The Insane Engineering of the P-47 Thunderbolt

[@gabethomas8123]

My grandfather flew a p-47 D in the pacific theatre. Flew combat missions over the Philippines, New Guinea, and southern Japan. He shot down zeroes and had his plane shot up pretty badly in the process but was always able to land thanks to the tough nature of the air craft. Before he died, I had him record some of his war stories. He told me about flying missions over Japan and strafing runs on supply trains. He described squeezing the trigger and feeling the forward momentum of the plane being slowed because of the 8 .50 cals going off. A one second burst would destroy anything he held in the sights. He and his buddies learned to bounce bombs into tunnels where the trains would hide after being alerted they were coming. He flew over Nagasaki after the a-bomb was dropped and gave me a first hand description of hell on earth. Recounting this really makes me miss him. I've set a picture of him in his P-47 as my profile pic.

[@aldrinmilespartosa1578]

You're grandfather is an absolute hero

[@nurburgringkid]

This is a very amazing comment and you are a grandson of a former P47 pilot. Would it be possible for you to upload the recordings? That would be of great historical value. thank you very much. And we will always remember and appreciate your late grandfather's service.

[@gabethomas8123]

Eurasia _0240 I believe you! But I know he would never accept that. That’s the amazing thing about that generation, they just did their jobs, with the hope of returning to their families.

[@gabethomas8123]

1a You’re right, I need to find the recordings and convert them to mp3 so they can be permanently preserved. They’re on micro-cassette and stored at my parents home, which unfortunately is far from me. Some of the stories are really amazing. I wish I could upload pictures to this thread.

[@royaltaiga9409]

I love this comment

[@VladGoro25]

P-47: " Are ya winnin' son?" A-10: "Yes dad, thanks!"

[@m_moj604]

"yes dad thanks" was a direct translation to BRRRRRRRRRTTTTTTTT

[@digzrow8745]

@@m_moj604 haha, A-10 go brrrrrrrrrt

[@itsdokko2990]

wholesome

[@crabbyj]

@@m_moj604 - ROFL 🤣

[@Max-rg2fd]

thing is a10 is known for its brrrrrt but the p47 had 8 mgs, as a War Thunder player, that equals brrrrrrrrt.

[@samaxe6495]

“Anything could out turn a Thunderbolt, but nothing could out roll it.” “If you wanted a picture to send to your girl, stand in front of a Mustang. If you want to get home to your girl, fly a Thunderbolt.” -Robert S. Johnson P-47 Ace with 28 kills

[@ercanyesiltas]

Pretty sure fw190 could roll

[@bobmalack481]

A flying tank or pillbox. Pratt and Whitney R-2800 twin Wasp radials rip, and is near bullit proof. Battle damage resistant. Eight 50's and underwing rockets, and or drop tanks. Yes, Mustangs and Spit's were the fighter darlings, but the P47-D-especially the 'bubble canopy' variant was the back alley tough guy that usually got you home. Robert at 66.

[@LongBinh70]

I've heard that quote many times. Similar to the B-17 vs B-24. The '17 was archaic, but it got you home.

[@dalestephan6777]

And Francis Gabreski another high kill ratio!

[@dalestephan6777]

@@ercanyesiltas but it could outlive anything lol, Get in trouble just Point down🙂

[@xlcrider]

The P-47 could be re-assembled in the field with the use of the cleverly built shipping container. A very strong point of the P-47.

[@jamesharding3459]

A feature of the P-40 as well - something a number of military assistance units in the China-Burma Theatre made good use of.

[@jadall77]

And it looks like even if you had cranes and forklifts you still get 50 guys to lift the wings on as weight on like 2 points of the wing would probably bend/damage them. kzbin.info/www/bejne/hKDUnqZqds2HgKM

[@ubroberts5541]

Could be assembled out of the factory crates in the field. Not reassembled

[@boydsinclair7606]

Oh, thought you meant that they used the shipping container as parts to re-assemble the plane, ending up with a little more drag, and less armour, but still a pretty fast and well armed shipping container with wings.

[@boydsinclair7606]

@@ubroberts5541 maybe you going on a stealth mission, but you still want air support? 🤔 Break it down, everybody carries a few bits, and once you're inside enemy territory, it's: crank-crank 🛠️ we got a flying tank 👍

[@KaiWolf18]

4:37 talking about horsepower and you include a clip of the thunderbolts flying over a horse. Clever Real Engineering, real cute.

[@RealEngineering]

That’s was all Dylan.

[@thef-35lockheedmartinlight11]

That’s was all Dylan.

[@chrisc.2626]

That's was all Dylan.

[@woods4530]

That’s was all Dylan

[@clarkclements7204]

That was all Dylan.

[@TralfazConstruction]

The best line I've ever read in reference to the P-47 is a ground crewman asking the pilot, "Where's the rest of the crew?".

[@mayankraj2294]

Wot? Wdym? Meaning?

[@isaacfairburne9981]

@@mayankraj2294 Because the plane so big that the ground crewman jokingly ask the pilot as if he's mistaking the plane with a bomber or a transport plane.

[@mikestanmore2614]

Haha! Nice one.

[@TralfazConstruction]

@@mikestanmore2614 Thank you very much, Mike.

[@currentcomentor1026]

It's one engine provided more power than some twin engine aircraft of tge same period.

[@JozefLucifugeKorzeniowski]

Naming the engine: "what's meaner than a wasp?" "Perhaps... Two wasps?" "ABSOLUTE GENIUS"

[@xx_insert_cool_username_he6876]

10th like

[@8ballentertainment.885]

If I remember correctly it was due to it being a chimera of two single wasp engines, but I’m not entirely sure and could be wrong

[@petta0616]

ummmmm donut media reference?

[@buckstarchaser2376]

@@8ballentertainment.885 Yes.... The Double Wasp is essentially two radial engines stacked together, because their shape makes this a lot easier than adding more engine to a more typical engine like you would find in a car. There are some old airliner engines that have several of these layers stacked together, and I would like to think that they're beautiful, but I would hate to have to do any deep work on one. They really show the "why" behind the reliability and efficiency of a turbine engine.

[@johnhess351]

Whats meaner than a Pratt and Whitney Dual Wasp? A Wright Duplex Cyclone!

[@gaffgarion7049]

I remember watching an interview of a Luftwaffe pilot and he said he never really felt like the spitfire or Mustang were all that great on individual encounters. More dangerous due to their numerical advantage. But the P-47 on the other hand he feared because it was incredibly resilient to damage and was armed to the teeth.

[@randomperson774]

For a second I thought you were saying “I remembered when I was a luftwaffe pilot.” And I clicked off and then when I saw a glimpse of it I was like “hol’ up”

[@o_sch]

Exactly how it goes in games like War thunder too

[@caralho5237]

@@o_sch In war thunder you have WW2 planes like A6M2s easily pulling 10gs and for extended periods of time, giving them very unrealistic performances. That makes the p47 not very good because most things outclimb you and outturn you significantly

[@jazzingpanda3190]

Pressing X to doubt on this one.

[@HappiKarafuru]

@@caralho5237 but what makes it P47 good is it ability to tank the doffes who want to challenge your manhood and they think they had more "dakka" than you XD

[@cynthiahumm6230]

My husband ‘s mother was a “Rosie” at the Evansville, IN plant that made the wings. She was very proud to have worked there.

[@thetreblerebel]

Unsung heroes of the war, the ladies who built the weapons to win it everyday

[@Adam-rv1ue]

Rosie the riveter?

[@davidgraham2673]

I love hearing these stories of the Heros behind the scenes. Thanks for sharing.

[@sithlord7282]

My grandmother worked at anchor and sunbeam in Evansville during the war

[@bobmalack481]

ya..but was she a riveter, or office secretary?

[@vincentheartland2088]

3:37 - A supercharger powered by hot exhaust? You mean, like, I dunno... a turbocharger?

[@dominicdaley5702]

Yea I was questioning what he said as well. Its definitely turbocharged with water meth injection

[@MrDutchyGuy]

I was wondering this too. Wikipedia calls it a superturbocharger, or a twin charger. Basically combining the both. He must've skipped over the supercharged bit.

[@194853DodgeTrucks]

In WW2 the U.S. air planes were assisted by a "Turbosupercharger"......I understand the automotive definition of super vs turbo, but I guess combining the two was common in warplanes back in the day. High altitude would effect the output to the engine, so the turbo part would improve the compression effect while not effecting the engine rpm..... the supercharger was the primary power boost, while the turbo part aided at high altitudes. reference: rwebs.net/avhistory/opsman/geturbo/geturbo.htm "At the present time, turbosuperchargers are used in series with geared superchargers" 1947 pamphlet by GE So there were two different types being utilized. Exhaust driven and engine driven

[@dominicdaley5702]

@@194853DodgeTrucks Ah ok good info man 👍

[@devinthierault]

Turbos were known as superchargers specifically turbosuperchargers. The P38 had this designation as well.

[@aendranireho6038]

"If you want to get the girl, fly a P51 If you want to get back to your girl, fly a P47" No clue where that comes from

[@Redspeare]

As I say; "The P-51 is the girl you whistle at. The P-47 girl you take hoe to meet your mother." :)

[@aendranireho6038]

The P51 whistles with you :D

[@stanhathcoat920]

From Francis Gabreski, top scoring UAAAF pilot int the ETO.

[@MarvinT0606]

P-40: *"yes"*

[@jasomkovac9115]

@@stanhathcoat920 ,cool, is that his plane at 12:08? 27 kills.

[@gratitude62]

I had a step grandfather who flew a p-47 in the european theater. A normally very sweet and calm man, he was visibly disturbed and firmly refuted the enthusiastic declaration of a 10 year old that the p-51 Mustang was the best fighter plane of ww2. He told me about flying a Thunderbolt and how clearly the superior the Thunderbolt was to the Mustang. This piqued my curiosity and i read about the Jug in earnest. There was wisdom to his words.

[@thethirdman225]

Let’s put it in context. According to USAAF figures, which I have been consultating lot recently, the P-51 shot down 60% more fighters in the ETO than the P-47 in half the number of missions. It also accounted for 30% more ground kills. It suffered only a slightly higher loss rate (1.18 v 0.73, all causes) but it spent a much higher percentage of its time in hostile airspace than the P-47 did because of its range. In short, the P-51 was at least twice as effective as the P-47 and not the ‘liquid-cooled death trap’ the P-47 fanbois claim it was. It also produced more aces than the P-47. The P-51 made daylight strategic bombing - bombing wherever and whenever they liked - a possibility. It was the aircraft that the Luftwaffe pilots measured their own fighters by and it was one of two types regularly mentioned in RLM reports. In other words, it gave the Germans the screaming meemies. Whatever the P-47’s contribution was - and there’s no doubt it was significant - it was the P-51 that did damage out of all proportion to missions flown.

