PDA

View Full Version : Quick Explanation - P47 Cannon Resistance



irR4tiOn4L
05-31-2005, 08:40 PM
to those who know anything about this, i just wanted to know why the P47D was so resistant to cannon fire. This plane is very fast, relatively agile and with very heavy armor.

Ive been having fun shooting them down lately (offline) with a KI61, and noticed that only the 61 Hei with Cannons had any hope of downing them. Even at point blank a one second cannon burst will leave only bullet holes in the wings (not the gaping holes on other planes), a leak and possibly a smoking engine. The control surfaces arent hard to shoot off, but ive never managed to rip off the wings. I tried out the KI84C against them, and while much more effective, chewing up the wings relatively quickly, for a 30mm cannon it seemed to kill them very slowly. Again i never managed to rip off a wing.

From the dive speed the 47 can manage the wings must have been extremely strong, so not that surprising, but the same 30mm cannon leaves gaping holes in the B29 - holes ten times the size as it leaves in the 47.

Thus i wanted to check what the rest of you have observed about this. Ive read that the Olegs Jug is neutered performance wise, i dont know much about this, but was it as tough as it is in the game?

I think it was, judging from the anecdote of a P47 that survived a FW190 expending all its ammo into it - So what i want to know is what was different about the P47 design to other Jap/German aircraft that made it take so much battle damage.

Thanks all

VW-IceFire
05-31-2005, 09:15 PM
I don't know all the reasons why but the P-47 is the typical American overengineering of aircraft taken to its more extreme levels. Heavy construction, large circular frame, armor plating, well protected, reliable, and resistant engine...several 9th Air Force Thunderbolts flew home with bricks, parts of trees, and other assorted items stuck in the leading edges of wings or in engines.

It may not be a very agile fighter in comparison to its contemporaries...but it was tough and sturdy.

As for downing them...focus on one wing, knock the aileron off, try and put as many bullets into one side and force it down. If you have cannons then you can do that or aim for the engine.

Waldo.Pepper
05-31-2005, 09:18 PM
judging from the anecdote of a P47 that survived a FW190 expending all its ammo into it


This was Robert Johnson and it was mg ammo only.

PF is an imperfect creation of man. It is a game and your experiences are not indicative of reality any more that the anecdotes we all read of and quote to each other as proof of something.

Jug was a tough plane, because of size and design. Radial engine mostly. It surely wasn't invincible. Just tough.

3.JG51_BigBear
05-31-2005, 09:18 PM
I totally agree with Icefire and would like to throw in my two cents. The engine is a standard radial engine with a very simple cooling system, unlike the German/Russian radials that had complicated ducting, the Jug just has a big hole in the front to let air in and some tabs in the back to let the air out. Radial engines by their very nature are hard to destroy. Even if one cylinder is damaged, the others can continue to function. There's a significant amount of armour around the pilot and the entire rear section is basically empty. You can hole the entire rear feus and hit nothing but the ducts for the turbo-supercharger. Putting holes through these will effect high alt performance but down low the plane is still more than capable of getting home.

irR4tiOn4L
06-01-2005, 12:53 AM
ahh so thats why the fuselage can take so much. But i never really fire at that part anyway. The way i tackled them with the Ki61 was simply to disabled them one by one (smoking engine, lose an aileron, lose an elevator etc) - i always aimed for either the engine or the wings, but it was near impossible to get them to burn or rip a wing off - with both the KI61 cannon and the KI84c 30 mm one.

The thing that had me thinking its weird is that the KI61 cannon would rip gaping holes in another KI61's wings, but only big bullet holes in the P47 - is this because the holes are more representative of the damage the area has suffered rather than the calibre of the round? But then again normal MG would cause such holes too, and they dont.

Ngg its weird - i think its a little too tough really

WOLFMondo
06-01-2005, 01:13 AM
With a P47 I prefer to fire at the cockpit.

tigertalon
06-01-2005, 02:38 AM
Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
...several 9th Air Force Thunderbolts flew home with bricks...

