P-47 Thunderbolt Pt. 6 Range, Deceit and Treachery.

[@publicmail2]

Charles D. Mohrle, who sadly passed away earlier this year, related the following: “One morning Sgt. Sing, our Squadron cook, asked me if I would help him with a project to which I agreed of course. He sawed a panel from the top of a paper gas tank in which we carried extra fuel - one that had not been used. He took the baffles out of the inside and hinged the panel he’d cut out so that it could be opened and closed. Into the tank he poured 50 gallons of powdered milk mix, ten gallons of mixed, canned fruit, ten pounds of sugar, some vanilla extract and a few other ingredients that I don’t remember. All this was mixed thoroughly and the tank was hung under the wing of my plane. Sgt. Sing told me to fly up to 30,000 feet where the temperature would be about 30 degrees below zero F. I was to slip and skid the airplane around for half an hour to keep the contents mixed up until it froze, then dive down and land as quickly as possible. When I parked the airplane Sgt. Sing dropped the tank off the wing and opened it up to reveal ICE CREAM. Everyone had a feast.”

[@billbolton]

Freezer broke and you want ice cream? No problem. Fantastic story, but I believe it.

[@CrusaderSports250]

@@billbolton its the sort of inventiveness that people come up with when the need arises, wonderful little glimpse of life.

[@nickbird7687]

AD Electronic Teardowns, I’ve heard similar accounts of world war 2 pilots cooling their beer by flying the barrels up to high altitude.

[@craigpennington1251]

That is some expensive ice cream. We cooled down some beer that way. Sort of. It did work like a charm.

[@stug41]

I spoke with him regularly at the Love Field museum, and that was his favorite story to elaborate on for his general audience of kids, great stuff, will miss him. A good version of his story is present here on youtube.

[@michaelmcduff2263]

My dad was a P47 pilot, was shot down and was a POW for the last 10 months of the war in Stalag Luft 1. He recently passed away 12-22-20. He was in the 9th air force and I don't think he ever did any escort flying. He flew ground support for the Army and was shot down from anti-aircraft fire just South of Koblinz. Thank you for helping me understand what the P47 pilots did while they flew in Europe. Great job.

[@patrickcannady2066]

That tracks-the 9th AAF was a strictly tactical unit devoted to supporting the Normandy landings and subsequent operations in France and the Low Countries. They wouldn’t have done long range strategic bomber escort missions, but low altitude fighter sweeps, precision strikes against ground targets like fuel depots, artillery emplacements, rail yards, bridges, troop and vehicle columns, and similar. Dangerous, dirty work that took all kinds of courage, even if the Luftwaffe wasn’t much of a presence. Flak and small arms fire were still very real threats!

[@johndonaldson3619]

There is NO WAY I am watching this now. I'm keeping this one hour treasure as my Saturday night prime time show, and I kid you not - -THANKS GREG!!

[@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles]

Thanks John, I hope you like it.

[@drdremd]

I’m watching it Friday night prime time.

[@anthonys7311]

Gotta watch all 8 parts in a row.

[@jacktattis]

You poor thing go and do comparison of what Greg tells you and other sources

[@stevenbade7438]

Greg, thank you for making a HUGE time investment to set the historical records straight. The more I have read the history of ETO by many authors, the more a feeling of important facts being omitted nags at me. You continue to correct the historical record, thank you! By the way, I enjoy the audio accompanying your videos. It's vintage Greg who provides the facts and clears up way to many years of misinformation.

[@kylestickley8096]

If you read Thunderbolt by Robert Johnson on the kindle app they pretty much omit everything from when he got home and was promoting war bonds. Specifically when he was doing an air show with a P38 and P51 pilot, both who had completed their tours. The P51 pilot did a victory roll and lost control of the aircraft, crashed, and perished. After Robert and the P38 pilot landed they both were on the same page about showing off vs doing what you needed to survive in a fight. They made it out of the war, why risk it at home. Strange to leave that out.

[@RivetGardener]

Yes, Thank you Mister Greg.

[@d-m8529]

@@kylestickley8096 Hi , I have the printed book. Can you tell where this story appears in the book?

[@kylestickley8096]

@@d-m8529 should have been towards the end

[@kylestickley8096]

@Jack Tangles consider that the spitfire was in combat for almost 3 years before the 47 or 51 entered combat

[@asiftalpur3758]

You have no idea how much I've been waiting for an upload. More jug content is always great!

[@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles]

Thanks Asif!

[@maxspruit8370]

Me too. The pay-off is great though.

[@cowboybob7093]

@@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles 1:01:00 Sound check with clothes on hangars in strategic places, put the bedspread and pillows to good use. - But frankly on this end the sound and your enunciation have never been an impediment. That said, pausing to absorb content is not unusual, like 34:39 135 cannon hits per 100 machine gun hits. My dad was tail gunner in a B-17, those young men.

[@RivetGardener]

More cowbell? Screw that. More JUG please!

[@Chango_Malo]

Thanks for all the fantastic videos, Greg. FWIW, speaking as a professional musician who records A LOT there's much that can be done to improve the audio quality while recording voiceovers in a hotel room. That said, as a professional musician who records A LOT I've never once thought to myself that I wished the audio quality was better. If I were in your shoes I wouldn't worry one bit about it.

[@danpatterson8009]

Put mic closer to mouth. That's it.

[@CrusaderSports250]

I thought the audio was fine, I could clearly understand you, no annoying other sounds, what more do you need in a documentary, other peoples comments on the audio is just them being a bit pedantic in my opinion, keep up the good work and stay safe.

[@ronjon7942]

There were audio issues? I must have been too frustrated learning of the drop tank scandal to have noticed.

[@Birdy890]

Just the first minute of this video is so articulate and agreeable, it's a healthy reminder of why I love this channel and its content. Don't have time to watch it all now but it seems like a very interesting topic, looking forward to getting to know more about my favorite WW2 American interceptor.

[@vaclav_fejt]

I remember how I repeated old memes, then found out they weren't true and replaced them with different repeated memes. Now I'm rather careful what I repeat.

[@mikedrndarski2707]

Been a WWII student of war in the air and was surprised on the range of the P-47 and P-51 that you have provided in your posts. Show again how the truth is not always what is told. Imagine the uproar if this information would have came out in early 1944. We'll never know how many brave men died in combat that might have had to. Thanks Again for all the time and after you put into these videos.

[@jacktattis]

Well yes and I would suggest you double check using outside sources

[@duanephillips2343]

I was an instructor for the US Army Command and General Staff Course for several years before I retired from the Army Reserve and we covered the bombing campaign against Germany in the class. The bomber "mafia" spent years fighting for funds to establish an effective air arm between the wars and were deeply influenced by Douhet and other air power enthusiasts. The power of their belief in their doctrine was very hard to break. I grew up reading about this stuff and it was a lot of fun to share it with our students, mostly National Guard and Army Reserve majors and lieutenant colonels. One thing we did to illustrate the 8th Air Force casualty rate was have everyone in the class stand and then have 10 -15% sit, then cut it by the same percent again - repeating this a few times shot the whole force down pretty fast. Your videos are great - really detailed - and are showing things I never saw before reading Caidin or anyone else. Thanks!

[@supermaster2012]

Imagine being a Lt. Col. and still have to go to school.

[@duanephillips2343]

@@supermaster2012 Essential professional development in the US services and our allied nations.