[@NamoChudankura]

What's the secret of increasing horsepower? P-47: *A L C O H O L*

[@erojerisiz1571]

Vodka Which makes sense because it's designer escaped the ussr

[@Skankhunter420]

Turbo-Supercharger with water-methanol injection will indeed get you going pretty quick.

[@ADRIAAN1007]

Alcohol and water, actually i thick it was MW50 Methanol/Water 50% 50%

[@dirtypure2023]

@@ADRIAAN1007 I think you're right. Fan of Greg's Airplanes? kzbin.info/aero/PLD2EcpzcvT-tvemNaIYUfZfV3s8K8Gbgh

[@750suzuki]

Ahh, alcohol, the cause and solution to all of lifes troubles....Homer Simpson

[@johnpicton5236]

My dad was a jug pilot. He loved this plane and felt that he was always going to come home, even when he volunteered for a “suicide” mission, for which he received the DFC. I would like to thank Republic for designing the plane that helped bring my dad home!

[@namvet68]

My father in law was a P-47 pilot also. Did 96 missions in WW2. He to loved his plane.

[@johnpicton5236]

My dad had a squadron mate that got shot up, still flew back, and almost made it to the base, but crashed into the second story of a brick building. Brushed the bricks off his lap, got out and sat on a couch waiting for the corpsmen. Those planes were flying tanks.

[@namvet68]

Yea my father in law came back shot up a few times thinking he would not make it back. He was promoted to Captain after 1 flight. Was awarded DFC but never got it My wife contacted 4 Presidents & Pentagon over 5 years & they finally awarded it to him a few years after he passed. So his wife & 6 kids had a ceremony at Joint base MDL in NJ on 1/2004

[@PJS50]

God Bless them All! My dad was a WW II vet who served on an airbase in the Aleutian Islands, Alaska. The earlier "Razorback" P-47 versions has armor plating directly behind/surrounding the pilot's seat, which they could slide the seat back into when being fired upon for extra protection. Personally, THIS is why I've always loved the P-47; THE GUNS! The early "Blue-Tipped" M-1 Incendiary rounds really let you see the sheer devastation that 8-M2 .50cals could deliver as those rounds would "flash/explode" on impact! I shoot .50BMG bolt action rifles and the newer M8-API rounds explode with enough authority that they can easily be heard exploding on the surface of a hard target when you are 400 yards away AND WEARING EAR PROTECTION! This first clip is one of my favorite ones; lots of M1 projos being used here. Look at the BALLS these pilots had in some of these low strafing runs! Jumping scrub trees and telephone poles to keep rounds on target! At 1:00 in this one, watch the Jug pilot flying so low, that he's landing gun-bursts INSIDE an airplane hangar through the open hangar door! These pilots were gentlemen too! The Nazi's would often have women driving horse drawn wagons full of ammunition/munitions, thinking that the gentlemen Allied pilots would not strafe and kill a women. So, what did a lot of the pilots do? They would aim for the horses instead of the wagon with the women in them. When the women jumped off, THEN they would blow the wagons! This exact scenario can be seen in this video at 1:23: kzbin.info/www/bejne/b2qroWeMf6xqnpI kzbin.info/www/bejne/Y5yseaVtqNqrnLs THE Greatest Generation INDEED!

[@whiterabbit-wo7hw]

@@namvet68 I thank him for his service and to his family for their sacrifice. Semper Fi.

[@Marc-zi4vg]

P47 at low alt : *pls do not hurt obese plane* P47 at high alt : _Whats the matter?! Cannot breathe?_

[@LegionnaireShork]

🤣 true that

[@topgun7573]

Obese plen

[@The_Crimson_Fucker]

Absolutely wrong, P47s were just as fast at low altitudes as they were at high. 2000hp is not fucking around in the least and It had upwards of twice the engine power of any competitive fighter and they were not particularly sluggish - certainly not the later models. The P47 was an absolute monster.

[@Marc-zi4vg]

@@The_Crimson_Fucker but the only "dogfight" you would do in low alt is forcing your opponent in head Ons or BnZming lower opponents (or BnX/Boom and extend for more dangerous planes). But high altitudes however...big plane, big surfaces (more air to touch), big engine, big snail at the back. so while their suffocating and struggling to turn on high alt, you're moving as if it's low alt and dunk on them

[@combativeThinker]

@@Marc-zi4vg You kidding? P-47 pilots brawled at all altitudes. They fought Zeros on the deck and just shrugged off whatever was thrown at them as they reduced them to burning wreckage with 8 .50s.

[@brianmcmillan8827]

My uncle was an Australian RAF pilot and flew Spitfires and Hurricanes in Europe and Middle East and Thunderbolts in Burma over the 5 years of the war. He loved the Thunderbolt because the underside was steel and the bullets would bounce off while strafing. The steel plate armor around him were also appreciated.

[@Josephi_Krakowski]

Now thats what i call a flying tank

[@thethirdman225]

@@Josephi_KrakowskiThat’s what I call a tall story. The P-47 carried 60-65 lbs of armour, which was the same as the Spitfire. The idea that the underside was made of steel thick enough that bullets would bounce off it is absurd.

[@Josephi_Krakowski]

@@thethirdman225 ☝️🤓

[@NotAntury]

​@@Josephi_Krakowski maybe ricocheting!?

[@feniraken]

I'm from Burma!

[@minnesotannomad86]

At 6:21 that plane with the bat on the side of the engine was my grandpas plane. It was called The Bat out of Hell because his last name is Batdorf. It's really cool to see it in this video.

[@xhafels6408]

damn cool

[@vanillagorilla8236]

Do you still have his flight jacket ?

[@TheTX35]

Very Cool!!

[@hddun]

WOW! that is great note of history--t hanks for sharing

[@letoubib21]

Batdorf?! A German renegade *. . . ;-)*

[@benbovard9579]

Once watched an episode of this show Dogfights that was on the History channel back when there was still decent stuff. The episode was about this American pilot who was flying a Razorback Jug over German territory with his squadron on an escort mission. They were intercepted by Fw-190s and he was separated from the pack, damaged, and began to fly back toward England. By chance, a lone 190 pilot spotted and intercepted him. He began raking the American wing to wing with bullets. The Jug held up, and the German pulled up next to the American, looked at him and shook his head, and pulled behind, again raking him wingtip to wingtip with bullets. It finally happened that the German ran out of ammo, pulled up next to the American, waggled his wings in salute, and broke off to fly back to his base. Flying the Jug shot full of holes, oil leaks obscuring his view, torn ailerons, an engine cylinder blown to bits, and shot up himself, the American pilot managed to return to base in England. The repair crew stopped counting the bullet holes at a hundred.

[@achieveradio1971]

It was incidents like the one you describe that probably inspired the running joke among P-51 pilots that the P-47 gained its excellent kill ratio by getting in FRONT of enemy fighters and waiting for them to run out of ammo before turning around and finishing them off.

[@gregpelzer6809]

The pilots name was Johnson and wrote a book called "God is my co-pilot" It was a pretty good read when I was 12

[@davidriddell9455]

I wonder if that was the inspiration for this video (pretty cool group btw) kzbin.info/www/bejne/gKeUi4FumJmSfdU

[@rwi8406]

@@gregpelzer6809 You're mixing up some famous WWII pilots. "God is my co-pilot" was written by Robert L. Scott.

[@markbrewster2630]

@@achieveradio1971 "Rope a Fock-wolfe"?

[@preacherF-15]

I flew the F-15C, but I grew up very involved with the CAF. I've flown thousands of hours as pic as well as instructor pilot, in everything from Stearman biplanes to P-51s and B-17s. I often tell people that the best dogfighter of WWII was the Spitfire mk IX, but the plane that would do the most damage and absorb the most damage and still bring you home was the P-47. I consider it sort of the A-10 of it's day. Fitting!

[@guaporeturns9472]

🤥

[@bruhzy2139]

the a10 isn't the thunderbolt 2 for no reason :)

[@M1A1HA_Abrams]

Fun fact: The same guy that designed the P-47 helped in designing the A-10, so the thunderbolt II nickname is well deserved

[@RRVCrinale]

Considering the breadth of the roles a Jug could take on, from air superiority to ground attack, and its role as a workhorse fighter built in great numbers, I feel like a more fair comparison is to place it with the Viper and even the Lightning now. Anything you want, you got it!

[@briannoecker7149]

My Dad was a P-47 crew chief on Okinawa during WWII. I loved hearing all the war stories that he used to tell me. I later joined the USAF mostly in part because of those exciting war stories. My dad really admired the P-47.

[@tyrisiustyroniusrex8322]

IL-2 was also a magnificent close air support aircraft. Would love to see a video of it on the brilliance of such a marvel of engineering aircraft

[@HMSNeptun]

And Yaks

[@elpatrico2562]

@Infinity Aren't Yakovlevs were better than Lavochkins? As far as I remember, the Yak was the most well liked plane among the soviet pilots.

[@stephenc5103]

@@elpatrico2562 Think you've got it a bit mixed up, the Lavochkin La series of planes outclassed the earlier Yaks. I believe the Yaks were much better than the underpowered LaGG planes which is probably what you were referring to, which themselves were disliked by their crews, outperformed by contemporary German fighters and was powered by an equally underpowered Klimov VK 105(PF) engine. The prototype La 5 quite literally had a Shvetsov M-82 Radial engine, (a much better engine than the engines equipped in previous LaGGs) lifted from a ground attack aircraft and grafted onto the nose of a LaGG fighter which subsequently led to the creation of the superior La-5 series of fighters which were well respected and almost equaled some German fighters if proper experienceand training was present, that is. Even the Yaks were much more favoured than the LaGG series of fighters and before the La-5, LaGG production was completely stopped in order to concentrate on Yak production as it was much more promising, liked by their crews and just performed much better.

[@elpatrico2562]

@@stephenc5103 I'm aware of the bad reputation of the LaGG series, I was refering to the pinacles of both versions, the Yak-3 and the late La-5. I did some research since then, and both planes had a really good reputation among soviet pilots and also the maintanance crew, since both were really simple, especially the Yak-3. I mostly based my thoughts about how some Yak aces claimed that their planes is superior even to the P-51 and Spitfire (at low altitude), but you can never be sure, because there could always be some bias.

