III, Spit V~ this has become your new variant sounding board. You already slipped up too much agreeing on the strong points of this addition. Too bad you didn't think of it... . What did you used to fly when you played, what was your handle? Have you even tried out the Ki-43 you so diligently lobbied for

[Seadog36]

Did you read the charts? It mentions the D-25 and D-23 top speeds. The D-23 is 3mph slower.

We've seen it's not faster, it's marginally slower than the D-25. You've been arguing that it was a model needed because it's got different performance, and we've seen it's not the case. I'll repeat it again: it's just 3mph slower than the D-25. If you want (another) 47 added so badly you'll have to give good reasons for it besides production numbers. We already have a truckload of P-47s.


The 47 has the densest version coverage of the whole planeset, and the D-23 would just give us cosmetic changes and a hardly appreciable performance decrease.

Rightttttt....never came up....ummm hmmm  What was I thinking, must be another chart?

[Xavier]

Rightttttt....never came up....ummm hmmm  What was I thinking, must be another chart?

What?

[Oldman731]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9KnwIYwEh6o

Arlo, that was really a superior find, thank you.

The videos can't impart the sound as accurately as real life, of course.  When you watch and hear them in person, there's no doubt (well....at least for me...) that the P-47 was the real Cadillac of the skies.

Oh....I'd like the D-23 (or 21, whichever) as well.  But the Beaufighter and Tojo should come first.

- oldman

[Karnak]

You are so cute Karnak the way you keep this thread going by throwing out random aircraft on a regular basis to compare the D22/23. 109, Seafire III, Spit V~ this has become your new variant sounding board. You already slipped up too much agreeing on the strong points of this addition. Too bad you didn't think of it... . What did you used to fly when you played, what was your handle? Have you even tried out the Ki-43 you so diligently lobbied for

I am not trying out random aircraft.  There is an absolutely huge number of aircraft that warrant addition before the P-47D-23 simply due to the D-23's lack of gap filling credentials.

Look, it isn't our fault you're obsessed with an aircraft that has near duplicate performance to an aircraft already in AH.  To you the differences between them are huge, but to anybody looking at it from a neutral standpoint the differences are minor compared to many others.