[@cannonfodder4376]

The feeling of having old misconceptions swept away and replaced by new information that is actually correct is quite the feeling. Naturally I am excited whenever a new video comes out but this one was a treat. Only upon closer inspection from people like you and MAH and MHV are old narratives broken and new truths brought to light. Learning can be quite the exciting experience IMO. Great work Greg! You may not fancy yourself a historian but this as good a historians work if there are any. To always look critically at, review and bring new findings to light are one of the most important things a Historian can do. In a field that suffers from the repeating the old narrative, this effort will have a profound effect given how popular your works are.

[@gustaveliasson5395]

Except... the "new information that is actually correct" information actually predated the "old misconceptions". Funny how that works out sometimes.

[@thurbine2411]

@@gustaveliasson5395 of course it does as it is true and at the time the things are happening the misconceptions aren’t that big but then the new information is forgotten and the old is repeated until it is the truth

[@taotoo2]

Bonus points for making a bomber mafia video while in Sicily.

[@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles]

LOL, I didn't even think about that.

[@dukecraig2402]

One of the leaders in the bomber mafia was Robin Olds's dad.

[@samrodian919]

Duke Craig yes you are correct. A couple of weeks ago I came across the video of Robin Old's daughter giving a talk somewhere in California to an audience littered with combat pilots past and present, and told about his early adult life pre West Point, and that his father wanted him to go into bombers and he basically said stuff that I want to go into fighters.

[@dukecraig2402]

@@samrodian919 Imagine my surprise when I found out that Robin Olds lived for a short period in my small town in Pennsylvania when he was young. The story goes that his dad's buddy that was a politician that sponsored him for his appointment to West Point was the representative of my area in Pennsylvania, so he had to actually reside here for that to happen, I guess he stayed at the YMCA until it went through.

[@jeebus6263]

TaoToo² making up false narratives!

[@jajsamurai]

and this is why enlisted soldiers refer to generals as REMF's "hey guys, we have a fighter we COULD send with you all the way to the target, but that would require ME to admit I was wrong. So you'll just have to put up with 25% casualties until even I cant refuse to face reality any more. I'm sure you're ok with that because after all, whats more important? your life or my promotion?"

[@Pointman-yf6or]

You should clarify what an remf was. Most people except us Vietnam vets wouldn’t know what that means. It stands for rear echelon mother fuckers, and that’s right on the money.

[@dukecraig2402]

@@Pointman-yf6or REMF, right alongside Pogue.

[@RivetGardener]

As a former Paratrooper Combat Infantryman (2 x) from the Panama Invasion and Desert Storm, yes, we still called them REMFS and we knew what that meant. So many of them...gads.

[@dukecraig2402]

@@RivetGardener Yep, I was in just a few years before you were in the early/mid 80's. Since there was still plenty of Vietnam veterans in the Army at the time their terminology was still prevalent and in common usage, with my favorite being "What're gonna do, send me to Vietnam?" Although the situation was different (in Vietnam you were already there, in the 80's the war was over) it still had the same meaning and was commonly used when standing your ground against someone of a higher rank.

[@snuffle2269]

I heard about a lot of WWII equipment designs which got submitted but went nowhere BECAUSE Senator Blowfart was championing his states companies and they were going to get the contract irregardless whether their design worked or not. Just like the MIC today. Did you know that at Sierra Army Deport in Herlong , CA there sits over 2,000 M1Abrams hunks?

[@garthharrison914]

David Isby in his book “The Decisive Duel” put it so eloquently when he said, “Spitfires duelled; P 47s destroyed.”

[@jacktattis]

Yes indeed Spitfires duelled the P47 and the P47 was destroyed

[@slytlygufy]

Bull💩

[@slytlygufy]

Spitfire had .303 guns. P47 had Browning .50''s.

[@slytlygufy]

It's fine to like the Spitfire. It's not fine to lie about the P47.

[@jacktattis]

@@slytlygufy Jesus are you ill informed Spitfire Mk IIB[ circa 1940 ]170 built 2x cannon 4x.303 by the time of the P47 in 1943 2 x cannon 2 x50s

[@fighterace316]

This episode is my favourite on the P-47 Thunderbolt series because it's real eye-opener to the reality that the "Jug" CAN escort bombers over Germany and to Berlin but the "Leadership" really hamstrung it's potential and put many Bomber crews' lives in jeopardy. Keep up the good work Greg!!!

[@airplanes42]

Just listened to this a second time after several months of reading on my own. This is extremely well done, and could serve as a template for routine dishonest practices of companies and governments to this day. I would categorize these practices as "management of perceptions." Truth is a secondary consideration. Perceptions have to be managed in order to preserve careers, and thereby power, and in many cases wealth.

[@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles]

That's a brilliant description of was was going on. Management of perceptions. Perfect!

[@flightcamm]

So impressed with your meticulous research Greg. I had always wondered about why the P47 wasn't developed into an escort fighter earlier in the 8th airforce campaign -turns out it had been making its lack of deployment a highly negligent act.

[@skyflier8955]

Just for reference, a Cessna 172 holds 40 gallons. 200 gallons is enough to fuel five Cessnas. Most cars have ~16 gallons tanks. 200 gallons in a drop tank is A LOT

[@briandenison2325]

How many gallons per hour at escort speed does a Pratt & Whitney R-2800 Double Wasp burn?

[@thedcrthriko]

such a shame they couldnt fit 201

[@skyflier8955]

@@jackhammer5468 it’s just me being baffled by how much fuel these extremely high power planes use. Sure they’re big numbers, but once you put them in context with what I would realistically use, it’s baffling.

[@prycenewberg3976]

@@skyflier8955 I have a Miata with an even smaller fuel tank... You're right. Those numbers are baffling.

[@MrNicoJac]

For an idea: 200 gallons is 200*3.8 liters, so about ~800 liters. 1000 liters is 1 cubic meter. So 800 liters would be in the ballpark of 1 cubic yard, or 3 feet by 3 feet by 3 feet. Obviously, they wouldn't hang a cube underneath a plane, but flatten/spread it out, a bit like a torpedo. I guess you could go with 1 foot by 1 foot by 27 feet 😂 (which would be almost the entire length of the plane, lol) Anyhow, that volume of fuel is just the drop tank! That's not even the two normal tanks built into the aircraft!

[@erickleven1712]

Great job covering this. Recently read about the 5th air force and their use of the Thunderbolt in New Guinea. They could get the airplane, but it didn't have the range. "Hey, let's design our own 200-gallon droptank and have Ford-Australia build gazillions of them". Kinney knew what was up. His book is great.

[@onewhosaysgoose4831]

Having heard the story of the Mark 14 torpedo, everything in this video sounds extremely true.

[@seanmac1793]

What about the mark 14. everything is fine with it, don't look there, nothings wrong, no tests are needed

[@rickevans3959]

@@seanmac1793 torpedoes did not significantly figure in the bombing of Germany Dresden was burned out without using a single torpedo.

[@seanmac1793]

@@rickevans3959 what the fuck does that have to do with anything

[@seanmac1793]

@@rickevans3959 seriously what's your point

[@Treblaine]

That's something that really changed history for the US to have near zero torpedo capability just when so many of their heavy gun warships were out of action.

[@AdamTheEnginerd]

Very interesting video! First time I hear about the bomber mafia. I knew about the pre-war belief that bombers would always get through, but I didn't know it was pushed even after combat experience showed otherwise.

[@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles]

Hi Adam, thanks for your comment. I enjoy your channel immensely.

