Planes

[manintrees]

Originally Posted by David603

P47 is quite good, but only at high altitude and it suffered from having the manoeuvrability of a barge, and the F6F worked well against Zeros but would be too slow to see effective use in Europe.

If I'm flying a Bf109 in Il2 1946 and I see a P47, the only part of the combat I'm worried about is getting past the 8 .50cals if the pilot tries a head on pass. Once I'm past these the only way a P47 is going to survive is either having a pilot far better than me or by using its weight to dive for the deck, and if I can spare the time and don't have to fight anyone else I will get him when he starts to climb back up to altitude again.

That's interesting. Thanks for the post. I have much to learn about the planes of ww2 and it seems like this will be a great place to do it.

Also, this forum has an alarming lack of douchebags

[Soviet Ace]

Originally Posted by manintrees

It's blowing my mind that none of you have mentioned the P-47 Thunderbolt or the ass-whoopin' F6F Hellcat from the PTO.
Both of these planes have insane kill ratios and are well known for their effectivness versus the FW 190's/Me 109's and the Zeroes respectively.

Obviously the P47 is call the "Jug" not because of the way it looks. The plan was a monstrosity! It often, like the P38, fell victim to both Me-109's and FW-109's. Many USAAF Pilots said that they disliked the P-47, and when the P-51 came into action, they all were jumping for a try. The P-47 fell victim in two VERY important categories.

1. Slow climb rate.

2. Turning was a problem.

What it did excel in was: 1. Diving (That thing fell like a stone) and 2. Armament, and Weaponry.

So against the Me-109 and FW-190, the P47 was a very eaten up plane, unless it was flown by a fairly good pilot (ie Gabby Gabreski).

[Soviet Ace]

Originally Posted by chacal49

All i want is the Yak 3

That's very true

[manintrees]

Originally Posted by Soviet Ace

Obviously the P47 is call the "Jug" not because of the way it looks. The plan was a monstrosity! It often, like the P38, fell victim to both Me-109's and FW-109's. Many USAAF Pilots said that they disliked the P-47, and when the P-51 came into action, they all were jumping for a try. The P-47 fell victim in two VERY important categories.

1. Slow climb rate.

2. Turning was a problem.

What it did excel in was: 1. Diving (That thing fell like a stone) and 2. Armament, and Weaponry.

So against the Me-109 and FW-190, the P47 was a very eaten up plane, unless it was flown by a fairly good pilot (ie Gabby Gabreski).

My knowledge of the P-47 is entirely from the book "Thunderbolt" so I may only know the good stuff. Regarding the nickname "Jug", it apparently is from the way it looks. The pilots named it that as it looked like a milk jug.

[wannabetheace]

Yep, I wholehartedly support the superiority of yak-3s especially yak-3P she is my lover

[thundermuffin]

Originally Posted by Soviet Ace

That's very true

Now, I'm not very knowledgeable with planes so most of this conversation is going over my head. But the Yak 3 looks a lot like the Spitfire (I don't know which model numbers). Is that intentional, or is the Spitfire design suitable for an all-around plane. A response with out starting like:
"Oh the little you know," or " God, you are a moron," would be much appreciated.

[David603]

There is a certain superficial similarity between the Merlin engined Spitfires and the Yak 3, mostly around the engine and cockpit, but I don't think this was intentional, and the rest of the design is dissimilar. In particular, the wings are very different shapes.

[juz1]

Originally Posted by Soviet Ace

Obviously the P47 is call the "Jug" not because of the way it looks. The plan was a monstrosity! It often, like the P38, fell victim to both Me-109's and FW-109's. Many USAAF Pilots said that they disliked the P-47, and when the P-51 came into action, they all were jumping for a try. The P-47 fell victim in two VERY important categories.

1. Slow climb rate.

2. Turning was a problem.

What it did excel in was: 1. Diving (That thing fell like a stone) and 2. Armament, and Weaponry.

So against the Me-109 and FW-190, the P47 was a very eaten up plane, unless it was flown by a fairly good pilot (ie Gabby Gabreski).

not forgetting in all theatres the pilots were good at counteracting their planes weakness with group tactics, learnt mainly from the inflexibility of the RAF in the early parts of the war....and it does need saying again how STUPIDLY TOUGH the P47 was...
jug for juggernaut?
________
Ford trimotor

[mondo]

Originally Posted by David603

P47 is quite good, but only at high altitude and it suffered from having the manoeuvrability of a barge, and the F6F worked well against Zeros but would be too slow to see effective use in Europe.

The P47 had a pretty good roll rate. Its extremely agile in a rolling scissors.

[mondo]

Originally Posted by Soviet Ace

So against the Me-109 and FW-190, the P47 was a very eaten up plane, unless it was flown by a fairly good pilot (ie Gabby Gabreski).

Thats not true at all! It excelled as a fighter, its only problem was range and low altitude speed (which was still on par with a Spitfire IXLF). Just look at its loss record. It had one of the best of the entire war. Above 20,000ft where they operated in 1943 they held all the cards over the 109G6's and 109A5's. Even later on when it was moved to ground attack it still excelled as a fighter due to its excellent roll rate and ability to hold its energy.