Best tank killer aircraft of WW2 Part I

Anonymous · Jan 7, 2005

I used to have a report on the P-38 from a commander (pilot) to his superiors on the problems of the plane in the ETO/MTO. The biggest problem he pointed out was the complexity of going from cruise mode (with tanks) to combat configuration. There were so many steps involved, many of them not physically easy to accomplish, that many pilots were shot down while trying to reconfigure the plane when the enemy appeared.

I'll try to find that report, i have it saves as an "offline favorite" I think, but its in an old version of Windows. I.e.: I'll need to setup to boot to another drive to retrieve it.

=S=

Lunatic

DerAdlerIstGelandet · Jan 7, 2005

I think a major problem with the ealier P-38's that would present a problem in the ETO (even though it is not really a life threatening thing) was the fact that the engines were so far from the cockpit that the heating for the pilot sucked. Anyways I cant remember how we got on the topic of the P-38 as a tank killer, yes it could do it, but it was not really a tank killer.

Lightning Guy · Jan 7, 2005

Ok. Let me clear up several things.

The P-38Ls carried loads as high as 5,200lbs in combat (2 x 2000lb on the maing pylons and 4 x 300lb under the outer wings).

In addition to the Droop Snoot, there was a version of the P-38 developed with APS-15 "Mickey" BTO radar.

To the best of my knowledge, the Swordfish was never used to give areobatic demonstartions to other P-38 pilots. This would have been rather ill-advised since the Swordfish had considerably different flight characteristics from a standard P-38. It was described as being the best diving version.

The dive recovery flaps were used fairly often to tighten a turn. I am currently reading the history of the 475th FG and several pilots mentioned using the dive flaps in combat.

The P-38s were fairly effective as a tank buster and achieved some notable success in the MTO. Even though only the late versions of the P-38 had rockets, the standard firepower was sufficient to handle most German tanks from above and behind.

DerAdlerIstGelandet · Jan 8, 2005

Lightning Guy said:
To the best of my knowledge, the Swordfish was never used to give areobatic demonstartions to other P-38 pilots. This would have been rather ill-advised since the Swordfish had considerably different flight characteristics from a standard P-38. It was described as being the best diving version.

This I pretty much believed my self. As for the tank busting abilities I am not arguing that, I just trying to figure out where this all got started.

the lancaster kicks ass · Jan 8, 2005

however the tankbuster in the med had to be the hurricane Mk.IID, with the vickers S guns................

lesofprimus · Jan 8, 2005

Who is in competition with that Hurricane IID???????

cheddar cheese · Jan 8, 2005

I dont know anything about tankbusting in the MTO...

Adolf Galland · Jan 8, 2005

ummm...when ppl talk about tank busting, y did everyone just talk about fighter-bombers? cuz not just the fighter bombers are effetive tank-destorying aircraft...like the dive-bombers are really compareable to the fighter-bombers in this role(probably even better than it)

lesofprimus · Jan 8, 2005

Dive bombing tank busters????

Hmmmmmmm....

cheddar cheese · Jan 8, 2005

We do talk about dive bombers, its justthat I dont the the Ju-87G or IL-2 really done much in the MTO...

lesofprimus · Jan 8, 2005

And those 2 particular aircraft didnt even divebomb, they approached at a shallow glidee angle... Well, the Ju-87G-2 and IL2-M3 did atleast......

Lightning Guy · Jan 8, 2005

As I mentioned, the P-38 earned a formidable reputation in the MTO as a tank buster. I'm not sure dive-bombers were as effective as tank-buster as strafing fighters/attack planes. I know Rudel prefered to have dive bombers attack Russian AA guns to make the job of shooting up tanks easier for his Ju-87Gs.

the lancaster kicks ass · Jan 8, 2005

As I mentioned, the P-38 earned a formidable reputation in the MTO as a tank buster

but the hurricane Mk.IID did even morso............

DerAdlerIstGelandet · Jan 8, 2005

Adolf Galland said:
ummm...when ppl talk about tank busting, y did everyone just talk about fighter-bombers? cuz not just the fighter bombers are effetive tank-destorying aircraft...like the dive-bombers are really compareable to the fighter-bombers in this role(probably even better than it)

Well I think that would be because most fighters could be configured to be fighter bombers and ground attack but tank busting is more of a mission. Many aircraft were used for tank busting duties, some were just better then others.

Lightning Guy · Jan 8, 2005

True. But personally, I would rather be in the fighter-bomber instead of the dedicated tank-buster as I would like to have a fighting chance if I was bounced.

DerAdlerIstGelandet · Jan 9, 2005

I agree with you completely and in the fighter bomber role I would want to be in a Fw-190.

the lancaster kicks ass · Jan 9, 2005

but i think i'd rather have the pure tank buster, then atleast i've got a better chance of destrying the tank and it'll be easier, and if i get shot down, i'd hjave died gloriously on the battlefield for queen and country...........

Anonymous · Jan 9, 2005

I'd rather be flying something like the F4U-4 corsair. Very tough, very fast, and it can drop napalm on the tanks for nearly 100% effectiveness. Then I can get the hell out of there at 400+ mph, and if some enemy fighter is by some fluke able to intercept me, I have a decent chance of winning that fight too.

8)

Lunatic

the lancaster kicks ass · Jan 9, 2005

i'd feel more at home in a hurricane Mk.IID.............

Anonymous · Jan 9, 2005

the lancaster kicks ass said:
i'd feel more at home in a hurricane Mk.IID.............

At least you think you would. The fact is neither of us would "feel at home" in any of these planes

But seriously, to be effective the IID had to go down low and slow and attack the tank, exposing itself to enemy ground fire while doing so. And it was a sitting duck for almost any true German fighter.

With the F4U-4 however, you can carry two large napalm tanks, come in at high speed, and dump each one across multiple tanks, potentially killing more than one each attack, and at least one is almost a sure thing since you can miss by quite a bit and still get the tank. One 110-gallon napalm bomb would spread over a pear-shaped area about 85 meters long and about 25 meters wide. Much easier than trying to go down and gun it, and you probably get any supporting infantry or vehicles too! And when you're done, you're in a top rated fighter and can either strafe ground targets or engage in aerial combat.

Just my opinion of course.

=S=

Lunatic

Best tank killer aircraft of WW2 Part I

Anonymous

Guest

Private Chemtrail Disperser

Master Sergeant

Private Chemtrail Disperser

Major General

Brigadier General

Major General

Airman 1st Class

Brigadier General

Major General

Brigadier General

Master Sergeant

Major General

Private Chemtrail Disperser

Master Sergeant

Private Chemtrail Disperser

Major General

Anonymous

Guest

Major General

Anonymous

Guest

Users who are viewing this thread

Similar threads