Best Tank Killer of WW2 continued

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Originally Posted by comiso90

What is your P-47 armed with?

Rockets weren't as effective as a lot of people think and they're far less practical then a cannon.

As a convoy buster and interdiction machine, yes the Thunderbolt was a God along with the Tempest but it wasnt much of a "tank buster" compared to the rest.

Agreed

Looking at a realistic point of view, I think the best tank busters are:

Focke Wulf Fw 190F-8

Henschel Hs 129

Junkers Ju 87G-1/G-2 (obviously not great against other aircraft, but as a tank buster very effective).

Hawker Hurricane Mk. IID or Mk. IV

Ilyushin Il-2 Shturmovik

[Clay_Allison]

Originally Posted by Venganza

However, while you're lining up for your free kill, ignoring the 12.7mm tracers streaking past you from the IL-2's rear gunner, the Yak or Lavochkin escorting the Ilyusha blast your tail off. I'm talking post mid-1943, not 1941 or 1942 when the escort was poor or non-existent.

Venganza

That rear gunner had no protection on the Il-2, my first burst would probably kill the poor bastard.

If he had escorts, that's different, with escorts the best was probably the Ju-87.

[lesofprimus]

If ur an Experten, u attack a Sturmovik from below and aim for his oil reservoir, thus ignoring the little pop gun....

[Venganza]

Originally Posted by lesofprimus

If ur an Experten, u attack a Sturmovik from below and aim for his oil reservoir, thus ignoring the little pop gun....

That little pop gun was a 12.7mm Berezin heavy machine gun with HE shells. However, Clay_Allison is right about the vulnerability of the rear gunner position and Les, the technique you mention would work at a reasonable altitude (say, above 1500 feet or so?), but obviously is impossible at low altitudes (hard to come from below if the IL-2 is at 300 feet - at this altitude, the IL-2 is vulnerable to ground fire, but that's another matter). At more reasonable altitudes, even an experten would have to deal with escorts (again, I'm talking from 1943 on). To be effective, most ground attack planes, tankbusters or not, are going to need effective escorts in any well-defended aerial environment. The list Adler provides is a good list, and all those planes would need escorts, with the possible exception of the 190.

Venganza

[Clay_Allison]

Originally Posted by Venganza

That little pop gun was a 12.7mm Berezin heavy machine gun with HE shells. However, Clay_Allison is right about the vulnerability of the rear gunner position and Les, the technique you mention would work at a reasonable altitude (say, above 1500 feet or so?), but obviously is impossible at low altitudes (hard to come from below if the IL-2 is at 300 feet - at this altitude, the IL-2 is vulnerable to ground fire, but that's another matter). At more reasonable altitudes, even an experten would have to deal with escorts (again, I'm talking from 1943 on). To be effective, most ground attack planes, tankbusters or not, are going to need effective escorts in any well-defended aerial environment. The list Adler provides is a good list, and all those planes would need escorts, with the possible exception of the 190.

Venganza

The 190 was a very good fighter plane, it would not have needed an escort. Fw 190s deserved a ton of respect.

[Catch22]

Originally Posted by Clay_Allison

The 190 was a very good fighter plane, it would not have needed an escort. Fw 190s deserved a ton of respect.

Not entirely true on the no escort part. If you're talking F-8s, they were much heavier armoured, and they generally were carrying large payloads, and had some of their guns deleted. While they would be able to put up a much better fight than a Stuka or an Il-2, they were not really a match for any pure fighter that was sent up to shoot it down. If you're talking As on the other hand, then no, it would not have needed an escort.

[Venganza]

Originally Posted by Catch22

Not entirely true on the no escort part. If you're talking F-8s, they were much heavier armoured, and they generally were carrying large payloads, and had some of their guns deleted. While they would be able to put up a much better fight than a Stuka or an Il-2, they were not really a match for any pure fighter that was sent up to shoot it down. If you're talking As on the other hand, then no, it would not have needed an escort.

I agree, Catch22. Clay_Allison is certainly correct about a fighter Fw-190, but the Fw-190F-8 was optimized for the ground attack role, which meant it wasn't optimized for the air-to-air role and might have had a hard time against a P-51D or an La-7, even after dropping its ordnance. As you say, it certainly would have handled itself better in air-to-air than the true bombers like the Ju-87 or IL-2. Adequate escort is still key to maximum efficiency for any optimized attack aircraft in a well-defended environment. Even if it's a capable fighter after expending its ordnance, it would need protection before and during its attack run.

