the P47 "the Unbreakable"no more

[mazex]

Originally Posted by JtD

The P-47 suffered quite a bit from compressibility and certainly wasn't pleasant to handle at high speeds. It was famous because it was fast in a dive and because it usually survived the problems so the pilots could tell the tale.

Well, I have never flown any plane that is pleasant to fly near Vne (Velocity never exceeded) - all movement in the air feels like riding over a road bump in a car and you sure understand without patch notes for 4.10 that sudden stick movements are a "no no" above Va (manouvre speed which is the maximum speed for full deflection of the control surfaces). That's the problems with sims - you don't get the stiff feeling of the air getting "harder and harder" as the speed increases

The fact that the P-47 could get close to mach 1 in dives must for sure tell that it was less prone to control surface flutter (which is really nasty - can tell you that from own experience), or compressability problems with rudders that are "locked" due to design of ailerons or elevator. I'm pretty sure that it was not the ability to withstand excessive G load during the pull ups that made it famous for surviving those dives... The planes with the problems mentioned before could not get high G:s - that was the problem as the controls where either torn away from flutter or "locked" due to compressability. I guess you had to be really smooth after shaking the 109 that when down straight into the fatherland with an elevator that was "stuck" after going 800 km/h in a dive... Not due to ripping the wings pulling 12 G:s...

[JtD]

Early P-47 tail design broke in a wind tunnel at 468 mph due to control flutter.
Flight tests of P-47 regularly state that the elevator froze in high speed dives and that trim was necessary to recover from it.

[mazex]

Originally Posted by JtD

Early P-47 tail design broke in a wind tunnel at 468 mph due to control flutter.
Flight tests of P-47 regularly state that the elevator froze in high speed dives and that trim was necessary to recover from it.

OK, but I guess they corrected that in the late D-models? And compared to the 109 at least I guess it was a lot better as the 109 was infamous for very stiff elevator controls at high speed? I once flew with an old 109 pilot (that was to old to keep his license) that spoke of very nasty behavior at deep dives with "locked" elevator. The worst thing was landing that beast of a crate with it's narrow gear and high wing loading though (he was flying late G and K models in 44-45). Which plane was better than the P-47 regarding these issues? I'm not that well read up on the P-47 so I'm not gonna keep on pressing my point much longer

[Richie]

Originally Posted by mazex

OK, but I guess they corrected that in the late D-models? And compared to the 109 at least I guess it was a lot better as the 109 was infamous for very stiff elevator controls at high speed? I once flew with an old 109 pilot (that was to old to keep his license) that spoke of very nasty behavior at deep dives with "locked" elevator. The worst thing was landing that beast of a crate with it's narrow gear and high wing loading though (he was flying late G and K models in 44-45). Which plane was better than the P-47 regarding these issues? I'm not that well read up on the P-47 so I'm not gonna keep on pressing my point much longer

From what I've read a late model G such as a G 10, G 14/AS, G6/AS could be a very capable fighter with a good pilot at the controls.

[mazex]

Originally Posted by Richie

From what I've read a late model G such as a G 10, G 14/AS, G6/AS could be a very capable fighter with a good pilot at the controls.

They sure where capable fighters, but they where harder to get out of a fast dive than a P-47 which is what we are discusding here? The fact that they where nasty to land for an 18 year old pilot with 100 flight hours doesn't mean anything regarding their fighting capability either - it was just a boring anecdote

[Richie]

Originally Posted by mazex

They sure where capable fighters, but they where harder to get out of a fast dive than a P-47 which is what we are discusding here? The fact that they where nasty to land for an 18 year old pilot with 100 flight hours doesn't mean anything regarding their fighting capability either - it was just a boring anecdote

Agree 100% on the diving part but if I had the chance to talk to any WWII pilot nothing he says would bore me.

As a G-load related aside ...

... it should also make a difference where the extra weight (bombs) are carried. The airframe should be able to pull more Gs with a 500 pounder under each wing versus a single 1000 pounder on the centerline. Spreading the weight across the span reduces the peak load at the center.

This is assuming the shackles aren't themselves the G-load limiting factor.