kool kitty89
Senior Master Sergeant
I agree, the only thing the 152C had was low-alt speed and roll rate, the H climbed better, turned better, had a higher lift:drag, and stalled at a higher AoA. (all thanks to the longer wings) Plus there were less engine problems among other things. Did the 152C even see action? (I know the H did)
When I said the P-47J's nose, I meant use it on the P-47N/M as it adds ~20-30 mph to the top speed and would increase range slightly due to decreased drag. I don't like the P-47J due to the lightened structure and thus lower durrabillity. (more likely to verstress airframe as well as more volnerable)
I'll also say that the P-72 wouldn't have been very usefull as it wouldn't have been ready for production before the P-80, and its only advantage was low-speed thrust (as with any prop a/c with high HP) and maximum range. (somthing the P-84 could match)
I'm not sure why the USAF (probably cost and greater inventory) prefered the P-51 over the P-47 in the post war period, but it was a mistake imo and the P-47D/N would have been much better suited to the Korean war than the P-51D, plus the P-51H was even worse it the milti-role fighter/Fighter-bomber role due to lighter structure. (hence why the H wasn't used) I'd say the P-38J/L would also be better as a multi-role fighter than the 51 (as was the P-63) but there weren't nearly as many as P-47s or P-51s left after WWII.
LIkewise the F4U-4/5 in Korea was better suited than the P-51, though the Jug was still less vulnerable due to the Corsairs oil coolers. (plus the turbo ducting acted as a crushable buffer in crash landings, reducing risk of injury to pilot or desintegration of airframe)
Who knows how many pilots' lives would have been saved if P-47D/N's had taken the place of the P-51D in Korea.
And also, below 25,000 ft performance of the P-47N and late model P-47D were very similar, the D's R-2800-63 engine had been cleared for 70" Hg boost with 100/150 fuel which gave a power of 2,600 HP @ 2,700 RPM with water injection and some P-47Ds may have been tuned as high as 2,700 HP, but the D's turbo could only produce 70" up to just under 24,000 ft while the P-47M/N could produce 2,800 HP at 2,800 RPM up to 32,000 ft. (Note, the P-47D could reach 444 mph at critical altitude with 2,600 HP)
See: P-47 Performance Tests
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/p-47/24june44-progress-report.pdf
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/150grade/p-47-66inch.jpg
Also I'm not sure where I got the 2x 15mm MG-151/15 nose guns of the 109K, but the only time 2x 15mm were to be used was in the K-14's (not produced) wing guns iirc. (I know the early 109F had a 15mm engine gun)
When I said the P-47J's nose, I meant use it on the P-47N/M as it adds ~20-30 mph to the top speed and would increase range slightly due to decreased drag. I don't like the P-47J due to the lightened structure and thus lower durrabillity. (more likely to verstress airframe as well as more volnerable)
I'll also say that the P-72 wouldn't have been very usefull as it wouldn't have been ready for production before the P-80, and its only advantage was low-speed thrust (as with any prop a/c with high HP) and maximum range. (somthing the P-84 could match)
I'm not sure why the USAF (probably cost and greater inventory) prefered the P-51 over the P-47 in the post war period, but it was a mistake imo and the P-47D/N would have been much better suited to the Korean war than the P-51D, plus the P-51H was even worse it the milti-role fighter/Fighter-bomber role due to lighter structure. (hence why the H wasn't used) I'd say the P-38J/L would also be better as a multi-role fighter than the 51 (as was the P-63) but there weren't nearly as many as P-47s or P-51s left after WWII.
LIkewise the F4U-4/5 in Korea was better suited than the P-51, though the Jug was still less vulnerable due to the Corsairs oil coolers. (plus the turbo ducting acted as a crushable buffer in crash landings, reducing risk of injury to pilot or desintegration of airframe)
Who knows how many pilots' lives would have been saved if P-47D/N's had taken the place of the P-51D in Korea.
And also, below 25,000 ft performance of the P-47N and late model P-47D were very similar, the D's R-2800-63 engine had been cleared for 70" Hg boost with 100/150 fuel which gave a power of 2,600 HP @ 2,700 RPM with water injection and some P-47Ds may have been tuned as high as 2,700 HP, but the D's turbo could only produce 70" up to just under 24,000 ft while the P-47M/N could produce 2,800 HP at 2,800 RPM up to 32,000 ft. (Note, the P-47D could reach 444 mph at critical altitude with 2,600 HP)
See: P-47 Performance Tests
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/p-47/24june44-progress-report.pdf
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/150grade/p-47-66inch.jpg
Also I'm not sure where I got the 2x 15mm MG-151/15 nose guns of the 109K, but the only time 2x 15mm were to be used was in the K-14's (not produced) wing guns iirc. (I know the early 109F had a 15mm engine gun)