[@AdamTheEnginerd]

@@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles Thanks, likewise!

[@Sturminfantrist]

Perfect Video! I wasted so much money for Books in the past and here i have all this and more and good explained, this channel is "No.1" for aircraft/aviation fans/enthusiasts, many Thanks Greg

[@nateweter4012]

You do the absolute best of the best, man. I haven’t been able to fly or go to the gym since late March and it’s been eating at me, but stuff like this, and playing IL-2 Sturmovik: Battle of Stalingrad/Moscow/Kuban /OP Bodenplatte with an Oculus Rift S VR headset has been helping me cope. I build and research scale models, mostly WW2 German ground subjects and specific engagements. I do a lot of research with Bundesarchiv photos, combat journals, personal memoirs, and official documents. The reason I stick to select source types is because I’ve noticed a very disturbing trend from mislabeled photos, to flat out, fake lore level “research”. I thought the main culprit of this was what I call “Pinterest Culture”, which is what I dubbed the practice of reposting mislabeled photos, battle and technical details, which are then reposted, repurposed, reposted and eventually, taken as actual common knowledge and fact. That and clickbait titles “Which tank was best?” and “Which was better?”. I thought this problem was born out of the internet and social media but I think you’re right, I think this started long ago with authors and story teller’s reusing other author’s erroneous info. This all highlights the importance of research methods getting things right, or at least emphasizing opinion vs common knowledge and confirmed facts. I imagine it can be really challenging to bring this level of tech detail and data to the table while still keeping an audience’s attention. You do a very good job using great subject-appropriate images and drawings, and have a real gift for story telling. Thanks for doing what you do and putting the effort in, we really appreciate it. Hope all is well.

[@karlvongazenberg8398]

3:20 (The Bomber Maffia) "they truly beleived in their cause" - as Greg did mention their theories WERE right, at the time, they were conceived. The Me Bf-110's case was similar: it was conceived as a long range escort/air superiority fighter. And the prototypes were in fact faster, than the contemporary Bf-109 variants, which supported this role and theory. But then this advantage was lost...

[@japekto2138]

Thank you. This answers the question I had when I was younger. I knew the P-47 had drop tanks. I also knew it had a heavy payload. Yet, I always wondered how the heck was the P-47 not able to escort bombers into Germany. Something didn't add up. But, it made sense once you mentioned "Bomber Mafia."

[@TheGrandslam89]

His document that the 200 gallon tank works at 30,000 feet specifies the P-47 as either carrying nothing or an empty 200-Gal tank. Which means its probably not actually stating the tank works at 30,000 feet like he claims.

[@kenneth9874]

@@TheGrandslam89 that's the best that you can do?

[@kenneth9874]

@@TheGrandslam89 get your hearing checked

[@loungelizard3922]

@@TheGrandslam89 That's not an insurmountable problem. Other planes had large drop tanks that worked at those altitudes already, the B-17s the P-47s could have been escorting for example.

[@kracerx]

Per Roger Freeman's "Mighty Eight War Manual", some of the 200 gallon tanks were obtained by 8th Fighter Command in Feb of 1943. The tanks were made of a paper-plastic composite and they were the large conformal tank you have a drawing of. Freeman has a picture in the book of a 78th FG P-47C with such a tank fitted. They found the tanks to be problematic. They added a lot of drag, and were so fragile that they couldn't be pressurized and thus couldn't feed above 22,000ft. They also started to leak fuel after a few hours. Despite these problems, the 4th, 56th and 78th FGs started using them on July 24th 1943 (Freeman reports that 1150 of the tanks were on hand). Only 100 gallons was carried, and the tanks were dropped as they climbed above their useful altitude. This wasn't a great solution and so others like the 75s and 108 gallon paper and steel tanks were tried. The 108s were big enough that they couldn't be used from a rough field on a belly shackle due to lack of ground clearance. That was the origin of the "flat" 150 gallon tank that showed up later. Wing shackle kits for the P-47 didn't arrive in the UK until November of 1943, and fitting them took some time (reportedly into December of 1943 to get all the 8th AF fighters outfitted). The "flat" 150 gallon tanks didn't start arriving until a few came from the US in Feb of 44 and then a British supply became available starting in March. The D-25 models with increased internal fuel start appearing in late May of 44, but a squadron or group would still be limited to the range of its older aircraft - the extra internal fuel wouldn't play a big factor until fall or winter of 44 as the razorbacks were gradually all replaced. Lastly, in regards to the Mustang, retrofit kits for the 85 gallon fuel tank were supplied in the UK in December of 1943. At the time, there was only a single group of P-51Bs in the UK to retrofit, so these kits were likely fitted pretty quickly.

[@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles]

Yes, that's the OTHER 200 gallon tank, which I mentioned. The two get confused all the time.

[@kracerx]

The P-47 manual simply mentions a 200 gallon drop tank - no mention of different tank types, and all the drawings, both the external and fuel diagram, are of the conformal 200 gallon tank. The only pictures of a 200 gallon tank during the early to mid 43 time frame are of the conformal tank. 8th Fighter Command was doing everything it could to extend the range of the P-47 from the beginning, including flying missions in July and August of 1943 with these 200 gallon tanks. This is documented by Roger Freeman, William Hess and Francis Dean. The 165 gallon P-38 tanks had been used to ferry P-47s to the UK, but had a similar problem to the 200 gallon tank in that they couldn't be pressurized and wouldn't feed at high altitude. They were also obtaining 75 and 108 gallon tanks as quickly as they could. There was a later "200 gallon" (actually 215) steel tank that was developed and produced in England in Oct-Nov of 1944 that was a widened version of the "flat" 150 gallon tank. There was also a very similar "Brisbane" 200 gallon flat tank that was developed for the 5th Air Force and built in Australia in very late 43 or early 44. 5th Fighter Command in New Guinea had a similar problem to the 8th - they needed longer range fighters for their offensive sweeps, and couldn't get enough P-38s. The "Brisbane" tank was born out of their efforts at finding ways to extend the P-47s range.

[@lindamcentaffer5969]

Amazing how the beautifully proportioned P-51 gets all the glory, because it looks better than the Jug. However, if one looks at the list of scores by AAF pilots in the E.T.O., most of the top scoring Aces flew the Jug.Most of their early kills were made with the skinny-bladed propellers, too. The Paddle-Bladed props made a huge performance difference. In the book, "Air Command," Hub Zemke said at 30,000 feet & up, the P-47 was in every way superior to the P-51 & any other allied planes; the line of parity with the P-51 & P-47 was about 25,000 feet. If you've ever heard a Jug fly by that has the complete Turbo-Supercharger hooked up, (many don't because of $$$$), it is the most Macho sounding Fighter of WW2. Great "lesson" Greg. Good thing the "Bomber Mafia" doesn't run Y. T. They'd probably censor ya. Lol!

[@dianedougwhale7260]

The mk 14 would give the p47 a run at 45,000ft.

[@dianedougwhale7260]

The beautifully proportioned mk 14 gets 💖 my vote--you can keep your big FAT LUMP !

[@dianedougwhale7260]

Long range Spitfires could fly to Berlin and return-- however they weren't wasted in that manner--mustangs were used for that !

[@scottinohio701]

My father flew104 missions with the 358fg they flew their1st missions around Dec 43. I have been defendingthe jug against the 51 my whole life!!! Im 75. Thank you for setting all the internet experts straight!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! By the way, 47s were the first fighters over Berlin,the 51s got lost,thats per Bob Johnson!!!1

[@dogsbd]

Actually the first allied fighter over Berlin was the P-38 on March 3rd, 1944.

