Il-2 Sturmovik

[holderoftheblade]

I need all the background info on this aircraft..
Armaments, top speed, designer, uses in combat... etc...

Thanks in advance. Im new here. I posted a topic somewhere else, but that one probably wasnt in the right place.

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

no don't worry it's been found...

 

[Brunner]

I need all the background info on this aircraft..
Armaments, top speed, designer, uses in combat... etc...

Thanks in advance. Im new here. I posted a topic somewhere else, but that one probably wasnt in the right place.

Hi!
Il2 designed as a CKB55 by the team led by Sergiey Iliushin flew for the 1st time in October 1939. It was revised and renamed CKB57. It was equipped with AM35 engine (1370 HP) with a supercharger which proved to be useless and thus the engine was replaced by AM 38 (1650 HP).

The pilot had a poor view from the cockpit due to the placement of the engine, so the 2nd prototype had a lowered power plant. Additionally the higher cockpit was introduced.

Initially the Soviets wanted to arm the plane with 4 7.62mm ShKAS machine guns (stupid weren't they?), but in the end they fitted two ShKAS and two ShVAK 20 mm cannons.

Initially it was a single seater, without the rear gunner. The front part of the fuselage was made of 700kg of steel (5-12mm thick). The cockpit was protected by K4 armoured glass (55-65mm).

Armament: 2 ShKAS, 2 ShVAK, 8 RS82 rockets, bombload 400 kg.

Before German invasion only 249 Sturmoviks were manufactured and didn't play significant role in the beginning phase of the Soviet-German war.

Not enough firepower and great vulnerability were the main disadvantages of this plane.
In the beginning of 1942 23mm VYa cannons were introduced to replace Shvaks and the place for the rear gunner was prepared. (initially this crew member wasn't protected by ANY armour (poor guy), but later his situation improved. New powerplant was installed (AM38F - 1750HP).

Il2M3 had the armoured position for the rear gunner with single 12.7mm UBT gun. The armour weight increased to 950 KG.

The Sturmoviks took part in 1941-42 actions but their real baptism of fire was Stalingrad, where they contributed to decrease of German armoured power in the city and nearby

Some Il2's were equipped with 37mm NS37 cannon, but its recoil was such big that it badly affected the aircraft handling and its structure (as in Aircobra, the same story).

Sturmoviks took part in the Kursk battle where the new 2.5 KG bombs were introduced (PTAB). Each plane could take up to 196 such bombs and drop them on the German armoured columns. Apart from that also DAG10 grenade launcher was used. It ejected grenades with little parachutes.

During this period weak sides of Sturmovik were revealed. It was mainly very poor manouverability with load of bombs or rockets and the exposed radiators under the belly. In the morning of 5th July 1943, during only one sortie, the Soviets lost 70 Sturmoviks...

Soft targets were attacked from 10-15 meters of altitude, while the bunkers - from almost vertical diving.
Armoured columns were attacked with PTAB from altitude of 100-150m.

Sturmoviks often formed circles of death against armoured offensive formations each of Il2's making a shallow dive to attack a tank, preferably from the rear.

In an operation Bagration (June 1944) almost 2000 Sturmoviks took part.
They were rearmed with 37 mm 11-P-37 cannons. Also new rockets were introduced - RS 132 of greater firepower than RS 82. They had anti tank warheads or highly explosive (for destroying fortifications).

These planes took also part in fighting in Poland, especially over Vistula bridgeheads (Magnuszew, Puławy, jabłonna) near Warsaw and during Oder crossing operation.

IMO, the Sturmovik is highly over estimated. It wasn't such great and effective strike plane. Despite its armour it was easy to shot down by German fghters as well as by Flak, it had terrible engines - AM38, called "single use engines" with tendency to overheating. (there were three times more engines than Sturmoviks, but it occured not to be enough)

It had a nickname :concrete plane, but I think it was not because of the Sturmovik's good armour but due to its horrible manouverability (or its lack)...

Well, I think that for the beginning that's it. i will try to find some details about combat use of Il2.

Oh, btw, some numbers:

wingspan 14.6m
wing area 38.5m2
lenght 11.65m
height 4.17m
empty weight 3400kg
MTO weight 5.850kg
max speed 425km/h
ceiling 4525m
range 600km

I hope I helped a bit

=S=

 

[The Jug Rules!]

