P-47 Thunderbolt Pt. 1A Throttle and Boost Lever Use 

I couldn't help but test this in DCS. For my test: 2550 RPM with 45" manifold at 17,000' in level flight there was a difference of about 12mph indicated between linked and independent turbo levers. I could have checked the exact airspeed in the map, but I didn't think of it, so indicated is good enough for me. Thank you for this info as well as your (exhausting, I imagine) research! This channel has become the gold standard for imaginary-aviators who just NEED to understand "Why my plane do this?!"

The DCS P47 seems to have fairly accurate behaviours to what you have shown here. I'm very pleased with it!

DCS models it accurately. You can disconnect the boost lever from the throttle or run it connected to simplify management in combat. If you use the boost on takeoff, it takes 350 hp to run it. It you are very heavy it is recommended to use boost and water. At high altitude everything is in the wall and you mange the engine with the boost lever only (and all the cooling flaps & intercooler). Neat simulator, the best yet for the P-47.

I love the fact that your open with a hi and close with a greeting and that's it. Finally somebody who's not begging for likes

as someone who just got the DCS P-47 these videos are an absolute godsend.

Wow, am I ever grateful for this channel!!! I don't know if anyone can relate, but I absolutely CRINGE when I see most WWII aircraft topics on YoutTube (I suppose this goes back to TV documentary days too). The sort of pop bubble gum hot takes and "factoids" aimed at the wow factor, the various experts trying to sound cool by finding the most outlandishly oversimplified analogies and then looking incredibly smug after making them, and just the limited knowledge and understanding of the subject matter are the norm. THIS CHANNEL IS THE EXCEPTION! I can't tell you how many times I have navigated past your videos thinking "nah... its gotta be one of those...I don't have the energy to scream at my computer" ;) My disdain for the coverage this subject receives is such that even though it is a life long passion of mine, you'd hardly know from the videos I watch. And then I found this channel. And all was well with the world. Thank you so much for restoring my faith and giving a safe harbour for all those aviation geeks who just can't take any more insults to their intelligence and have for far too long resigned themselves to content that was either overly simplistic, inaccurate or both just to see pretty pictures of our favourite things (which were also often misidentified etc). What a breath of fresh air, keep doing what you're doing, this channel rocks (and yes I am also a car nut).

Another great video , Thanks Greg . Reminds me of a German pilots impression after flying a captured P47 ."The cockpit was immense and unfamiliar.,. With all those levers, controls and switches in the cockpit. I'm surprised your pilots could find the time to fight. We had nothing like this Our instrumentation was complete, but simple: throttle, mixture control and prop pitch. How your pilots were able to work on all their gadgets and still function amazes me." Walter Wolfrum

Hey Greg, thanks for the info about the P-47 engine management. This is how it's implemented in IL-2 currently: At sea level, with turbo off and full RPM and Throttle, without water injection the engine will do 49.5" of pressure, for around 306 mph top speed. With water injection activated, the manifold pressure remains the same but speed increases to 313 mph. With water off, advancing the turbo lever doesn't activate it until you hit 89% of the lever position, then the light starts blinking and the tachometer spools up to around 900 RPM, speed doesn't change, as the turbocharger RPM rises, so does the manifold pressure and the speed. Going 100% turbo it spools up to 6000 RPM, manifold pressure increases to 55.5" and top speed increases to 320 mph. With water injection on, the turbo activates when the lever is at the 59% position. Going 100% on the turbo increases manifold pressure to around 67.2" at 11000 turbo RPM. To achieve the listed 64", you can have full throttle and decrease turbo a bit, or link both throttle and turbo to do it. With full throttle and going back a bit with the turbo (8700 RPM) top speed is 348 mph at 64". Now at the same setting but now linking the throttle and turbo levers (95%, 10500 RPM) the top speed is 347 mph, there is a bit of power loss but it's very small. There is no damage by having the turbo boost lever ahead of the throttle lever. There is some power loss by running the turbo at full speed but it doesn't look like it is so much. For example with water injection and full turbo, but pulling back the throttle to make 52", top speed is 313 mph. With full throttle but pulling back the turbo to make the same 52", top speed is 319 mph. The speed values are for a clean plane (no wing racks), 50% fuel and both oil and cowl shutters fully closed, intercooler at neutral position. Also looks like the turbo gives a too low critical altitude, with 22000 RPM the critical altitude for 64" is 23000 feet. At this altitude top speed is 435 mph. Looks like the turbosupercharger needs some adjustments, but I bet given the correct information and presented in a constructive way they will look at it ^^