[@scottinohio701]

@@dogsbd You were there??? Oh,another internet expert!!!!!!

[@bradleypeterson2208]

We’re still flying R-2800 powered C-46s and DC-6s in Alaska, I’d take an R-2800 powered Jug over a Merlin any day!

[@steveperreira5850]

Ctrot I thought so, thanks for saying, give the P 38 a little credit.

[@AlanRoehrich9651]

@@scottinohio701 No, he's absolutely correct.

[@vicnighthorse]

I think the Bomber Mafia now controls my HOA board.

[@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles]

lol.

[@PaulsGarage]

They don't allow fighter planes either? HOA's aren't any fun!

[@billbolton]

Told you to take down your flak tower?

[@johngalt3568]

My HOA won’t allow me to park my P-51 in my driveway. They say the Merlin is too loud and the streets aren’t long enough for takeoffs. I’ll show them. I’m getting a Bearcat.

[@mpetersen6]

@@johngalt3568 Get a Harrier. It's even louder

[@danpatterson8009]

As a kid I read a lot of hot rod magazines and was always frustrated by how vague they were. They'd make some remark like "X engine is too much for the street" without explaining what that actually meant, or they'd list the components of some car "X carburetor, Y stall speed, Z rear axle", again without explaining why those were chosen, the trade offs, and how well they worked together. I now think a lot of those authors simply did not know these things- combine some new photos with re-combinations of terms and phrases gleaned from other articles, and voila! New article. Looking forward to the dope on the use of the P-38 in Europe. So far I've read the cockpit heating was poor and the complexity of the controls made for a steep learning curve that some judged unacceptable, but it had the range and speed and firepower- didn't it? USAAC politics influenced the development of that fighter as well.

[@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles]

The 38 did have the range speed and firepower.

[@Philistine47]

I've read at least one pilot account citing engine (and turbo) management as a major issue in the P-38: the claim is that it was acceptable as long as you were bouncing the enemy, but if you _got_ bounced while you were set up for economical cruising, you had to go through a lot of steps to get the engines up to military power. But as for the rest, the P-38 had competitive speed and excellent firepower; and as for range, Lightnings certainly flew some fairly long-range missions in the PTO (albeit under rather different conditions).

[@gort8203]

@@Philistine47 And that account repeated over and over is all I have seen to support the narrative that the P-38 was too complicated for the average pilot. I've read the flight manual and watched the wartime training film for the plane and I don't see much support for that narrative. I think the fuel system was a bit more complex than that of the typical single engine fighter, but as for the rest I don't see the big deal. The plane had two levers for every engine functions like prop and throttle instead of just one, but during normal flight you moved the dual levers as one anyway. Multi-engine flight characteristics would require more training than the pilots of single engine fighters would need, but all multi-engine airplanes suffered from that complication. With most of the early mechanical systems issues worked out by the time the L model was in production, I would suspect the weakest attribute of the P-38 was it's low critical mach number, limiting its ability to dive away from or after other fighters. I'm looking forward to a video on this plane by Greg in the future.

[@RidinDirtyRollinBurnouts]

@@gort8203 This really demonstrates the advantage of something like the FW-190s automatic engine controls. Reduced the workload of the pilot in combat

[@RD2564]

@@Philistine47 There is truth to that, wasn't until P-38J-25-LO that an automatic manifold pressure regulator to control power, RPM and mixture by use of a single lever was fitted, electric dive flaps to address compressibility in dives, power boosted ailerons to make it a mean rolling machine, and canopy defrost issues were sorted out, and that model did not arrive until July of 1944. The P-51 was a simpler and cheaper option than the P-39 and P-47 by that point.

[@edwardsmith6609]

P-47 and F4U, my two favorite American planes from the war ! So...our own "bomber mafia" is responsible for the proliferation of Mustang "fan boys" by relegating the Bolt to sacrificial lamb status as they played Cover Your Ass. Great Channel, thanks Greg.

[@briandenison2325]

I prefer the Hellcat to the Corsair for the carrier op, naval fighters.

[@steveperreira5850]

Dear Ed Smith: I became increasingly infuriated as I listened to Greg’s video, Learning that our stupid eighth Air Force bomber commanders sacrificed our bomber Crews by not supplying drop tanks to extend the range of the escort fighters. May they burn in hell! Imagine how many young airman burned to death in their bombers on account of these incompetent idiots in the military, including Hap Arnold. Dogma is the scourge of humanity.

[@samrodian919]

Steve Perreira so true, as in many other walks of life.

[@anthonykaiser974]

@@briandenison2325 well, it is a better carrier fighter, and I'm a Corsair fan. Heck, my maternal grandmother worked at the Evansville, IN Chrysler plant where they made Corsair wings. Same city that made P-47Ds. She was a Navy inspector and also worked on the line from what I learned.

[@quovadis5036]

51, 38, f4u, f6, and the mosquito. Can't help myself, I love 'em all, the long, the sort and the tall.

[@andrewstar9747]

Thank you for this. the P 47 has long been my favorite fighter of the war ever since I was a kid when I would sit and listen to the stories of a pilot of one from the war, and he could never say enough good things about the plane. He always claimed the range limitations were BS.

[@dk6024]

History repeats itself, historians repeat each other.

[@stevefreeland9255]

Brilliant 😀

[@Billfish57]

@@jackhammer5468 Good, about time, the elections have been rigged for years. Maybe now they can revamp the whole process and people show the same I.D. to vote that they use to cash a check or buy a beer. That way we can cut down on some of the fraud. Everyone has I.D., it's not a big deal to ask them to show it before they get to place a vote. Anyone against proving who they are to vote, is wanting fraud in the system. How's that for using over 7 words to explain a problem?

[@hk-wr2jt]

@@jackhammer5468 Not all states were like yours. Mine isn't.

[@seanmac1793]

@@jackhammer5468 look at me i am emo and this makes me smart. why don't you go away and hang out with people who will appreciate your edgy garbage

[@steveperreira5850]

Dear dk: this is the nature of humans, laziness, so they just copy someone else rather than doing thorough research. After I graduated with engineering degree, I went to a small company and engaged in research and development. I found the same scenario, publications with “fake science“ printed as gospel, and no one questioned it, and no one was even determined enough to test it. In one of my several research papers, I completely debunked 100 years of garbage on how to “suppress electromagnetic coil back EMF” and in the same paper showed how to do it properly. This research paper was a revelation that had industry wide, worldwide application, and I won an award for that, one of many. To this day I am disappointed by the propensity of even engineers to be lazy and not curious enough to take on problems, to make improvements, to be determined to break through with Science applied with discipline and creativity.

[@OneHitWonder383]

When Saburo Sakai's group was tasked with escorting the Japanese bombers from Taiwan to Luzon Island in the Philippines, they learned to lean the mixture and set propeller revs so they got the most efficient use of fuel. Sakai's personal best was 17 gallons per hour. And the Zero already had a great range. That was in 1941. In 1944, Charles Lindbergh toured the Pacific Theater and latched onto a P-38 group. Being an expert in long range flying and fuel consumption (obviously!) he instructed the P-38 pilots in how to lean the mixture properly and set propeller revs as to get the most range from the P-38s. At first, the pilots balked because they thought that would damage the engines. A Lockheed technician (versed in the Allison engines) assured the pilots the engines would be fine. At one point, the P-38s were escorting bombers from Biak to Balikpapan which is a distance of just over 1300 miles. That's 2600 miles round trip. Lindbergh flew on at least one of these missions. Surely, these techniques were available to the P-47 pilots. Why weren't they used? There is no reference that this happened and I'm sure a representative from Pratt and Whitney would have been more than willing to facilitate any needed training.