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

ClnlSandersLite
06-01-2005, 02:55 AM
The thing that had me thinking its weird is that the KI61 cannon would rip gaping holes in another KI61's wings, but only big bullet holes in the P47 - is this because the holes are more representative of the damage the area has suffered rather than the calibre of the round?


Kinda both. The viewable dammage has little/nothing to do with where exactly/how many times it was hit. It's just a texture that appeares when something is dammaged. It is sensitive enough to know not to paint bullet holes on the nose when the outer wing is hit, and how many dammage layers are shown depends on how badly that section is hit.

If you want to conduct a test, get online with a friend and have him just shoot a few squirts into the wing root of your aircraft. Try it with mg fire only, and be sure to record it. Repeat a few times. Then you can see exactly how it works.

Cajun76
06-01-2005, 07:23 AM
http://rwebs.net/avhistory/history/p-47.htm

Enemy battle damage. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v30/Cajun76/jugdamage.jpg

The tree lost... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v30/Cajun76/350th-02.jpg

20mm hit on left inboard flap

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v30/Cajun76/gf20mmdamagep47.jpg

This is why you have two elevators, in case one is broken, the pilot can still get down. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v30/Cajun76/P-47elevatorgone.jpg

While flying over half a million combat sorties, the Jug had a combat loss rate of only 0.7 percent. In the ETO, the Jug faced the veteran west front Germans for a year in the air, before the P-51 took over most of the long range A2A duties. After mid-'44, it served as escort for medium bombers and tactical fighter-bomber. Mud moving is probably one of the most dangerous roles for an aircraft.

VW-IceFire
06-01-2005, 07:44 AM
Originally posted by irR4tiOn4L:
ahh so thats why the fuselage can take so much. But i never really fire at that part anyway. The way i tackled them with the Ki61 was simply to disabled them one by one (smoking engine, lose an aileron, lose an elevator etc) - i always aimed for either the engine or the wings, but it was near impossible to get them to burn or rip a wing off - with both the KI61 cannon and the KI84c 30 mm one.

The thing that had me thinking its weird is that the KI61 cannon would rip gaping holes in another KI61's wings, but only big bullet holes in the P47 - is this because the holes are more representative of the damage the area has suffered rather than the calibre of the round? But then again normal MG would cause such holes too, and they dont.

Ngg its weird - i think its a little too tough really
The indications of damage on a wing or elsewhere are meerly an artistic consideration. Same for all planes really. I've noticed that there are several areas to the wings and sections of the plane that have textures applied to them in three layers. So its a help as to where and what you're damaging but its otherwise not truly indicative of whats going on.

Think of it this way. Stage 1 is no damage. Stage 2 is 33 percent damage. Stage 3 is 66 percent damage and Stage 4 involves the piece being ripped off. Its artistic with a connection to the damage model overall.

Have another look at those pictures. P-47s flew through telephone poles, were shot to pieces by enemy gunfire, and came home with bricks in engines and wings. A few small bullets is not going to do the trick...

...and if you fly one, you'll see exactly why the P-47 is tough (or rather the result of its toughness)...it also handles quite poorly when you compare it to the Ki-61 for instance which you can wip around in a fantastic array of manuevers (great plane too). So it can't very well get out of the way like another smaller or more agile plane can.

A little secret...aim for the tail..even a few 12.7mm rounds will destroy the control cables and end the P-47s combat career.

Blutarski2004
06-01-2005, 08:31 AM
Originally posted by irR4tiOn4L:
to those who know anything about this, i just wanted to know why the P47D was so resistant to cannon fire. This plane is very fast, relatively agile and with very heavy armor.

Ive been having fun shooting them down lately (offline) with a KI61, and noticed that only the 61 Hei with Cannons had any hope of downing them. Even at point blank a one second cannon burst will leave only bullet holes in the wings (not the gaping holes on other planes), a leak and possibly a smoking engine. The control surfaces arent hard to shoot off, but ive never managed to rip off the wings. I tried out the KI84C against them, and while much more effective, chewing up the wings relatively quickly, for a 30mm cannon it seemed to kill them very slowly. Again i never managed to rip off a wing.

