It’s Spitfire with Griffon which sounds like it’s going to be good, but because of navalisation it’s damn heavy. Good for catching up to jets in a dive tho. Climbspeed wise it’s worse than Sea Fury but at least it’s fairly maneuverable compared to Sea Fury.
In short it’s just another Spitfire made for energy fighting since unlike other Spits you are not outturning many planes. If you’ve played Griffon Spitfires you’ll have similar experience but a bit worse because it’s much heavier and has less ammo (496 rounds iirc). It works best at high altitude but well, no one really fights up there.
I’ve mainly done BnZ with some defensive flying when needed, sometimes you can just run away with a slight dive depending on what’s chasing you.
The Seafire FR 47 is a fun plane but she is definitely a big girl between the naval gear and the recon equipment you can definitely feel it in the handling.
You kinda just need to play 4D chess with enemies:
You’re a spitfire frame so people are hesitant to engage
But since your a seafire, people who do engage will probably stick the fight because they see seafires are worse spitfires
BUT, you have a very good engine and people don’t expect how fast you really can be so they often misjudge energy at first making it easy to bait
And they’re gonna fight you like they would fight a spitfire which works to your benefit because as a FR 47 you don’t play like a spitfire
So essentially, you get to bait people into a fight and then fight them the complete opposite way they are expecting the fight to go
(As a side note there is a possibility to buff the FR 47, in game right now with 150 octane fuel you are running 21lbs of boost but IRL it ran 25lbs of boost giving it just under 2400HP)
Nah, I don’t think the f4u4b really can… well maybe in a downtier yes. At it’s own br It’s not the fastest, doesn’t turn the best nor does it climb the best. It’s a jack of all trades master of none type of plane, something like a bf109k4 id put my bet on over an f4u4b if both the pilots are of equal skill. I don’t really think any plane near the f4u4’s br except for the yak3u and hornet are untouchable. The f4u4 has better performance at its own br than the f4u4b, its comparitivly much faster than it’s opponents. Where an f4u4b might only be quicker than a bf109 on deck and slower at medium altitude, the f4u4 is just straight up faster than the fw190s at its br, the bf109s, the la7, yaks 9/3. ETC at most altitudes worth talking about. So in that sense it’s actually untouchable. As you literally can’t catch up to it in any of you teams planes. You need a p51 to catch an f4u4, and those are on your side.
I wasn’t talking about the F4U-4, it’s fairly decent for its BR. The problem is most US players there are lobotomites. The F4U-1C is what irks me the most, it only has cannons going for it, and is insanely easy to neutralize.
Don’t be LOL, Mk14’s are generally slow, Mk22 feels kind of the same, I have barely fought Mk24’s but they’re atleast slightly better. Lf. Mk9’s the big headache. If you know your energy management well then the Lf functions as a rabid, steroid-infested, possible sexual predator british A6M Zero.
I mean, compared to the P-47Ds the P-51C and Ds are kinda disappointing.
P-51H is an exception, and going by it’s design, it’s not even a P-51 any more and just looks like it. It’s as much of a P-51 as the MB-5 is a P-51.
P-47N though was gaijined hard by Gaijin and I have no clue why they made it worse after reducing it’s weight. “We gotta give it tons of fuel!”
Tell it to the people beating G-2s in dogfights in P-47s.
P-51 has slightly more energy retention than the P-47D but the difference is so minor that I find I’m in toss-up situations on if the P-51 can run away. Not only that, the P-51s only effective flaps are the combat and maybe take-off flaps. but the full range of flaps on the P-47 allows it to turn inside really well, mixed with the wing design in general being pretty good with turn performance, very lifty for it’s size.
Also, it gets better than the P-51 the higher you go, I’m not even talking engine performance at this, but just that the wings of the P-47 are way more efficient, the second you get to around 3000m you’re basically fighting an uphill battle at that point if you’re in a P-51 facing a P-47. There’s a reason why the P-47 IRL was a better fighter than the P-51D, and the only they picked the P-51 was because it was cheaper, and they didn’t want to use larger sized drop-tanks like the australians used to great effect.
when flying the D-22, I’ve fought Spitfire Mk Vcs at 4000m and I had them on the ropes each time. This wasn’t me diving on them. This was me fighting them at equal altitude on a merge.
P-47M is only 100kg lighter and several years ago they nerfed the plane where the 2800hp only comes in at high altitude (6000m) as at that point, it’s a barely lighter version of a D-28. You can find duels of the nerfed P-47M literally dunking on Bf-109 G-2s at low alt. I use the P-47M because I haven’t found any duels against the G-2 in the D-28 besides my own experience. But there is a vid online of a G6 p-47D-28 duel ¯_(ツ)_/¯
Literally search up any proper P-47 video or even post and you’ll see people praising how good the flaps are, actually. I think an Adam enginenerd video showed data that the P-51s landing flaps are not conducive in a fight except in a narrow range and you’d want to use Take-offs at most but with the P-47D it has amazing flaps and the landing flaps allowing it to float in vertical maneuvers. The only real way I’ve found possibly for a P-51D to win is to force horizontals.
I mean you’re arguing against physics at that point. The P-47, especially the D-28. Big power, great prop, plus big wings means good turn and great prop hang capability. The higher you go, the less air you have to work with, so the more wing area you have, the more lift you generate. At 3000m the P-47 is a hard fight for Bf-109 and very difficult for P-51s to deal with. Like my Spitfire Vc comment, I stated 4000m because in the D-22 that’s where I feel it’s the minimum altitude where the spitfire really loses his energy in comparison to the P-47 and I can take advantage of without being able to chase me
Bruh, I’m happy to argue, but I’m not gonna start up War thunder to settle some dispute at 2:30 in the morning bro.
there’s a vid online where a G-6 does well against a P-47D in a dedicated duel, but even the dude admits in the description the P-47D turns better than him, and even people in the comments telling him to not pull too hard as he’s literally eating his energy whilst the P-47 keeps it. Now, I think the P-47 pilot could do better (obviously). But it shows the P-47D-28 can obviously show off his chops.
i agree, spitfires are strong but not really OP, just fitting for the 1vx climb-deathmatch. Their engines cook badly with mec and guzzle on fuel like me drinking water after walking for six hours in a summer day. If we had larger airfields and enemies appeared at different altitudes it would be a different story, with p51s, sea furies and la7s mopping the floor.
Alas, I suck with spitfires because it’s not my type of gameplay, however if i play seriously I can get some work done.
the p47d28 does indeed shit on the d30 for the sole fact that the d30 is a low altitude high speed bomber escort while the p47 is a high altitude interceptor. High altitude aircraft like the bf109, the ta152h, the late corsairs, the i225, the n1k2j, the Do335, the pyörremyrsky and the p47d28/d30/m1re have the virtue of pushing an obnoxious amount of air when their propellers are hitting 350 ias or below which is the speeds at which dogfights in props usually happen. Why this is? Because these props are made for thin air (consequently low airspeed too) and that’s why they’re more efficient at slow speed. P51 prop is tiny, tempest mkv prop has poor low speed incidence, etc.
i’m talking about the functions they have in game. The P47s have lower fuel loads than the P51s and have better high altitude performance than mustangs (like, objectively)
