Best Fighter Plane Of The War?

[jimbotosome]

Originally posted by redcoat+Sep 24 2005, 04:01 PM-->

Well, all books claim they have the official AAF numbers. But there is no site to verify this. There is a site called USAAF.NET that claims to have official numbers of the USAAF but it is in fact a private link as evidenced by the fact ALL US government links end in with an extension .GOV (government). There is no way to determine what official numbers are. You choose which ones you like usually based on the sites you visit or the books you read. That’s about as official as it gets.

My book does not say a spare pilot returned. It says the squadron jettisoned its ordinance and immediately turned around and returned. It also says they were only 20 miles away. If the day was clear, you could have seen the planes once they turned around. No Luftwaffe plane is going to escape a squadron of angry Jugs hell bent on shooting then down since they were attacking their bases.

What are you saying? They simply waved at them, saluted them, what? Of course they engaged them. Full of fuel they would have pursued them all the way back to their bases shooting them down one by one if the Germans fled. I don’t think that either of our books would have posted the turn around if they simply landed.

The P-47N (467 mph) was almost as fast as the P-47M but was a far better dogfighter because it was lighter and could retain more of its energy in a dive. There were over 1800 of these produced. I have to believe most of them were in the Ninth. The M models were rated at 470 but documented at 488 mph during the testing with an additional 15-20 mph available with by over-boosting the engine. That “Evolution of the Jug site” claimed the M model was the fastest production plane deployed by any Air Force in WWII. It was primarily used by the British as an interceptor for the V1s to replace the latest Tempests and Spitfires since V1s could travel 400mph and had to be intercepted before they reached the populated area. The J-model was the speed demon that could go 507mph with an astonishing climb rate of over 4900fpm. That’s a vertical rate of 82 mph! A modern Boeing 777 has a climb rate of 3000fpm. Top get a perspective on that, go out to an airport and watch them take off. It looks like they are standing on their tail. Now imagine a large 7.5 ton WWII fighter climbing at 66% faster than that. When these planes intercepted German fighters and fighter bombers, then they would most certainly shoot them down.

I don’t know if the only M models used in air-to-air combat went exclusively to Zemke’s group or not, not sure how you would know that. But regardless of whether we are talking 450 mph or 433 mph which would go from 2.6 minutes to 2.8 minutes. They still would have overtaken the invaders. If they were at any altitude or simply did a fast climb, they could have run them down by the time they could have gotten in the third pass.

My book said they made pass after pass trying to destroy everything at the base and it took 45 minutes. They destroyed 32 planes, but few servicemen. They lost 8 from the field AAA. You don’t loose 8 airplanes to field AAA on one pass, especially since the first pass was not recognized until they started shooting.

<!--QuoteBegin-redcoat@Sep 24 2005, 04:01 PM
The only numbers that give you a fairly accurate account of losses and victories are the loss reports of the various airforces... Claims made by pilots, even those accepted by their airforce cannot be trusted

I don’t suspect that this was a problem for Ninth Air Force since they had stringent kill confirmation rules. It took a gun camera capturing a chute or crash into terrain. My book says because of this, the kills of the Ninth were probably much higher.


But, if the Jug kills at Bodenplatte were not as high as my book claims, it would have been because they simply were not in the air, rather caught on the ground. A plane than can out-dive, out-climb, and out-run in straight and level flight, any other fighter of any Air Force in WWII, and was notorious for being able to take a pounding and had the firepower of 8 - .50 caliber machine guns (no, there was no plane that could carry more firepower, it would have taken 8 - 20mm) with virtually every category covered (with the exception of the Mustang’s longer range and the Spitfire's turning radius), a bomber that could carry 2500 pounds of bombs as well, I don’t see how a case can be made for any other fighter to be the “best”, not just the best fighter/bomber. This is why almost anywhere you the documenting of Jugs being shot down, it is prefaced with “most by Flak” or "Flak was the real enemy of the P-47". Get any book by Jug pilots, and you will invariably find that the initial phase with the early Jugs with the 3-blade prop, they talk about their buddies getting shot down by German fighters and it is about even at that phase. But once the 4 blade prop is added and the new tactics are employed, you will notice that virtually the only time a German fighter registers a kill of a Jug is when they are jumped from above and didn’t see them coming. Jugs just did not get into dogfights where they could be shot down. The Jug lost most of its advantages if it tried to turn with the top fighters. But with the climb and dive tactics, most planes could not catch it or escape it. Every plane can be killed if they don't see the enemy plane.

