Supreme long range escort of the war - P-38L or P-47N? - Aircraft of World War II

Sal Monella · 11-10-2005, 07:18 PM

I can see strong points for each. What do you think?

syscom3 · 11-10-2005, 07:24 PM

P38L for very long range missions. Just having two engines is better for morale of the pilot when flying over long stretches of water.

book1182 · 11-10-2005, 08:20 PM

I agree, the P-38L has the twin engines for reliability and the great armament of 4x.50cal and 1x20mm. I love the hitting power of a 20mm.

Here's my but...

P-47N 8x.50cal??? Pretty good armament also. The P-47N would have better maneuverability over the P-38. You would lose the reliability of the twin engines but, you have a big radial engine in front of you that can take a punishment.

Winner P-47N: I think you need the ability to maneuver with the enemy to be able to keep them away from the bombers

Jank · 11-10-2005, 08:25 PM

That N model is one fast ship. 467mph.

syscom3 · 11-10-2005, 08:25 PM

But when you have to fly 800 miles over water back to your airbase, Id take the two engines over the single one.

Aggie08 · 11-10-2005, 08:44 PM

467, wow that is pretty damn fast. The two engines would be nice but in terms of performance and armament i'd have to go with the thunderbolt.

Jabberwocky · 11-10-2005, 08:59 PM

The P-47N was a big steep up for the whole Thunderbolt family.

It added a new wing and more fuel to the uprated R-2800 that came in on the P-47M. It was actually a better dogfighter than the P-47D as well, rolling better and turning better than the previous models.

As for VLR escorts, well the P-51B/C, P-51D, P-38L, late build P-47D models and the P-47N all fit well into the category. It is really swings and round-abouts as to which was better or "the best". Do you take the speed of the P-47N, the twin engined reliability of the P-38L or the better dogfighting capability of the P-51?

The USA was really the only nation to build an effective long range escort fighter, with the only other contender being the A6M. Most other long range fighters were two man twin engined planes, that had real trouble competing against single seaters.

lesofprimus · 11-10-2005, 10:44 PM

Im not overly impressed with the whole "dual engine safety" thing... The performance issues weigh heavier in my opinion.... And u gotta love having that badass radial infront of u....

Talk about a HUGE moral booster....

Sal Monella · 11-10-2005, 10:58 PM

Now that's a burly ass kicker. No pansy ass tea and crumpet eating "Tiffy" lad behind the stick of this machine.

syscom3 · 11-11-2005, 01:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sal Monella

[img]......No pansy ass tea and crumpet eating "Tiffy" lad behind the stick of this machine.

RAGMAN · 11-11-2005, 02:04 AM

the P47 is better in my view,radial engine for damage,speed.Agility is not bad either,it won't be confused for a Spitfire MK 1 but it could hold its own.8 machine guns is not too shabby either.

Did the P47 ever have 20 mm cannons installed?

syscom3 · 11-11-2005, 02:09 AM

The center located MG's on the Lightning were just as effective as the eight fifty's on the -47. So I would say its a draw.

Although the radial engine was was one tough machine, it to could be damaged in a multitude of ways. Think of this. Could the -2800 suffer significant damage and still bring the plane home to an airbase 600 miles away? Remember, if the engine fails, the pilot is going into the sea.

The P38 and its twin engines proved time and time again in the PTO, that in some instances, 2 engines are definatly better than 1

Gnomey · 11-11-2005, 07:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by syscom3

P38L for very long range missions. Just having two engines is better for morale of the pilot when flying over long stretches of water.

Agreed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by syscom3

But when you have to fly 800 miles over water back to your airbase, Id take the two engines over the single one.

So would I.

Quote:

Originally Posted by book1182

I agree, the P-38L has the twin engines for reliability and the great armament of 4x.50cal and 1x20mm. I love the hitting power of a 20mm.

Here's my but...

P-47N 8x.50cal??? Pretty good armament also. The P-47N would have better maneuverability over the P-38. You would lose the reliability of the twin engines but, you have a big radial engine in front of you that can take a punishment.

Winner P-47N: I think you need the ability to maneuver with the enemy to be able to keep them away from the bombers

Good points I agree with them.

Quote:

Originally Posted by syscom3

But when you have to fly 800 miles over water back to your airbase, Id take the two engines over the single one.

This is what is boils down to for me.

For extreme range missions I would take the P-38L as well as for long missions over water. I would then use the P-47N for slightly shorter missions over land/small stretches of water. They are both pretty equal in my view, but for long range escort 2 engines are better than 1 even if that one can take a fair amount of battle damage.

RAGMAN · 11-11-2005, 08:20 AM

From what I have read on this site, I thought that the Allison Engine,being a liquid cooled engine was more prone to gunfire than a radial engine.But that being said, I can see the benefits of two engines than one.But the 2800 engine was legendary for bringing pilots(in Europe I know) back to Allied land at great distances. On one of the stories I have read here,(in another thread)a pilot was raked by gunfire from a German(FW190?) plane and he crouched in his armour plated seat and lived to fight another day.

DerAdlerIstGelandet · 11-11-2005, 09:39 AM

I go for the Jug. Both aircraft are great and 2 of the best of all times but I have always loved the Jug. Something about how rugged she is and I love the radial engine.

We all do know that the P-51D though was the escort fighter of choice for the USAAF. I am not a fan of the P-51D and I do not think that it was that it was cracked up to be but it was the aircraft that took the fight to the Germans.