[@gordoh7634]

According to the P38 Pilots it was the mechanics of their aircrew that objected to Lindbergh. And then Lindy said I'll just go with you and that shut everybody up.

[@eamonnreilly1455]

I just discovered this channel recently and I absolutely love it! These long form series are great and I'll be the first one here if you ever decide to do one on the p-38. Great channel and great video.

[@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles]

Thanks Eamonn. I will do a series on the 38. It was a close choice to do the 38 or 47 first.

[@whiskeytangosierra6]

Another excellent presentation. I knew some of this for sure, I had surmised more from what wasn't said and what I knew of the CYA game played by the Bomber Mafia. However, you really did your due diligence and put it together beautifully.

[@PaulAJohnston1963]

The sound quality is just fine, we listen to you because of the first class information you always seem to find. I'm always intently listening, it's not background music.

[@brent-JG26]

I don’t understand how anyone could give Greg a “thumbs down”!!!

[@jacktattis]

Because he does not recognise tests done in England AND in the USA during the war at RAE AFDU and Wright Field

[@nilo9456]

​@@jacktattisPlease elaborate on the tests you mention.

[@nilo9456]

There are always naysayers, those for whatever reason are in disagreement with the material presented. To be fair, there can be legitimate reasons for disagreement, this is not suggesting all criticism is based on factual disagreement.

[@jacktattis]

@@nilo9456 RAE Farnborough early 1944 Dive tests P38 P47 P51 p38 Mach 0.68 P47 Mach 0.71 P51 Mach 0.78 AFDU Duxford Report No 66 P47C dive very fast but reaches its limit @ 520 IAS @10000ft and 450IAS @ 20000ft Wright Airfield Jun 44 Signed off by Brig F.G. CARROLL Indicated Limit Diving Speed mph 500 mph ILDS the last was a test between p38.p47 p51 and p80 and the full tests can be seen on an addendum to WW2Aircraft Performance

[@stew9168]

@@nilo9456 They can’t

[@waltergreif4836]

Looking at the 56 Fighter Group's service (p47) I read that Onerbruck- Drummmer Lake was the 56th's reference for benefical use of 150 gallon tanks (well short of Berlin). (Page 50 Osprey Publishing). But on Page 53 mentions the 56th's 'happy hunting grounds' of Berlin claiming 27 e/a downed presumably flying the bubble canopy 'D' version. Seems the 56 was permitted to Berlin on escort in March 1944 (no mention of external tanks.) Great effort for revealing what the Jug could do!!

[@gf-qx8mv]

Greg: Fantastic informational video! Couldn't have been explained better about people "covering their butts" because they were incorrectly using their positions of influence wrongly. Note to you; "Wire-mold" has been around a long time, similar in manner to the baseboard wire guide you shared. I've used wire mold many times when it was necessary to place power where it was needed, and had limited access to install power inside the walls. Keep up the great videos and research, you're a great historian!

[@richardallen6552]

Greg, I just wanted to express my thanks to you for the time and effort you devote to these aviation videos. This video like many of your others is truly a great work in my humble opinion. Thanks again.

[@steffen19k]

Attaboy, Greg. Thanks for covering the topic and vindicating Kartvelis design choices.

[@gort8203]

Amen; Kartveli does not get the recognition he deserves.

[@Spectre407]

Greg, I totally agree with your assessment of USAAF brass going to great extents to discredit the P-38 and P-47 for CYA. The 8th AF brass, and General Ira Eaker was especially bad about this with his whole “300 bombers or more will always get through.”

[@Silverhks]

Thanks Greg! I appreciate you busting this myth, which I believed BTW. I personally would love if you, or we, could come up with a way to host your primary sources. P.S. my main issue with your sound is usually just lack of volume volume. This one was much better in that regard. For some reason I'm not as worried about the quality if I can hear you.

[@Joe_Not_A_Fed]

Absolutely fascinating. Deceit and treachery, indeed. Until I watched your vids, I was caught in the thrall of misdirection and fighter fiction regarding P-47 range. 'But everybody says...'. Proof again why consensus isn't the same as fact. I love this stuff. I spent almost a decade and a half in radio...much of that lugging around sound equipment. It can be a real pain. I have a pretty good ear for good sound. Sound quality is very important to me and your sound quality is just fine. You have a lovely timbre to your voice which easily out does the quite light background echoes in a hard walled room and any limitations of your mic. And you obviously know how to use your mic to best advantage, speaking close to the mic without popping and clicking. I guess some people expect recording studio quality from vids they get for free. Thanks for sharing your hard work.

[@carltyson4393]

Great work! Tons of interesting and vital information. It is odd that the more one reads about Hap Arnold the less you like him. Love entire series on P 47. I cannot imagine how much work you put into these videos. I for one am fine with the sound...just please keep the great content coming. Thanks!

[@skeeterhoney]

Ah yes, the "Bomber Mafia." THe USAF has the fighter mafia now, but all services have their mafia that holds and maintains power by stifling the development of other components of their respective services. There's nothing new under the sun. Fantastic video, fantastic channel. You actually research and show your work--a model for this site.

[@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles]

Thanks, I do try and show the actual source documents during the video. That way, you don't have to take my word for it, it's right there on the screen and you can follow up with the actual document if more info is desired.

[@767bob]

Another great video, back in the 70's and 80's I read pretty much the same thing you mention about the range differences between both planes and the Mustang was always the best....but when I read about the P-47N it was always funny to read as that having the longest single engine escort range.....I always did my own math, looked at the fuel capacity and figured out the fuel burn rate....I always found the P-47 was never treated fare for its true range in the ETO. The information is out there, but never in one source. It is amazing how much more fuel the P-47 had to carry to fly as far as the Mustang....but yes it did had the range for full bomber escort in the ETO and in the PTO the P-47N was the king but hardly used for that job.

[@joelwalmsley7217]

These deep dives are excellent in putting facts right that easily gets lost in shorter videos. Personally I enjoy longer videos, even though it takes a lot longer to research and produce. This channel has shown me answers I'd wondered about and forgotten. Keep it up Greg

[@outdoorfuninthesun2393]

Really sad that all those lives were lost over this. Love the 47. Another great video Greg thanks for posting. 👍

[@billsmith5109]

I’m not sure we can say more bomber crews would have survived their tour. Even escorted half life wasn’t great early in war. It’s might be as likely more missions might have been flown and tonnage dropped if capability of P-47 had been utilized with losses per month staying high.

[@merlin51h84]

Thanks Greg on another brilliantly researched article. BTW, no issue with the sound, it’s the quality of the information that’s important. Keep up the great work!

[@stevendunn6255]

Once again, Greg provides the absolute best video’s on the P47. It’s true historical meaning during the Great War.

[@mikenodine6713]

I wish I could like this video 1,000 times over! Thanks for sharing such exceptionally well-researched videos! This one is a real game-changer to "established" WWII Warbird history!

