P-47 size comparison. (2024)

Whilst researching for the current Group Build in the modelling section, I came across this size comparison chart in the book "Thunderbolt, a documentary history of the Republic P-47", by Roger Freeman, which I thought might be of general interest. (apologies for the distortion, I had to photograph the page, as the book wouldn't fit on the scanner without damaging the spine).
We all know that the P-47 was a large aircraft, but this shows it wasn't just big, it was huge !
Note in particular its size compared to the Bf-109G.

pinehilljoe said:

It would be interesting to see the P-7 compared with the F6F, or F4U

Click to expand...

The F4U was pretty close (width/length) to the P-47.
Both wingspan were 41 feet, the P-47 being three feet longer at 36 feet.
The Thunderbolt's fuselage was larger, though.

GrauGeist said:

The F4U was pretty close (width/length) to the P-47.
Both wingspan were 41 feet, the P-47 being three feet longer at 36 feet.
The Thunderbolt's fuselage was larger, though.

Click to expand...

The P-47 is a BIG airplane...

Edited ( I think ) on Graugeist's suggestion, to remove a photo.

Sisu said:

The P-47 is a BIG airplane...

See Also

P-47 Thunderbolt returns to UK airshow scene - The Vintage Aviation EchoP-47 Thunderbolts at the Battle of the BulgeWhy the P-47 Thunderbolt, a World War II Beast of the Airways, Ruled the SkiesZemke’s Wolfpack of P-47 Thunderbolts Ruled Europe's Skies

Click to expand...

The Jug certainly is large, no doubt, but you might want to edit that photo before the Mods see it.

Boobs must be covered - forum rule.

GrauGeist said:

The Jug certainly is large, no doubt, but you might want to edit that photo before the Mods see it.

Boobs must be covered - forum rule.

Click to expand...

Sorry about that -- I'm pretty new here, and don't know how to edit yet. I thought she was a pretty good size comparison.

Sisu

Sisu said:

Sorry about that -- I'm pretty new here, and don't know how to edit yet. I thought she was a pretty good size comparison.

Sisu

Click to expand...

Sisu said:

Sorry about that -- I'm pretty new here, and don't know how to edit yet. I thought she was a pretty good size comparison.

Sisu

Click to expand...

She was a fantastic size comparison and it was a great photo - unfortunately her jugs were showing!

FLYBOYJ said:

Terms and rules

You must agree to these terms and rules before using the site.

ww2aircraft.net

Click to expand...

Actually, I don't see a reference to this particular issue in the terms. I have absolutely no problem with the picture going away, though, and I apologize for the photograph.

Airframes said:

We all know that the P-47 was a large aircraft, but this shows it wasn't just big, it was huge !
Note in particular its size compared to the Bf-109G.

Click to expand...

Making a fighter around a 2000 HP engine + turbo system as big as that engine, plenty of fuel, 8 heavy guns and their heavy ammo is a far cry vs. making a fighter starting with a 600 HP engine, tiny amount of fuel, two light guns and their light ammo

FLYBOYJ said:

Terms and rules

You must agree to these terms and rules before using the site.

ww2aircraft.net

Click to expand...

Re-read them and didn't see any rule on boobs. Did I miss it? Again?

GregP said:

Re-read them and didn't see any rule on boobs. Did I miss it? Again?

Click to expand...

Boobs = Adult Content.

Don't get me wrong, I am one to appreciate adult content.

We're just not supposed to appreciate it here...

sotaro said:

Was aircraft volume an engineering specification? or any part of the aircraft besides the engine and tanks for fuel, lubricants, hydraulics, oxygen, nitrous, alcohol/water ADI, etc etc? I thought fuselage volume would be known, but I have never seen it referred to.

Click to expand...

The volume was always intended to be calculated to be as small as practical, taking into account for nessecary items (as you mentioned) plus radio equipment and other items.

The P-47's fuselage was much larger than other fighters because it had to accommodate the remote turbo system that was located behind the co*ckpit.

GrauGeist said:

The volume was always intended to be calculated to be as small as practical, taking into account for nessecary items (as you mentioned) plus radio equipment and other items.

The P-47's fuselage was much larger than other fighters because it had to accommodate the remote turbo system that was located behind the co*ckpit.

Click to expand...

Thank you GrauGeist. My question is: Was aircraft volume a known statistic for an aircraft? I understand the imperative of making the aircraft as small as possible and as light as possible and the conflict of those imperatives with the bulk, center of gravity constraints and ducting of the turbosupercharger that caused the bulbous look of the P-47. Is it raining a lot in Redding? It started to rain lightly here around 6pm.

sotaro said:

Thank you GrauGeist. My question is: Was aircraft volume a known statistic for an aircraft? I understand the imperative of making the aircraft as small as possible and as light as possible and the conflict of those imperatives with the bulk, center of gravity constraints and ducting of the turbosupercharger that caused the bulbous look of the P-47. Is it raining a lot in Redding? It started to rain lightly here around 6pm.

Click to expand...

I've not seen total volume referred to, wetted area and cross-sectional area are though which obviously impact on volume.