From the dive speed the 47 can manage the wings must have been extremely strong, so not that surprising, but the same 30mm cannon leaves gaping holes in the B29 - holes ten times the size as it leaves in the 47.

Thus i wanted to check what the rest of you have observed about this. Ive read that the Olegs Jug is neutered performance wise, i dont know much about this, but was it as tough as it is in the game?

I think it was, judging from the anecdote of a P47 that survived a FW190 expending all its ammo into it - So what i want to know is what was different about the P47 design to other Jap/German aircraft that made it take so much battle damage.

Thanks all


..... Go here -

http://rwebs.net/avhistory/history/p-47.htm

Design Analysis of the P-47 Thunderbolt
by Nicholas Mastrangelo
Chief Technical Publications, Republic Aviation Corporation

- for a useful article on the structural design of the P47.

Jambock__01
06-01-2005, 09:43 AM
T-Bolts were very resistant, thats why they are so strong in the game.

This is one of many impressive histories of the Jug.

1st Brazilian Fighter Squadron - Red Flight P-47D-25 "A6" Flown by Asp. CanĂ¡rio returned from a missios almost without one wing!

http://www.sentandoapua.com.br/imagens/galeria/cotidiano/grande/c01.jpg

"In 01/27/1945 the Red flight (aircraft code: "A") took off for one more sortie, with the 1⺠Ten. Av. Dornelles as leader of the formation, and one young pilot called Raymundo da Costa CanĂ¡rio, flying the P-47D #44-19663 (the "A6" aircraft). CanĂ¡rio was originaly pilot of the Yellow flight.

During an attack at low altitude, CanĂ¡rio collided with an industry chimney which fell down. In the collision the P-47 lost 1.28m (50.394") of the right wing, but that loss of a part of the wing did not hinder it coming back to the base.

Dornelles was his guide, opting to fly over the Adriatic Sea: over the land there was much Germany flak and low and dense clouds. Over Veneza some Spitfires had almost knocked them down therefore they had not recognised them immediately as allied pilots. After this "small" incident , Dornelles flew with CanĂ¡rio until 5000 ft, keeping silence on the radio.

The low and dense clouds made it difficult for a visual approach; when Dornelles found a hole in the clouds he told CanĂ¡rio: "wait for me here. I will to go down to have a look and and I will come back to to tell you if this airstrip is OK!"

Well, at age of 20, CanĂ¡rio ignored the acknowledgment and flew right back with Dornelles.

A few moments before CanĂ¡rio to land he heard on the radio: "abort! abort! A P-61 Blackwidow needed to make an emergency landing!". CanĂ¡rio pulled up the P-47, made another final approach and landed safely.

Dornelles flew 89 missions (he used to say "I'll never became 90 missions) - he died in 04/26/1945, flying his P-47.

CanĂ¡rio flew 51 missions. He survived the war."

Blutarski2004
06-01-2005, 12:34 PM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Jambock__01:
T-Bolts were very resistant, thats why they are so strong in the game.

This is one of many impressive histories of the Jug.

1st Brazilian Fighter Squadron - Red Flight P-47D-25 "A6" Flown by Asp. CanĂ¡rio returned from a missios almost without one wing!


..... Maybe the P47 was a strongly built a/c, but that was one h@ll of a pilot who brought that plane home!

Brain32
06-01-2005, 12:36 PM
Just to add something if you hit the Jug in the front part of the engine as close to the propeller as you can you will permanently disable it's engine.

Waldo.Pepper
06-01-2005, 12:49 PM
The indications of damage on a wing or elsewhere are meerly an artistic consideration. Same for all planes really. I've noticed that there are several areas to the wings and sections of the plane that have textures applied to them in three layers. So its a help as to where and what you're damaging but its otherwise not truly indicative of whats going on.


Right like I said ITS A GAME, and IMPERFECT. Sorry if I am blowing the illusion.

