SBD vs. JU-87 vs. Aichi D3A

[USS Enterprise CV-6]

But as best dive bomber, I would have to go with the SBD. It had decent speed (255 mph) decent weapons for pilot (2x.50 caliber machine guns) and rear seat gunner (2x.30 caliber machine guns). It also had a decent bomb load, (500 pounds to 1000 pounds) and was double purposed (Scout Plane/Dive Bomber). Was the SBD built to be a scout plane, because I have heard SBD stood for Scouting by Douglass?

 

[USS Enterprise CV-6]

Hardly the case - the Stukas are probably the best armored of all three, with a good defensive gun suite - a twin MG81 is a nasty thing with 3200 rounds/min...

Looking at the specs, the Ju 87D seems to be a clear winner of the three; it has the same speed as the Dauntless, it`s heavily armored, the D-5 is heavily armed and also the Dora carries a heaviest bombload of all three, bombs as big as 1800 kg can be carried. As naval bombers for the Pacific, the other two generally has the advantage of range, though I am not sure how this would play out with a variation of ordonance - droptanks/bombs.

The Val was a nice dive bomber when the war started, but the lack of development simply made it fall behind against newer types of dive bombers.

I read the reason the Stuka was so vunerable was because of its speed. However, some of you more experienced and know more about the Stuka would know

 

[tomo pauk]

But as best dive bomber, I would have to go with the SBD. It had decent speed (255 mph) decent weapons for pilot (2x.50 caliber machine guns) and rear seat gunner (2x.30 caliber machine guns). It also had a decent bomb load, (500 pounds to 1000 pounds) and was double purposed (Scout Plane/Dive Bomber). Was the SBD built to be a scout plane, because I have heard SBD stood for Scouting by Douglass?

SBD is for 'scout, bomber', 'D' was letter code for Douglas. The Vought have had letter code 'U' (like in F4U), Grumman was 'F' (like in F4F), North American was 'J' (like in FJ). As you've guessed it, if the 1st letter was 'F', the aircraft was in fighter class (or VF class).

I read the reason the Stuka was so vunerable was because of its speed. However, some of you more experienced and know more about the Stuka would know

Every slow bomber (and other A/C) was vulnerable to fighters, whether it was a dive bomber, 'level' bomber or torpedo bomber.

BTW, what happened to the Stug's pictures??

 

[Garyt]

The SBD had some maneuverability, had two forward firing 50 cals and was even used as a CAP against VTs early on but it would not have a good chance unescorted against enemy VFs. However it served and served well during the whole war.

I'd agree here. Regardless of how well a bomber flies with a normal load, it's flight characteristics change dramatically when loaded down. The Val was far more maneuverable than the others, bit it won't maneuver well loaded with a bomb. The Val was used in last ditch CAP - but again, not with a bomb.

If a Val, Dauntless or Stuka dropped their bomb load and fought with enemy fighters they may have a very small chance of competing. Actually, the Val should perform a lot better here due to it's maneuvering. But none of these planes carried much forward firing hardware, the 2 50.'s on the Dauntless were better than the others. But the best hope for any of these would be to escape or mess around long enough for their escort to help if they had one. None would be able to run away effectively, their best chance of escape would be to get "lost" in a crowded fight. And by the time ordinance was jettisoned, the opposing fighters were sucessful, as no ordinance would reach the target.

I still like the Dauntless the best, but it's certainly close, and the reasoning is mostly due to weight of ordinance carried. And none were true fighter bombers that had a chance of fighting on anywhere close to even keel once ordinance was jettisoned.

 

[USS Enterprise CV-6]

SBD is for 'scout, bomber', 'D' was letter code for Douglas. The Vought have had letter code 'U' (like in F4U), Grumman was 'F' (like in F4F), North American was 'J' (like in FJ). As you've guessed it, if the 1st letter was 'F', the aircraft was in fighter class (or VF class).



Every slow bomber (and other A/C) was vulnerable to fighters, whether it was a dive bomber, 'level' bomber or torpedo bomber.

BTW, what happened to the Stug's pictures??

I knew Scouting by Douglass wasn't right! It just doesn't sound right! And when I said the Scouting by Douglass part, I didn't mean that's what it meant, I meant that's what I heard and didn't know if it was right.

 

[USS Enterprise CV-6]

All of them were good dive bombers, and it is hard to determion which was the best. The Val was not, so we can rule that one out. I kinda want the SBD to be better, but both the SBD and Stuka were very good dive bombers.

 

[Wildcat]

... as was the Vengeance

 

[GrumpyBadger]

first off,

RL sucks sometimes, sorry for being gone for so long.

but I have to vote for the SBD probably for the reason anyone else votes for theirs. Purely sentimental reasons. I just love that kite. Right now in IL-2, in my online airgroup squadron, I chose the SBD as my first bird to become carrier qual'd in (CVE, CVL, and CV - fly out to CG using Hayrake, 5 touch and go, 1 trap, fly back using DR on "full real" settings). It's not because arguably she's the easiest to do this in. But because honestly, even if just in a made-up online group, I want my gold wings earned in an SBD Dauntless.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Video games- how fun!

 

[VBF-13]

That's a darn cool picture.

Seeing in as much as you revived this thread, I'd like to add this to it. Do you know what another issue was in the steeper dives in this aircraft? I know at least by late 1943, they wanted 60-degrees, but no steeper. It was in the pull-out. The crew (rear gun) couldn't take the pull-outs in the steeper dives. They'd vomit.