[@MichaelVanHeemst]

This reaffirmed my love for the P-47. My favorite fighter of WWII

[@Gunquip]

Greg - I really appreciate your going to the trouble to make this video series & this pt 6 in particular. The P-47 has always been my favorite allied WWII fighter. Like many other comments made here - the P-47 has been 'greatly' ignored. It's true performance, it's war record as a dogfighter & the men who flew and fought (56th Fighter Group) against the German Luftwaffe...largely ignored ...but not in this series !!! Thanks !!!

[@donbalduf572]

You can call this a technical analysis or even investigative journalism. Both fit. In fact, Greg’s description of starting research on one topic - firepower - led to an examination of range is exactly how good reporters find their way to interesting stories. It’s excellent work that should be a must for anyone seriously interested in wwII aircraft.

[@aseriesguy]

When P-47 wings were "urged" to switch to P-51s there was at least one that refused. They referred to the Mustangs as SPAM CANS due to the water cooled engine and light construction that were hazards for ground attack. During Korea the re-designated F-51 became the primary USAF ground attack aircraft with an expected amount of losses to small calibre AA defense. Many WW II vets were asking for P-47s instead of the SPAM CANS. As the F-51s declined they were mostly replaced by F-80s and F-84s that were unsuited to Mig-Alley.

[@glypnir]

I had a nice discussion with a Tuskegee Airman mechanic, and he said many of the Tuskgee Airmen preferred the P47. One of the reasons was that the big radial engine was pretty good armor in a head to head encounter.

[@oregongaper]

A friend's dad flew a Corsair on ground attack missions in Korea, which makes much more sense than a Mustang. That was a USMC Corsair, of course.

[@PoochAndBoo]

P-47 units were not "urged" to convert to Mustangs. They were told, "You are comverting to Mustangs." The military is NOT a Democracy. The 56th Fighter Group requested, in writing, that be allowed to keep their Jugs. And it wasn't because of the dangers of ground attack misions. The 56th was not a fighter bomber outfit. They were 8th Air Force. They simply loved their Thunderbolts. The 8th AF High Command allowed this, and the 56TH wound up being the only 8th Air Force fighter group not flying Mustangs by the time the war ended.

[@gort8203]

@@PoochAndBoo Thank you. The 56th had great success in *air to air* combat with the P-47. It is not surprising that they didn't want to convert to the P-51. The fact that the 8th Air Force allowed them to keep the P-47 was in recognition not only of the group's success, but that they did not have to fly the P-51 to continue escorting bombers effectively.

[@iflycentral]

Bureaucracy... working as intended! :P Love the thorough research as always.

[@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles]

Thanks Central.

[@donjones4719]

@@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles Real research is key. The problems you note of circular quoting, not checking for primary sources, and going along with a narrative are the bane of hardcore professional historians. That's why peer reviewed journals are so important - other experts won't let you get away with B.S. But once we get into the history of WW II, there are many levels of "experts" writing books, writing with an eye to sales. There are plenty of sub-par professional historians, too. I started working as a volunteer on a history of science project about 10 years ago. (Putting Charles Darwin's research notes online.) It's run by a hardcore professor of science who's spent a lifetime on Darwin. He's ingrained in me how irresponsible it is to put something in the official record that isn't 100% proven and accurate. One inaccurate statement can propagate over and over, be hard to eradicate, as you point out. True in the print age, and magnitudes more with the internet. I occasionally write a footnote, and sometimes sweat a day and a half over two lines. (Nothing goes in without the professor's approval.) Thank you for digging through and sorting through this morass.

[@jmack7615]

Thanks for providing such informative videos. I think you do an excellent job providing just the right balance of technical information. I really appreciate you taking the time to put put videos like this together. Thanks again!

[@Zajuts149]

This has been well worth the wait! I thought the P-47 series was over, but this is certainly a juicy dessert 😄. If you ever have plans to write a book, this topic seems to be untouched ground. I would love to see a deep dive on this.

[@SVTL4799]

Lars Petter Simonsen it would be interesting to find out who the individuals of the “Bomber Mafia” were and see if it’s possible to find out if they were getting any “under the table” money from Boeing! “Don’t spend money on drop tanks, buy more B-17’s!” I wonder how many Bomber Mafia guys had cushy Boeing jobs waiting for them after the war?

[@iambicpentameter7177]

Great video! I follow all your posts. My Dad flew with the 56th ( 61st group) in 1945 as a replacement pilot. These videos bring back some memories!

[@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles]

Wow, the 56th might be the most famous squadron from WW2.

[@billbolton]

Thanks Greg, great info and analysis. Thanks for taking the time and effort to put these things on KZbin.

[@maxwellheintz2391]

Loved watching this. My grandfather was a crew chief on P-47s in the 12th AF (316th FS / 324th FG) and in the ANG after the war (139th FS, NYANG).

[@konstantinatanassov4353]

Wonderful analysis! Now it makes sense! Gladly awaiting the firepower - part.

[@pierQRzt180]

Thank you. The reference on the p47 pt6 that mentions that are referenced in a circular fashion become Truth without being in primary sources is worth more than half of youtube. Important insights are everything. If I may ask. Would it be possible to make an analysis on plane engine endurance? How long engine lasted? Were they made to last or the engineers knew that planes would be destroyed or scrapped before, say, 200 hours?

[@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles]

Wow, thanks for that contribution. I do appreciate it. The U.S. planes were built to last, not because they expected them to, it was more because in order to be rugged enough to handle the G loads and everything else they had to be quite sturdy. That's why 75 years later we still have some WW2 planes flying around.

[@barryjones8842]

Great video. Two thoughts - 1) given the missions they were used for the USAF really screwed up in keeping the P51 vice the P47 after the war. The P51s were used mostly for ground support in Korea and got their lunch eaten by loosing A/C to ground flak and specifically radiator hits and coolant loss resulting in Aircraft loss. It was a mission the P47 was much better suited to ground support...and 2) I thought I have read somewhere that P47-Ns flew at least SOME escort missions from Saipan and Tinian to Japan and back...resulting in pilots so fatigued and stiff they couldn't climb out of the cockpit on landing! Not sure where I read it, though and apparently the N model was not as good in air to air(because of the modifications) as earlier models...Great video, though!

[@mustanglimey]

Another brilliant piece Greg. I learn so much from your videos. I'm as guilty as most for the range and drop tank availability. Great stuff. Thanks for making these 👌🏼

[@joechang8696]

up to the 1930's, before radar and before 2000 HP engines, given the time it would take for a fighter on the ground to reach the altitude, intercept would be unlikely. Furthermore, finding the bomber would be difficult. The only intercept possibility would be to have fighters already in the air, and this is difficult to sustain. Unfortunately, the bomber always gets through failed to factor in the development of radar, and fast climb fighters.

[@allangibson8494]

Joe Chang “A” bomber always got through - loosing 10% on each raid was unsustainable long term until atomic bombs became an option.

[@myparceltape1169]

Radar warned British control of bombers climbing and coming over the 21 miles wide English Channel. Even so, it was difficult to get Spitfires and Hurricanes high enough and early enough to attack the bombers and their fighter cover.

[@garyhill2740]

I believe, after viewing this video and having the chance to read some of the well written analysis that Martin Caidin does in his writings on WW II fighters, that there was indeed a deliberate effort to create a narrative to support the idea that deep penetration bombing was not supportable until the P-51. Between narrative of the "short range P-47" you put forth here, Greg, AND the narrative of the P-38 supposedly "lacking the performance to match German fighters" (despite testimony of pilots like Arthur Heiden to the contrary), the bomber mafia definitely manufactured a history of the air war that was meant to cover up their poor decision making process. This history exaggerates the capabilities and significance of the P-51, and downplays the capabilities of the P-38 and P-47 and the role they played in breaking the Luftwaffe's dominance of the skied over Europe in WW II. Fantastic video Greg, thanks for your hard work and dedication!

