DCS: P-47D-30 Discussion

[HeadHunter52]

P-40 will be my next ride, then the Spit, but only because....

 

THE P-47 DIDN'T GET HERE FIRST. :pilotfly:

 

Being patient.

 

Mmm hmmmm. With just a touch of anticipation.

 

Like when a piano falling from the 7th floor touches yer head. :D

[Echo38]

Like when a piano falling from the 7th floor touches yer head.

 

For some reason, I find the notion of a falling piano apt, when talking about the Thunderbolt. : )

[OutOnTheOP]

For some reason, I find the notion of a falling piano apt, when talking about the Thunderbolt. : )

 

I think the 'Bolt is a bit past "piano", and somewhere in the realm of "ton of bricks" ;)

[Solty]

Actually P-47 was quite easy to land and didn't reqiure the pilot to drop on the field like a "piano" nor like a "ton of bricks". It is realy easy to take off and land, simillar to the Mustang... maybe even easier. Just it needs long runway to stop.

How the pilot Jeff Ethell described it "It flies like on rails"

 

https://youtu.be/75RwPrdAej8

 

Edited July 7, 2015 by Solty

[gavagai]

Yes, I am hopeful for the P-47. It should be very easy to fly compared to our other warbirds:

 

A few years ago, the Society of Experimental Test Pilots ran a flight test comparison of the F6F-5, FG-1D (Goodyear F4U), P-47D-40 and P-51D. Chief test pilot was John Ellis of Kal-Aero. Other pilots also participated.

 

The three radial jobs had versions of the R-2800 that produced appx. 2,000 hp, so differences in performance can be reasonably attributed to the airframe (and prop). The P-51 had a V-1650-9 Merlin rated at appx. 1,500 hp.

 

The P-47 had a Curtiss Electric constant-speed four-blade prop. The FG-1 and F6F both had Hamilton Standard three-bladed constant speed props (so only the airframe made the difference between these two). The P-51 had a Hamilton Standard Hydromatic four-bladed constant speed prop.

 

Because of the age of the aircraft, structural loads were kept to 6g max. Engines were fueled with 100LL, which limited MP by four inches on the radials. Power was limited to maximum continuous settings (except for

take-off & climb to 10,000 ft., when military power was used), superchargers were limited to low range. Altitude did not exceed 10,000 ft (so bomber escort altitudes were not reached).

 

Some of the findings:

 

CLIMB brake release to 10,000 ft.

Hellcat quickest at 4min 15 seconds, followed by the FG-1 at 4min 44 sec. However, the F6F required 100 lbs of continuous right rudder making it very tiring to operate. The P-47 trailed the FG-1 by a few seconds. The

P-51 came in last.

 

LEVEL ACCELERATION at 10,000 ft. using METO to max attainable speed:

P-51 accelerated from 110 KIAS to 242 KIAS in 133 seconds.

P-47 accelerated from 105 KIAS to 223 KIAS in 130 seconds.

F6F accelerated from 100 KIAS to 220 KIAS in 115 seconds.

FG-1 accelerated from 100 KIAS to 230 KIAS in 162 seconds.

 

STALL normal (straight and level decelerating at 1 kt/sec.) and accelerated (constant 3g turn decelerating at 1 kt/sec.)

Aerodynamic warning:

Best--P-47, with buffet 5 kt above stall.

Worst--P-51, no buffet or other warning.

FG-1 and F6F buffeted 2 kts above stall.

Decreasing aileron effectiveness and increasing longitudinal stick forces

were noticeable in all except the FG-1.

Height loss, accelerated stall:

Best--P-47, 100 ft.

Worst--P-51, 500 ft.

FG-1 and F6F both 150 ft.

 

Behavior during accelrated stall:

Most predictable and controllable: P-47 and F6F. Both could be flown at will into the pre-stall buffet, which at no time was heavy enough to present problems with tracking, and held at maximum usable lift coefficient with ease. Sideslip became noticeable as wing heaviness correctible with rudder. There was little tendency to depart controlled

flight. The FG-1 suffered severe airframe buffet shortly before the stall, but at the stall there was a strong g-break and rapid right wing drop--no matter which direction the turn. Careful left rudder could prevent wing drop,

but then at the stall the aircraft became very unpredictable, bucking and porpoising, with a tendency to a sudden departure. The P-51 gave no warning whatsoever of an accelerated stall. At the stall, the aircraft departed with complete loss of control, achieving 270-degree of roll before recovery. Departure was accompanied by violent

aileron snatch strong enough to rip the control stick from the hand. In short, the P-51 suffered from a Part I deficiency.

 

SUSTAINED TURN PERFORMANCE at METO at 10,000 ft.

The F6F out-turned the other three by a conclusive margin (1g). The other three were all about the same.

Corner speeds of all were very close to the maximum level flight speed, implying very rapid energy loss when turning at the structural limit. The F6F was in light airframe buffet at 6g at Vmax; the P-47 experiencedlight buffet at 4.8g. The FG-1 and P-51 were buffet-free up to 6g.