Gerard_K
06-01-2005, 02:28 PM
The following link will take you to a small extract of the book Zemke's Wolf Pack by Roger A. Freeman, which shows that the P-47 was not invincible:

http://home.tiscali.nl/adsl446606/Hub%20Zemke%20-%20Dogdays.htm

If you want to read the story of a man that really made a difference in the war over Europe, I can recommend this book.

FlyTyer1970
06-01-2005, 03:16 PM
Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
several 9th Air Force Thunderbolts flew home with bricks, parts of trees, and other assorted items stuck in the leading edges of wings or in engines.

Well that's ilegal import of building materials. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

VMF-214_HaVoK
06-01-2005, 04:11 PM
Originally posted by Waldo.Pepper:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">judging from the anecdote of a P47 that survived a FW190 expending all its ammo into it


This was Robert Johnson and it was mg ammo only.

PF is an imperfect creation of man. It is a game and your experiences are not indicative of reality any more that the anecdotes we all read of and quote to each other as proof of something.

Jug was a tough plane, because of size and design. Radial engine mostly. It surely wasn't invincible. Just tough. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actualy Robert S Johnson surived an encounter where 20mms penetrated his P-47 and made it home in one piece as well.

Buzzsaw-
06-01-2005, 05:39 PM
Salute

P-47's had TWO main spars in the wings and another THREE auxiliary supporting spars.

Most planes, (like 109s) had 1 main spar. FW190 had 1 with auxiliary spars.

Engine was 18 cylinder air cooled, with potential of the engine continuing to run with 1 or more cylinders shot away.

All control surfaces were activated with metal rods, not wire cables, for more durability. That is something which does not seem to be modelled, P-47's suffer loss of control just as quickly as other aircraft.

Pilot armour was capable of resisting small calibre Machine gun fire at any range, large calibre MG at 200 meters or more. Cannon would penetrate.

Of course, that doesn't matter in this game, since on the servers, all 109's from G6 onwards are equipped with Mk 108 30mm, unlike historical aircraft... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Design analysis of P-47 with cutaways of fuselage and structural members here:

http://rwebs.net/avhistory/history/p-47.htm

spitfire22287
06-01-2005, 05:59 PM
I once read the story of a P-47 that landed with a hung bomb, as he was out of fuel. While rolling out, the bomb fell off and detonated. Amazingly, the pilot survived... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

I remember the picture of the incident: the front of the Jug was on its nose as if it had nosed-over, the tail is on the ground, as are the wings...with a giant gaping hole where the cockpit was. If I find it, I will post it here.

I have read stories and seen countless picture of P-47's running into trees or coming back to base with half of their engine shot off. It was definitely the plane to go into combat with if you wanted to make it back to base!

OldMan____
06-01-2005, 06:28 PM
In fact planes were much tougher than we are used to think. Simple 10mm hardened face armor of german or American quality was enough to stop a .50 bulelt at 500 meters at ZERO angle to a crawl that would not damage anything after it. At 50% it could deflect the bulelt even at 100 meters.

In game I usually aim for controls.. after I take one out.. I position myself and shoot at pilot.

BigKahuna_GS
06-01-2005, 06:33 PM
S!




This was Robert Johnson and it was mg ammo only.



Robert S. Johnson observation of Luftwaffe fighters Interview

From the AH forum


"As far as the 109, all of the German pilots loved that plane, but the
FW-190 was harder to shoot down. Just like the controversy over the P-51 and P-47. The P-47 was faster; it just did not have the climb and range the
Mustang did. But it had speed, roll, dive and the necessary ruggedness that
allowed it to do such a great job in the Ninth Air Force.

As far as aerialkills go, we met and beat the best the Luftwaffe had when we first got there. It was the P-47 groups that pushed them back, as I said before. The P-51s had the advantage of longer range, and they were able to hit even the training schools, hitting boys just learning to fly.