I can't tell you how revealing your videos are for me. Being an A&P with forty years of experience and also a rated Multi-engine Commercial and instrument pilot, your videos tell me in no uncertain terms how complex these aircraft were to fly, let alone fight in. It doubles my respect for the 20-25 year old kids who flew them, even though I already had a lot. Their courage and exceptional skill is extremely admirable. It's apparent that the Jug was not only a handful to take off & land because of the high stall speed, but the pilot had intellectual challenges for the remainder of his missions. Non-pilots who watch this probably have no idea that today's average aviator would feel like the beast was trying to kill him if he strapped it on (tail wheel airplane, Seversky wing, super powerful engine with a huge prop and enough torque to put you into the weeds in the blink of an eye). I've flown a T-6/SNJ and felt overmatched in that airplane... I can only imagine what it must have felt like to walk out to the flight line, having had a couple hours of ground instruction, and climb into it with hands shaking. Bravo Greg! The amount of research and work you've put into this is much appreciated.

From everything I've read pilots found this easy to use and a valuable tool in combat. Since most pilots had their mounts set up for battle after crossing the Channel and making "Dry Feet". Basically the only things left they had to do was punch tanks and hit the throttle, then play with the boost. A majority of the time the P-47 groups assigned to Bomber escort were above the Germans. The Luftwaffe at first called the Americans "Upstairs maids" which the Luftwaffe considered an insult and slur. Prop over rev was a serious problem with the Curtiss electric series, the "Pencil Prop" and "Paddle blade" was fairly tame, but the Asymmetrical and symmetrical caused headaches to Crew chiefs for a few months. The Hamilton Standard 13'3" was the perfect blade for the 47 until Curtiss straightened out their gremlins. Great explanation on use of all levers. Great job on 1A!

I love these super detailed videos. Would you ever consider doing a video that talks about the strengths and weaknesses of these planes? You've mentioned them in passing so it'd be fun to have your breakdown of them.

Between this video and the previous one, I am quite happy to be around during Thanksgiving break to watch and enjoy both informative videos in their totality. I can certainly see some advantages and uses to such a intricate control of the engine and systems as mentioned, but I would still end up sticking to the 190's automated systems.

Yet again, many thanks for additional info..l It brings to light just one aspect of flying an aeroplane in combat during this historic period ! then there is the flying/trim of the "beastie" then trying to keep out of harms way but also be aggressive to ones opponent. These pilots had to be intelligent and alert and of course lucky !

I must say that you are real "talking encyclopedia" regarding the WW2 stuff Greg. Again a excellent video from you. You mentioned fly sims and possibility to use this throttle as it should be used. Since I frequently fly in IL2 BoS flight sim and fue days ago they release P-47D-28 as a early acces airplane , I just want to say that this is simulated in this airplane and it is possible to use throttle and turbocharger (boost) levers together (they are fixed to each other also with prop pitch lever) and you can move them together or adjust them separately as you like or as it required. Thx for this video! Keep them coming ;D

Chuck brought me here (chucks dcs guides) and now i understand fully. If they where smart, they did somekind of a double linking system for the boost and the throttle lever, so you can link it with “2 pins” where the forward pin is movable so in the down position the boost lever wil always moves with the throttle lever (backward & forward) and the backward pin is unmovable so when you move the throttle lever backwards the boost throttle always moves with it backwards so it never goes past the throttle lever.

It's amazing just how complex WWII were to operate. Take this scenario as an example. You and the boys are flying a fighter sweep when you get bounced by Jerry. You're in a P-47D, set up for cruise, running external drop tanks. (fuel settings and drop tank operation vary depending on model) You change your primary fuel selector switch to main, reach to the left of your seat and pull the two T shaped handles to release the left and right drop tanks, Mixture goes to auto rich, prop pitch set to auto to get RPM's up, then throttle full. If you're above 7000ft, your turbo will be set linked to throttle. If not, there's that to manage too. On top of all of this, you need to be turning and likely starting a dive to build energy / speed, flip the master arm switch for camera / gun, check gun heat is on, and turn on your gun sight which a lot of pilots turned off when not in combat to ensure the bulb worked. Most kept a spare on them and hey, if you can do all the above, changing a bulb out is a piece of cake while your head is on a swivel trying to figure out where those cannon wielding Kraut's went.