The Smithsonian web site: http://<a href="http://www.nasm.si.e...pubP47.htm</a> states the following about the Jug:
Of the 15,683 P-47s built, about two-thirds reached overseas commands. A total of 5,222 were lost-1,723 in accidents not related to combat. The Jug flew more than half a million missions and dropped more than 132 thousand tons of bombs. Thunderbolts were lost at the exceptionally low rate of 0.7 per cent per mission and Jug pilots achieved an aerial kill ratio of 4.6:1. In the European Theater, P-47 pilots destroyed more than 7,000 enemy aircraft, more than half of them in air-to-air combat. They destroyed the remainder on very dangerous ground attack missions.
In fact, the Thunderbolt was probably the best ground-attack aircraft fielded by the United States. From D-Day, the invasion of Europe launched June 8, 1944, until VE day on May 7, 1945, pilots flying the Thunderbolt destroyed the following enemy equipment:
86,000 railway cars
9,000 locomotives
6,000 armored fighting vehicles
68,000 trucks

If the Smithsonian numbers are somewhat factual, then that would say that 1500 were destroyed in air-to-air combat, the rest on the ground or to Flak. The numbers I read that were lost were 887. Maybe that was ETO only. It’s in one of my books and it will surface again. Does the Smithsonian claim official Air Force numbers? Probably.

[spidge]

Originally posted by jimbotosome@Sep 25 2005, 01:24 PM
[quote From D-Day, the invasion of Europe launched June 8, 1944,

Hi Jimbo,

Their website doesn't say the 8th of June does it?

[jimbotosome]

Originally posted by spidge@Sep 25 2005, 03:34 AM
Their website doesn't say the 8th of June does it?

Yes it does. I guess some people like to start their invasion a couple of days later than others.

[Gnomey]

Originally posted by jimbotosome+Sep 25 2005, 04:28 PM-->

Yes it does. I guess some people like to start their invasion a couple of days later than others.

Quoted post

[/b]

That is kind of worrying that people can be so ignorant of the date of D-Day.

[morse1001]

Originally posted by Gnomey+Sep 25 2005, 05:48 PM-->

That is kind of worrying that people can be so ignorant of the date of D-Day.

Quoted post

[/b]

I remember sitting in a seminar at Uni, while someone who boasted they had a A level History, tell the course that he did not know about Germany invading Russia!

[redcoat]

My book does not say a spare pilot returned. It says the squadron jettisoned its ordinance and immediately turned around and returned. It also says they were only 20 miles away. If the day was clear, you could have seen the planes once they turned around. No Luftwaffe plane is going to escape a squadron of angry Jugs hell bent on shooting then down since they were attacking their bases.

Your book doesn't seem to have an awful lot to say about anything. It doesn't say anything about a spare pilot, and it doesn't say anything about whether the P-47's attacked the Luftwaffe formation or not.
So in truth all you have is your own assumption on what happened. But you have no evidence to back it up.

What are you saying? They simply waved at them, saluted them, what? Of course they engaged them. Full of fuel they would have pursued them all the way back to their bases shooting them down one by one if the Germans fled. I don't think that either of our books would have posted the turn around if they simply landed.

What I'm saying is quite simple.
When the 388th FS returned the Luftwaffe had gone.

The P-47N (467 mph) was almost as fast as the P-47M but was a far better dogfighter because it was lighter and could retain more of its energy in a dive. There were over 1800 of these produced. I have to believe most of them were in the Ninth.

Another assumption, and again its wrong.
The first production P-47N's only came off the line in December 44, and these were sent to the Pacific. A small number were sent to Europe in March 45, but saw little if any combat.

That “Evolution of the Jug site” claimed the M model was the fastest production plane deployed by any Air Force in WWII. It was primarily used by the British as an interceptor for the V1s to replace the latest Tempests and Spitfires since V1s could travel 400mph and had to be intercepted before they reached the populated area.

The P-47M saw no service with the RAF in WW2.