[@ME-xh7zp]

It doesn't, the analysis here is flawed. Recommend you read the flight manual for the same pages quoted here yourself. The 4th FG actually tested that 200 gal tank on 28 July '43 at Lt. Col. Cass Hough's request. It was half filled because the Bolt didn't have the plumbing for pressurized tanks yet.

[@ME-xh7zp]

@@johnbrewer8954 Yeah the existence of this video irks me to no end. Initially thought this channel was a gem but his refusal to fix this despite evidence ruins his credibility.

[@ME-xh7zp]

@@johnbrewer8954 Speak of the devil "Caliban Rising" just did

[@garyhill2740]

@@johnbrewer8954 Uh no. You said that. ;) But thanks for your sarcasm and attitude. It's the kind of thing that always makes online interactions with persons like yourself so enjoyable. I said that despite it's limitations, having been rushed into service with teething troubles, P-38 held the line. Once fully developed, it was a superb airplane. Read Martin Caidin's book, and the testimony of Art Heiden and others. Then look at the capabilities of the P-38L, which Heiden called "THE airplane". He actually flew them, and most other types, concluding "there is nothing the Mustang can do that the P-38 cannot", referring to the late J and L.

[@michaelmoorrees3585]

From a B-17 crew member, out of the book, Aircrew: The Story of the Men Who Flew the Bombers , By Bruce Lewis ... "The B-24s are our best escort. When They're around the [German] fighters always go for them, and leave us alone !"

[@genekelly7756]

Gene Kelly... Greg , I listened to the sound of those World War Two radial engines ,from my crib on a farm labor camp in northern California,(Taken from cannibalized .A.T.6,s, and installed in Stearman Crop dusters) and have always loved these old aircraft. Your site is fantastic, Thank you for your efforts at clarifying misconceptions , myths ,and downright falsehoods,about a Great fighter, ...GK

[@enriquepadilla4154]

hi, great to learn from an original fresh view in to the old history dogmas we’ve been reading for years, seems like many of the generals back then were kind of like the catch22 high brass, i’m sure there are many more fishy facts to check regarding wwii air dogmas we’ve held for so long, anyway, i enjoy your work, keep up the research, have a great day!!

[@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles]

Thanks Enrique.

[@dennismason3740]

I've been living the Mustang Lie for over six decades, now, I will forgive myself. This movie or essay or what-the-funk-ever is why YT exists. Thank you Greg, we missed you however your continuity is impeccable. The Bomber Mafia were scuddling about in their dishonor in '45 when they hired my dad. I would watched the Constellations land at L.A.X. - Howard Hughes? Whoever. My mom worked at Hughes Aircraft whilst we inhabited Inglewood and Hawthorn, now they design Starships in Hawthorn. And they test ion drives. What planet is this, again? Oh, right, Thunderbolts and Treachery. Your restraint is epic as concerns the gov't. Those dudes were not soldiers and now they're all dead! Sometimes karma sets her own sunrise.

[@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles]

Hi Dennis, my mom worked at Hughes as well. Small world.

[@MrChiron12]

Thanks for your hardwork on getting all this information compiled together.

[@richardschaffer5588]

Another terrific video! Range, like dive performance as opposed to speed and turn performance is a neglected subject. But if you don’t make it to the game you can’ t play. In a bar fight a busted beer bottle in your hand is a lot better than a shotgun in your bedroom back home. There is a lot of vagueness about increasing the range of the fighters in the ETO in 1943. Now I see why. The bomber commanders were looking for the the answer and it was right there sitting out on the flight line. And they were ignoring it! In defense of the bomber boys, when they developed their theories fighters didn’t have the speed and rate of climb to intercept a 200 mph B 17 flying at 30,000’. In 1940 when Fighter Command used a radar directed air defense system the equation was flipped. Radar gave the defender time to get into the air, time to climb and time to run down the intruder. In the Mediterranean the Fleet Air arm was able to defend using Fulmars which were slower than the attacking aircraft. With radar warning the Fulmars could climb above attackers along their path and dive on them. With radar, interceptors can be directed to favorable tactical positions. Radar made the interceptor viable, thus making the escort fighter necessary. The bomber guys didn’t get it. The war in the West was decided by the arrival of an enormous and well equipped USAAF in Europe which decisively defeated the Luftwaffe in 1943-44. There was a time limit too, 8th Air force had to beat the Luftwaffe before the summer of 1944 for Overlord to work. The RAF would never have achieved air superiority by bombing cities at night. Unescorted daytime bombers raids were getting annihilated and it was already the middle of 1943. Without air superiority no invasion. Time to try something else. The answer was simple, use the bombers inside of the escort fighter radius of action, and expand that radius. Compare the radius of action of early war fighters with later aircraft it’s always more for the late war models even ones with more speed and power. Fortunately we had the P 47, a Merlin fit into a P 51 and the P 38 could be fixed. (Will you ever do a video on the P-38?). The Jug is the hero. The USAAF statistics for ‘aircraft on hand against Germany’ show 1320 T bolts to 369 Mustangs in November ‘43 when air to air victories hit 105-triple digits for the first time. Then 2241 Jugs to 1132 51s when they hit 596 in May’44 the highest month of the war. Next month the Luftwaffe was a no show at Normandy, they had lost the war. The the Mustang was the racehorse but the P 47 was the workhorse. de Seversky wrote a book “Victory Through Air Power” advocating among other things building high power, supercharged, high altitude, heavily armed fighters like the P 47 as opposed to low altitude P 40, P 39, Allison Mustang etc. He felt these aircraft would be only good for ground support and less useful for achieving command of the air. The bomber gang thought that the unescorted turbo charged bomber would get through any defense. Expensive high power, high flying escorts and interceptors would only divert resources from bombers. 9(

[@williamsayers2163]

Good analysis. Most historians would say that air superiority was won during "Big Week" at the end of February, 1944 or by the end of March, at the latest. In December of 1943, when the Mustang started escort duties, they claimed only 7 enemy aircraft, compared to 95 claims by P-38s and P-47s. In January, the numbers were 43 claims by P-51s and 180 by the other fighters. This was also the month that Doolittle cut the fighters loose from the bombers, and changed them from defensive escort within sight of the bombers, to an offensive posture of hunting the Luftwaffe down anywhere they could be found. On the eve of the big battles of February and March, the P-51 was largely a non-factor. In February, Mustangs still claimed only 88 kills to the other fighters' 270. 20 February, the first day of "Big Week," was the first time two groups of P-51s were available. March was the first month Mustangs even claimed the majority of fighter kills: 325 to 224 by the Lightnings and Jugs. Clearly, the P-51 DID NOT win air superiority. That was done by the P-47s and, to a lesser extent, the P-38s and bomber gunners, starting back in the fall of 1943. Neither were the big battles in the last 5 months of 1943 nearly the disaster for the USAAF that it was for the Luftwaffe. The Eighth quickly replaced its losses. The Luftwaffe never did, which is why it was so brittle and unable to hang on to air superiority when the coup de gras came in February and March. The real contribution by the Mustang was in keeping the Luftwaffe suppressed after air superiority was won by other aircraft.

