Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Oleg Rastrenin - I can not recommend him highly enough in everything related to Il-2, Ilyushin in general and "shturmovik" aircraft of VVS in the 1930s-1940s. Ironically, he started his research of Il-2 as a true believer in the Soviet myths of "flying tank", "black death", etc. He changed his mind.It looks very logical: the Il-2 was hard to shoot down, so it took over 36,000 of them to produce. And 9 (nine!!!) sorties per one loss in 1941 also certainly testifies to the IL-2's invincibility.
I really wish that Oleg Rastrenin would finally publish his books in English, so that those who do not speak Russian would finally familiarize themselves with the history of IL-2 based on documents, not Soviet propaganda. The history of IL-2 was very complex and ambiguous. And now, when we know the alternatives (and there were more than one) there is no certainty that the decision to produce the IL-2 on a mass scale was optimal.
Undoubtedly, the airplane contributed to the victory over Germany, but it is a definite exaggeration to consider it decisive. Artillery and infantry were of the greatest importance in the Soviet army, while air force was probably the weakest branch, unless you consider the navy, which did not prove itself at all.
The P-39 WAS in combat against ground forces. That according to actual Russians who flew with the VVS in the 1970 /1980s. I believe them. They MOSTLY used the P-39s as escorts for Il-2s and other ground attack aircraft but, yes, they used them against ground targets, too. That particular mission was simply not the primary P-39 assignment.Il-10 was not in combat by 1944, purely in training until early 45, units barely entered combat to fight against the germans.
The P-39 was not in the ground attack role, they liked the big gun to take out bombers
In Soviet air doctrine, all aircraft had the primary task of supporting ground forces. Basically, it was how they employed airplanes.It's not like the Germans weren't retreating on the ground and losing their airfields along the way. I don't think it was the VVS doing the driving -- literally. I think the Red Army appreciated the help, all the same.
In Soviet air doctrine, all aircraft had the primary task of supporting ground forces. Basically, it was how they employed airplanes.
P-39 was involved in ground attack missions mostly at the end of the war. Even in the antishipping missions.The P-39 WAS in combat against ground forces. That according to actual Russians who flew with the VVS in the 1970 /1980s. I believe them. They MOSTLY used the P-39s as escorts for Il-2s and other ground attack aircraft but, yes, they used them against ground targets, too. That particular mission was simply not the primary P-39 assignment.
If I am not mistaken, almost ALL WWII aircraft were sometimes tasked to do things normally "out of their wheelhouse;" it wasn't just the Soviet P-39s.
But it was not that simple. Fighter would have taken on german fighters.In Soviet air doctrine, all aircraft had the primary task of supporting ground forces. Basically, it was how they employed airplanes.
Many Cobra pilots claimed that they were often engaged in escorting ILs and Pe-2s. It would be interesting to compare data from the combat logs of different Cobra regiments and calculate how the sorties were distributed by mission. I can very roughly estimate the distribution for several regiments, but my estimates cannot be considered as reliable. One thing is certain: ground attack was the least typical mission for the Cobras.ground attack role vs target of opporunity on the ground. The P-39 was used as air superiority fighter for most of the time, by later 44/45 it may have been relegated to more secondary roles
I also spoke a lot with pilots of the Soviet Air Force from 1970-1980s, most of them piously believed in propaganda myths and were not very interested in history.The P-39 WAS in combat against ground forces. That according to actual Russians who flew with the VVS in the 1970 /1980s. I believe them.
I think it was a bit more than "targets of opportunity," but I basically agree with you.ground attack role vs target of opporunity on the ground. The P-39 was used as air superiority fighter for most of the time, by later 44/45 it may have been relegated to more secondary roles
The first combat sortie of Il-10 was on 15th April 1945 according to Rastrenin.According to the histories I read, the Il-10 had its combat introduction in Sep 1944 and 99 were produced before the end of 1944.