Excellent Greg! The mysterious throttle quandrant!

A2A Simulations do some of the very best addons for flight sims, and their P47 is absolutely fantastic!

This video is correct about the boost and throttle. By leaving the boost lever down, the exhaust pressure is essentially bypassing or freewheeling the turbo, leaving the R-2800's blower to make boost. Closing the wastegates too early/fast causes that big turbo-supercharger to have MONSTER turbo lag.

Looking forward to the P-47 in IL-2 BOS

Thank you man, this was wery interesting and useful, i will chech what sim do regarding this trotle feature in P-47. 👍

I love the nitty gritty. Thanks Greg.

Nicely done, again, for the non-engineer and non-pilot. This is the sort of thing I wouldn't have thought of when writing about my Dad "transitioning" from the F6F to the F4U-4. Obviously, neither one is/was a P-47, but all 3 used basically the same engine, even if not the same boost mechanism(s), and these are the kinds of details - if you don't want to get yourself killed, either operationally or in combat - that you'd need to learn and practice until they became habit when moving from one fighter to another. Flying a WW II fighter was complicated enough without having to remember in one cockpit the details of (or exceptions to) procedures you'd learned in a different cockpit.

Hi Greg ALL of yoir videos are more than excellent, thank you ! Greetings and Merry Christmas from Italy

Man what a great video and you explain everything so well,im one of those that you have to explain things to me with diagrams and much pointing but once i get it down its down for good, thank you.

I know this was from four years ago but the way DCS tells you to use the boost lever is wrong. In the manual it tells you to connect them at take off and leave them there. Where as A2A's excellent P-47 for Microsoft Flight Simulator works exactly as you explained here. I found this video because DCS made me question my memory of the many hours with A2A's P-47. I'll give the high altitude test a try and see what happens. Thanks for the upload.

Sooner than I expected. Yesss

Have watched several of your videos, they are fantastic. You have the calm, the perfect voice and the correct speed when explaining things. And for most, you seem to have profound knowledge on your subjects. And where you're not sure, you just tell it. What I learned from your video's: In WW2 they were far far more advanced on (motor) technology than I ever thought. Why did it take till the 80's before turbochargers were applied in cars???

Greg, while we are in the topic of simulations, I would really like to see an indepth analysis of the Allison V-1710, especially in the context of its combat reliability in the Curtiss P-40E when facing the Bf109G2. In il2 BoS, the engine still appears to be made out of glass, easy to missmanage - which is contrary to what I read about both the plane, and those engines. But I do not look into the NACA documentation as you are.

Thanks, Greg. Very interesting as always.

Another awesome video! Keep them coming!

Always interesting, Greg, and always factual.

Another great video on my favorite plane!

Thanks for the very informative video

Would be nice if this system had the same level of automation found in the German planes. ( Push throttle forward, get power! ) seem that to get the most out of this plane one may need a proper throttle quadrant with multiple levers.

another great video! I learn so much!

Of course I now have to open FSX and grab My A2A jug to see !

Just my opinion on this, i believe using the turbo lever for takeoff would be helpful in very hot climates where engines dont quite reach the rated numbers.

Greg, let's be honest... You don't need to talk about throttle control on the P47, but im pretty sure everyone here is glad you are. These detailed videos are fascinating and im that much more of a aviation nerd for knowing all these little details. I hope at some point you take a look at the P38 Lightning and it's controls and just how complex and difficult the aircraft was to fight in. I stumbled across this article and its a topic ive never heard covered. www.historynet.com/p-38-flunked-europe.htm

You have a fantastic timing ;)

Perhaps it is because I'm from the automotive world, but it looks to me that the 300 hp loss isn't really a hit to performance, but rather a hit to fuel economy. Am I missing something? You just adjust both or one of the levers to the power level you desire and you get the same desired result; only fuel consumption and maybe a bit of wear and tear going up? BTW I'm a huge fan of your videos! This channel is a true gem!

Nice work! I need a turbo to keep up with you!

Greg, I'm enjoying your P-47 series immensely. Just finishing up part 5 but there's a piece of data I'm missing...what is the glide ratio on the p-47? You showed a piece of the chart which would have that data when you were talking about power off landing speed, etc. This is important to me because my uncle was killed in a p-47 that had just been uncrated and assembled at Prestwick for him to ferry down to the southeast for the d-day buildup. He lost power completely at about 6k feet and misjudged his landing site in a light snowfall. I've often wondered how much time he had to decide on a site. If I knew the glide ratio I could work out how much time he had from engine stop to touchdown. Thanks for all your work. Tom C. Athens GA

Always wondered how the p-38 controlled it’s turbo’s , l actually met lefty and white lighting but the turbo’s were long gone and never got a chance to ask him how they worked.

