Hs123/9 and Schlactflugzeuge were WW2 equivalent to helicopters?

[wiking85]

Didn't the USAF use the A-37 Dragonfly in Vietnam?

Oh yeah the Super Tweet. Caused major hearing loss due to the sound of the engines; it was used to the bitter end.

 

[gjs238]

And the USAF Marine OV-10 Bronco's were retired relatively recently (post Gulf War 1)?

 

[davebender]

They had one but Hitler refused to fund the program, finally cancelling it outright during fall 1941.

Germany must design and produce 32 ton medium tanks armed with 7.5cm/48 main gun in factory complexes designed to build 300 vehicles per month. Engine would be 400hp Daimler-Benz diesel designed and tested specifically for the German medium tank program. If desired you could also build a matching StuG on same chassis armed with 8.8cm/56 main gun for infantry support.

This medium tank program must receive full funding from 1935 onward (i.e. when Germany began Heer expansion). That should ensure mass production of German medium tanks from 1939 onward.

32 ton medium tank program would cause cancellation of 15 ton Panzer III and 18 ton Panzer IV just as the Heer wanted.

 

[vikingBerserker]

vB, I actually disagree with post, bacon was due to my fat fingers and darned touch screen

The Hs-129 was conceived as an all-around ground attack aircraft, and not as a dedicated tank buster. The MG 151/20 was a fine cannon for air-to-air-work, but less powerful for anti-armor work, even when compared with Hispano or Flak 30/38.

I do not believe it stated it was developed as a dedicated tank killer, it merely stated it was designed to attack ground targets including AFVs and the 20mm was a pretty common anti-tank round for that period. Is there a source that states otherwise?

 

[tomo pauk]

Source for 20mm as a viable AP gun, or source for Hs-129 being conceived for such-and-such roles?

I agree with wiking's statement ("The Hs129 wasn't designed as a tank killer either; It was meant as a ground attack/strafer type. It developed into a tank buster once the need was identified during the 1941 campaign in Russia."), that you've replied: I have to disagree with that statement.... in post #16.

 

[vikingBerserker]

Source for the Hs 129 being conceived only as a ground attack/strafer without AFV targets in mind.

 

[tomo pauk]

In the Kagero's book "Hs-129 in combat", it is stated that initial main purpose was to strafe ground targets. Unfortunately, the perceived/preferred targets are not listed.

 

[Shortround6]

It is hard to say what was the "intended" target/s as the plane didn't go into action until around 4 years after work started what with the change of engines. The early B series planes could be fitted with the 30mm cannon, an uncowled mount for four MG17s (hardly an anti armor weapon), racks for four 50kg bombs or four packs of 24SD2 anti-personnel bombs or a single 250kg bomb or an internal reconnaissance camera. I am not sure how much to read into this but it was third staffel to be equipped with Hs 123s that was a specialized anti-tank unit. It went into action in Jan 1943, 9 months after the first Staffel went into action. Not saying the first and second staffels didn't have 30mm gun packs available but they seem to have been tasked with more general purpose support.

 

[GrauGeist]

Also, at the time that the request for such an attack aircraft was issued, tank warfare hadn't matured to the point that it would within the next 8 years, either.

The Hs129 as a dedicated close-support ground attack aircraft was unique in all the airforces, as it wasn't a dive bomber, fighter, recon or an existing type other than a dedicated gun platform. That it would shortly evolve into an AFV hunter parallels the evolving armored warfare policy. Unlike the Ju87, which was conceived as a dive bomber, the Hs129 was simply upgunned during the execution of it's original mission: ground attack.

 

[pbehn]

I thought the HS 129 was one of many many German design projects, but that went into production because it used the engines from Gnome Rhone. Those engines were never going to power a combat AC but could be used in a ground attack AC without affecting other types. I dont remember many other Henschel AC in WW2.

 

[Shortround6]

The Hs 129 was designed to use 465hp Argus V-12s. The plane was woefully under-powered (at least 12 being built) and with the fall of France the availability of of the Gnome Rhone allowed for a slightly enlarged version to be built.

 

[GrauGeist]

Henschel had several types in service during WWII: Hs123, Hs126, Hs129 (of course) and several guided munitions. They nearly introduced a BMW003 powered dive bomber, the Hs132, but as with many latewar types, they simply ran out of time. 4 airframes were in various stages of completion, the first two were slated for flight testing within days of their facilities being over-run.

But their main focus was heavy industry: locomotives, AFVs and vehicles.

 

[davparlr]

Oh yeah the Super Tweet. Caused major hearing loss due to the sound of the engines; it was used to the bitter end.

Actually the A-37 changed engines from the T-37. Non-A/B axial J85 (also used on the Navy T-2C) replaced the noisy centrifugal J69 on the T-37 so the A-37 should be less ear damaging. Of course, all the AF pilots were already deaf from flying the T-37!

 

[gjs238]

Actually the A-37 changed engines from the T-37. Non-A/B axial J85 (also used on the Navy T-2C) replaced the noisy centrifugal J69 on the T-37 so the A-37 should be less ear damaging. Of course, all the AF pilots were already deaf from flying the T-37!

J85, same engine used on the F-5 and T-38.

 

[davparlr]

J85, same engine used on the F-5 and T-38.

I didn't include those because of the afterburner. It has been used on other aircraft including White Knight One. It is an impressive engine in that it was originally designed to be a one use engine, and has one of best power-to-weight performance of jet engines. It is quite small, less than a 18 in. in diameter and about 46 in. (< 4 ft) in length, non-AB. It looks like a toy and the compressor blades look like old fashion razor blades, which is one of the reasons it cannot tolerate much icing. Designed in the '50s,it is schedule to be in use by the USAF until 2040, or an active use period of about 80 years.

 

[Shortround6]

It was also the engine that pretty much started the Biz jet Business, along with the Viper.

 

[nuuumannn]

Unless you are talking about a turbo prop "conversion" of the Skyraider there aren't enough R-3350 engines and parts to support even a small number of of combat aircraft and trying to put the R-3350 back into production would not be cheap. Finding the gasoline it needs to run on won't be easy either.

Yep, cost is the issue with putting a 1940s aircraft into service today - not to mention maintenance time spent on the ground. The Skyraider is just too old a design. Why use that when you can buy a modern COIN aircraft, such as the Embraer Tucano, Pilatus PC-9 or 21 that is far more reliable, faster and readily available? Not to mention far smaller than the Spad.

The Harrier was/is an exceptional close support aircraft (not getting COIN and C/S confused, moved on from COIN now) and really created a niche as a cheap alternative to the traditional ship based fixed wing element, but on land its biggest novelty is being able to be deployed from very rough conditions at the front. The US military should buy more of them, maybe they could regenerate the ex-RAF GR.9s sitting forlornly and wastefully on pallets in the desert in the USA? Logistics is the problem with those though, the British ones are not compatible with the Marines' AV-8s.

It was also the engine that pretty much started the Biz jet Business, along with the Viper.

Lets not forget the RR Tay. The Viper was also conceived as a one shot engine - Armstrong Siddeley originally designed it for putting in the Jindivik target aircraft (A/S named their engines after snakes - Viper, Mamba Python etc, RR expanded the design beyond what it originally was).