Venganza

[Clay_Allison]

Originally Posted by Venganza

I agree, Catch22. Clay_Allison is certainly correct about a fighter Fw-190, but the Fw-190F-8 was optimized for the ground attack role, which meant it wasn't optimized for the air-to-air role and might have had a hard time against a P-51D or an La-7, even after dropping its ordnance. As you say, it certainly would have handled itself better in air-to-air than the true bombers like the Ju-87 or IL-2. Adequate escort is still key to maximum efficiency for any optimized attack aircraft in a well-defended environment. Even if it's a capable fighter after expending its ordnance, it would need protection before and during its attack run.

Venganza

I'd put my money on the 190 (assuming it has already discharged its ordnance) against the La-7 on the calculated guess that the German pilot is competent and the Soviet pilot is likely to be a 16 year old farm boy who doesn't know his way around a woman, much less a fighter plane.

[Catch22]

Originally Posted by Clay_Allison

I'd put my money on the 190 (assuming it has already discharged its ordnance) against the La-7 on the calculated guess that the German pilot is competent and the Soviet pilot is likely to be a 16 year old farm boy who doesn't know his way around a woman, much less a fighter plane.

That is entirely false. The La-7 was an excellent aircraft at low levels, and by the time it entered service the roles (though still exaggerated), would have been reversed. The quality of the Russian pilots got better as the war went on, while late in the war the German quality went down due to attrition. Stating that a Soviet pilot is incompetent is just simply wrong. I could understand if we were talking early war, but we're not, as both the La-7 and Fw 190F-8 were late war aircraft.

[lesofprimus]

There were many MANY incompetent Russian pilots in 1945 Catch... The numbers that died totally oblivious to what was goin on around them is astounding....

I will agree that the overall quality of VVS pilots towards late44-45 had improved significantly

[Catch22]

Originally Posted by lesofprimus

There were many MANY incompetent Russian pilots in 1945 Catch... The numbers that died totally oblivious to what was goin on around them is astounding....

I will agree that the overall quality of VVS pilots towards late44-45 had improved significantly

Yes, I suppose, but the quality of the German pilots was pretty bad in those days as well, save for the experten of course.

[Clay_Allison]

Originally Posted by Catch22

That is entirely false. The La-7 was an excellent aircraft at low levels, and by the time it entered service the roles (though still exaggerated), would have been reversed. The quality of the Russian pilots got better as the war went on, while late in the war the German quality went down due to attrition. Stating that a Soviet pilot is incompetent is just simply wrong. I could understand if we were talking early war, but we're not, as both the La-7 and Fw 190F-8 were late war aircraft.

Just look at the late war kill ratios for the Finns flying Brewster Buffalos against front line Soviet Aircraft, look at the list of German aces, almost 90% of those kills in the East. Tell me the Soviets didn't routinely put untrained pilots into fighters.

If a Soviet pilot was good, it was because he learned to be good on the job. The only reason the Soviet pilots got better is they formed a core group of survivors who learned the tricks of the trade and made it while their buddies made little painted marks on the sides of Me 109s. Once they had some seasoned pilots to take their young comrades under their wing, it got better, but the Red Army was no better about throwing young men into the fire in airplanes than they were with their infantry.

[lesofprimus]

Agree with both of u guys....

[Catch22]

Originally Posted by Clay_Allison

Just look at the late war kill ratios for the Finns flying Brewster Buffalos against front line Soviet Aircraft, look at the list of German aces, almost 90% of those kills in the East. Tell me the Soviets didn't routinely put untrained pilots into fighters.

If a Soviet pilot was good, it was because he learned to be good on the job. The only reason the Soviet pilots got better is they formed a core group of survivors who learned the tricks of the trade and made it while their buddies made little painted marks on the sides of Me 109s. Once they had some seasoned pilots to take their young comrades under their wing, it got better, but the Red Army was no better about throwing young men into the fire in airplanes than they were with their infantry.

I guess my point was that the quality of the Soviet pilots had improved dramatically by the end of the war, and that the Germans by that point were just as likely to have a 16 year old farmboy in the cockpit. I wasn't saying that the Soviets had suddenly mass amounts of great pilots, just that they may not have been as bad as some people think.

[Clay_Allison]

Originally Posted by Catch22

I guess my point was that the quality of the Soviet pilots had improved dramatically by the end of the war, and that the Germans by that point were just as likely to have a 16 year old farmboy in the cockpit. I wasn't saying that the Soviets had suddenly mass amounts of great pilots, just that they may not have been as bad as some people think.

Things did get rough for Germany, and the situation being reversed is certainly a possibility. I'd still put my money on the German because of how many top German aces survived the war.

Johannes Steinhoff, an ace with 176 victories (152 on the Eastern Front) described the standard of Soviet pilots in combat:

In fighting the Soviets, we fought an apparatus, not a human being--that was the difference. There was no flexibility in their tactical orientation, no individual freedom of action, and in that way they were a little stupid. If we shot down the leader in a Soviet fighter group, the rest were simply sitting ducks, waiting to be taken out.