 

MANEUVERING STABILITY stick forces/g at Vmax

FG-1--5 lbs/g (too light)

P-47--7.5 lbs/g (ideal)

F6F--12.5 lbs/g (barely acceptable)

P-51--over 20 lbs/g (excessive)

 

STATIC LATERAL DIRECTION STABILITY steady heading sideslips

All aircraft except the P-47 exhibited moderate or greater adverse aileronyaw. Worst was the F6F, followed by the FG-1 and the P-51.

 

ROLL PERFORMANCE

1g 360-degree right (left slower--F6F worst, P-51 best)

FG-1--81 deg./sec.

F6F--78 deg./sec.

P-51--75 deg./sec.

P-47--74 deg./sec.

3g 180 degree right (left slower--P-51 and F6F best, FG-1 worst)

P-47--66 deg./sec.

FG-1--58 deg./sec.

P-51--55 deg./sec.

F6F--48 deg./sec.

 

DIVING ACCELERATION 30 deg. dive from 10,000 ft., 5,000 ft. begin pull-up, level off at 4,000 ft.

Aircraft P-47 FG-1 F6F P51

 

Start Speed 110 kts 100 kts 100 kts 120 kts

Max Speed 350 kts 348 kts 315 kts 350 kts

Time 23 secs 32 secs 28 secs 25 secs

All aircraft except the P-47 needed retrimming during the dive.

 

AGILITY

g capture of 3g target, held for 5 seconds.

G capture and hold was easiest in the P-47, predictable and accurate. F6F overshot the target by 0.2g. P-51 and FG-1 both overshot by 0.5g

 

Heading Change Time (180 deg at METO, 220 KIAS at 10,000 ft.)

FG-1--8.5 sec P-47--9.7 sec F6F--9.9 sec P-51--10.0 sec

 

AIR-TO-AIR TRACKING 210 KIAS at 10,000 ft. (straight & level into a 3g turn to the left building to 4g followed by a hard reversal into a 4g right turn.)

FG-1 best, followed by P-47, F6F and, trailing badly, the P-51. Lateral corrections in the P-51 were difficult thanks to the very high stick forces. During one run-thru, an effort at a longitudinal tracking correction that put 4.5g on the plane led to a sudden departure and spin.Poor forward visibility in all aircraft (P-47 worst, FG-1 best) made air-to-air tracking difficult. Depressed sight-line aiming difficult to impossible.

 

AIR-TO-GROUND TRACKING (90-degree roll into a 30-degree dive from 200 KIAS at 5,000 ft. into a 3.5g right rolling pullout to a 90-degree heading change initiated at 2,500 ft.)

The P-47 was far and away the best, accelerating 125 kts in the dive, no retrimming required, with crisp control response. Accurate target tracking very easy. FG-1 next best. 100 kt. acceleration. Agressive lateral corrections required. P-51 similar to FG-1 in acceleration and

control response, but with heavier stick forces. F6F also accelerated 100 kts., but stick forces increased 20 lbs and rudder forces became so high they interfered with accurate target tracking.

 

THROTTLE & PROPELLER RESPONSE

MP response instantaneous. Hamilton Standard propeller response quick and positive. Curtiss electric prop (on P-47) sluggish in response, delaying RPM change by 3 seconds in a change from 2,000 rpm (cruise) and 2,550 rpm (METO).

Radial engines required pilot to manage cowl and cooler flap settings. Merlin engine had automatic control of oil and coolant radiator flaps.

[SilentGun]

Yes, I am hopeful for the P-47. It should be very easy to fly compared to our other warbirds:

 

 

Well taxiing/takeoff might be another story as it could only lock the tail wheel completely or have it swivel freely.

[HeadHunter52]

Actually P-47 was quite easy to land and didn't reqiure the pilot to drop on the field like a "piano" nor like a "ton of bricks". It is realy easy to take off and land, simillar to the Mustang... maybe even easier.

 

The piano reference was to a Luftwaffe pilot and his comments in a video posted here recently. I was adapting it to the "subtly" of just how much the anticipation weighs upon me.

 

Had nothing to do with landing in this usage...

[OutOnTheOP]

Actually P-47 was quite easy to land and didn't reqiure the pilot to drop on the field like a "piano" nor like a "ton of bricks". It is realy easy to take off and land, simillar to the Mustang... maybe even easier. Just it needs long runway to stop.

How the pilot Jeff Ethell described it "It flies like on rails"

 

I think you are misinterpreting.

 

Think "hits like a ton of bricks". It's big, it's rugged, and it's got punch.

Edited July 8, 2015 by OutOnTheOP

[fastfreddie]

Actually P-47 was quite easy to land and didn't reqiure the pilot to drop on the field like a "piano" nor like a "ton of bricks". It is realy easy to take off and land, simillar to the Mustang... maybe even easier. Just it needs long runway to stop.