[@Fred_the_1996]

@@elpatrico2562 ok so basically, the yaks were more maneuverable at low altitude and speed, but performed worse at high altitude and speed. Its firepower was superior in caliber and destructive power but you needed to really aim it well, since it had little ammo. The allied, early german and japanese doctrine at the time was: "just brrrrrrrrrt all over the place and you'll hit something eventually, since you have so much ammo". The late german and soviet doctrine was: "wait for the right time to shoot and only shoot a couple of rounds when you have a clear shot". This made sense since the soviet and late german guns had a ton of stopping power and very little ammo, and the allied 50. Cals didn't do any impressive damage, but if 8 50. Cals fired continuously, they could be more effective in the hands of a less experienced pilot, whereas soviet and late german planes needed to be aimed with more expertise, otherwise the ammo would just run out. Hope this helped!

[@mvdw0251]

A supercharger is powerd by a belt from the engeine this is a turbo charger sins it's powers the turbine white exhaust gas 3:45

[@TheGreatSteve]

I'm going for deliberate mistake to generate comments for the algorithm.

[@MysterDaftGame]

Spotted the mistake too

[@SgtStinger]

The reason it is called a super charger is that when the P47 was built, engineers called it a turbine super charger. The term "turbo" is a newer term.

[@rnzafdude]

In modern English, yes that is the case. However, back in WWII, both types were called SuperChargers, and ones driven by turbines were called Turbosuperchargers back then!

[@MysterDaftGame]

@@SgtStinger so at least when explainig it, he should have sait that it works like a turbocharger

[@hydranmenace]

I didn't know this plane had a negative image. I always thought it was pretty badass. It was a flying tank basically. There's a reason the warthog carries its name.

[@giorgikartvelishvili4527]

They were both designed by Alexander Pirveli. First Warthog was designed by him in the middle of Cold War in 70-es.

[@joshuameader8898]

Most of the haters don't know anything about the airplane.

[@badgermcbadger1968]

@@joshuameader8898 yes

[@steriskyline4470]

anyone who things negatively about this aircraft simply hasnt done any research into it, the thing was absolutely incredible and without them, the Americans would have had far worse bomber losses.

[@fredsmith5473]

In the first stages of WWII fighters were seen as elegant, aerobatic dogfighters. In the later stages things moved towards bigger, heavier, more powerful, faster designs; FW190, Corsair, Tempest. Tactics had to change and horses for courses. The P47 was maybe a little ahead of its time. It did have something of a negative image, but I could never see why. I've always thought it's a beautiful plane.

[@Danger_mouse]

5:44 Unless I missed something during physics, the water injection evaporating doesn't 'increase pressure', it makes the air more dense which isn't the same thing. Having denser air allows you to add more fuel and have a more energetic burn. You can also raise the boost pressure before knock occurs which does increase the pressure. An exhaust driven super-charger is called a turbo charger, yes it is still strictly a super charger, but not often described that way. The name Super Charger is more commonly used for mechanically driven charge devices.

[@steriskyline4470]

You didnt miss a beat, absolutely on the money, was a pleasure to read your comment.

[@BILLYLAMB76]

@@steriskyline4470 the water/alcohol mixture evaporated into steam cooling and increasing pressure.

[@theforerunnerreclaimer]

Actually, it has a gear driven supercharger as well, I've heard vets that flew the P-47 call them "Turbo-Super chargers"

[@kaigongfu]

Water injecion incrased power for take off and emergeny power. water and alcohol, i thnk it helped cool the intake air and reduce detonaton. the R2800 was turbocharged and supercharged. an exuast system that was almost asl long as the fuselage,

[@Danger_mouse]

@@kaigongfu The water injection did indeed cool the intake charge entering the cylinder, and allows for increased boost and/or ignition timing without fear of dangerous pinging (knocking). The water injection allowed the engine to use higher boost pressure, but did not 'increase the pressure' as stated in the video. And yes, they had both an engine driven supercharger and an exhaust driven turbo charger.

[@highrzr]

The "Jug" was really just a good solid plane that could take a lot of damage and still make it back to base.

[@MrTemplerage]

The glory not the story please.

[@xx_insert_cool_username_he6876]

True

[@davegeisler7802]

It was better than "solid " try "great plane "

[@johnhess351]

More than that, but still simple. Take the biggest powerplant you have and build the fastest combat airplane around it. The high power to weight ratio allowed for the strength to be built in efficiently as a result of the scale.

[@mcrichton46]

And could put the hurt on whoever was in the gunsights. Those 8 50-cals were all business

[@Military_Archive]

As always it's been a pleasure to watch. Thank you for your amazing work! Keep it up!

[@dominickdavis7515]

@Yt-drew space vibes

[@chuck.reichert83]

The P-47 was known as "The Jug" because of its resemblance to a milk jug in shape. It was not until after the nickname was given that the resiliency of the plane became apparent.

[@rextuller3498]

milk is good

[@confectortyrannis275]

Thank you! Bud Johnson salutes you!

[@markgranger9150]

In England a semi truck is juggernaut The P47 was named after a milk jug not a truck Finally somebody has the Turn for the P47s nick name.

[@flyinggoomba5127]

Specifically, the shape of the engine cowl when viewed from the front. This is how misinformation spreads, it's not even an obscure tidbit, you can't go anywhere with out the 'Flying Milk Jug" being tossed at you when reading contemporary or near period sources.

[@cyberherbalist]

The thing about jug vs juggernaut is similar to the A10 Thunderbolt II: it's unofficial name is the Warthog because of its ungainly shape. But there's no way to get back to a more cool nickname origin, because warts and hogs can't be back-derived to something more complimentary. So sad!

[@kl0wnkiller912]

In the early/mid 1970s my father was paying for me to take flying lessons (I was 15 or 16 then). At the FBO where I was taking lessons there was a P-47 being restored in there. I actually got to walk all around it and peek into the removed inspection hatches, etc. One day my dad put me in the car and we drove out to the airport to watch it take off. They turned the engine over by hand and then after about 10 revolutions and a lot of smoke it started. I still remember feeling the engine in my chest! The guy taxied away and took off and it climbed into the clouds and away. I was told it went to the CAF in Harlingen Texas where I presume it is still there today. Ill never forget that day... amazing plane.

[@pot8552]

Stuka: i am a feared aircraft that has one of the most iconic sounds. Zero: i am the most agile and dominating plane in the pacifi- P-47: CHONK

[@phylaxinator7040]

P-51: i can literally fit in a P-47

[@rtbdmd]

You realize that the lowly F4F Wildcat basically ate zeros for lunch? From wiki: "However, the F4F's ruggedness, coupled with tactics such as the Thach Weave and High-side guns pass maneuvers using altitude advantage,[3] resulted in a claimed air combat kill-to-loss ratio of 5.9:1 in 1942 and 6.9:1 for the entire war.[4]"

[@ryangrimm9305]

@@phylaxinator7040 Spitfire pilots tried the P-47, and said the plane was so roomy and heavy that the best way to avoid German fighters was to undo the shoulder straps and run about the cockpit.

[@vineetkaddu1214]

@@ryangrimm9305 LOLz that's hilarious, thanks for the chuckle. What I'd read was that the Germans tested the cockpit and found it very roomy, the German cockpits being cramped on purpose. Never had I heard about the running around bit. That's hilarious.

[@ryangrimm9305]

@@vineetkaddu1214 There was a pilot/cartoonist, Bob Stevens, who was a WW2/Korea/Vietnam era pilot, and he did a book called "THERE I WAS, FLAT ON MY BACK.."...among others, highly amusing. He did one cartoon about two pilots in a pub, one a P-51 and the other a P-47....the P-47 pilot saying "Yeah, you can outDIVE me, but I can OUTFALL you..." talking about the planes ability to descend so quickly it felt like the floor fell out of a building.

[@briquetaverne]

The P-47 was built in East Farmingdale, New York in Republic aviation's Suffolk County facility on Long Island. Republic was a big company and even though I was born after the war, I still remember the huge amount of laborers who went to work daily at the assorted plants at and around Republic airfield right up until the late '50's.

[@Jake_Innes]

Best comment

[@stevemiller6500]

Same company that built the WARTHOG !

[@kdrapertrucker]

Also built in Evansville, indiana. A city that also built LSTs, and copious amounts of ammunition.

[@SirNobleIZH]

I live less than 30 miles away from there! I'll be sure to check it out

[@VictorRice]

Did it later become Grumman(F-14), or were they separate facilities? I grew up in Huntington and there were plenty of Grumman workers but that was in the '70s.

[@johnbeauvais3159]

Also I’d like to talk about the “Paddle” propeller, it was a Curtiss Electric prop which meant it didn’t have to rely on oil for pitch control. In certain orientations and under certain G loadings the pitch could change More importantly the new prop combined with a better gear ratio for the super and a higher turbine speed for the turbo meant the plane had effectively almost 400 more horsepower at altitude and according to P-47 pilot Robert Johnson “No plane could climb away from him”

[@michaelmancini5773]

great piece of info, would not have known that, it seems a lot of ingenuity was built into the P-47, particularly with the delivery of cool air into the pistons at altitude.

[@robertorolfo]

@@michaelmancini5773 Yes, the plane is often only known for being big and tough, but it was actually really advanced as well.

[@johnbeauvais3159]

robertorolfo For instance the flaps were designed to preserve the airfoil even if damaged by first extending rearward and then only at the end of travel tipping downward

[@killer.crayon]

Without paddle-blades 10.7m/s. Okay... F4U-4 R-2800-18W 19.67m/s, P-51D-25-NA 17.65m/s, N1K1-J Homare 21 16.76m/s, Ki-84-I Homare 23 21.7m/s, Ki-44-II Ha-34-11 20.0m/s, Fw 190 A-4..6 BMW 801 D-2 18.25m/s, Bf 109 F-2 DB 601 N 19.0m/s, La-7 ASh-82FN 17.0m/s, Spitfire 14 Griffon 61 23.0m/s... So, what is the new initial climb rate of P-47D-22-RE then?

[@johnbeauvais3159]

Walter Pratt A P-47 with cuffed prop could climb at 3,600 feet/sec at sea level. At 25 angels it could climb at 2,600 feet/sec and for comparison a 109G-14 could only do 2,300 feet/sec climb at that altitude. kzbin.info/www/bejne/i3m4noqKo6eonrc shows this all in exceptional detail starting at the 17 minute mark

[@beachboy1234]

The R-2800 Double Wasp Engine was also used on the F4U Corsair and the F6F Hellcat, both of which were fitted with two stage mechanically driven superchargers. The “Jug” was the preeminent high altitude fighter of the war. The two highest scoring aces of the ETO flew the P-47. (The top scoring Ace of the war was Richard Bong flying the P-38 in the Pacific theater). The range issue was belatedly solved with the P-47N model, which arrived too late to have any major impact on the war in Europe. The P-47 and the F4U were in my mind the two most versatile fighters of the war. Washington must’ve agreed as the US built more P-47s than any other fighter.

