To be honest, I do not give one flying fornicating god damn. You seem to be incapable of admitting that adding an additional operational circuit to an engine makes it more prone to failure, more difficult to maintain, and uses more consumables on a limited storage platform (aircraft carrier), and I am sick of listening to this.
Acknowledged.
Respectfully I believe you're misinterpreting this information. The P-47 was fames for its amazing dive speed, but it was exceeding it speed limit. The problem was recognized and delt with by pilot training and technical fixes. Like most of the aircraft of WWII the Thunderbolt went though many modifications to correct problems and improve performance. By the time the air war in West reached its peak in early 1944 most of the P-47's major problems had been worked out.
I don't believe that I'm misrepresenting stuff. The P-51 was even faster in dive, and was safer to dive. P-47 was also a good fighter in dive, if not as safe to dive as fast. Unlike the P-47, there was no need to add the dive flaps to the P-51s.
It's very hard debating which is the better fighter because the Mustang & Thunderbolt were such different planes. A pilot will fly his fighter to its strengths. As a classic dogfighter the Mustang is clearly the winner. It's fast and maneuverable in both the horizontal & vertical planes. Once it had the Packard Merlin engine and 85-gallon fuselage fuel tank it had the range and high-altitude performance to range over Germany destroying enemy fighters. It had the added advantage of both the Bf-109G's & FW-190A's being handy caped with the weight and drag penalties imposed by extra gun pods, and other anti-bomber weapons. The FW-190 was never at its best at high altitude and being burdened with the added weight of extra weapons and armor put them at a heavy disadvantage vs. the Mustang.
Merlin Mustang was outperforming also the 190s and 109s /bar the 109K-4) when these were without the extra gun pods, and P-47 was similar in this regard to the Merlin Mustangs.
Pilots of the Fw 190As would've gladly traded the supposed ability to fly back home with a cylinder or two missing (due to a radial engine in the nose) for the performance of a P-51-B/-D, but Germany was late in that development. Even the pretty straightforward re-engining of the 190 with a big V12 - that would've provided them with closing the gap in performance above 20000 ft - was late by almost a full year vs. what was technically possible.
The Thunderbolt was designed from the beginning as a high-altitude fighter that was in its element above 25,000 ft. At altitude the P-47 was faster than both the Bf-109G-6 & the FW-190A and could out turn and dive them. Its heavy fire power could shred even the well armored FW-190A. At medium & lower altitudes the Thunderbolt's poor climb rate was greatly improved in early 1944 by giving it a paddle propeller that better bit into the air. The P-47 always had an excellent roll rate, and German pilots were amazed how hard it was to shoot one down just like the Japanese were amazed by how hard it was to shoot down an F4F or F6F. The Thunderbolt was clearly better on the deck basting ground targets.
Agreed all the way.
The P-47M was probable the fastest American prop fighter ever being able to exceed 500mph in level flight. Being based on the M the wet wing N version would probably be just as fast over Japan when some of its fuel load was burned off. If WWII had lasted longer the number of super props on all sides would've been amazing, with German, British, and American fighters flying over 450 mph, and the P-47 actually passing 500 mph.
P-47M, when the engine was working as it was supposed to, was indeed very fast.
Seems like it was topping at ~475 mph; while not 500 mph, it was still with amazing speed for the ww2 piston-power fighter.
The USAAF was blessed to have 3 fighters that were faster than the Bf-109G, or FW-190A at altitude. Nether German fighter was capable of surpassing 400 mph in level flight. The P-38, P-47, and P-51 were amazingly capable fighters with great war records, and each has their fans. My point wasn't that the P-47 was superior to the P-51 just that the P-47 is underestimated by most history buffs. I do hold that radial engine designs were more rugged which helped bring many of their pilot's home after a tough fight. I think the USN was right to stick with radial engine aircraft. That choice enabled them to fight the air war they wanted to wage. An important factor in that decision was even pre-war navy and especially marine doctrine called for close air support. The USAAF planned a very different war, and only adjusted as circumstance demanded it.
German fighters, like the Fw 190A-2 or the Bf 109F-4 were topping 650 km/h by late 1941, ie. a tad better than 400 mph. Granted, what was amazing for that time was not cutting it two years later.
I like all of these US fighters. My intention via mentioning the P-51 and it's proves in flying and fighting many hundreds of miles away from friendly territory was to underscore that fighters powered by liquid-cooled engines were doing their job just fine, and that supposed ability of the radial engine powered fighter to came back with blown off cylinders is overblown.
Lastly, job of a fighter aircraft is not to bring it's pilot home, but to defeat enemy aircraft. P-51B and later delivered that in spades, ironically while killing the enemy's fighters that were powered by radial engines in many cases, all while 'returning' the bomber crews home by doing it's job. The same bomber crews that were in jeopardy even while on aircraft powered by multiple radial engines.
Pre-war USN and USMC doctrine was better served if the dive bombers were used for close air support than what will be possible with fighters.
I still can't remember when I've suggested that USN and USMC use liquid cooled engines on all of their aircraft, especially on the non-fighters.
In terms of durability, it's my understanding that the U.S. had a higher structural strength standard than the RAF used. That resulted in more robust but heavier aircraft. The secret of the P-51H was its main weight saving trick was building it to the lighter British standard. The lighter structure was one of the reasons the USAF kept the F-51D in service and not the faster H model.
P-51H was also kept in the service.