How the pilot Jeff Ethell described it "It flies like on rails"

 

https://youtu.be/75RwPrdAej8

 

 

I think the P-47 will be very easy and fun to fly especially after the Dora/K4. Not sure how much engine management we will have to do or if its pretty simple like the Mustang. Really the only bird I'm really looking forward to at this point until we hear more about the 262.

[[DBS]TH0R]

Yes, I am hopeful for the P-47. It should be very easy to fly compared to our other warbirds:

 

This report was already posted here.

 

P-51 in it was in very rough shape and had engine problems. P-47 had its turbocharger removed, and exhaust lines re-routed. Not very representative.

[Solty]

The piano reference was to a Luftwaffe pilot and his comments in a video posted here recently. I was adapting it to the "subtly" of just how much the anticipation weighs upon me.

 

Had nothing to do with landing in this usage...

I know, I just wanted to point out that each plane has its own personality and Jug is a tame monster.

I think you are misinterpreting.

 

Think "hits like a ton of bricks". It's big, it's rugged, and it's got punch.

Well... I couldn't get that from this line :) Maybe because the "hits" part was not so clear.

I think the 'Bolt is a bit past "piano", and somewhere in the realm of "ton of bricks"

But I agree that its big, its rugged and it can puch hard.:pilotfly:

 

I think the P-47 will be very easy and fun to fly especially after the Dora/K4. Not sure how much engine management we will have to do or if its pretty simple like the Mustang. Really the only bird I'm really looking forward to at this point until we hear more about the 262.

Hmmm... I am fairly certain we will have lots more manual work inside, for sure engine RPM and Turbocharger RPM and I am sure that mixture is not automatic either.

Edited July 8, 2015 by Solty

[Flying-Kane]

What Solty said.

 

I think there is "lots of" work to do in the P-47.

 

As i can see, you have 3 levers to work with: rpm, boost and turbocharger.

 

 

So, i don't understand your comment fastfreddie. The german planes are very easy to handle in flight and combat. One lever and all subsystems are automatic.

[gavagai]

This report was already posted here.

 

P-51 in it was in very rough shape and had engine problems. P-47 had its turbocharger removed, and exhaust lines re-routed. Not very representative.

 

And I had already posted it here: http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1840402&postcount=4

 

Edited July 9, 2015 by gavagai

[Echo38]

Think "hits like a ton of bricks". It's big, it's rugged, and it's got punch.

 

Yep. When I was talking about a falling piano, I was thinking of a Thunderbolt diving on a 109 at a near-vertical angle. Big, heavy, and you don't wanna be underneath one!

[HeadHunter52]

I'm looking forward to fighting it like original pilots did. It looks to have been a flipping beast when handled right. Up there on my list of curiosities is the damage model - will it handle damage in a way like the stories we've heard?

[Barrett_g]

Anyone know where to find blueprints/measurements/etc for cockpit deminsions? I'm thinking about building a P-47 pit for the upcoming module.

[fastfreddie]

What Solty said.

 

I think there is "lots of" work to do in the P-47.

 

As i can see, you have 3 levers to work with: rpm, boost and turbocharger.

 

 

So, i don't understand your comment fastfreddie. The german planes are very easy to handle in flight and combat. One lever and all subsystems are automatic.

 

Talking more about the takeoff, landings, and lack of trim controls that so many have complained about on these forums. Dora is by far my favorite plane so far and yes its systems are as simple as it can get. I personally have no problems with them but others don't care for its flight characteristics.

[Anatoli-Kagari9]

- Intentionally left blank -

Edited August 17, 2015 by jcomm

[Flying-Kane]

Talking more about the takeoff, landings, and lack of trim controls that so many have complained about on these forums. Dora is by far my favorite plane so far and yes its systems are as simple as it can get. I personally have no problems with them but others don't care for its flight characteristics.

 

 

Ah ok, i understand.

The FW190 is my favorite bird, too.

 

BTW, the P-47 is the one and only bird, which interests me from the allied side...

[Anatoli-Kagari9]

- Intentionally left blank -

Edited August 17, 2015 by jcomm

[Flying-Kane]

Ah, nope... :D

 

I'm waiting for P-47 and Me262.

[fastfreddie]

Ah ok, i understand.

The FW190 is my favorite bird, too.

 

BTW, the P-47 is the one and only bird, which interests me from the allied side...

 

I'll probably get everything eventually but the Spitfires will be bargain bin items unless someone gifts me a serial number. :smilewink: There are several other allied fighter I would like to see: P-38, F4U, and Hellcat.

[Bulldog51]

I'll probably get everything eventually but the Spitfires will be bargain bin items unless someone gifts me a serial number. :smilewink: There are several other allied fighter I would like to see: P-38, F4U, and Hellcat.

Could not agree more with the Allied line up. Especially if there were some appropriate flat tops in the middle of a deep blue sea somewhere in the pacific Slot.. However the Spit is a nice bird as well.. Gota love the guns!!!

[DSR_T-800]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=75RwPrdAej8

[VIKBELL]

That video wets my whistle for the P-47 it looked so good.. It is first day buy.