PDA

View Full Version : No F-47 in Korea: why? (On topic article).



Waldo.Pepper
11-12-2009, 05:18 PM
I am usually pretty good at using the search feature supplied to us via this forum. But this time I cannot find the topic that speculated on why the US used the F-51 (as it was then referred to) in Korea as opposed to the F-47 (or as we would say P-47).

Well I stumbled upon this article from Air Power Journal the other day poking around in some radar archives, and it is directly on topic. Anyway, for any interested parties here she be:

http://hotfile.com/dl/17405150...e_Korea_War.pdf.html (http://hotfile.com/dl/17405150/7b29a1d/Why_the_US_Air_Force_did_not_use_the_F-47_Thunderbolt_in_the_Korea_War.pdf.html)

Waldo.Pepper
11-12-2009, 05:18 PM
I am usually pretty good at using the search feature supplied to us via this forum. But this time I cannot find the topic that speculated on why the US used the F-51 (as it was then referred to) in Korea as opposed to the F-47 (or as we would say P-47).

Well I stumbled upon this article from Air Power Journal the other day poking around in some radar archives, and it is directly on topic. Anyway, for any interested parties here she be:

http://hotfile.com/dl/17405150...e_Korea_War.pdf.html (http://hotfile.com/dl/17405150/7b29a1d/Why_the_US_Air_Force_did_not_use_the_F-47_Thunderbolt_in_the_Korea_War.pdf.html)

Daiichidoku
11-12-2009, 05:40 PM
WP, while you have not actually started a dicussion of the subject, we all know it will happen, and will eventually degenerate into either 50cals, P/F51 wings ripping off, NKAF was all soviet/no soviet pilots, and 86vs15 who pwned who

i'll get us started then http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

AFAIK they would have preffered having 47s and 38s for the job, but most 38s were scrapped, and a good deal of the Jugs that werent scrapped were given to or sold to other nations

51s were the "only show in town" so to speak; they still had plenty of em at the time, and they could do the job required of them reasonable well

in any event, IMHO, they should have ramped up A-1 and F4U-5 and AU-1 production to staggering heights, just cuz they are so cool :P

Daiichidoku
11-12-2009, 05:54 PM
anyhoo, good time for gratutious Invader pics

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v479/Daiichidoku/1a.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v479/Daiichidoku/korean85.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v479/Daiichidoku/korean50.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v479/Daiichidoku/korean83.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v479/Daiichidoku/korean37.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v479/Daiichidoku/korean21.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v479/Daiichidoku/korean63.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v479/Daiichidoku/korean75.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v479/Daiichidoku/korean78.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v479/Daiichidoku/korean15.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v479/Daiichidoku/korean5.jpg

The_Stealth_Owl
11-12-2009, 06:05 PM
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v479/Daiichidoku/1a.jpg


Is that a butt in the window??



Anyways, I thik the P-47 would have benn useless for the war, besides ground attack, the thing piston engines have against jets, the ycan out turn them. The P-47 would be too slow, same speed as teh P-51, but could not turn with jets. I think.

BillSwagger
11-12-2009, 06:13 PM
Its a great read. I often wondered that myself.

It appears budget, resources, and the fact that most of the F-47s that the military stilled owned had been in storage for years.

Its speculated they wouldn't have been any more effective in Korea than the F-51, however given that they were a bit more resilient at absorbing battle damage, many F-51 pilots may not have met their fate if they had been flying a F-47.


Bill

Choctaw111
11-12-2009, 06:14 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by The_Stealth_Owl:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v479/Daiichidoku/1a.jpg


Is that a butt in the window??
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>


http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif
I didn't even notice that till you mentioned it.

scaredycat1
11-12-2009, 06:20 PM
I want this one...



The A-26B Invader shined when it came to its armament loadout. More noticeable was the battery of 6 x 12.7mm (.50 caliber) heavy machine guns (early block A-26B models ) all allocated in the nose housing. Later block B-26Bs featured a total of 8 x 12.7mm nose-mounted machine guns. This assembly allowed the Invader to make devastating strafing sweeps on enemy ground targets with usually destructive results, combining the concentrated power of six to eight heavy caliber machine guns into one focal burst of hot lead. In addition to the nose armament, two 12.7mm machine guns were held in a dorsal barbette while another two were featured in a ventral barbette. The ventral barbette was sometimes removed in favor of an additional fuel cell. Invaders could also sport 8 x underwing gun pods and 6 x 12.7mm machine guns mounted in each wing leading edge (three guns to a side) along with blister mounts on the fuselage sides - all concentrated in a forward-firing position. With a single burst of the all machine guns, the entire aircraft would buffet violently rearward, a consideration for the crew to keep in mind in terms of their own safety. In total, a given A-26 could sport as many as 22 x 12.7mm machine guns with up to 6,000 rounds of ammunition.

Waldo.Pepper
11-12-2009, 08:30 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BillSwagger:
It appears budget, resources, and the fact that most of the F-47s that the military stilled owned had been in storage for years. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

And they could not take off in shorter austere airfields. It is always something obscure that you do not think of.

Urufu_Shinjiro
11-13-2009, 11:51 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by scaredycat1:In total, a given A-26 could sport as many as 22 x 12.7mm machine guns with up to 6,000 rounds of ammunition. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Do want!

Blottogg
11-13-2009, 03:45 PM
IIRC, the majority of F-47's were assigned to East Coast Guard and Reserve units, and were committed to Europe. Most of the F-51's were with West Coast units, and committed to the Pacific. Arguably the Jug would have been the better choice (payload, air cooled engine), but at first it was a fire brigade mentality, to get aircraft there fast to stop the North Korean advance. Afterward, it apparently wasn't worth the bureaucratic effort to make the swap. The number of F-47's remaining in the inventory probably also played a factor.