ju 87 used as a fighter (1 Viewer)

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

mikey

Recruit
8
0
Dec 10, 2013
I read hans book he was saying they used ju 87s without gun pod to escort the gun ones where they that maneuverable making hard to shoot at
 
I i wonder about that, ive heard they had a good turning capability, and were able to shoot down enemy fighters, i think Rudel had a few kills, but in my opinion, handling or roll, actually is more important than an aircraft that has a tight turn.
 
Roll is typically more important at high speeds and high altitude. Banked turn capability is relatively more important at low altitude and slower speeds where the CAS battle takes place.

Not that I would recommend Ju-87 or most other single engine dive bombers for air to air combat as they were just too slow. IJN D4Y (Judy) dive bomber is one of the few that were fast enough to compete with fighter aircraft. Twin engine Me-410 dive bomber could fight other aircraft in a pinch too.
 
I read hans book he was saying they used ju 87s without gun pod to escort the gun ones where they that maneuverable making hard to shoot at

Escort them to protect them against what? Any decent fighter aircraft will make mince meat of a Ju 87. Ask any Battle of Britain pilot.
Cheers
Steve
 
Ju 87 wasn't a fighter but anyway the first air kill of WWII was achieved by a Ju 87 pilot, the victim was a Polish P.11c fighter

Juha
 
Heck, if you can dive bomb with the Heinkel He 177, then why not dogfight with the Ju-87!
:rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
I'm sure a Ju 87 would be able to out-turn any of the newer Soviet fighters.

If enemy fighters are getting amongst your burdened Stukas having their way with them - I could see the merit in having a few nimble versions in the pack.
 
Most strike aircraft, with front guns, were used as "fighters" if a suitable target came into view. The Skua was used to intercept raids on RN carriers in 1940, and the SBD was used against IJN Kates on several occasions. Stukas were used to intercept an Albacore strike on Kirkenes in July 1941 where they shot down several Albacores and in return lost one to an Albacore front gun.
 
The SBD downed a variety of Japanese fighters and bombers during it's time and it was even used as a reserve fleet CAP aircraft in the early stages of the PTO.

It's actually ranked among the Allied fighters, for PTO victories.
 
During the BoB, several Ju 87 pilots would wait until an RAF plane had lined up on their 6 then lower the dive brakes and get a few shots off as the attacking fighter overshot the Stuka. Several escaped that way.
 
During the BoB, several Ju 87 pilots would wait until an RAF plane had lined up on their 6 then lower the dive brakes and get a few shots off as the attacking fighter overshot the Stuka. Several escaped that way.


And an awful lot got shot down :)
Teddy Donaldson of 151 Squadron summed up the attitude of Fighter Command's pilots towards the Ju 87.

They were "...very easy to get out of the sky. We tackled them from the back end and the poor bastards just fell out of the sky."

Not for no reason did the pilots of Fighter Command invent the phrase 'Stuka party'.

Cheers

Steve
 
Roll is typically more important at high speeds and high altitude. Banked turn capability is relatively more important at low altitude and slower speeds where the CAS battle takes place.

Not that I would recommend Ju-87 or most other single engine dive bombers for air to air combat as they were just too slow. IJN D4Y (Judy) dive bomber is one of the few that were fast enough to compete with fighter aircraft. Twin engine Me-410 dive bomber could fight other aircraft in a pinch too.

Can you expand on the top part a little more? Why is roll more important at high speeds and altitude?
 
"Stuka Party" was obviously a battle incentive and a youthfull legend.
Not without ground, but those two are good reasons for it came to be.

Ilyushin Il-2 and SBD Dauntless were also 'good fighters' when circonstances were there.
Hell, in wartime even a helmet can become an offensive weapon...

[I think the thread should avoid bashing or anihilating the idea of using a Ju-87 as an air to air weapon, obviously opportunistic, but instead document it, and discuss versus the Aichi Val or Dauntless etc.]
 
Last edited:
"Stuka Party" was obviously a battle incentive and a youthfull legend.]

It's a phrase that came into RAF parlance in 1940 to reflect the relative ease (and lack of risk) with which the Ju 87 could be engaged by a Spitfire or Hurricane. Nobody talked about Messerschmitt parties.

Several memoirs refer to the Stuka in similar terms to the ones I posted previously. One pilot simply described the Ju 87 as 'my favourite target'.

It wasn't a fighter, it was a dive bomber and the idea that it had any air to air capability when confronted with fighters is simply wrong. Whether it could compete with other types is a moot point.

Cheers

Steve
 
There is quite a difference between what a skillful and determined pilot could do and what a below average or green pilot could do. There is also an element of luck. Avro Anson's shot down several Bf 109s but nobody in their right mind thought Ansons were the answer to 109s.

Vals and Dauntlesses were used at times to stretch fighter numbers and were intended to be used against even poorer performing aircraft. Zeros or F4Fs engage enemy fighters and the dive bombers then try to engage the undefended/unescorted Kates or TBDs. Or Vals attacked Hudsons or Vildebeests or what ever.

There were often some rather large differences in the ability of some pilots and the average pilot on the other side. This allowed some good pilots to get away with tactics (stunts) that would be rather questionable if used against decent pilots. In other words they worked right up until they didn't and then the pilot using them was not usually in a position to write memoirs.
 
Ironically, it was a Stuka that was credited with the first Axis air-to-air victory, when on 1 September 1939, a Ju87 encountered and shot down, a PZL P.11c of the Polish Air Force.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back