Kind of disagree. From what I've heard from Russians, the P-39 was used as a fighter and as an escort and as a ground-attack aircraft. Primarily, they WANTED to use it as a fighter but in reality, German ground and air attacks mostly determined where the "defense" needs were. If there was a big ground push, then attacks on troops were the order of the day. If there wasn't a big ground push, then they went with fighter unless the Il-2s and Su-2s required escort.P-39 was involved in ground attack missions mostly at the end of the war. Even in the antishipping missions.
Probably, it was used in the escort role occasionally, stranger things happened in VVS. However, escort was not a primary role for Soviet P-39s.
Well... I'm Russian as well and I'm telling a different storyKind of disagree. From what I've heard from Russians, the P-39 was used as a fighter and as an escort and as a ground-attack aircraft. Primarily, they WANTED to use it as a fighter but in reality, German ground and air attacks mostly determined where the "defense" needs were. If there was a big ground push, then attacks on troops were the order of the day. If there wasn't a big ground push, then they went with fighter unless the Il-2s and Su-2s required escort.
I was given to believe that most of the missions were dictated by German attacks when the Germans were invading, and were much more driven by Soviet objectives when the Germans were retreating. During the German retreat, the main Soviet objectives shifted to attacks on the retreating troops so they could never come back.
So, yes, they got in some fighter missions. But not as many as they wanted to fly.
Less than a thousand Su-2s were produced. Their contribution is extremely small.Kind of disagree. From what I've heard from Russians, the P-39 was used as a fighter and as an escort and as a ground-attack aircraft. Primarily, they WANTED to use it as a fighter but in reality, German ground and air attacks mostly determined where the "defense" needs were. If there was a big ground push, then attacks on troops were the order of the day. If there wasn't a big ground push, then they went with fighter unless the Il-2s and Su-2s required escort.
The main reason for using Cobras for ground attack was the absence of severe anti-aircraft fire from retreating German troops.I was given to believe that most of the missions were dictated by German attacks when the Germans were invading, and were much more driven by Soviet objectives when the Germans were retreating. During the German retreat, the main Soviet objectives shifted to attacks on the retreating troops so they could never come back.
Soviet P-39 carried neither bomb load, nor rockets. Thus, their role as ground attack aircraft was very limited. They WERE used for ground attack, but rather as an exception. I even know rare examples when a regiment claimed more aircraft destroyed on the ground than shot down in the air during a certain time period, but these figures are highly unreliable and not typical for Cobras combat activity. The number of Soviet aces on Cobras is completely disproportionate to the number of Cobras. In the USSR, the Cobras played the role of an almost pure fighter.So, yes, they got in some fighter missions. But not as many as they wanted to fly.
Hi DImlee.Well... I'm Russian as well and I'm telling a different story.
Yaks were typical escort fighters, especially at low altitudes. Of course, other types did that job but less effectvely.
I can not back up my opinion with the hard data now. But the general consensus in Russian-language post Soviet historical community was that P-39 excelled as an air superiority fighter and an interceptor (until LW bombers were a threat). End 1944/1945 was a different story, of course since there were less and less targets in the air.
I'll see if I can find some statistics.
Actually, the MiG-17 was a rarity in the Soviet Air Force in the 1970s. After 1970 they were only in a single squadron of 472 IAP equipped with MiG-19s. I don't know why exactly MiG-17s were kept there, but you clearly have an absolutely unrepresentative sample of pilots from the Soviet Air Force. Even the MiG-21 was already being actively replaced by a new generation of fighters in the 1980s.Just FYI, the guys I spoke with flew MiGs in the 1970s and 1980s. Mostly MiG-17s with some time in MiG-21s.
As it follows from books and interviews of Cobra pilots, ground attack was not a typical mission. It's a much more reliable source.They were under the impression that, despite desires to the contrary, the fighter missions were no more than about 50% of missions, with the balance being ground attack and escort. They were semi-sure most of the ground attack happened during the German retreat, many times in poor winter
Their opinion has no value without citing sources.Doesn't mean they were right, but they had that opinion.