Thorlifter
Captain
Joining in this discussion late, but voting for the B-17.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
But is the Ju 87 really the most overrate in current popular oppinion?
Joining in this discussion late, but voting for the B-17.
Good question! I think in popular opinion nowadays the Ju 87 is actually under-rated. In D and G forms it soldiered on late into the war, socking it to the Russians, in a dogged, determined way. And then there's Rudel to consider-- perhaps the best, or most accomplished combat pilot of all time, and a 7-victory fighter ace while flying Stukas! Yet everyone today seems to think the Stuka was just death-trap. Not my choice to fly into combat with, but Mr. Rudel thought otherwise! (Or was it Rugel? Y'all know who I mean! 11,000 lifetime comabt sorties? Ringing a bell, anyone?)
Il-2, especially of the early modifications.
Agreed; IIRC, Mr. Hartmann racked up quite a few kills on the Il-2; his technique was to approach from the rear below, and take out the ventral oil cooler with a well-placed burst of 30mm.
Agreed; IIRC, Mr. Hartmann racked up quite a few kills on the Il-2; his technique was to approach from the rear below, and take out the ventral oil cooler with a well-placed burst of 30mm.
Oreo are you talking about Hans-Ulrich Rudel?
Hans-Ulrich Rudel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
It shows you just needed to fly one right
The 109 couldn't even carry half the bomb load let alone be as precise as the Ju 87. And loaded with a 500 kg bomb (which wasn't even possible until F or G version iirc) it was a sitting duck. Of all the possible choices for a fighter-bomber the 109 is probably among the worst. It could've never replaced the Ju 87.Ju-87. Slow, outmoded and vulnerable and shown up as soon as air superiority wasn't certain. Best impact was a psychological one but in terms of light bombing I'd rather have a squadron of 109's any day
With the 30mm you they wouldn't need to aim for the radiator...
Now with the 20mm (or 15mm in a few cases) and MG's only the radiator was a prime target. (although with the 20mm a good deal of structural tamage could be dealt as well)
The 109 couldn't even carry half the bomb load let alone be as precise as the Ju 87. And loaded with a 500 kg bomb (which wasn't even possible until F or G version iirc) it was a sitting duck. Of all the possible choices for a fighter-bomber the 109 is probably among the worst. It could've never replaced the Ju 87.
Well even so, the point stands that 30mm mine shells (the standard ammo for the MK 108 ) would still tear up the Il-2.
Well even so, the point stands that 30mm mine shells (the standard ammo for the MK 108 ) would still tear up the Il-2.
Wow, what a difficult question, so I'll go for the shocker and vote for the B29.
Although this was probably the best bomber of the war, it was only "tested" in the PTO and was never challenged by Luftwaffe (IMHO had much better A/C than Japanese) also the magic of the '29 was quickly extinguished 5 years later in Korea
edd