P-47N Thunderbolt vs. F4U-4 Corsair - Which was superior?

[DAVIDICUS]

I'm curious which of these were better in the air to air role and why.

[evangilder]

I'd have to go with the Corsair in air to air engagements on this one. They were both capable air to air fighters, but the Jug was bigger and heavier. The Corsair was designed using the biggest possible engine in the smallest possible airframe.

The original specification on the Jug, interestingly, called for a small, lightweight fighter! The November 2004 edition of Air Classics has a great article on the Jug.

[DAVIDICUS]

The P-47 had the top speed, roll rate, dive speed, armament and protective armor advantages. The P-47 had a high altitude advantage in general performance.

The F4-U had the manueverability and the climb rate advantage. The F4-U had a low and medium altitude advantage in general performance.

Any disagreement on these attributes?

[evangilder]

They were both excellent aircraft. In a pure air to air role, I would think the Corsair would have the edge.

They were designed for different things. The P-47N was a long range escort plane, the F4U-4 was a patrol/interceptor. The P-47N probably had the advantage above 30,000 feet, the F4U-4 below 30,000 feet. The P-47N had more firepower, the F4U-4 was a little tougher.

Very hard call.

=S=

Lunatic

[evangilder]

They were both excellent ground support aircraft as well.

[R Leonard]

. . . but you could land a Corsair on a carrier.

Originally Posted by R Leonard

. . . but you could land a Corsair on a carrier.

Sure, but the P-47N had 1000 mile greater range. Kinda fits since the P-47N was a USAAF plane, where the F4U-4 was a USN plane. They were designed for different roles.

=S=

Lunatic

[Soren]

In a Dogfight, it would defidently be the Corsair !

It could climb faster and it was more maneuverable, plus against the P-47 the F4U Corsair had the rare advantage of being able to out-turn the P-47

The best thing the P-47 could hope fore against a F4U Corsair, would be a head on attack or, that there was enough altitude to let it dive away from harms way. (Almost nothing could follow a P-47 in a dive !)

[evangilder]

Originally Posted by R Leonard

. . . but you could land a Corsair on a carrier.

That is true, but a majority of Corsair missions were flown from land bases. When it finally was able to land on the carrier, it was still a difficult task due to that long nose.

[the lancaster kicks ass]

i honestly don't know who would win but i'd kinda want the P-47 to win, a very good thread here, shud be some good disscussion...........

[cheddar cheese]

I know id rather be in a P-47N...

Originally Posted by Soren

In a Dogfight, it would defidently be the Corsair !

It could climb faster and it was more maneuverable, plus against the P-47 the F4U Corsair had the rare advantage of being able to out-turn the P-47

The best thing the P-47 could hope fore against a F4U Corsair, would be a head on attack or, that there was enough altitude to let it dive away from harms way. (Almost nothing could follow a P-47 in a dive !)

Umm... the P-47 was fast into the dive, but a number of planes could dive faster. The Corsair and the P-47 were about equal in initial dive performance (both are very heavy planes) and the Corsair was actually faster (550 mph) under a high degree of pilot control.

In general I'd agree, the F4U-4 probably would have the advantage, but it'd be slight. And the P-47N had TWICE the firepower of the F4U-4, which is a huge factor. Near the end of WWII P-47N's chewed up Franks flown by two of Japan's few remaining ace squadrons, over Korea. One relatively rookie pilot, Oscar F. Perdomo, scored 5 kills that day, becomming the last "Ace in a day" in history.

http://www.elknet.pl/acestory/perdomo/perdomo.htm

=S=

Lunatic

[DAVIDICUS]

RG_Lunatic,

What is your source regarding your statement, "Umm... the P-47 was fast into the dive, but a number of planes could dive faster. The Corsair and the P-47 were about equal in initial dive performance (both are very heavy planes) and the Corsair was actually faster (550 mph) under a high degree of pilot control."

In addition, what is your source for your statement, "And the P-47N had TWICE the firepower of the F4U-4, which is a huge factor."

I am certain the latter of your above statements is incorrect and interested to find out if my understanding concerning the former is incorrect.

Originally Posted by DAVIDICUS

RG_Lunatic,

What is your source regarding your statement, "Umm... the P-47 was fast into the dive, but a number of planes could dive faster. The Corsair and the P-47 were about equal in initial dive performance (both are very heavy planes) and the Corsair was actually faster (550 mph) under a high degree of pilot control."

In addition, what is your source for your statement, "And the P-47N had TWICE the firepower of the F4U-4, which is a huge factor."

I am certain the latter of your above statements is incorrect and interested to find out if my understanding concerning the former is incorrect.

The P-47 was fast in its initial dive acceleration because it was heavy and had a large engine. But its critical mach level is lower than a number of other planes, and compression limited its maximum dive speed. The Corsair was able to dive at speeds up to 550 mph IAS, which is faster than the max IAS of the P-47.

The P-47N got the .50 M3, which fired at 1200 rpm. That means the ROF was the equivalent of 12 x .50 M2's, double the 6 x M2's on the Corsair. Somewhere I have records of the M3's being delivered to Iwo Shima and one other base, both of which were P-47N bases. Also, pilot comments can be found refering to the faster rate of fire on the P-47N guns.

=S=

Lunatic