As the war dragged on, many of the old German veterans had been killed--so much of the experience was gone. As far as the 109 versus 190 argument, the 109 had the liquid-cooled engine whereas the 190 had an air-cooled radial engine, much like ours. One hit in the cooling system of a Messerschmitt and he was going down.

Also, none of the German fighters were as rugged as a P-47. When I was
badly shot up on June 26, 1943, I had twenty-one 20mm cannon shells in that
airplane, and more than 200 7.92mm machine-gun bullets. One nicked my nose
and another entered my right leg, where the bullet split in half. I still
have those two little pieces, by the way; they went in just under the skin.
I had been hurt worse playing football and boxing. However, I had never been that scared, I'll tell you that. I was always scared--that was what made me move quick.

Adolf Galland, who was a very good friend of mine and who I had known since 1949, flew the Me-262 and loved it, but he still swore by the 109, although it was still easier to shoot down."

When Johnson states that the P-47 was faster than the Mustang, he is using
his hotrodded P-47D-5-RE "Lucky", S/N 42-8461 for reference. Johnson's crew
chief (Pappy Gould) worked magic on the R-2800. Johnson repeatedly claimed
he could pull 72" of MAP and reported airspeeds of 470 mph TAS.
Squadron-mates agreed that Johnson's Jug was far faster than any other P-47
in the 61st FS. Lt. Joe Powers flew Johnson's Jug on an escort mission and
was horrified at the thought of pulling 72" MAP when Gould briefed him on
the airplane. Powers reportedly firewalled the throttle on the return leg
and was stupified at the speed. He simply ran away from the rest of the
squadron. Even though Johnson's Jug was fitted with water injection, Johnson never used it. In an interview for the P-47 Pilots Association newsletter, Johnson stated, "I didn't need it, it was fast enough."



In "Fighter Aces," aviation historians Raymond Tolliver and Trevor Constable compared Johnson's record with that of two German aces. Werner Molders was the first ace to score 100 aerial victories and Erich Hartmann is the top scoring ace of all time with 352.

The authors noted that Johnson "emerges impressively from this comparison."
He downed 28 planes in 91 sorties, while Molders took 142 sorties to do the
same, and Hartmann, 194.

http://www.littlefriends.co.uk/56thfg-gallery.jsp

http://www.littlefriends.co.uk/gallery/56g/rsj5.jpg
Lt. Robert S Johnson. Lawton, OK. 61st Fighter Squadron. P-47C 41-6235 HV-P "Half Pint". Detail shot of damage to canopy area.

http://www.littlefriends.co.uk/gallery/56g/rsj4.jpg


_______

Asgeir_Strips
06-02-2005, 04:16 AM
Now hear this!

The F4U-4 Corsair was more sturdy/tough than the Thunderbolt! Thats amazing!
The F4U-4 Could take as far as 6000 pounds of ordnance.. more than the Jug..


We really need the F4U-4 in this game

OldMan____
06-02-2005, 06:25 AM
You must remember P7 had twice surface area from a FW for example. So for sturdiness you must comapre in a normalized way. Still impressive.. but not that miraculous.


If you target a C5 galaxy with 7.62 bullets you should be able to put 2000 of them without making it go down.

Buzzsaw-
06-02-2005, 07:32 AM
Salute

Size of an aircraft does not always have anything to do with its durability.

I know a Canadian Ace who flew P-40's in the desert.

His Squadron caught a group of Me-323's, (huge plane) coming in to supply the Germans in Tunisia.

He fired one burst from the six .50's on his P-40, and as he described it: "...the transport just folded up and collapsed." (unlike the one in the game which is very tough to shoot down) The Me-323 was built quite lightly.

The Jug was tough because its frame was built very strongly AND it was overall a big aircraft.

Aaron_GT
06-02-2005, 08:42 AM
Buzzsaw - there is always the chance of a lucky hit. Plus who knows - maybe the Me 323 had been over stressed in a bad landing earlier and was ready to fall apart anyway. This is one of the problems with combat reports - lots of unknown quantities.