Fascinating

Thank you

Excellent ! Thanks

I am really enjoying these videos, but I'm a bit of a novice. If it's something you'd be interested in doing, I'd love to see a video explaining the basics of things like throttling, boost / pressure and all the terms you frequently use. I follow these videos and have a basic understand of these terms, but I feel you could do a good job giving people like me a fuller understanding of these concepts. Just a thought. I really enjoy your content!

Greg, right now in Il-2 this is what most of us are doing. It yields about 90-95% of top speed at WEP and 3000fpm climb, but it takes 15 minutes to kill your engine instead of 5 “You can enable the water injection just on the nominal (47" @ 2530rpm) to get something like an "intermediate WEP" - rpm stays the same but MP rises to 59". Not only it's significantly stronger than the "normal" combat power at 55" @ 2700rpm but lasts as long. Even better, after that you can switch to "full" WEP for full 5m without a hitch. I managed to climb to the 20k ft on the "boosted nominal" at initial rate around 3000ft/m then enabled full power; was running very fast at that alt for 5m and 45s before the engine finally seized.”

Thanks this video came as a good help. Mostly i fly german planes (as a semi-far family of a germany ww2 fighter ace i feel kinda forced to haha) but you can't resist the Jug right ;) i needed info when to use the turbo and when not. Thanks again. Martijn Schroer (PIBInvictus)

Thanks!

Great video Greg. I love flying the Jug in IL2 Greatest Battles and your videos have really been the icing on the cake. Since the prop can also be linked to the throttle, when would one want to do this? The P-47 is such a fascinating aircraft. Cheers.

Viel kultivierter als im Sportwagen von siebziger Jahre. Danke für die zusätzliche Erklärung!

Merchants' guild is pleased.

sounds like in a pinch you can push both levers all the way forward and then start easing the boost lever back until the manifold pressure "responds"

I have read anecdotal comments on prop changes later in the war 'paddle blade' type...not sure what exactly was changed and what actually improved by the prop change...do you have any insights as to the changes and performance differences...if any.

In every constant speed type airplane I have flown the trotter controls Manifold pressure (Power) and the Prop control controls the Engine / Prop RPM. and the only air plane that you could have Manifold pressure exceed RPM i.e. 35"mp over 2700 RPM was in Turbo Charged planes like the Turbo Piper Lance or the Turbo Cessna 210.

Bonjour mon ami félicitations de FRANCE 👍🇫🇷hello my friend awesome model P47 Thunderbolt Thank you for your explanation very interesting for me I understand a little 👍 Congrats buddy good days of French 🇫🇷👍

Love your vids, Greg. Any love for the P-38? It has turbos, not to mention uncommon flight characteristics because of it’s counter-rotating props, turbos, and unique design.

Great video. I'm flying in DCS but chucks guide says to only move throttle to 95% when in WEP. I'm not sure of the reason for this? Also would you leave the prop rpm to the wall when looking for power during a dogfight?

These are really great videos! I’ve watched them serval times now. I am a bit confused regarding the configuration of boost controller and the throttle. It seems to me the supercharger creates this ~300hp loss as parasitic loss. Regardless of how the turbocharger is configured, this loss should always be present in some capacity, this is the nature of a directly driven supercharger unit. So what PEAK power loss would be experienced by advancing the throttle and boost simultaneously? The engine would reach its maximum power under its supercharger manifold pressure and the turbo would be helping increase air density/MAP at the same time independently. The interaction between the two should never cause ore or less parasitic power. I think operation guidelines page in the video suggests this is the case. What I think it is trying to convey is that, if there is throttle left to utilize from a system that has proportionate parasitic loss:power output, utilize it. Other wise you would be wasting the purpose of the supercharger unit’s natural losses. I don’t believe it is indicating a PEAK power loss due to order of operations. ie: throttle before boost vs throttle and boost. What do y’all think?

in il-2 bodenplatte i had turbo on higher position then trottle and on 2 ocasions when i moved trottle in df from 80 to 20 and then back to 100 i damaged engine, i guess it was because i didnt move turbo lever also with trottle or below it. So it looks like thats also modeled in game.

