![]() |
| |||||||
| Aviation Discussion on the aircraft of WWII. |
![]() |
| | LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
| | #1006 |
| Minister of Whoopass ![]() Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Long Island Native in Mississippi
Posts: 17,490
| And all this talk about pilot proficiency brings us right back to the same conclusion: The Fw 190F-8 was the best tank buster of the War.... (back on topic)
__________________ ![]() My IL2 Video Tribute to My Grandfather: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HtzN5RuNNJk |
| | |
| | #1007 |
| Member Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 42
| Any good ground-attack aircraft needs a radial engine, decent (not incredible...just decent to neutralize any light armor in a tank column) armament, and the ability to carry a good array of ordnance. Therefore, my vote for the best tank-killer goes to...the Jug. It certainly didn't kill the most, but the survivability and fantastic loadout options put it in contention at least IMO.
__________________ _________________________________________________ |
| | |
| | #1008 |
| Minister of Whoopass ![]() Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Long Island Native in Mississippi
Posts: 17,490
| No surprise there....
__________________ ![]() My IL2 Video Tribute to My Grandfather: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HtzN5RuNNJk |
| | |
| | #1009 |
| Member Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 42
| Consistency RULES! p.s. Cool sig vid
__________________ _________________________________________________ |
| | |
| | #1010 |
| Der Crewchief ![]() Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Ansbach, Germany
Posts: 33,152
| I will take a Fw 190F-8 over a Jug any day. It meets all of your requirements for a good tank killer, but was built for the purpose of ground attack and tank killing. 1. Radial engine 2. Built rugged 3. Specially armored for the job of ground attack/tank killing. 4. Carried armament specifically for the job.
__________________ ![]() fly boy:"isnt that the first jet bomber becasue i have flown one in a flight sim before and i know how it handles"[/I] |
| | |
| | #1011 |
| Member Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 42
| The F8 is a great ground attack aircraft indeed. But for heavily armored tanks, it has limited effectiveness, IMO, due to such a limited ordnance loadout option. Even the F8's strong guns had difficulty penetrating the heavy tanks and it only had 1 drop IIRC. The jug could carry a decent bomb load, had 2 drops and could even carry 8 HVARS. Personally, from a pure aircraft standpoint, I like the FW F8 better (believe it or not). It's a better cockpit layout and more of a true "pilot's" aircraft, but if I were actually flying one in battle, it'd be hard for me to not take the Jug.
__________________ _________________________________________________ |
| | |
| | #1012 | |
| Der Crewchief ![]() Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Ansbach, Germany
Posts: 33,152
| Quote:
Also... The F-8 also had provisions for: 2 drop tanks 3 SC 250 88mm Panzerschreck Panzerblitz R4M
__________________ ![]() fly boy:"isnt that the first jet bomber becasue i have flown one in a flight sim before and i know how it handles"[/I] | |
| | |
| | #1013 | |
| Member Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 42
| Quote:
I'll admit, I'm a bit ignorant of the loadout options the F8 could deploy. That list is as impressive as it is interesting (88mm Panzerschreck?!
__________________ _________________________________________________ | |
| | |
| | #1014 | |
| Der Crewchief ![]() Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Ansbach, Germany
Posts: 33,152
| Quote:
The F-8 was a purpose built up-armored variant of the Fw 190 for ground attack and anti-tank operations.
__________________ ![]() fly boy:"isnt that the first jet bomber becasue i have flown one in a flight sim before and i know how it handles"[/I] | |
| | |
| | #1015 |
| Minister of Whoopass ![]() Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Long Island Native in Mississippi
Posts: 17,490
| The Germans were painfully impressed by the lethality of rocket-firing Allied fighter-bombers, such as USAAF Thunderbolts firing HVAR rockets and RAF Typhoons firing 60-pounder rockets. In response, they developed a series of their own unguided air-to-ground rockets. Early experiments involved firing the "Panzerschreck" infantry anti-tank rocket, a scaled-up copy of the American "Bazooka" rocket, from triple tubes mounted under each wing. As the Panzerschreck had inadequate range, it was followed by the "Panzerblitz I", which took the hollow-charge warhead from the Panzerschreck and fitted it with an improved rocket motor. They were mounted in fours under each wing in a wooden launch rack. Since Panzerblitz I couldn't be fired while flying at top speed, it led in turn to "Panzerblitz II", which used a similar warhead but the even larger rocket motor of the "R4M" folding-fin unguided air-to-air rocket. These rockets were mounted on racks under each wing, with six or seven rockets per rack.
__________________ ![]() My IL2 Video Tribute to My Grandfather: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HtzN5RuNNJk |
| | |
| | #1016 |
| Junior Member | Best ground attack....in what environment? Air Superiority, Inferiority, escorted, non-escorted. I would say the IL-2 prior to the P-47 receiving the 5 inch underwing rocket capability. Then the P-47. Those 5 inch rockets are hard to beat. They hit what you aim at. Not too much drop... Short dive run and exposure. will penetrate top armor... all good stuff.... |
| | |
| | #1017 | |
| Minister of Whoopass ![]() Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Long Island Native in Mississippi
Posts: 17,490
| Quote:
Those rockets were so unreliable, u'd be lucky to hit a Destroyer with them let alone a small tank with em... Recent research on the Normandie Campaign has shown that the actual number of tanks destroyed by them were miniscule... The P-47 was more vulnerable to ground fire than the Fw 190F-8 was BTW... And this thread isnt about ground attack, its about TANK BUSTING....
__________________ ![]() My IL2 Video Tribute to My Grandfather: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HtzN5RuNNJk | |
| | |
| | #1018 |
| Junior Member | 5 inch rockets are very very good. They drop little. Decent range. You can use the rudder in a last minute correction and it will for the most part work. Above all your time straight and predictable in the run is much less than with free fall weapons or 2.75. all good things... survivability is a key ingredient from the perspective of the cockpit. |
| | |
| | #1019 |
| Minister of Whoopass ![]() Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Long Island Native in Mississippi
Posts: 17,490
| Did u even read my post or are u just spouting sh!t outta ur mouth for the sake of hearing it???
__________________ ![]() My IL2 Video Tribute to My Grandfather: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HtzN5RuNNJk |
| | |
| | #1020 |
| "World Traveller" ![]() | Someone has been playing too many computer games... The average hit ratio for the rockets (both 5" and 60lb) was less than 0.5% so they were neither accurate nor had a good range. Watch any gun camera of them in action and you will see the drop. In fact here are some for you: YouTube - Hawker Typhoon in Action YouTube - Hawker Typhoon pt.2 Survivability is a key component and the FW190F8 was better at it than the P47 + it had better armour and better guns and also mounted rockets...
__________________ ![]() "Success is not Final, Failure is not Fatal, it is the Courage to Continue that Counts" Sir Winston Churchill "To him the People of the World Largely owe the Freedom and Liberties they Enjoy Today" Enscription on Hugh Dowding's (AOC Fighter Command 1936-40) statue in London WW2 Talk: A WW2 Discussion Forum My Photo Collections on Flickr |
| | |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
| |