I had no idea that the Airacobra had a recoil problem! I always wondered why they replaced the 37mm. BTW, nice '190 sig...where did you get it?

 

[Brunner]

I don't remember. I downloaded it from net very very long time ago. Cute isn't it?

Yes, there were some problems with T9 cannon, but not such big ones as in the case of Sturmovik or Yak9T. The fact is that in P39 the cannon was placed in such way that it absorbed most shock generated during shooting, but nevertheless, the influence the T9 had on the airframe of the plane and its manouverability prevailed. And thus t9 was replaced by 20mm cannon.

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

a good move IMO............

 

[Brunner]

the best possible.
WHat is interesting, Pokryshkin had all the weapon (guns and cannons) available under one trigger. It had to be a little nice salvo 8)

 

[Learstang]

Yes, I'm a Newbie (I hate that term), and I shouldn't be refuting a "Senior Member" of this site, but I beg to differ with Mr. Brunner regarding the IL-2 on some points. I have extensively researched this aeroplane for many years, and far from being overestimated, I believe it has been greatly underestimated, at least by those in the West. "It wasn't such great and effective strike plane." Really? Ask the crews of the thousands of Nazis tanks blown to Hell by this great assault plane. They might disagree with you. You mention the 70 Shturmoviks shot down in one sortie during the Battle of Kursk. Perhaps of more importance are the hundreds (thousands?) of German tanks destroyed by the IL-2's in this battle and if memory serves me, the Soviets decisively won the Battle of Kursk. Perhaps I shouldn't bring this up, but is it just a coincidence that a Pole is denigrating the greatest Russian plane of the war? I'm sorry, Mr. Brunner, that the Soviets sat on the Vistula and watched whilst the Home Army was slaughtered in Warsaw by the Nazis, but that doesn't alter the fact that the IL-2 was one of the truly great aeroplanes of WWII, and in my opinion, the single plane most responsible for defeating the Nazis in the war. As far as it being vulnerable to fighters, and not as manouevrable, of course it had problems with fighters - it wasn't a fighter, it was a bomber, and every bomber needs fighter escort to operate most effectively. As I recall, your PZL-23 Karas didn't exactly distinguish itself against the Nazi fighter opposition. I'm sorry if I seem to be taking this a bit personally, but I'm getting a little tired of all the negative and inaccurate b.s. that has been flung about over the years regarding the IL-2, much of it politically or even ethnically motivated.

How's this for a first (and I suspect last) post?

Za Rodinu! Learstang

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Although Mr. Learstang is already banned for being just as ignorant in another thread, I'd like to point out to the rest of our membership that reads this that this idiot spewed his stupidity on a thread that's been dead for 3 years.

 

[Matt308]

What a juvenile mental midget.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Gee Matt, don't give him that much credit!

 

[Matt308]

Well I thought his PM rave was just a lunatic PO'd liberal. But the above post puts him in the closet momma's boy living at home at much too great of an age.

 

[timshatz]

Kinda depressing to read his posts. Outside him missing the dead thread line on this, he just went out of his way to insult and otherwise be nasty to Brunner. He had a different opinion and that was grounds for an attack.

Self induced moral superiority doesn't give a person the right to insult others at will. Shows a certain shallowness of character.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Well said Tim unfortunately based on his posts and PMs the guy seems to be a "wanna - be" - armchair pilot and master of all when in essence the only aircraft seat he ever sat in was row 15A, and that on a rare occasion.

 

[Flyboy2]

Is there like a way you can kick him out. I don't like him and haven't even met him

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Is there like a way you can kick him out. I don't like him and haven't even met him

We banned him and if he finds a way back he'll continue to ban him - we have no tolerance here for idiots like him.

 

[timshatz]

Well said Tim unfortunately based on his posts and PMs the guy seems to be a "wanna - be" - armchair pilot and master of all when in essence the only aircraft seat he ever sat in was row 15A, and that on a rare occasion.

Gotcha. Experience makes people thoughtful and cautious. He seems to lack both.

Well, flying lessons are available all over the country. Oughta go out and prove to himself what an above average personality he really is.

 

[Matt308]

He's already gone.

 

[Flyboy2]

I love when people like him get burned