[@Glenn-m1t]

The Corsair has always been my favorite fighter plane!!! There's just something about the way the wings look! I still don't see how they took off and landed??

[@RockGeek00]

It could also be totally assembled out of its shipping crates with simple hand tools and manpower, which is great for front line bases which usually had limited supplies of tools and equipment.

[@joaquinandreu8530]

Indeed. There is a instructional video in KZbin showing how to do it: kzbin.info/www/bejne/hKDUnqZqds2HgKM

[@smurfatron1515]

Oh damn that is incredibly usefull in a war that’s cool

[@jimrobcoyle]

@@joaquinandreu8530 thanks!

[@rickmay1188]

When you need a hammer, all tools are a hammer... When you need a screwdriver, all tools are a hammer...

[@billnu]

Smurfatron yes it’s a good point. War was won because the machines were in use. Stuck on the drawing board or in shipping crates doesn’t help.

[@quavismtbcars]

“Fitted with an *_alcohol_* water mixture-“ *_P47-D22, Age 3: Alcoholic._*

[@erojerisiz1571]

P51: That pretty boy who gets all the ladies P47: That fat drunkard who always beats up robbers

[@mythical6957]

@@erojerisiz1571 F-82E the sexy twin boys

[@erojerisiz1571]

@@mythical6957 ah yes, those cute twins

[@sooryan_1018]

The B17 - The grumpy old uncle who actually does all the work

[@quavismtbcars]

The P40: The fast baby

[@alexradu1921]

I'm really stunned by the 3D animations/renders... the model details are insane. I would watch 1 hour full of your 3D animations... they look even better than War Thunder live gameplay.

[@dirtypure2023]

His 3D stuff looks remarkably similar to that of Mustard (YT channel about planes w/ nice animations). Maybe they collab, or just use the same program?

[@eliprenten7066]

@@dirtypure2023 It's in both cases a 3D model in a software generated sky. Not much difference you can create other than the animations and a bit of color grading.

[@larrysmith6797]

I see some video from flight sims / war games.

[@dirtypure2023]

@@eliprenten7066 I know. I'm referring to the quality of shading and textures. It has a very similar visual style in that regard to the work of Mustard. You know there's more to 3D rendering than just the model itself, right?

[@eliprenten7066]

@@dirtypure2023 I know exactly what I'm talking about because I'm the person who made these 3D animations. So to answer your question, it's probably because I'm using Octane render and maybe Mustard does too, I don't know if he does. The airplane models are bought from sites as Turbosquid. So neither of us own that visual style of the models themselves.

[@AgressorNation]

As much as I'm a big fan of the P-51 Mustang, I also absolutely love the P-47. Bulky and non sleek as it is, I find it gorgeous in its brutal and aggressive looks. I'm amazed at the advanced engineering that went into that fighter plane. We tend to look at them today and regard them as "old airplanes", but in reality they're very advanced airplanes. Maybe not as advanced as an F-16, but advanced and beautifully engineered nevertheless.

[@krebsfish5035]

"P-47 isn't good at dogfight so it's not a good plane" Air force instructor : Have you ever heard of boom and zoom?

[@chrisbaker2903]

The European leading ace flew a P-47. Read Thunderbolt by Martin Caidin.

[@razorback20]

@@chrisbaker2903 Francis Gabreski I presume?

[@hionmaiden663]

@Alvin Dudd Not even close Alan....Kill Ratios and their Aerial kills: - P47; 4.6:1 over 3,500, P51; 11:1 about 5,000, Corsair 11:1 about 2,200, and top of the tree (The Zero Killer) F6F Hellcat 19:1 with over 5,100.

[@stoobydootoo4098]

@@razorback20 I THOUGHT I'd seen old Gabby in the footage!

[@TheArklyte]

To be fair, in hands of good pilot even fucking IL-2 could dogfight. Still baffles me that that one is also lighter then P-47 though.

[@karthikavasarala7572]

just wanna say that u changed my life and got me interested in engineering thank you soo much brian

[@dominicjose3660]

For a second there I thought you were thanking your own brain.

[@w8stral]

Let us hope your engineering work is VASTLY superior to the "research" quality of this channel. I watch to observe all the lazy dumb good sounding ignorant shit he says as a reminder that just because someone calls themselves an engineer or has a document saying they are one, does not make one an engineer. If you want actual pseudo engineering on youtube watch Greg's Airplanes and Automobiles, or Millennium 7 * HistoryTech, or many other channels. This channel is almost guaranteed to be repeated Bull Shit out of a poorly researched book someone already wrote.

[@darraghobrien1028]

@@w8stral haters gonna hate

[@w8stral]

@@darraghobrien1028 lazy ignorants like yourself and the host of this channel are going to slander out of sheer arrogance and incompetence.

[@matthewhunnewell9155]

w8stral I mean, as an engineering student, I can appreciate the way he lays out this stuff in laymen’s terms for non-engineers to understand, and the historical content is always nice to listen to. the high level of technicality of even basic thermodynamics or electrical networks will elude the average person, but the way he explains this stuff makes it really easy to grasp for someone that isn’t studying to be in any of these fields.

[@lefr33man]

"If you want to get the girl fly a P-51, if you want to go home to your girl strap on a P-47."

[@w8stral]

Yup: P47, faster, more maneuverable at high altitude, and while a pig down low due to no spinner added to production, it was given this roll of ground pounding because the inline engines could not do it, and because the bomber mafia were covering their butts from their 1943 fiasco's of daylight raiding without fighter escort when everyone told them IT WOULD NOT WORK. Why this matters? P47's were designed at its inception with high altitude streamlined drop tank which would give it range past Berlin, but Bomber Mafia declared that NO USAAF $$$ would go to drop tanks as they were not needed...... So, everyone had flight manuals of P47's with drop tank ranges easily able to cover the bombers going into Germany, but the USAAF were too STUPID, ARROGANT to order them. Instead later in the war, Shitty British paper tanks were used instead with TONS Of drag and you could not FLY HIGH as they would collapse and therefore had to fly SLOW, and LOW requiring the fighters who were supposed to be escorting the bombers now requiring escorts of their own. Ah, gotta love CYA BS.

[@Luke-tm5oy]

@@w8stral what planes are you talking about that are british paper tanks? the mosquito?

[@aquablue6301]

@@Luke-tm5oy Here was referring to the British made drop tanks made of paper that were used to carry extra fuel to increase the aircrafts range.

[@w8stral]

@@Luke-tm5oy DO you know what a DROP tank is? Brits made a quick and dirty drop tank out of paper. You could not fly over 15000ft in them otherwise they would collapse due to differential pressure. Later they changed to aluminum drop tanks. Republic/Lockheed had vastly superior drop tanks tested and ready for production years before. In fact, the Brits were using some of them for their sea patrol airplanes hunting submarines.

[@Luke-tm5oy]

@@aquablue6301 thank you for the information and timely reply

[@rogerhoward7104]

This video I thoroughly enjoyed. I couldn't find fault in anything you said about the P-47. You made me realize just how good of a fighter - bomber it was. General Patton needed the P-47'S to help advance his armor. I also didn't know about all the systems of the plane, and the bomb, and 50 cal weight it carried. The best plane for combat protection, and crash landings.

[@steveb6103]

One of the top aces of the war. Crashed his P 47 while attacking a German air field at full power when his propeller hit the ground. He walked away! Gabby Gabaski.

[@thethirdman225]

@@steveb6103 That was just dumb luck.

[@kainhall]

5:40 detonation, pre-ignition, pinging, ETC...... is when the fuel air lights off before the piston reaches the TOP!!! of the stroke. not the bottom. . the problem with "pinging" is that it can shatter the piston..... melt valves....burn a hole in piston.... other bad things. its not so much the power output..... its the fact it breaks stuff..... thats why you want to avoid detonation. . like.... higher octane gas actually burns SLOWER so when the fuel air detonates / pre-ignites..... it basically explodes..... this HUGE pressure spike makes the engine LITERALLY make a "ping" noise like if someone tapped on the top of the piston with a hammer. . before the water meth injection..... they had to run less boost you can avoid detionation by reducing boost..... or taking out ignition timing (instead of 10 degrees before top dead center.... like 6 or so degrees) . im a mechanic, most people arnt..... and you explained it pretty well.... just wanted to correct that little part and add a bit of nerd stuff for anyone interested

[@Gabriel-yd4bq]

what about if they delayed the ignition further, maybe after it reached the top? Less energy would be needed to slow down the piston and proppeling it forward so... maybe it's better? correct me if I am wrong as I probably am.

[@babydriver8134]

That's where I stopped watching

[@DogwalkerTom]

@@Gabriel-yd4bq That's because the explosion of the mixture right after ignition isn't instantaneous. It takes a fraction before it builds up pressure to push the piston down. You want the piston to have passed top dead center ever so slightly before reaching maximum energy from your burning mixture. We're talking fractions of a second here of course, and the perfect ignition timing depends on a lot of factors but basically if you're igniting after the piston reached tdp, you're not getting the biggest bang out of your mixture.

[@DChrls]

Detonation and pre-ignition are two different things. Detonation is two explosions colliding with the second ignition happening after spark ignition. Pre-ignition is one explosion from heat before spark plug fires, but still only one explosion. Both create elevated cylinder pressure and happen at the wrong time in the stroke.

[@jeffgreenrgv]

So, first of detonation will destroy an engine, so an engine is tuned to avoid this in the first place, otherwise it would require water injection at all times. Cylinder pressure will also cause detonation, this is why you run higher octane rated fuels in performance engines, it doesn’t burn slower, its more stable and can deal with higher pressures before ‘self igniting’. If you cranked up your boost pressure for a short period, to escape the enemy or whatever you could avoid detonation by injecting water, this would cool the inlet charge and stabilise the fuel. It also gives you better thermal efficiency, ie, your inlet charge has to burn and expand to drive the piston down, if that inlet charge is already hot then your expansion is less, thus less force. Finally water is made from Hydrogen and Oxygen, H2O, and under combustion the Oxygen aids the burning of the fuel. Finally, this aircraft runs a turbo charger as opposed to a mechanically driven supercharger. All interesting stuff though.

[@bClaudino]

'It was nicknamed Jug, short for Juggernaut' The shape of the fuselage: *sad jug noises

[@markgranger9150]

No it's shaped like a 7 ton milk jug. In England a semi truck is called a juggernaut and their milk is in a bottle

[@bClaudino]

@@markgranger9150 umm im not sure if it the P-47 saw service in the RAF, but according to wikipedia and war thunder's loading screen tip, it was called jug beacuse it looks like a jug

[@scarecrow1323]

@@bClaudino the P47 wasn't flown by the RAF, but they were based in Britain with the American Army Air Core 353rd Fighter Group of the 8th Air Force. 👌👌

[@bClaudino]

@@scarecrow1323 but it was flown by american or british pilots? im honestly confused rn

[@kill-nine]

@@bClaudino I'd heard the same from my grandfather who was ATC and around aircraft his whole life. It was nicknamed the 'Jug' because it was mildly milk jug shaped from the side.

[@phil_nicholls]

I had the pleasure of helping an ‘old boy’ get back to flying when I was an instructor during the eighties. He had been a P47 pilot during the war, having been given his first choice of operational type. I asked him why he chose to fly the P47 over other types. His answer was simple, it had more armour-plating than all the other single engine types, and he simply wanted to have the best chance of survival! Can’t really argue with that! He got to climb over a restored P47 in Duxford one last time before he ‘slipped the surly bonds’.

[@steveperreira5850]

Great reminiscing, thank you.

[@redbluesome2829]

It’s a good thing the P-47 had all that armor and “survivability” because it spent plenty of time on the defensive getting shot at. That’s something people seem to forget. The Thunderbolt was a formidable adversary in a dogfight, but only if kept within its rather slim envelope of strategic advantage. Rolling, diving, and powering away.

[@richardvonpingel2379]

Glad he did.

[@RCAvhstape]

@@Pravlord Not.

[@thethirdman225]

*_"His answer was simple, it had more armour-plating than all the other single engine types, and he simply wanted to have the best chance of survival! Can’t really argue with that!"_* It had about the same amount of armour as a Spitfire, about 85 lbs from memory. The Hellcat had 220 lbs.

[@b.thomas8926]

My grandfather was part of the ground teams who re-armed and maintained the P-47 after the plane was flown over the Atlantic. As a country boy from East Texas, he had a particular point of view of England. I loved listening to his stories.

[@srinjoymandal458]

4:35 Shows actual horse for power.

[@dirtypure2023]

I thought everyone knew American horsepower is supplied by rolling pastures of equestrian majesty, horses galloping across bubbling streams through a spray of fresh mountain spring water.

[@arpadpinter6050]

Tbh i think that if they could fly, two thousand horses could defeat a P-47

[@prestonwood1549]

this post made my day

[@3.2Carrera]

My late neighbor was a pilot in WWII and then went on to be an engineer at Pratt and Whitney post war. Before he died I got him on my PC back in the 90's and he got a kick as it brought back memories. He flew the both the P51 and P47 and preferred the P47. He was telling me how friendly it was to fly. Just smooth, comfortable, and durable. He smiled as he was telling me this as he was reliving a moment from the past. So I believe it.

[@Ihavetruth22]

cool

[@comradefriendship]

4:34 Of course he talks about horsepower while showing footage with horses.

[@TacJam]

Lol

[@explodingevo]

how else are you gonna know what a horse looks like?

[@comradefriendship]

@@explodingevo good point, because the government could be lying to us whenever we google horse

[@jacquesblaque7728]

Then we consider the irony- power is not linked to horses; James Watt did that. Power is simply work/time, whether in watts, mouse-power, mule-power, whatever you units you wish.

[@edwarddobbins7759]

I remember reading a book from Martin Cadin about the P-47 where he recalled a story from a Thunderbolt pilot where one of his classmates at flight school described how when he landed his wing clipped a telephone pole he succeeded in landing and he ended up with a 3foot chunk of pole in his leading edge.

[@thethirdman225]

Probably another Martin Caidin tall story.

[@sdslofi1107]

The 35% of people: "tHe P 47 iSnT gOoD" The P47 that hit the ground and still flew back to base: "wot"

[@FrogOnAHorse]

I can guarantee you the 35% are people who have played warthunder and have the oh so fun experience of being skullfucked by Bf 109's

[@Demonslayer20111]

Nobody said it wasn't good. It was. It wasn't the best though. The best plane isn't really the right question. It was good for boom and zoom fighting, and for ground pounding. The p51 was an arguably better dogfighter and escort. And that not even taking into account other nations fighter aircraft.

[@sdslofi1107]

@@Demonslayer20111 its a joke . . . . .

[@sdslofi1107]

@@FrogOnAHorse i was in a P 47 when i saw five different P-47s get shredded in a match once. . . . A Bf 109 and a Fw 190 made short work of them. I killed them both before getting jumped by the P-47s of the Germans.

[@Mikestriken]

@@Demonslayer20111 Liking cos I didn't even vote on that ballot but I probably would have been the one to click "No" because I didn't read the fine print as being "one" of the best I definitely think it's ONE of the best planes but I will never say it's the best and my best wouldn't even necessarily be due to stats, just cos I like it lol

[@Gigas0101]

Thicc, thirsty, and gets you home in any condition.

[@PiotrBarcz]

Just like the B-17 and Wellington, they can take a licking and keep on ticking.

[@Fred_the_1996]

Just like the IL-2, it was like a flying tank

[@PiotrBarcz]

@@Fred_the_1996 yup

[@Daxored]

@@PiotrBarcz Wellington? the welly was a coffin for every crew

[@PiotrBarcz]

@@Daxored It was considered to have the strongest airframe of any bomber in the war! it's warthunder that messed up their flight model!

[@maxypoo4652]

You should make a series where you analyse every ww2 aircraft, would love to see that

[@jadger1871]

If you want that you should check out "Greg's airplane and automobile" channel then. His videos are far more in depth and accurate. He doesn't just skim over his points in clickbait videos like this.

[@thecrazyfarmboy]

@@jadger1871 thank god I was starting to think I'm the only one here who feels that way. I subscribe to real engineering but I'm baffled by the mistakes in this one

[@viruspter1dactl]

@@jadger1871 -___-

[@maxypoo4652]

jadger1871 sure thing, I’ll give his channel a visit

[@thecrazyfarmboy]

@@viruspter1dactl nah fr dude. Gregs videos deserve the views way more than this does.

[@nathanryweck3137]

One thing not really mentioned much is how fast the P-47 actually was, later models with increased power from the better turbocharger could reach 500 mph in level flight making it the fastest single engine propeller plane of the war to see combat.

[@92suzukigsx1100g]

Wrong

[@92suzukigsx1100g]

Where are you getting this information.

[@nathanryweck3137]

@@92suzukigsx1100g look up the XP-47J…more powerful engine, more streamlined cowling and yes it was a late war experimental version, but it did go that fast.

[@92suzukigsx1100g]

@@nathanryweck3137 ??? You said later models with increased power could reach 500mph in level flight and they seen combat. They only made 1 of the J series. And it never seen combat and the 500mph was never documented. They were able to document 480 or 490 something mph.

[@danraymond1253]

@@92suzukigsx1100g you are right. Except that 500 mph was never documented part. In August of 1944 both the test pilot alstated and official Republic records show an air speed of 505 mph in level flight at 34,500 feet. This was the first piston to break 500 mph in level flight. It only did this once, however. The army tested it later and only got something like 484 mph, though I don't think they were able to run it at full power because the engine started making metal.

[@johnshoosmith]

The time and detail you put into this pays off. This is probably the best produced youtube vid I've ever seen, and I mean that! Great graphics, well written narrative

[@theglobalwarming6081]

"This gave short bursts of additional horsepower" *shows horses with the planes flying above them* Editing 100, Effort 100

[@cyberherbalist]

Yeah, that tickled me, too!

[@davef.2811]

Almost worthy of a "Scotty Kilmer" video, eh?

[@thecrazyfarmboy]

Explanation of how water methanol injection increases power, hard 0

[@PJS50]

@@thecrazyfarmboy agreed... Not only cooling of the air charge, but the injected methanol also increased the octane number of the incoming fuel, allowing an accompanying extra boost from the supercharger to be applied and resultant higher compression in the cylinders to not cause detonation in the cylinders. That's why the temporary methanol boost also decreased fuel economy...

[@thecrazyfarmboy]

@@PJS50 exactly.. he almost had it but then he missed the most important point of all- the simple fact that it allows the engine to handle higher manifold pressure

[@mymomsaysimcool9650]

My grandfather was a p47 ground chief in the 8th Air Corps. He told me that on the second day after DDay, he had landed at Omaha and was building the airfield within hours. He said they were receiving P47 within days, but he did say that was the most exhausting thing he ever did so time probably had no meaning to him. RIP PeeWee.

[@johnrogers9481]

Ah, your cherished Grandfather!

[@michaelengle9062]

my dad was a chief with the 373rd FS. he was on that beach too getting ready for the P-47s. Many years later, my brother took us to Omaha Beach. I remember dad saying that "a lot of this sand was still red when we got here" . The things that these men saw....

[@kughn2]

My Uncle flew a P47 in WW2. He passed away today and would have been 102 in October. R.I.P. Thanks for a great video!

[@alexvolute7454]

"Jug" was not short for "juggernaut". It was given that nickname because of the shape of the plane. It wasn't a compliment

[@Hagen823]

Juggernaut was the RAF nickname.

[@MrEkshin]

@@Hagen823 Please cite any reference. Not being snarky here. I seriously have never heard this, and would like to read where this came from, and not something recent. I will admit that I'm dubious of it though.

[@shermansquires3979]

it's not true, although should be. incidentally there is almost no evidemce that, the 'jug' was an actual term used at the time, more so after ww2.

[@henrychubbs2823]

It was called the jug because it looked like a milk jug laid on it's side. Take a look at the old one quart glass milk bottles.

[@shermansquires3979]

@@henrychubbs2823 yes exactly! And anyways, it wasn’t called that during world war 2 either. I have only seen one contemporary reference to a ‘jug’ . Normally it was referred to as a p47, thunderbolt.

[@0g0mogosepikworld31]

“People who learn history from video games will bash p47 for its disadvantage in dogfights” Ahem, boom and zoom

[@sfantugraal6717]

0g0mogos EPİK World Tell that to the us pilots in war thunder which can t do anything else then dogfighting

[@IanNuke]

@@sfantugraal6717 I think that its pretty good in war thunder you just need to climb after spawn to about 10K feet and pick off low flying bombers or climb more to kill more bombers or dive on heavy fighters and attack aircraft

[@zhurs-mom]

@@IanNuke u use impirial in wt?

[@NewerSing]

well, I fly all of its modifications in WT and they are rugged. When I go out in a squad of 4 with my buddies - we wreck the enemy team, no matter if its american P-47, Soviet lend-lease P-47 or german captured P-47, it fights just as well against all planes, even itself.

[@banditmc12]

@@zhurs-mom lmao I saw the the 10k feet and thought, jesus, thats out in space, what bombers are there. fuck Imperial

[@jordanfancy3609]

Wouldn’t it be called a “turbocharger” due to the fact that it’s powers by the exhaust

[@gheetza14]

Yes

[@DChrls]

Back then they used the name interchangeably. I've even heard older gentlemen call them turbo-superchargers.

[@breadloafbrad]

That’s what I was thinking, glad someone else noticed that

[@jimgoff1170]

Yes it’s generally called a turbocharger these days, and the engine also has a gear driven supercharger and an inter cooler to cool the compressed air coming out of the turbo charger. The short range story is a bit of myth, they could and did carry drop tanks to give them the range needed.

[@korvtm]

Jordan Fancy, a mechanical engineer once told that it would properly be called a turbosupercharger,because the device does the same thing as a mechanically driven supercharger. Also I have worked on ground vehicles that had both a turbo ,and a supercharger.engine was a Detriot Diesel 8v71,which means of course that it had a Roots scroll type supercharger,but this unit was also fitted with a turbo,needed because of the design of the air intake system.

[@deanmurphy7307]

I remember watching dogfights on the discovery channel and one of the episodes was about the Thunderbolt. I can’t remember the pilot but ill never forget what happened to him. The plane caught fire, flames in the cabin. His canopy broke (it also jammed) so there was glass in his face. And in the shock of it all the plane went into a flat spin. The pilot recovered from the spin, the fire went out. He couldn’t see due to the blood and glass in his face. A FW190 caught him and emptied its guns into the damaged thunderbolt but he didn’t down it. He was shocked to see the thunderbolt was still flying and the pilot was still alive. Its been my favourite plane ever since.

[@leeham6230]

The FW pilot shot .30 cal ammunition into the plane, which was notoriously underpowered. He also shot into it at the worst angle possible (straight into the rear of the plane). If it was hit accurately with a single burst of German 20mm rounds, it would burst into flames, just like all the bombers that were shot down.

[@robertlewis1965]

I believe that the pilot was ROBERT S. JOHNSON .

[@wrathofatlantis2316]

That P-47 was put back into service, lost in July 44. He exaggerated the damage...

[@thethirdman225]

Discovery Channel... tells me everything about that story.

[@royaltaiga9409]

“Unusually THICC” had to rewind for that 10/10

[@imsomeoneyouknow]

I know, me too!! 😂

[@100forks]

Planes have come home with cylinders blown off the engine. I dare to say that those pilots thanked God they were flying the 47.

[@nathanhobson1142]

With about 2 tonne of metal in front of the pilot, they were (relatively) well protected.

[@samuellatta6774]

@@nathanhobson1142 the engine had two rows, meaning that if a round hit the first row, it would either have bounced or flipped or started spinning around and either hit the second row or failed to penetrate the armor plate between the pilot and the engine... Of course the pilot could still get hit, but it was less likely thanks to this

[@jamesharrison6201]

Try that in a 51or spit

[@dieselyeti]

That's exactly what happened to my old boss in 1944. A flak round hit his Jug blowing off 2 cylinders but the big Pratt kept running and got him home.

[@thabasder]

As a Hitman fan, I initially thought you were talking about Agent 47

[@Kirktalon]

A design becomes more beautiful once you know why it was designed that way. :)

[@justanunluckyirishmaninabl5178]

As someone who just took thermodynamics I concur with this statement.

[@bobsakamanos4469]

Conversely, once you read the design specs for it's operational requirement, you can see how it fell short of the mark.

[@michaelengle9062]

my dad was a crew chief with a P-47 unit (the 412th) during WWII. spent a lot of time under terrible conditions keeping them flying

[@bobsakamanos4469]

Not to take anything away from your pops, but the field conditions and supply chain in the ETO were far better than in North Africa or CBI or PTO.

[@davidblair9877]

Europeans: “Let’s build an airplane and design an engine for it.” America: “Let’s build an engine and design an airplane for it.”

[@shocktrooper8443]

Very cool comparison bro!

[@veritas41photo]

I think this statement is wrong on its face. The P-51 was designed by America with an American engine. But the P-51 did not reach its true zenith until the Rolls-Royce Merlin (yes, British-made) engine made it truly excellent.

[@dcorman]

@@veritas41photo You must be a blast at parties. ;)

[@dcorman]

And then 30 years later: Let's build a gun and then design an airplane for it. We can call it the Thunderbolt II

[@dcorman]

But, yeah, it still has legs because: We designed an airplane and the Europeans designed an engine for it.

[@SephirothRyu]

Meanwhile, the design philosophy of the Twin Mustang: "We heard you like Mustangs, so we added a Mustang to your Mustang!"

[@TheSaturnV]

LOL!

[@justanotherasian4395]

Slap some more .50 cals on there to. Just for fun.

[@thysonsacclaim]

@Jon Boy - The Twin Mustang actually was Two Mustangs put together. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_F-82_Twin_Mustang

[@jballew2239]

And we ditched the Merlins for Allisons.

[@iszox2973]

Hey pilot. Are you exausted flying a plane for 5 hours strait? Get your Buddy and fly your plane together.

[@make1up726]

"We flew together in formation, and then I decided to see just what this airplane had to its credit. I opened the throttle full and the Thunderbolt forged ahead. A moment later exhaust smoke poured from the Spit as the pilot came after me. He couldn't make it; the big Jug had a definite speed advantage. I grinned happily; I'd heard so much about this airplane that I really wanted to show off the Thunderbolt to her pilot. The Jug kept pulling away from the Spitfire; suddenly I hauled back on the stick and lifted the nose. The Thunderbolt zoomed upward, soaring into the cloud-flecked sky. I looked out and back; the Spit was straining to match me, and barely able to hold his position. But my advantage was only the zoom-once in steady climb, he had me. I gaped as smoke poured from the exhausts and the Spitfire shot past me as if I were standing still. Could that plane climb! He tore upward in a climb I couldn't match in the Jug. Now it was his turn; the broad elliptical wings rolled, swung around, and the Spit screamed in, hell-bent on chewing me up. This was going to be fun. I knew he could turn inside the heavy Thunderbolt; if I attempted to hold a tight turn the Spitfire would slip right inside me. I knew, also, that he could easily outclimb my fighter. I stayed out of those sucker traps. First rule in this kind of a fight: don't fight the way your opponent fights best. No sharp turns; don't climb; keep him at your own level. We were at 5,000 feet, the Spitfire skidding around hard and coming in on my tail. No use turning; he'd whip right inside me as if I were a truck loaded with cement, and snap out in firing position. Well, I had a few tricks, too. The P-47 was faster, and I threw the ship into a roll. Right here I had him. The Jug could outroll any plane in the air, bar none. With my speed, roll was my only advantage, and I made full use of the manner in which the Thunderbolt could whirl. I kicked the Jug into a wicked left roll, horizon spinning crazily, once, twice, into a third. As he turned to the left to follow, I tramped down on the right rudder, banged the stick over to the right. Around and around we went, left, right, left, right. I could whip through better than two rolls before the Spitfire even completed his first. And this killed his ability to turn inside me. I just refused to turn. Every time he tried to follow me in a roll, I flashed away to the opposite side, opening the gap between our two planes. Then I played the trump. The Spitfire was clawing wildly through the air, trying to follow me in a roll, when I dropped the nose. The Thunderbolt howled and ran for earth. Barely had the Spitfire started to follow-and I was a long way ahead of him by now-when I jerked back on the stick and threw the Jug into a zoom climb. In a straight or turning climb, the British ship had the advantage. But coming out of a dive, there's not a British or a German fighter that can come close to a Thunderbolt rushing upward in a zoom. Before the Spit pilot knew what had happened, I was high above him, the Thunderbolt hammering around. And that was it-for in the next few moments the Spitfire flier was amazed to see a less maneuverable, slower-climbing Thunderbolt rushing straight at him, eight guns pointed ominously at his cockpit." - Robert S. Johnston

[@bryonmorgan5208]

I've read that account before, and I will point out that this particular practice dogfight was before the larger paddle blades were fitted to the airplane. He did it again later with one of those props and was easily able to maintain the faster climb rate.

[@steveperreira5850]

Thanks for that narrative from Robert S Johnson. He really knew how to fly that thunderbolt. I’m so sick of hearing people talk about how rapidly a Spitfire turns, etc. you win the war with tough planes And smart tactics.

[@brianoneil9662]

I read a biography of Robert Johnson as a young boy and have been a Jug admirer ever since.

[@louism6306]

Steve Perreira no, you don’t win a war with fighter planes at all. The p47 and spitfire were completely different types of aircraft. The spitfire was designed as an interceptor dogfighter, whereas the p47 was a long range fighter. It’s not a fair comparison.

[@georgehare2915]

spits hurri ca ns pilots flew rings round that jug in real fighter combat even the ZERO outclassed it

[@arturpereira5428]

The Brazilian air force also named FAB used the P47 throughout their campaing in Italy from late 1944 to the end of the war as a fighter bomber, all the brazilian pilots described the p47 as a sturdy and yet smooth plane to fly and its capability of carrying lots of extra weapons such as rockets and 1000Lb bombs made the plane a force to be recognized and feared. Im really proud of those old men.

[@anthonyross9276]

The jug was one of the best looking,toughest,fastest,hardest hitting,and reliable fighters to ever serve in ww2.

[@deplorable_bitter_clinger7482]

The Mustang was a great plane but it gets too much attention because it was sexy and got lots of press coverage during the war. The P-47 wasn't the best pure dogfighter, wasn't the best escort fighter, wasn't the best low level fighter but it did ALL of those things well and was the best fighter-bomber. It also excelled at high altitudes. Most planes are considered successful if they can do two different types of missions well. No other single engine fighter plane was so good at so many different kinds of missions as the P-47, and in it's final version, the P-47N, it had a longer range than the P-51D.

[@bullseye_2147]

He prefers to be called handsome

[@anthonyross9276]

Not only that werent the "M" variants the fastest single piston engine fighter of the war?

[@deplorable_bitter_clinger7482]

@@anthonyross9276 - Yes. 473 mph. But some pilots/crew chiefs said that with the advice of Republic engineers who were at the base that they were able to boost the 2,800 hp engines up to 3,000 and get the speed up to 480 mph. No P-47M was lost in air to air combat. The last aircraft shot down by a P-47M was an Me-262 jet.

[@thomasodetinape4180]

Jabo😎

[@mikebelanger4165]

My friend's dad flew them! He was with the 56th FG, 61st FS - "Zemke's Wolfpack", Major James Carter (he was also squadron commander for a short time). He flew "HV-C" most of the time and sometimes "HV-A". In fact, a good part of the gun camera footage you see these days came either from his plane or from one of the other 61st FS planes. The F-16 squadron at Luke, AFB, AZ was named in honor of this squadron.

[@jzyyz]

"Turn n' burn" dogfighting was obsolete by early/mid war when air forces discovered roll rate, energy and team tactics were the real meta for air superiority.

[@martijn9568]

Gotta love how the Imperial Japanese Naval Air Service (IJNAF) already knew this and are most remembered for turn fighting everybody.

[@mxguy2438]

Truth

[@killer.crayon]

Nope. It's nice when you hunt for enemy planes as planes (which Jug does badly), and ultimately bad when trying to get army's job done. When attackers are being on the way or working, you just cannot "run!" You must provide point-defence there, over enemy lands. That's why La-5/Yak-9 and many more of a kind, like Spitfire, Bf 109, Ki-61 are way much better for army. The only solution here was to make P-47 an attacker itself, and it's not about fighters already. Bomber interceptor? Probably. Fighter-bomber? Yes. Air-support? Not quite. Escort? Lesser evil. Superiority? You're joking.

[@w8stral]

@@killer.crayon ? P47 was designed at the outset as an air superiority high altitude fighter. IT dominated every aircraft over 20,000ft. Was faster, more maneuverable, than every aircraft in the sky over 25,000ft. Yes, faster than Mustang, Spitfire and more maneuverable than both. 25,000ft is where USA bombers flew... Was is pathetic is that the P51 was given the roll instead of the P47 because the bomber mafia had egg on its face from 1943 and had to cover their asses after those disasters.

[@JoJo-vm8vk]

w8stral : No, the P-51 got the escort mission because thanks to much lower drag the Mustang has better range. The P-47 was too big and too thirsty...

[@davidbeattie4294]

I really appreciated the graphic presentation of the P-47's internal layout. You clearly show how the huge fuselage is actually the minimum required to house the complex internal structures. Excellent discussion of how fundamental design choices drove the planes strengths and weaknesses. I simply can't image being on the receiving end of an angry P-47. Eights 50's is simply devestating to pretty much everything, ignoring the rockets and bombs it delivered as well. Great video.

[@thethirdman225]

It had too many guns. According to Richard Turner, in his book, _'Big Friend, Little Friend',_ six .50 cals were enough to shred any German fighter. The extra weight and complexity of eight guns made it too heavy and too complicated for no advantage. It didn't make the pilot a better shot but it did make the aircraft considerably heavier..

[@davidbeattie4294]

@@thethirdman225 Your point is well taken. I wonder if there are any trials of 6 vs 8 gun Thunderbolts. I still like the devastating impact of 8 x 50 cal in the ground attack role.

[@thethirdman225]

@@davidbeattie4294 *_"I wonder if there are any trials of 6 vs 8 gun Thunderbolts."_* There almost certainly were because the original P-47 had six guns, not eight. The trouble was that the designers took their eyes off the ball. They added guns instead of internal fuel capacity. Pilots didn't need extra guns to shoot down enemy fighters but the USAAF _did_ need a fighter with sufficient internal fuel to go deep into Germany with the bombers and the P-47 didn't have it.

[@GabrielKish]

My Mom loved working in the old Thuñderbolts when they were built in Detroit.

[@isaiahcampbell488]

That's actually pretty cool!

[@laurencethornblade1195]

You sure they were built in Detroit?

[@vipervenom741]

El Thuñderbolt 😂

[@georgiobenelli4854]

My mother worked there also. We lived in Livonia, was semi country back then

[@GabrielKish]

@@georgiobenelli4854 Too funny. That's where we moved after growing up in Detroit.

[@falxonPSN]

Shots of horses at the exact moment of discussing horsepower? KZbin PROFESSIONAL.

[@Dowlphin]

Could also have measured it in kilowatts while showing a German shore. (Probably won't get that unless you're German.)

[@gotbread2]

@@Dowlphin I see what you did there

[@johnjones4825]

More like cheesy and opportunistic.

[@xenofoxx]

Was thinking the same thing.

[@rayceeya8659]

Ahh man the Jug. The most indestructible plane of the war. America's flying tank. She was a real beast.

[@michalsimanek6988]

I agree, but the IL-2 might like to have a word with you :)

[@rayceeya8659]

@@michalsimanek6988 LOL I mentioned the IL-2 in my second post. That turbocharger made all the difference in the world. Head to head the P-47 could out climb an IL-2 in in a heartbeat.

[@nazamroth8427]

@@rayceeya8659 What is everyone talking about? My WarThunder pilot record clearly shows that the IL-2 was an air superiority fighter, eclipsed only by the mighty Ju-87D

[@rayceeya8659]

@@nazamroth8427 LMAO oh man good one! That's like a joke that belongs on Squire's channel.

[@erojerisiz1571]

@@rayceeya8659 To be fair the p47 was a fighter-bomber while the il2 was purely for cas only

[@mikeyskitchenfoodporn1171]

Flying tank! May not have been the fastest (at low altitude) may not have been the most sleek... Had the highest kill ratio in world War II fire power, maybe not unmatched but it's armament and protection of the pilot as well as its visibility for such a larger aircraft gave it a distinctive edge. It was the first aircraft to escort bombers and while it didn't have the range the p51 mustang had luftwaffe pilots new to stay away from it until it ran out of gas and turned back

[@thethirdman225]

*_"Had the highest kill ratio in world War II fire power, maybe not unmatched but it's armament and protection of the pilot as well as its visibility for such a larger aircraft gave it a distinctive edge."_* The P-51 shot down 60% more German aircraft in half the number of missions. Ergo, its kill ratio was much higher than the P-47.

[@TheAirplaneDriver]

Absolutely excellent video! The Jug was an outstanding fighter-bomber by any measure. I completely agree with your very professional assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of this astonishing aircraft. Wish I could fly one!

[@dell899]

it feels weird that he did not start with: "this episode of real engineering is brought to you by ..."

[@MarloSoBalJr]

I think he was taking this episode personal according to the questionaire he held with viewers about the P47

[@dell899]

@@MarloSoBalJr oh thank you

[@Nakul_degen]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/eIfcqo2mqqiBq8U

[@nightshade7745]

Raid: Shadow Legends

[@007kuntasod]

A10: "Hey Grandpa, can you tell me the story on how you destroyed German tanks again?" P47: "sure grandson"

[@hshs5756]

My favorite-ever WWII documentary (and I've been watching them for 65 years) is Quentin Aanenson's _A Fighter Pilot's Story_ about his experience as a P-47 driver. Unfortunately I have never been able to find a copy for sale, and I just checked eBay and Amazon (again). So if you missed it when it was originally aired on PBS in the 90's you may never get another chance.

[@dirtypure2023]

@@hshs5756 I checked KZbin and only found clips :/ Would love to see it

[@killer.crayon]

Ricochetted .50 from ground right into tanks' belly!!! >:-D

[@hshs5756]

@@dirtypure2023 The whole film is three hours long, every minute of it good. The scene that has stuck in my mind more than any other is when he and his wingman are strafing German airfields when his buddy gets hit. Skimming the treetops, losing power, and knowing that in a few seconds he's going to hit the trees and turn into a fireball, the wingman turns to Quentin, who has flown up alongside, to wave goodbye. Quentin says, "I've seen his face every day for fifty years."

[@dirtypure2023]

@@hshs5756 That's heavy.

[@goneflying140]

Thank you for a very informative video about the Jug. It sure was a rugged, capable aircraft. I knew it was a formidable ground attack aircraft, but I never knew the numbers it racked up in ground target kills.. That is amazing!! Thank you to all who served as well. You will never be forgotten. Well, at least not by me...

[@mixnmatchflavourbleach2313]

When a plane shines brighter than the rest: *UNUSUALLY THICC*

[@thef-35lockheedmartinlight11]

🤣

[@maxmustermann2197]

I don't get it

[@siechamontillado]

Man, just want to give that plane a pat on its rudder, just watch that frame shimmy for a sec....

[@thef-35lockheedmartinlight11]

Nakul Salat stop self promoting little kid

[@Nakul_degen]

@@thef-35lockheedmartinlight11 stop complaining little kid

[@WTH1812]

Unsung heroes of WWII: everyone who designed, developed, built, maintained, prepped, armed and flew the P-47. It was a prime bomber escort before the P-51 matured, and a totally devastating beast in air and ground attack. Truly one of the most under appreciated planes of WWII by those who don't study history. (And so was the Mosquito)

[@augustuslunasol10thapostle]

The later models also where very fast the fastest single engine plane in the war if I am correct

[@justmerc1642]

Real Engineering: "the Me 109" You have provoked a gang war.

[@crispay8304]

Lol

[@ssd21345]

honey you've got a big storm coming

[@thomaskreisz8477]

Bf 109 smh

[@viruspter1dactl]

I would like but its at 69

[@gingerlyglasses444]

I mean hes not technically wrong since it was designed by messerschmitt

[@davegeisler7802]

Love the whistling sound of the big GE Turbo when she flys by , badass ! 🤩🏁

[@dmacpher]

Neat - isn’t this a “turbo-supercharger” or in modern parlance just a turbo? *edit poor Brandon fighting the good fight here below RIP

[@Sheridantank]

Turbine supercharger = turbo charger I wouldnt call it a turbo supercharger though, sounds off. Edited for the idiots who cant understand what I'm saying and feel the need to "correct" me. I'm saying turbo supercharger is an awkward pairing of words to me. It doesnt SOUND right. By no means am I saying the term is Incorrect.

[@dmacpher]

Brandon it’s a specific term during this era www.flight-mechanic.com/turbosuperchargers/

[@Sheridantank]

@@dmacpher Still sounds wrong to me. Turbine sounds more technical.

[@dmacpher]

Brandon present the evidence, “still sounds wrong” - alrighty then.

[@Sheridantank]

@@dmacpher Jesus christ kids shouldnt be on the internet. It SOUNDS wrong. It's not pleasing to the ears to hear, or to the eyes to read. It's an awkward combination of words.

[@danatcanyonlake583]

Had the pleasure in 1980 to work with a fellow who flew P-47's in WWII. When he told me he flew home with several cylinders shot off I was knocked over. Wish I had spoken more with him. He retired shortly after I started.

[@thethirdman225]

I think most P-47 pilots claimed that. It was really a matter of range. The fact was that a P-47 suffering critical damage over Antwerp had a better chance of getting home than a similarly damaged P-51 over Cottbus.

[@danatcanyonlake583]

@@thethirdman225Aircooled vs watercooled.

[@thethirdman225]

@@danatcanyonlake583 Statistically, that doesn’t seem to have made very much difference, if any. If you look at the casualty rates for both types, the P-47 was 0.73 and the P-51 was 1.18. Score one for the P-47. But if you look deeper, there are other considerations that need to be taken into account. First of all, the P-51 spent a higher percentage of its time in hostile airspace than the P-47 because it did most of the long range escort work. So if you consider the example I suggested earlier, you can see why survivor bias needs to be taken into account. The time and distance you are from your home base has a very significant impact on your chances of getting back. That’s called survivor bias. Secondly, the P-51 was used later in the war, when there were much higher concentrations of Flak in target areas. This was less the case in the areas where the P-47 was working, like Northern France, Belgium or Holland. The P-51, however, was over Germany. Any late war memoir you care to read will make mention of how dense the Flak was over Germany in that period. If you read those memoirs, you rarely find any mention of any concerns about a stray bullet in the cooling system during ground attack missions. They were much more concerned with crashing into the target or being blasted out of the sky by a 40mm. So the point is that the statistics are largely inconclusive on survivability anyway. They don’t take into account a hit in the cooling system - just whether or not an aircraft was destroyed. Some stats on ground attack losses differentiate between enemy aircraft, ground fire and accidental crash. I have more on this if you’re curious.

[@thethirdman225]

@@danatcanyonlake583 KZbin is deleting my comments. I wrote a detailed reply to this but it has disappeared. I’ll try again. The question of water cooling seems to have minimal impact on survivability rates. The P-47 had a rate of 0.73, compared to the P-51 at 1.18. Superficially, that’s a win for the P-47. These statistics don’t actually reveal the nuance of the story. As I illustrated earlier, the P-51, because it did so much of the long range work, spent a lot more of its time over hostile territory than did the P-47. Time and distance are critical considerations when looking at casualties. This was the point I was showing: Antwerp was a lot closer to home than Cottbus. This is known as survivor bias and formed a major part of USAAF investigations, both during the war and in the post war period. The second thing the stats don’t show is the fact that the P-51 operated in areas of higher Flak concentrations than the P-47. Northern France, Belgium and Holland were less heavily defended than Germany in the post D-Day period. Read any late war pilot memoir and they all talk about the amount of Flak they faced. Finally, the statistics don’t differentiate between hits in the cooling system and hits anywhere else. Some stats on ground attack losses account for things like enemy aircraft in the area, Flak and flight into terrain. The pilots themselves say in this their memoirs too. They were more concerned with crashing into the target due to loss of situational awareness, or being blasted to bits by a 37 mm, than a stray bullet in the cooling system. That doesn’t rate a mention. So the stats on air-cooled versus liquid-cooled don’t really exist and what does exist is inconclusive. They certainly don’t give any reason to be concerned about liquid cooling.

[@thethirdman225]

@@danatcanyonlake583 KZbin is deleting my comments. I'll try again. The stats on this are inconclusive. On the surface the casualty rates were 0.73 for the P-47 and 1.18 for the P-51. Superficially that looks like an easy win for the P-47 but there's rather more to it. The P-51 did most of the long range work so it spent more time in enemy airspace than the P-47. Time and distance are a huge influence on whether or not an aircraft could make it home. That's to say nothing of a wounded pilot. The example I gave above is survivor bias. Secondly, the P-51, because it fought later in the war, encountered heavier Flak than the P-47. While the P-47 was doing sterling support work in Northern France, Belgium and Holland, the P-51 was attacking airfields and trains in Germany. As the German territory constricted, the Flak guns retreated too. If you read any memoirs from late in the war, you will know how heavy the Flak was. So, while the P-47 had a great reputation for toughness, it was still made out of basically the same gauge of duralumin that any other fighter was made from. The point, of course, is that the P-47 had a better chance of getting back from somewhere near the Channel or North Sea coast than a P-51 would have from deep in Germany. There are plenty of other stats - which I can provide if you like - but they don't prove anything one way or the other. The stats don't say whether the P-51s were lost flew into the ground because of pilot disorientation, were shot down by enemy aircraft or blown to bits by a battery of 40mm. In any case, whether or not the aircraft was air-cooled or liquid cooled doesn't seem to have any bearing on the loss rates..

[@chocolatte6157]

I love this plane. When I was in elementary school, 50 years ago, I was looking at an encyclopedia with pictures of WWII aircraft. There was something about the P-47 that just appealed to me on looks alone. I debated my older brother on fighter planes (he was a BF 109 fan) and stood by the Thunderbolt. I still love that plane.

[@stanlogan7504]

Me too same time same conclusion by the time I was 10 years old

[@rooster4382]

The Thunderbolt makes a 109 look like a toothpick

[@skny2282]

I’ve heard the extremely loud low pass sound from P-47’s P&W 18-cylinder at air show. The horse at 4:37 seemed so joyful with it.

[@DonMeaker]

Eric Hartmann, the German ace of aces, said "The P-47 can take numerous 20mm hits. I can attest to that. It is a 20mm sponge."

[@DonMeaker]

@Hoa Tattis You will have to argue with him about that. He is officially credited with 7 kills of American planes, 345 Soviet planes.

[@DonMeaker]

@Hoa Tattis Which is why he claimed that the P-47 was a 20mm sponge. It would take a licking and keep on ticking.

[@DonMeaker]

@Hoa Tattis You would have to ask him. It probably stuck out in his mind as the plane he was unable to shoot down. He also didn't like the Sturmovik, (IL-2) as you could only take it down by shooting out the oil cooler. Other than that it was well armored.

[@DonMeaker]

@Hoa Tattis He said different. Your argument is with him.

[@DonMeaker]

@@josephh6697 Read it in a book on the P-47, one of the Squadron/Signal books.

[@Moose6340]

The P-47 is that interesting rarity of a creation that was built for one role (interceptor) and ended up succeeding at a completely different role (low-altitude ground attack).

[@thethirdman225]

It was never an interceptor and could not have fulfilled that role.

[@mbabist01]

My dad once had lunch with a man who flew a P-47. Dad asked him if the P-47 was better than the Bf-109. "Oh, I don't know. It was a 109 which shot me down!"

[@alexanderdority9186]

That is not true because on record from the us military not a single p-47 was shot down and I noticed the 20 me 262 were shot down by p-47 models now I’m am not being an ass but that’s what I know

[@mbabist01]

@@alexanderdority9186 The man was THERE, little boy. YOU weren't!

[@Pouzdraken]

@@alexanderdority9186 kinda bs to assume no p47 was shot down

[@DChrls]

@@alexanderdority9186 My godfather flew a P-47 in WWII and spent 2 yrs. in a German POW camp. He didn't go there to vacation in the German countryside.

[@CUBuffnSD]

F4U kill to loss ratio…. The jug was a great all around plane, a class by itself.

[@TehButterflyEffect]

A lot of F4Us were lost because they were very difficult to land. They were very good fighter aircraft and flew really well. Just ridiculously hard to land on a carrier because of how far back the pilot sat.

[@thethirdman225]

*_"The jug was a great all around plane, a class by itself."_* Errr... not really. The best measure of the aircraft's worth was what its opponents thought of it. There are two aircraft the Germans mention in their reports: the de Havilland Mosquito and the P-51 Mustang. The P-47 and the P-38 (iconic aircraft which have now acquired a cult status) don't rate a mention. Neither does the Spitfire. The German's knew their goose was cooked when the Mustang started to appear. In the words of fighter pilot Werner Schroer, they had nothing of that quality to match it. Adolf Galland talks of the P-51 in terms of it simply making interception impossible because of its quality and its numbers. And it's widely known that the Germans hated the Mosquito because it was an aircraft they could do very little about. It was almost impossible to stop. Finally, when the German pilots started to receive their Fw-190Ds, they talked in terms of it being able to match the Mustang, so it was the P-51 that was uppermost in their minds, rather than the P-47. As for the Mosquito, imitation is the greatest form of flattery and this was the one aircraft they actually tried to copy.

[@apersondoingthings5689]

The F4U doesn’t even have the highest kill loss ratio, the hellcat does, with 19:1 compared to the 11:1 of the F4U. The Corsair ran out of planes to kill hence why it’s lower

[@drivewaystar6485]

Those 3D renders are f'cking phenomenal.

[@k20nutz]

Agreed

[@phoenix55755]

It was said by several pilots in the USAAF, "If you want to send a picture home to your girl, stand in front of a P51. If you want to be sure to go home to her, fly a P47."

[@PiotrBarcz]

Ooh, another good WWII saying!

[@mEmEzMaN...]

Depending on pilots skills

[@stevenschwartz1209]

I always liked the P47 and considered it my favorite of WW2. This video confirmed my feelings about the plane, it’s firepower, it’s durability and it’s maneuverability.

[@Pwj579]

The P-47 was the USAAF's Corsair. Both had the mammoth R-2800 and were big and brutish. Both were also AWESOME fighter-bombers used to punish enemy ground installations, vehicles and personnel.

[@rayzorrayzor9000]

I love what you said about Dogfighting , my grandad told me many tales about his time during the war but one thing that always stood out was him telling me , a war isn’t won by the battles fought, it is won by the battles NOT fought . He told me that when I grow up it would end up making sense to me , oh how true he was . RIP to my grandad & to all those that gave thier all for our freedoms

[@alitunakucukduran9237]

F

[@uss_04]

“War is Bad but Planes are Rad”

[@Olivershamoo]

so is a war plane a bad but rad vehicle?

[@fobbitoperator3620]

Werrrrrrd!

[@niksaperusic7737]

SICK

[@cybersentient4758]

"Thicc plane" "Chonky plane" Cool names

[@bribbripnairbnab7301]

Like some of my women.

[@CharyllGabrielCAclao]

@@bribbripnairbnab7301 chad 100

[@colewebb9881]

Don’t forget Thirsty Plane 🥴

[@cgnovice2969]

I will never stop loving these WW2 aviation videos