[@hgbarnes1584]

Congrats on getting close to 50K subs Greg! Heck by the time I'm finished writing this it may well be. Fantastic video and one to watch multiple times. No need to reply.

[@123fockewolf]

Greg the saviour of quarantine times! Love this vid as always!

[@davidconnolly7693]

One thing worth mentioning is that the P-47 has fuel return to the main tank through the carburetor, so you periodically switch to the main tank to burn off a little to make room for fuel-return. So when you drop your tanks you probably have a few gallons missing from that main tank.

[@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles]

Hi David. That's a good point. The early draft of this video touched on a lot of fuel system stuff like that, but I trimmed out a lot of it due to time. The video was just getting too long. There are a few remnants of it in the video including the discussion of using the main for engine start and takeoff, and I put up an image of the fuel system management schedule for a long flight in an N model later in the video. Again, good comment, and thanks.

[@will3835]

I was just getting ready to comment on this asking why they had to take off on the main tank. I figured it was for CG reasons but overflowing avgas out of the main tank would be bad as well.

[@MrLemonbaby]

Absolutely great and informative video as usual Greg, thank you... and about one of my favorite aircraft. I stopped at 9:25 to make this comment. In an interview I watched on YT with Bud Anderson, it was related by him that when he deployed to the UK with P51s the powers that be "didn't want them" until they saw what they could do. Back to the vid.

[@borisspleit7105]

Thanks for one more beautiful work,Greg. I hope you'll make some about M and N versions.

[@marioacevedo5077]

Thoughtful video. Thanks. I read an article published during the Spanish Civil War by an American officer who claimed that the war proved that the bomber will always get through. His argument was that by the time fighters are scrambled to intercept, the bombers will have passed. What he failed to consider were the improved capabilities of new fighters, radar, and attacking a sophisticated air defense network like that of Great Britain or Germany.

[@jeromestern8225]

incredible detailed video! Thanks Greg one more time. Your splendid work has to be appreciated.

[@pierQRzt180]

In the first minutes, Greg explains how misleading are statements that quote each other but are ultimately not in the primary sources. Those can become "truth" in books without being truth (they are circular). Such statements and few minutes of audio, so well said, are worth more than half of youtube videos. Amazing. Now I hope if I send a thanks youtube won't cut a large amount.

[@igel1]

I must say that personal transport drop tank was one of the most unexpected ww2 things I ever seen. But maybe it´s something they should introduce again now? Just smack a few hundred under the wings of your Dreamliner and social distancing is guarantied! And great video!

[@myparceltape1169]

And each person to their own destination.

[@Redhand1949]

Great video. You should, quite literally, write a book about this. I wrote a book about a B-17 crew (303rd BG) whose tour ran from Aug. 43 to the beginning of "Big Week." Miraculously, they all made it with no serious injuries. They went on both Schweinfult missions too. Your research puts the experiences of all 8AF bomber crewmen during this period in an entirely different, darker light. A couple of additional points. The 8th AF suffered more combat casualties than the Marines in WWII. Also, I was told by the co-pilot of the crew I wrote about that there was a mission to Berlin briefed during the period between Second Schweinfurt and the end of 1943, and that it was only canceled due to weather. My sense is that Eaker wanted to get on with the deeper penetrations before the end of '43, especially since there was a huge increase in 8AF bombers and crews during this period. (Group sizes actually doubled). I have no smoking gun proof on Eaker's desires or plans, but I believe the co-pilot's story. So, it could be that the shorter penetration missions in late '43 to places like Bremen and Kiel were more a function of weather than a strategic decision by the bomber brass "to wait for the P-51s."

[@brucesmith4436]

Greg, thank you for tilting at pre conceived notions! Wonderful video!

[@jimanderson1355]

Thanks for this terrific documentary on the P-47. I am always stunned by the number of people ignorant of its’ existence, let alone its’ meritorious service. My father-in-law served in a Thunderbolt squadron with the 9th. Air Force and related their moving airfields of PSP overnight on many occasions while in France to gain any miles made available day by day.

[@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles]

Thanks Jim.

[@matthewdick6063]

The sound is good enough. Your videos are awesome

[@Darkline27]

I’ve watched this video at least 10 times now (along with the entire series) and it has to be my favorite. Man is it just perfectly done!

[@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles]

Thanks, that's quite a compliment.

[@johnthompson8812]

Thank you, I have fought long and hard against my Pony fanboy friends that the P51 was a good plane but it didnt 'win the war' as is so often stated on/in everything. The Jug has been my only love, of planes, forever and I finally got to see two of them at the Tenn air museum.

[@biffwellington1782]

Sound isn't an issue. Information is key. Keep up the good work. And thank you for doing these.

[@hangonsnoop]

This is impressive analysis and presentation with links to sources as always. Thank you.

[@gooraway1]

Greg the content and quality of your videos just keeps improving. Well done.

[@JohnSmith-oh9ux]

Great video, as usual :) Thanks Greg!

[@richardlinter4111]

That the "US commanders in Europe had to go a bit rogue and work with the British to get a decent supply of drop tanks" (52:52) is absolutely one of the oddest and most overlooked aspects of the air war. There is an interesting first hand account of this from a mechanic assigned to Mustang resupply, one Donald W. Marner, who writes in relevant part: "I don't ever remember handling any 75-gallon tanks, as I believe they were phased out sometime in May or June [1944]. " Marner adds they were replaced by the far more common paper 108 gallon models: "I handled hundreds, maybe thousands, of 108-gallon wing tanks... They became big in June 1944 at the time I arrived at Leiston. I started hauling them from a stockpile somewhere on our base. When the pile became low I went to a RAF air base or depot and hauled load after load back to our base. I distributed them to each hardstand. I was told to have a supply of at least a dozen at each hardstand. I also remember big RAF trucks that delivered 108-gallon tanks to our base supply."

[@mehmetsan6044]

Finally,I have been waiting for a long time. Thank you ^^

[@victormiranda9163]

an excellent explanation of what happened with escort of bomber missions. some of the ranges of various aircraft left me thinking that escort duties had more fuel costs than ferry ranges. but but but? thank you.

[@sysfx]

Great video. The "bomber mafia" is yet another example of the scariest part of WW2: the important role that prejudices had.

[@seanmac1793]

It’s important to not take it too far or else you create the very same dogmas you are dismantling.

[@kenneth9874]

Even worse covering their asses

[@wheatoncox]

Another insightful, well researched video, thanks you. My dad was a Jug pilot in the MTO. He brought back a tree branch in his cowling one mission and lost 3 feet off his right wing another time ( dang trees! ) He once said if you wanted to send a picture back to your girlfriend you stood next to a Mustang, but if you wanted to come back from a mission you flew a Jug.

[@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles]

Thanks for your comment, it's meaningful to me.

[@myparceltape1169]

The name of the plane. A jug reminds her of pouring milk, but a Mustang is an exciting ride. Cling on tight....

[@jimh6763]

Guess if i would have finished this video id have known!! Thanks again Greg!!

[@45CaliberCure]

I have no problem with the audio. I can hear it well enough to understand what you're saying, even if I'm to stupid to understand all of it. Huge fan of the P-47. Grew up reading about Gabreski and other great guys. I sincerely appreciate the information that you convey so well. It's a shame that bureaucratic inertia and intra-service rivalry have caused, and will continue to cause, such loss of life. Our military deserve better.