11-10-2005, 07:18 PM	#1
Sal Monella Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Redwood City Posts: 223	Supreme long range escort of the war - P-38L or P-47N? I can see strong points for each. What do you think?

11-10-2005, 07:24 PM	#2
syscom3 Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Orange County, CA Posts: 10,279	P38L for very long range missions. Just having two engines is better for morale of the pilot when flying over long stretches of water. __________________ "Pilot to copilot..... what are those mountain goats doing up here in the clouds?"

11-10-2005, 08:20 PM	#3
book1182 Member Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: United States Posts: 75	I agree, the P-38L has the twin engines for reliability and the great armament of 4x.50cal and 1x20mm. I love the hitting power of a 20mm. Here's my but... P-47N 8x.50cal??? Pretty good armament also. The P-47N would have better maneuverability over the P-38. You would lose the reliability of the twin engines but, you have a big radial engine in front of you that can take a punishment. Winner P-47N: I think you need the ability to maneuver with the enemy to be able to keep them away from the bombers __________________ Get the greedy bastard...

11-10-2005, 08:25 PM	#5
syscom3 Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Orange County, CA Posts: 10,279	But when you have to fly 800 miles over water back to your airbase, Id take the two engines over the single one. __________________ "Pilot to copilot..... what are those mountain goats doing up here in the clouds?"

11-10-2005, 08:44 PM	#6
Aggie08 Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Texas Posts: 1,013	467, wow that is pretty damn fast. The two engines would be nice but in terms of performance and armament i'd have to go with the thunderbolt. __________________ "I had ten rockets on board, and as I wasn't particularly fond of head-on attacks, I salvoed the whole lot at him. The rockets didn't hit him but but they must have scared the bejesus out of him, for he did a steep turn to starboard... I let him have the full blast, all eight fifty-calibers. I had never seen an aircraft completely disintegrate in the air the way this Me-110 did..." Bill Dunn, 406th Fighter Group Matt

11-10-2005, 08:25 PM	#4
Jank Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 679	That N model is one fast ship. 467mph.

11-10-2005, 08:59 PM	#7
Jabberwocky Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Japan Posts: 494	The P-47N was a big steep up for the whole Thunderbolt family. It added a new wing and more fuel to the uprated R-2800 that came in on the P-47M. It was actually a better dogfighter than the P-47D as well, rolling better and turning better than the previous models. As for VLR escorts, well the P-51B/C, P-51D, P-38L, late build P-47D models and the P-47N all fit well into the category. It is really swings and round-abouts as to which was better or "the best". Do you take the speed of the P-47N, the twin engined reliability of the P-38L or the better dogfighting capability of the P-51? The USA was really the only nation to build an effective long range escort fighter, with the only other contender being the A6M. Most other long range fighters were two man twin engined planes, that had real trouble competing against single seaters.

11-10-2005, 10:44 PM	#8
lesofprimus Minister of Whoopass Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Long Island Native in Mississippi Posts: 17,498	Im not overly impressed with the whole "dual engine safety" thing... The performance issues weigh heavier in my opinion.... And u gotta love having that badass radial infront of u.... Talk about a HUGE moral booster.... __________________ My IL2 Video Tribute to My Grandfather: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HtzN5RuNNJk

11-10-2005, 10:58 PM	#9
Sal Monella Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Redwood City Posts: 223	Now that's a burly ass kicker. No pansy ass tea and crumpet eating "Tiffy" lad behind the stick of this machine.

11-11-2005, 02:04 AM	#11
RAGMAN Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: B.C. Posts: 59	the P47 is better in my view,radial engine for damage,speed.Agility is not bad either,it won't be confused for a Spitfire MK 1 but it could hold its own.8 machine guns is not too shabby either. Did the P47 ever have 20 mm cannons installed? __________________ sorry I'm a newbie

11-11-2005, 02:09 AM	#12
syscom3 Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Orange County, CA Posts: 10,279	The center located MG's on the Lightning were just as effective as the eight fifty's on the -47. So I would say its a draw. Although the radial engine was was one tough machine, it to could be damaged in a multitude of ways. Think of this. Could the -2800 suffer significant damage and still bring the plane home to an airbase 600 miles away? Remember, if the engine fails, the pilot is going into the sea. The P38 and its twin engines proved time and time again in the PTO, that in some instances, 2 engines are definatly better than 1 __________________ "Pilot to copilot..... what are those mountain goats doing up here in the clouds?"

11-11-2005, 08:20 AM	#14
RAGMAN Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: B.C. Posts: 59	From what I have read on this site, I thought that the Allison Engine,being a liquid cooled engine was more prone to gunfire than a radial engine.But that being said, I can see the benefits of two engines than one.But the 2800 engine was legendary for bringing pilots(in Europe I know) back to Allied land at great distances. On one of the stories I have read here,(in another thread)a pilot was raked by gunfire from a German(FW190?) plane and he crouched in his armour plated seat and lived to fight another day. __________________ sorry I'm a newbie

11-11-2005, 09:39 AM	#15
DerAdlerIstGelandet Der Crewchief Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Ansbach, Germany Posts: 33,152	I go for the Jug. Both aircraft are great and 2 of the best of all times but I have always loved the Jug. Something about how rugged she is and I love the radial engine. We all do know that the P-51D though was the escort fighter of choice for the USAAF. I am not a fan of the P-51D and I do not think that it was that it was cracked up to be but it was the aircraft that took the fight to the Germans. __________________ fly boy:"isnt that the first jet bomber becasue i have flown one in a flight sim before and i know how it handles"[/I]

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode