|
Just short comments before sauna.
According to graphs in Dean's book P-47 D-25 (with paddle blades) at 14500lb was clearly better climber than P-51D at 10200lb from SL upwards.
The RAF opinion may be biased. T'Bolt wasn't like Spitfire, which many of the FC brass saw as the epitem of fighter design of the day. IIRC even in 4thFG, which had flown Spitfires up that time, there were many who first thought that P-47 was too big to be a good fighter.
IIRC Eastern Front was the main meat grinder for Jagdwaffe from 22.6.41 to very early 1943 but after that West and for a ½ year also MTO were the main area(s) of Jagdwaffe losses. But I don't have time to check this from my sources. Ruy, You can check this from Williamson Murray's Strategy of Defeat, there are some good graps on this.
56th has experience and some extraordinary airmen but so has 4thFG. But IIRC even the long time CO of 56th, Zemke said after war, that P-51 was better fighter than P-47 for 8th AAF. But I think that the main point of this discussion is not which was the better fighter but was the impact made by P-47 units underestimated and that made by P-51 units overestimated. IMHO the P-47 accomplishments are underestimated and to the other point, I think that P-51D was better fighter.
Juha
And no to sauna
|