P-47's only saw service with the RAF in the Far Eastern theater (India and Burma)

Originally Posted by redcoat,Sep 24 2005, 04:01 PM

The only numbers that give you a fairly accurate account of losses and victories are the loss reports of the various airforces... Claims made by pilots, even those accepted by their airforce cannot be trusted

I don't suspect that this was a problem for Ninth Air Force since they had stringent kill confirmation rules. It took a gun camera capturing a chute or crash into terrain. My book says because of this, the kills of the Ninth were probably much higher. [/quote]

Total utter rubbish, all the major airforces had stringent kill confirmation rules, and despite this all overclaimed

[Kiwiwriter]

Originally posted by morse1001+Sep 25 2005, 03:57 PM-->

I remember sitting in a seminar at Uni, while someone who boasted they had a A level History, tell the course that he did not know about Germany invading Russia!

Quoted post

[/b]

Look, here in New York, kids tell their teachers that Georgia is the fifth borough (Manhattan, The Bronx, Staten Island, Queens, Brooklyn). They don't know which countries the US fought in World War II. People go to Pearl Harbor and ask the National Park Service guys if the Arizona was one of the Japanese ships the US sunk. Or if it can be towed around to Waikiki Beach, so it would be easier to visit. My nephew believed that Flight 77 hitting the Pentagon was a fake until a US Attorney told him point-blank that his wife's boss and some of his friends were killed on the plane. Newspapers run horoscopes every day, despite their lack of validity.

People are ignorant, unless they make a choice not to be. Unfortunately, most people know more about Britney Spears' love life and Paris Hilton's movie career than about Hermann Goering and Josef Goebbels.

[jimbotosome]

Originally posted by Kiwiwriter@Sep 25 2005, 10:17 PM

People are ignorant, unless they make a choice not to be. Unfortunately, most people know more about Britney Spears' love life and Paris Hilton's movie career than about Hermann Goering and Josef Goebbels.

I am sure it was just a typo people. Everybody remain calm. I not sure that folks participating in a web forum where much typing is done, should ding anyone too hard for typos. I am certain the fine people at the Smithsonian know that D-Day was on June 6, not June 8.

[jimbotosome]

Originally posted by redcoat+Sep 25 2005, 04:15 PM-->

Your book doesn’t say they did NOT engage them. Your book doesn’t seem to have an awful lot to say about anything. So in truth, all you have is your own assumption on what happened. But you have no evidence to back it up.

My book says the attack on the Metz lasted for 45 minutes. Your book doesn’t say whether they kept attacking that field or went airfield hopping using up some remaining time. Your book doesn’t seem to have an awful lot to say about anything. So in truth, all you have is your own assumption on what happened. But you have no evidence to back it up. (Is there a pattern forming here?)

You are also assuming that the first ones were not delivered to the Ninth (its amazing the number of assumptions you make in your accusations of me making assumptions). But whether or not they flew 467 mph or 433 mph is of no consequence, they could have easily have caught the Germans. I am surprised that you don’t assume since both of our books said they turned around and returned that they didn’t engage them. Why would it even mention an immediate turn around since they didn’t enumerate any of the other planes en route to intercept them? I don’t think both books would have published the same drivel of trivia.

The RAF 4th FG began using P-47s in early 1943. In addition the M model was used “primarily” to chase down V1 rockets because “the Tempests and Spitfires” were usually not fast enough to catch the 400 mph flying bombs from behind before they got to the populated areas. If the British didn’t use them more, then it was to their hurt. It is possible that they preferred slower planes because they didn’t have enough skilled pilots to handle the Jug. It was not for a plane for beginners.

<!--QuoteBegin-redcoat@Sep 25 2005, 04:15 PM
Total utter rubbish, all the major airforces had stringent kill confirmation rules, and despite this all overclaimed

Not what the book says. Again, at the risk of sounding like a broken record, this is an assumption you are making.

Assumptions you say? People in glass houses…

[spidge]

Originally posted by jimbotosome+Sep 26 2005, 02:14 PM-->

I am sure it was just a typo people. Everybody remain calm. I not sure that folks participating in a web forum where much typing is done, should ding anyone too hard for typos. I am certain the fine people at the Smithsonian know that D-Day was on June 6, not June 8.

Quoted post

[/b]

Hi Jimbo,

The reason I asked the question initially was I thought you may have typed the extract instead of copying & pasting and like all of us do - made a typo.

Still, they should be made aware that there is a typo of this most important day in world history.

People would expect that the Smithsonian content would be accurate.

Do you agree?