tlb wrote:Wonderful that the N variant had all that added range, but what puzzles me is why the Mustang trick of a fuselage tank was not used more widely. I was not trying to state a fact, but Jonathan S's statement seemed to be an explanation; which you now state is incorrect. It seems that would have given the needed extra range much earlier, just like with the Mustang beginning at the B variant.
Johnathan S's statement is not incorrect. Rather, not the whole story. Like most things in life, we prefer simple explanations, with a kernel of truth even if it is not complete. WWII Authors have repeated this simple explanation verbatim so many times that NO ONE has questioned otherwise UNTIL, the archives were opened 50 years later and all kinds of "truths" have been found out to be complete LIES or at best, partial truths to hide some VERY ugly part of history like Operation KEELHAUL for instance.
The simplistic explanation for why the P51 was chosen over the P47 for the majority usage, in terms of an escort fighter is not simple in the slightest. Especially since the P51 IS superior in terms of Fuel usage/mileage. Of course it has far less survivability and was the main reason why the P47 was relegated to forward interdiction and ground attack role instead of escort even though it was faster and more maneuverable at high elevation than the P51.
The more convoluted reason: It mostly has to do with Generals high up in the USAAF covering their ass instead of admitting their MORONIC ARROGANT idea that bombers would always get through and can bomb a "pickle jar" instead of having fighter escort was pitifully negligent and stupid. Careers had to be saved after all instead of admitting their arrogance and lack of forethought/planning got thousands of airmen killed/wounded. So, the USAAF Generals cooked the books is the short explanation to show that the P47 did not have the range but the P51 did, which did not show up until
AFTER the disasterous 1943 daylight bombing campaigns over Schweinfurt.
So, If the P47's had their already designed/tested/verified drop tanks made by Republic in 1941 and written into the range chart IN the OPERATION MANUAL for ALL P47's, which EVERY pilot had to know by heart, and be tested on, had been manufactured and bought by the USAAF, then the P47 would have been doing escort missions all the way over Germany in Middle of 1943 covering those early disasterous raids. Something the P51B could not do until it received the fuel tank behind the pilot. And then the initial restrictions on fuel use were lifted as it was found that absolutely no one dualed in the sky for 5 minutes as 80% of all kills were energy "boom and zoom" and only 20% could be classified as "dogfights" and the majority of these happened VERY early in the war over France/UK/Eastern Front + a few early on in the Pacific.
PS: I believe the Spitfire XIV and later models had a fuel tank behind the pilot as well. I suppose your real question is why the Hellcat/Wildcat/Corsair did not add this fuel tank behind the pilots. I do not know, but they already had long endurance comparatively speaking to their USAAF/German/UK contemporaries with the additional consideration that long range missions were not common other than by land based patrol aircraft. Why? Islands/Carriers are just too danged small compared to the vast distances of the Pacific between islands. We are talking over 1000nm in most cases. It should also be pointed out that Carriers/escorts range limit by fuel is a not unfounded consideration. Everyone asks, WHY the Japanese did not send a 3rd wave to Pearl Harbor... Fuel is the main reason, lack of surprise is another, did not know where the USN carriers were was also upper most in their minds. Refueling ships at sea, while in its infancy in WWII usually happened in a harbor or behind a reef somewhere so in effect carriers were not really used as forward operation bases as they are today, but rather strike force for specific targets.