Best tank killer aircraft of WW2 Part I

[plan_D]

The weight of a rocket does only refer to the warhead. So they had 60lb warheads, even with a much lighter weight they still could have the same hitting power. Velocity is a big part of the rounds penertration power.
The Pz.IV Ausf G could take several hits to the rear, and top from a 20mm cannon. However since the Typhoon had 4, the continuous impact and velocity from these would be more than enough to destroy it. And the IV Ausf G was the main battle tank of the Wehrmacht.
The ability to take out Panthers, and Tigers is another great mark to its name, after all a good tank killer needs to be able kill tanks effectively, and the Tiffy could.

The Konigstiger, or King Tiger for the majority. The ability to take this monster out is a great feat for another tank, let alone an aircraft.

 

[Lightning Guy]

The Tiffy was good, but it still doesn't match the Il-2. The Il-2 carried heavier guns and much heavier armor.

 

[plan_D]

The Tiffy was faster though.

 

[Lightning Guy]

Il-2s 37mm guns were more effective than the Tiffy's 4 20mm. Il-2s would do a better job of shooting up tanks.

 

[GermansRGeniuses]

I disagree. 4x 20=80 so 80mm for Tiffy. 2x 37=74 so 74mm for IL2.
Advantage? Tiffy. Tiffy also fired faster, allowing more rounds to get a chance to hit, had more ammo, giving it more of a chance to hit period, and it could more easily evade ack-ack and ground fire due to its speed. Also, thanks to its fair (for a ground-pounder) range, it could more than likely come around for other passes more than and safer than the Sturmovik.
Tiffy range:605mi. regular, 930mi. with underwing tanks
Il-2M3 Sturmovik range:375mi.

 

[Lightning Guy]

Your mathematics are rather flawed there. It is a simple fact that 37mm was better for punching holes through armor than 20mm. A bigger shell is always almost better for that. The lower ammo count for the Sturmovik is not an issue as as few as 2 or 3 37mm hits can disable a tank. While 20mm can penetrate most medium tanks, few (if any, I'm not sure) tanks in WWII had the top or rear-decking armor to withstand 37mm ammo. I'll admit that the Il-2 would have beneffitted from more range, but it delivered more bang while it was there.

 

[GermansRGeniuses]

The thing about the Il2's range is that the Soviets thought it was so good and demand was so high, that they DELIBERATELY discouraged updates in order to keep production high.

 

[Lightning Guy]

Wouldn't surprise me. The superb P-38K never went into production because the USAF was unwilling to allow the line to shut down for the two weeks (max) that would have been required for re-tooling.

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

but they must have had a huge surplus at the end of the war, they made 36,163 of them.................

 

[cheddar cheese]

i doubt thats a correct figure

 

[plan_D]

I think you both, LG and GrG have a slight misunderstanding in penertration of rounds. GrG is right in thinking the more rounds, at a higher velocity would cause more damage and, yes LG is right in thinking the heavier round causes more damage by looking at its size. But you have to look at how many, how fast, at what speed and where all together.
A Pz.IV Ausf G (Medium Tank) could take a direct hit from a 20mm anywhere on the tank from any range (except from a certain German 20mm shell but why would they shoot their own tank?). Even with this several hits, at high speed, in the same general area would destroy the tank. Most 37mm could pierce its armour (Rear and Top) so the IL-2 could do it effectively, but would still take some doing. It's not one round, the tank is dead.

Now, talking of Pz.V, Pz.VI and Tg II it's a completely different matter. Plus you're all missing out the German SPGs one of which (a great difficulty for the Soviets and Allies alike) the Pz. Jag Tiger (P) or Ferdinand for normal people. One 37mm would struggle taking out the Ferdinand from the top, let alone anywhere else. It was impossible, and I repeat impossible, to destroy these things from the front with 37mm or 20mm shells. Rockets would be needed for taking out Tg. IIs and Tiger (P)s. The Ferdinand had 200mm armour for Gods sake...the T-34s and Kv-1s of the SU didn't stand a chance, let alone the Sherman. Anyway, a little off course here.
The Tiffy had about the same penertration with guns as the Il-2 because the Il-2 had heavier, but less guns, with slower speed of round, and slower rate of fire. Example of gun being smaller but a heavier hitter; The 75mm KwK 42 L/70 (Gun on the Panther) had a penertration of 194mm at 100m. The 88mm KwK 36 L/56 (Gun on Tiger) had penertration of 120mm at 100m.

On the production, the Soviets were unwilling to break the production runs, that's why they loved the T-34, because things like new turrets, improvements or armour upgrades could be added into the production with little or no disruption.

 

[Huckebein]

I thought it was getting on for 40,000 Sturmoviks produced, with the '109 next in line with about 33,000 (as far as we can tell).

Or am I mixed up and is it 33,000 Il-2s and 30,000 '109s?

I know neither of them ran under 30,000 produced.

 

[cheddar cheese]

it was about 36,000 Il-2's and around 30,000 109's i think 8)

 

[Huckebein]

Heh, yeah - p'raps we should just leave it at "a lot"!

 

[cheddar cheese]

 

[plan_D]

It's 33,000 109s from the first Kestrel engined prototype to the last Hispano built HA-1112 Merlin engined one, with the last rolling off the line in 1958, 23 years after the first.

 

[cheddar cheese]

my stats were based on numbers built during the war i think 8)

 

[plan_D]

Then they are just wrong, it was 33,000 all together.

 

[cheddar cheese]

and i was only counting the Messerschmitt versions

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

you didn't count them, i got you the figures, out of all my books on the subject no two can give the same figure......................