Tail gunner worth?

[exec228]

il-2's armoured cockpit could be penetrated only by 20mm. dunno about high-power UB and .5Brownings, but MG 131 almost could not harm Il-2's pilot from rear.
but the later added gunner was protected very miserably. indeed. with low power/wt ratio of AM-37/Il-2 another crewman with heavy UB seriously decreased plane's performance. but anyways, during 1942 crews made field modifications to accomodate a gunner with ShKAS, UB or even DShK.
in late october of 1942 a serial production two-seaters entered action under stalingrad. the situation improved when more powerfull AM-38F could carry two-seaters since 1943-01.

 

[comiso90]

Even with a tail gunner, some aircraft destined to be destroyed - Devestator, stuka, kate and val. I cant help but think that man power could have been better used.

 

[exec228]

yup. with twin 12.7 more effective.

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

then surely the trade off becomes which would you prefer

a fast attack bomber, single seat, kinda like a fighter/bomber but with less of the fighter element, hoping your speed will get you through, a concept that only works if you're talking a seriously fast bomber, of which there are few........

or a more traditional dive-bomber with a rear gunner, his sprey and prey will do little to protect you but he is a second pair of eyes, but against a decent attacker even that wont save you, and the extra weight will make one seriously slow bomber, and of course the extra guy could've been piloting another aircraft somewhere safe from harm, so which is it?

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Either way if I was in a Stuka or some other kind of dive bomber than again what I would want the gunner for is the second set of eyes watching out for predators from the rear and high. Sure the guns would be nice, but the extra set of eyes is the advantage.

Not that it mattered though, the slow cumberson dive bombers were easy prey either way.

 

[Udet]

"but it's hard to believe this trick was used "en mass"...."

It might be hard to believe but battle records make a clear indication German fighter pilots, wether seasoned or rookies, learned how to destroy IL-2s in huge quantities as pointed out by Primus.

Have Luftwaffe guncamera footage showing the two seat version of the IL-2 getting brutally gutted, with huge pieces and chunks of fuselage, wings, cockpit, pilots and incinerated rear gunners flying all over the camera sight. A view that should be similar if not more brutally abhorrent when compared with images of B-17s and B-24s getting processed by German fighters.

I have always commented that if such a huge piece of work like the B-17, sound, radial engined, 12 or more .50 cal defensive guns got slaughtered en mass by Fw 190s and Bf 109s, how is it that there are people believing the IL-2 was some sort of "terribly difficult" target.

The most confident comments you will find from German pilots are likely to say "we could outmanouver the enemy", or "our guns and cannons proved very effective and we destroyed the targets..", and that´s about it. No jokes or laughing at the allied planes and pilots.

If anyone might comment it is German pilots themselves affirming the Shturmovik was a "tough target" then my response will be "have you heard of any German pilot mocking or diminishing any allied plane (bomber or fighter alike)?

Unlike so many pilots from the victorious club who mock and ridicule German planes, i do not think you will find any evidence of German pilots commenting anything similar about allied hardware.

Cheers!

 

[Erich]

well it is true that tail gunners have proved their worth during the heat of battle. have accounts of the US and the German side of things when an He 177 tail gunner took on a P-61. the P-61 was lucky to get away and crack up on landing with only the crew shaken. The He 177 tail gunner received the EK for the action saving his crews butt big time as they were going to easily be dog meat, but the rear gunner got the jump on the Widow

 

[Chingachgook]

Zero vs. SBD - kill ratio was 1 to 1 (by loss record - source unknown due to Chings' bad memory).

I am not sure how many could be attributed to the stinger, but it must have been significant because the SBD couldn't outfly the Zero.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Zero vs. SBD - kill ratio was 1 to 1 (by loss record - source unknown due to Chings' bad memory).

I am not sure how many could be attributed to the stinger, but it must have been significant because the SBD couldn't outfly the Zero.

Actually once clear of their bombs the SBD was quite maneuverable. Several SBD drivers (Stanley W Vejtasa) had multiple kills while flying the SBD.

 

[comiso90]

cool. I didn't know that about the Dauntless.... one more reason to like it!

 

[exec228]

saw some memoir mentions of the fact that stuka is quite maneuverable.
read a report that said il-2 turn time is slower 2 times and radius lesser 1.5 times (or vise versa) than 109's. so when il-2 goes virage, 109 should not follow it, because when it follows, it outruns il-2 by outer circle and comes to il-2's sight from below.
actually, the problem was bliezkrieg shock that did not allowed to train pilots well. soviets were just not quite ready for such a war in 1941. soviets expected war in 1942, because they did not believed that hitler will rush with 3 months in disposal before massive snow falls. soviet spies reported that wehrmacht does not have ANY hue about winter equipment. fuel, oil could not stand frosts, no winter wearings, no winter training for staff. attacking huge territory having only 3 months was a crazyness, and soviets really were not ready for war in autumn/41.

ok, so il-2 pilots were trained quite poor, and almost did not attempted to take an initiative in dogfight.
however, even heavy underpowered il-2 could become a tough opponent in dogfight with highly trained pilot. it was proven when two aces duelled, one in il-2, another in la-5. that ace (which later became an cosmonaut afair. g.t.beregovoy?) demonstrated that la-5 can have real troubles aiming at il-2, and even can find himself to be a target.
therefore, i think that many scouts without bombs technically can give an adequate answer to an interceptor.
but reality is another thing. most of pilots were trained not good enough to use all advantages of their airplanes. and being passive, many scouts were shot down.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Most aircraft shot down were not shot down in a dog fight anyhow but were rather jumped. The one you did not see was the one that got you.

 

[exec228]

even spotting bandits, VVS usually kept formation to carry out primary goal.
many veterans said that LW preferred to intercept strike planes AFTER the strike was done. sometimes LW even to avoided interception of well built flight group. with soviet doctrine in mind these veterans wondered why LW often allowed VVS to strike, because soviet pilots usually tried to indercept stukas and buffs BEFORE strike to prevent harm to army.
ah, back on topic: having spotted enemy ilyushins and petlyakovs preferred to tighten formation and to proceed combat course.

 

[lesofprimus]

Several SBD drivers (Stanley W Vejtasa) had multiple kills while flying the SBD.

As u may recall Joe, The "Swede" was my Grandfathers best friend for several decades, as was afectionatly known as Uncle Swede... He was one of the true blue died in the wool aviators...

 

[Bf109_g]

Im guessing on this but if enough research is done Im sure that there has to be at least one ace out there as a tail gunner with 5 or more confirmed kills. I do think for the most part we all agree having a second set of eyes are for the best though.

Hi guys!

I have been skimming through "Night After Night - New Zealanders In Bomber Command", and there is a rear gunner with 5 confirmed enemy kills, Ted de Joux, DFM, CGM. He shot down three Me109s in one firefight in 1941, and then two more during the later stage of the war to becoming one of the top-scoring rear gunner "aces" of World War Two.

James.

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

yes there are a few in bomber command, interestingly none using any of the .50cal turrets as far as i'm aware, i haven't mentioned them here as they're asking about the rear gunners on dive bombers and other smaller aircraft..........

 

[Chingachgook]

As u may recall Joe, The "Swede" was my Grandfathers best friend for several decades, as was afectionatly known as Uncle Swede... He was one of the true blue died in the wool aviators...

Cool, what was his trick to downing Zeros?