Catch22
Major
Yes, I suppose, but the quality of the German pilots was pretty bad in those days as well, save for the experten of course.
Best Tank Killer of WW2 continued (3 Viewers)
- Thread starter Erich
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
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
Staff Sergeant
- 1,154
- Dec 24, 2008
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
Brigadier General
Agree with both of u guys....
Catch22
Major
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
Staff Sergeant
- 1,154
- Dec 24, 2008
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.
lesofprimus
Brigadier General
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)
The Fw 190F-8 was the best tank buster of the War.... (back on topic)
Thunderbolt56
Airman
- 42
- Dec 31, 2008
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.
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.
lesofprimus
Brigadier General
No surprise there....
Thunderbolt56
Airman
- 42
- Dec 31, 2008
Consistency RULES! 8)
p.s. Cool sig vid
p.s. Cool sig vid
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.
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.
Thunderbolt56
Airman
- 42
- Dec 31, 2008
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.
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.
The F-8 was no less effective than the Jug was.
Also...
The F-8 also had provisions for:
2 drop tanks
3 SC 250
88mm Panzerschreck
Panzerblitz
R4M
Thunderbolt56
Airman
- 42
- Dec 31, 2008
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?!
)
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?!
I believe that it was only tested. Erich might actually have more information on this.
The F-8 was a purpose built up-armored variant of the Fw 190 for ground attack and anti-tank operations.
lesofprimus
Brigadier General
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.
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.
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....
lesofprimus
Brigadier General
U been smokin crack or just huffin the paint fumes???
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....
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.
lesofprimus
Brigadier General
Did u even read my post or are u just spouting sh!t outta ur mouth for the sake of hearing it???
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:
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iffnw_rbB1Q
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HwN3ZvIe6Yc
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...
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:
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iffnw_rbB1Q
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HwN3ZvIe6Yc
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...