Looking at various Pilot Flight Operating Instructions issued 1943-1945, the earliest procedures I found state: "Take-off may be made with or without turbine supercharger. To obtain shortest run, supercharger should be used as follows: (a) Push turbine control FULL ON or to setting previously determined to give 52 inches Hg. (b) Hold with brakes while opening throttle to about 30 inches Hg. (c) Release brakes and push throttle FULL ON. (d) Manifold pressure should not exceed 52 inches Hg. (See T.O. No. 01-65BC-1 for P-47B,-C,-D and -G Airplanes, dated 20 JAN 1943). The take-off procedure in later POIs is to link the turbo and throttle. (See AN 01-65-1 for RP-47B & C and P-47D & G Airplanes, dated 20 NOV 1943; AN 01-65BC-1A for Army Models P-47D-25, -26, -27, -28, -30 and -35 Airplanes, dated 25 JAN 1945; and AN 01-65BD-1 for P-47N Series Airplane, revised 20 JULY 1945). Furthermore, AN 01-65BC-1A states: "Above critical altitude it will be necessary to disconnect controls and adjust boost and throttle independently to avoid overspeeding of the turbosupercharger." The landing checklist calls for interconnecting the engine controls. The 1943 US Army Air Forces training films No. 107A-C presented to familiarize pilots on the the P-47 somewhat confuse the matter by demonstrating take-off procedures never using the turbo lever. The films mention that the controls are usually linked, but also that trainees wouldn't be using the turbo until they transitioned to high altitude work. Regarding how Thunderbolts are modelled in PC simulations, I learned take-off without turbo from the A2A Simulations P-47D Razorback in FSX. The A2A product manual instructs: "With the turbo boost pulled all the way back, advance throttle slowly until 52 inches Hg at 2700 rpm is obtained for take-off ... You may interconnect the turbo boost and throttle control when over 10,000 feet." I carried that habit over to the IL-2 Great Battles P-47D-22 and D-28. The DCS P-47D-30 manual seemed to contradict so I went back to the historical POIs to check. I now follow the checklists in the later POIs. However, I'll test out not using the turbo below 7,000 feet and see if I notice a 300 HP gain in any of the current sims.

Great video lots of nice info. Any eta on the next video? I'm very curious to see what you say about the P-47s high speed handling, from all the research I've done it was quite good at high speed maneuvering. Currently in Il2 however it is very sluggish and can't even outmaneuver/pull more g than a 109 at high speeds. It also can't outdive 109s ingame as well and suffers from structural loss at around 540 IAS when in reality it shouldn't suffer any loss. The 109 however can dive upwards of 580-590 mph IAS before suffering structural damage. Il2 is great but the P-47 needs alot of work to get it correct imo. Great videos, I really enjoy them. I Can't wait for the next one.

I want to ride in a Juggernaut before I die..."well the Spit, yeah she's alright, just strap her on - too many Marks to remember...the Mustang, yeah she's thoroughbred just watch out for those one-nine-oh cannons...just give me a Juggernaut, anytime, half the rudder gone the port wing's got a hole or three, I'll land her anyway...".

Very interesting to see. But, give me a P47 with a Kommandogerät Greg 😉

Do you have any information on the 47 increasing its manifold pressure when at or near (

Something must be funky with the DCS implementation of boost. Without boost I cannot get more than 46" on takeoff from sea level, and to mantain 42" during the climb I have to start using boost once I pass through 4,000ft. I'm still trying to figure out if it's me doing something wrong or DCS doing something wrong, but either way I'm not getting what real-world sources say I should.

Question as a Private Pilot with time in many different Single Engine Land AC I have a question about the P&W R-2800 series of engines. Being they have a gear reduction of I believe 2 to 1 is the tach reading Propeller RPM or Engine RPM since all props over 3 feet in diameter seem to red line at or below 2700 rpm.

@Greg's Airplanes And Automobiles I'm searching for some documentary evidence on 1. How effective the elevators of the 47 were between 350-500 mph (right now in Il-2 you can't really pull any more G than the 109 at those speeds, and he can pull more if he works stab trim) 2. Roll rates at various speeds and 3. Evidence that the engine could be and was run at WEP continuously as long as the water lasted in actual operations. Can you point me in the right direction on that?

dang i didnt know they were that complicated

What are the good simulators for realism and especially for a newbie?

You should seriously have your own "computer voice" ... I could watch endless hours od documentaries about anything and everything then.

