The best low-flying attack aircraft of WW2.

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


Mar 19, 2005
Ofcourse, it`s russian Il-2 "flying tank" :) [/img]
Actuall - I like the F7F Tigercat :D


It never saw combat (other than possibly attacking japanese subs) but they were stationed at Guam and flying patrols before the war ended. They were being saved for the assault on Japan but were actually ready for combat in the Spring of '45.

1 x 2000 lbs bomb on the center station, 2 x 1000 lbs bombs on the inner wing stations, 8 x 5" HVAR's on the outboard wing stations, 4 x 20mm (200 rpg) in the wing roots and 4 x .50 BMG's (300 rpg) in the nose, and almost 400 lbs of armor in a 400 mph package (5.2 mins to 20K too!) is pretty hard to beat!


A-26B Invader


Eight .50 cal's in the nose.
Six .50 cal's in the wings.
Two .50 cal's in the upper turret locked forward. (The plane in the picture has had its dorsal and ventral turrets removed.)


Rockets or 2,000lbs. of bombs mounted under the wings.


4,000lbs of bombs carried internally.
How about the Stuka or the Mitchell... They were hard to take down... The Michell had a hard shell, was manuvrable enough...It was the choice in the surprise atack against japan...
The Stuka, though quite slow, it was considered terrifing by the english... The sound it made during a dive sent chills up human spines...
The Stuka was a good weapon providing it had the advantage of air superiority however, the RAF blew the hell out of the stuka during the battle of britain, which is why it was hastily withdrawn from the battle after only a short time. The Hawker typhoon tempest were quite a handfull, And if either went against a stuka, then its bye, bye Stuka!!
Indeed...It would ahve been weak... But in the circumstances of a surprise attack(such as the Blitzkrieg) the Stuka has been used effectively and it's small size in comparison to regular bombers had made it perfect for small hidden aerodroms, being easily conceild beneath camuflage... It could operate from small landing strips close to the front...
the lancaster kicks ass said:
but is no match for decent fighter opposition.........

Which is why my vote is for the F7F tigercat, which was a match for enemy fighters and by far the superior groundpounder.


I thought the Tigercat had a 2,000lb bomb load capacity and not 4,000lbs. I also seem to recall that it had a really slow cruise speed too. (Something like 225mph) Perhaps I'm mistaken.

The only combat Tigercats ever saw were as water tankers for fire suppression by the forestry service many, many years ago (unlike the A-26 which saw active combat in WWII, Korea and Vietnam in addition to current use as a water tanker today)

What ... me biased towards the A-26?
But both only saw limited use in the closing months of WW 2 (the A-26 saw a little more). The P-47 would be a better choice in my eyes, it proved to be very reliable and it succed in its role (as the Il-2).
The Tigercat say some service in Korea, the jet nighfighters were too fast to get the Po-2 biplanes known as bedcheck charlie's (they were sent over with their engine out of tune so it woke everyone up). Therefore they brought in the Tigercats to make mincemeat of them

Users who are viewing this thread