An interesting factor of wooden aircraft (e.g. Mosquito) is that decent wood is as strong by weight in compression and tension as aluminium (although less strong in torsion) but has greater bulk. This means that when a projectile hits a structural member the wooden member experiences a smaller loss of volume. So for losses that are still relatively small the wooden member will stand up better. But the wooden member, being of larger volume, is more likely to get hit. With larger volume losses, though, the wooden member's ability to support stresses drops very dramatically in a catastrophic failure. This is why the Mosquito was good at absorbing damage, especially it relatively spread out over the plane (ditto for deltawood planes) but that with sufficient damage catastrophic failure would occur.

Cajun76
06-02-2005, 03:44 PM
Originally posted by Asgeir_Strips:
Now hear this!

The F4U-4 Corsair was more sturdy/tough than the Thunderbolt! Thats amazing!
The F4U-4 Could take as far as 6000 pounds of ordnance.. more than the Jug..


We really need the F4U-4 in this game

Got a source for that 6000lbs. besides that one website? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

And I've heard that they were similar in the ruggedness department, but this is the first claim my humble ears have heard that the -4 Hog was more sturdy/tough than the Thunderbolt.

Waldo.Pepper
06-02-2005, 08:52 PM
The suposedly miraculous part of the Johnson story is tha part that is most frequently quoted.

Namely the part where the FW sits on his 6 and 'empties all of his ammo into the invincible Jug.'

This part of the encounter was the part I was refereing to. (Gee you try to save a few words of typing and look at all the grief you get huh!?)

This part was exclusively mg ammo only. This 'fact' that it was mg ammo is the part that is most often overlooked.

IIRC in the initial attack Johnson's plane sustains a burst of fire that does included 20mm hits. (and this part acounts for the 20mm holes) His plane is damaged so severely that he goes out of control and tries to bail out. During this phase he cannot get the canopy off, and then tries to fly. Not only can he fly but he can climb and begins to thinik that he will make it home.

The Johnson story is the kind of anecdotal evidence we should be wary of. I think he was 'luckier' that the Jug was 'invincible' or even 'sturdy'

Don't get me wrong. The Jug was tough, but the Titanic was tough too, look what happened when it was unlucky though.

Cajun76
06-02-2005, 10:40 PM
As far as I know, no one who is familiar with the encounter says the second attacker had cannon. He was being hosed with MG fire only. Still, even MGs at point blank is not something I would want, even in an Il2 or a P-47.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v30/Cajun76/Karl2.jpg

The pilot had a hung up 500 pounder, alluded to in an earlier post. He tried to shake it loose in flight, violently rocking his a/c. It wouldn't come loose, so he had little choice but to land. It finally dropped as he landed. The pilot survived with a minor wound to the head, IIRC.

TAGERT.
06-02-2005, 11:03 PM
Originally posted by irR4tiOn4L:
to those who know anything about this, i just wanted to know why the P47D was so resistant to cannon fire. This plane is very fast, relatively agile and with very heavy armor.

Ive been having fun shooting them down lately (offline) with a KI61, and noticed that only the 61 Hei with Cannons had any hope of downing them. Even at point blank a one second cannon burst will leave only bullet holes in the wings (not the gaping holes on other planes), a leak and possibly a smoking engine. The control surfaces arent hard to shoot off, but ive never managed to rip off the wings. I tried out the KI84C against them, and while much more effective, chewing up the wings relatively quickly, for a 30mm cannon it seemed to kill them very slowly. Again i never managed to rip off a wing.

From the dive speed the 47 can manage the wings must have been extremely strong, so not that surprising, but the same 30mm cannon leaves gaping holes in the B29 - holes ten times the size as it leaves in the 47.

Thus i wanted to check what the rest of you have observed about this. Ive read that the Olegs Jug is neutered performance wise, i dont know much about this, but was it as tough as it is in the game?

I think it was, judging from the anecdote of a P47 that survived a FW190 expending all its ammo into it - So what i want to know is what was different about the P47 design to other Jap/German aircraft that made it take so much battle damage.

Thanks all simple.. god loves a winner