I don't know how to contact you about a suggestion/question that might explain inverted engines on German aircraft. Sorry for it appearing here. Could it be upper cylinder lubrication (which would be a reference to non-inverted engines of today) or, in this case, lower cylinder lubrication?

Great video but I’m still not sure where the parasitic drain from the turbo system is. The supercharger is a constant 300 HP drain to make more horsepower then 300 obviously, or put another way, a power adder that requires an investment of 300 HP at the crank and is a constant costs. The B lever to my understanding controls the waste gate of the turbocharger. Aft being open (no boost) to the nose waste gate closed allowing maximum exposure of the exhaust impeller to exhaust gasses. With no physical connection to the engine, with the turbo being driven by exhaust velocity, why would it cost horsepower? Thanks in advance. I’m not an aeronautical engineer but I am a mechanic, just not understanding. If anything at low altitude in thick air I would think the turbo would OVERBOOST the manifold. The only possible explanation I can think of would be thermodynamic inefficiency but this would be managed by MW injection. Great video!!

Interesting points Greg. I just tested the IL2 BOX P47-D28 to see how they modeled it and this is what I found. The supercharger alone seems to have critical altitude at sea level. So it is not throttled at low alt at all. With just supercharger it gets only 49' MAP and with turbo that increases to 52" at combat power at sea level. So it seems that even at low alt you can't get full power without using the turbo. Also the Turbo has no risk of over pressuring the cylinders even if you reduce the throttle lever below the turbo lever. I think that is just not modeled. The forums have a link to the real life P47 manual which instructs to use both levers linked from take off until reaching high alt when the turbo RPM will become too hi and then unlink them and manually control the turbo rpm to keep it from over speeding. forum.il2sturmovik.com/uploads/monthly_2018_11/310416774_2018-11-2113_17_34-P-47AAFManual.pdf-SumatraPDF.jpg.7ad0b8f2e0d4142622604ab9303fdc3a.jpg That method seems to make sense with the way it is modeled in the sim. You seemed to believe the supercharger had a crit alt of 12 ft? and using full turbo below this is wasting boost in the supercharger that is then just throttled.... I wonder if this was different in different models of P47 or if the sim just simplifies the turbo use . Thanks for the video . Lots of us very interested in this right now. I've been looking forward to playing with this plane since I watched your P47 turbo video a few months ago :) I also note that in a high alt emergency, with a bf109 on my tail, I was able to manually over speed the turbo and get extra boost temporarily, and climb away from contrailing bf109. Maybe it was a G6 I don't know . But I would not have thought to even try that if I have not watched your video about he P47 ace who over sped his turbo to get extra performance at high alt.

Do you have any knowledge on what the turbo lever is actually adjusting, is it blow off valve or something else? how does it directly influence the RPM of the Turbo?

That’s so freaking cool. I wish my car had a lever that allowed me to adjust boost on the fly.

A suggestion if I may. Don't use black letters when putting in a text as it can be hard to see unless there is a light background.

I just wish that my throttle quadrant had more than three levers now >.o

How about the water injection thing?

Manual says do not use turbo below 7K feet IF you are using 91 octane fuel, like was commonly used for training.

Can you explain briefly why the Turbo lever is required to be infront of the throttle? Since I still havent understood why. I have understood why moving them together is bad, but to get higher MAP than just 52" Turbo is required. I can hardly imagine that pilots had the discipline to remind this rule in heated combat.

All of you who are interested in this type of detail in a simulator, come on over to DCS world!

What is a P47 November?

Greg: You get your sim going yet? Check out the A2A P-47!Seeya ATB

Greg do you play war thunder?

Missed water injection!

Hubert Zemke

That one dislike?

im SURE!!!!! when the p-47 for "DCS flight sim" releases...... it will be EXACTLY like it should be in real life it takes 10 mins for the navigation systems to align in stuff like the a-10c, f18, f16, f14......during which time, if you move even one inch, it screws up the alignment and you get drift exactly like real life

The aircraft that you don’t mention is the Tempest V or the Typhoon which is in the P-47 D. You always put the Spitfire MK-9 when the Spitfire Mk-XlV through Mk-XX was used till the end of the war. How about the Spitfire that dived to Mach 8.5. This was computed with gauged for this reach. Eric “Winkle” Brown said as much and the airframe and wings show no structural damage to the Spitfire as it was inspected by British officials. This comment was ment for part 2 and not 3

Thank you