Best tank killer aircraft of WW2 Part I (2 Viewers)

Pretty obvious really.

What, that the Germans were ahead of Britain in developing all of that techonology?

The Germans had some of the best and brightest at the time, no denying that.

Ahead of Britain in some things yes, I'm not ashamed in admitting that. Germany and Britain were two(And are still up at the top) of the greatest industrial, engineering and scientific nations of the world. German technology being stolen from them by the Americans and Russians. Still, couldn't beat the British engine.

is that plane engine or car engine, because no-one can beat either.......................

The Americans do nice sounding engines, and big gas guzzling engines. Shame about the weight of the car, and low power out-put in comparison to the size of the thing. But we'll keep off car engines.

I was of course refering to the Aircraft engines.

The British do have some phenomenal aircraft engines. The Merlin and Griffon have to be considered two of the best ever.

i would say the mirlin was the most succesfull of all time..............

Of course it was, a lot of the Allied Air Force used the Merlin. And so did some tanks.

it's also the best remebered...............

Hurricane, Spit, Lanc, some Beaus, Mossie, P-51, P-40. It was probably the most successful engine of the war, or at least the most successful Allied engine anyway.

easily the most succesfull of the war................

and you forgot the lancaster.............

A27M Cromwell, A30 Challenger, SPG Avenger (A30), A34 Comet, A41 Centurion (Still used in the British Army in the 60s), A39 Tortoise, A33 H.A.T are all the tanks I know of with the Rolls-Royce Merlin (Re-named Meteor for tank engine version).

No, I mentioned it, right after the Hurrican and the Spit. I did forget the Battle, Defiant, Fulmar, and Firefly though.[/quote]

I've just remembered another thing the Americans had that no one else had. Gyro-Stabilisers in their gun turrets (On the tanks) from the M4A4 onwards they had stabilisers for, well, stability on the move. Easier aiming when moving, which is always good.

but many tank crews didn't even trun it on when they went into battle as it was complicated to use..........................

It depends on the battle situation. If they were going to wait for the enemy to come to them, therefore sitting and waiting, they wouldn't, obviously.

Attacks across open uneven terrain, it was used. And it's still used to this day, with a little more sophistication with computers and all.

OK...
Just found this site, and i think its great... i have some info on Rudel that might clear up some opinions and misinformation on the Stuka as a tank-buster...

Oberst Hans-Ulrich Rudel was actively involved in the developement of the Ju-87G-1 "flying tank destroyer" and participated in trials at Rechlin and Tarnewitz in early 1943... The first operational trials took place on 16 March, 1943... By 5 July 1943, which was the start of Operation "Zitadelle", the first 2 Ju-87G-1 equipped Staffeln were operational: Pz.J.Sta/St.G 1 and St.G 2...

On the same day, Hptm Rudel, destroyed a complete company of 12 attacking Soviet T-34's... 12 of em...

Rudel was shot down 30 times by Anti-Aircraft fire, never by a fighter...

He did in fact sink the Soviet Battleship Marat at Kronshtadt, on 21 Sept 1941... He scored a direct hit on Marat with an ordinary 1,102 lb bomb on 16 Sept, but the 2,205 lb armour piercing bomb dropped 5 days later split the ship in half... Kronshtadt was defended by more than 1,000 AA guns...

And he shot down 9 enemy aircraft, including 7 fighters, while flying the 87G...

He was so despised by the Soviet Regime, that a price of 100,000 rubels was put on his head, dead or alive...

The 87G-1 was basically a conversion of the 87D-3 with attachment points to carry the 2x 37mm Flak 18 cannons... Often had improved ground vision panel in the cockpit floor...

The D-3 was a basic "Dora" airframe with added armour protection for the crew, radiators, and engine... Deleted those sickening dive sirens...

The Ju-87G-2 was a conversion of the 87D-5 airframe, which had tapered and extended wings, mass-balanced ailerons, reinforced ground observation panel, and deleted the wing dive brakes and fixed wing armament (2x 20mm MG 151/20 cannon)... Occasionally used 8.8 lb. SD4/HL hollow charge bombs, fitted with rocket boosters, against Soviet tank concentrations...

The 37mm BK 3.7 Flak 18 anti-tank cannon weighed 600lbs, was 11 ft 10 inches long with a 6 ft 11 inche long barrel... Muzzle velocity was 2,610-2,820 ft/second... Rtae of fire was 140 rds/min... Effective range was 2,000 meters (6,600 ft)... Fired 2 kinds of rounds... Tungsten-carbide core armour peircing tracer and high explosive tracer... Tungsten round weighed in at 1.37 lbs.... Carried 2x 6 round magazines per gun...

Enough for now.. I'm beat... More later...

The Sturmovik was still better though. One man isn't going to change my view on the aircraft itself.

But lesofprimus does bring up the point that maybe the Stuka's later-war role has been severly underrated. Seems like after they were withdrawn from the Battle of Britain, where they were being mis-used in a strategic role, people in the West assumed they disappeared completly. (Incidentally, they had the best damage to kill ratio of the major caregories of German planes in the BoB, suggesting they were not as fragile as believed.)

I don't have the figures, but I'm willing to bet they had a better kill to death ratio than the Il-2 on the Eastern Front, and maybe even the greater overall tank kill score.

I think my vote would be for the Stuka, based on its record. How many other 1939 ground attack aircraft were still in use in 1945? (Apart from Japanese kamikaze-use Vals etc)

I don't think the West believed the Stuka had gone as it was still in use in North Africa. The fact is the Stuka could only be considered good in situations where air superiority had been gained. The Stuka had a great time over Poland, and France 1940 when there was no true opposition.
During BoB when the Luftwaffe finally were getting what they gave the Stuka fell down, and suffered heavily at the hands of the RAF. So, where did they send them? To Russia where air superiority was gained quickly over the VVS.

On the other hand the Sturmovik was in the fighting when the Luftwaffe held the skies, and it still caused considerable damage to the Wehrmacht. The Stuka wasn't fragile, it was a sitting duck. The Sturmovik at least, was heavily armoured but could still manuver.