wmaxt
Staff Sergeant
P-38, P-47, B-25, A26 even the Tigercat and F4U are all good choices as are the Typhoon/Tempest.
The best low-flying attack aircraft of WW2.
- Thread starter I-16_SpB
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
delcyros
Tech Sergeant
You are completely right, mosquitoman, but Korea is not ww2 and the Po-2 biplane (I remember 2 times such a biplane was towing my glider in the air back in the middle 90´s) was obsolete food for any prop driven plane. Shooting down a Po-2 doesn´t underline its low flying abilities or not? I stay with either P-47 oe Il-2. Both are not techically the best choice, but they did a good deal to axis forces...
mosquitoman
Master Sergeant
delcyros, I was just pointing out that the Tigercat did see active service in a major war- outlining what it did, nothing else
delcyros
Tech Sergeant
I got it. No need to argue. -
Gemhorse
Senior Airman
As far as the ETO goes, although I would usually vote 'Mosquito' in a blink of the eyes, D-Day could not have proceeded if it wasn't for the huge sacrifice made by RAF Typhoons to clearing the French coast of German guns, aircraft, V1's, radar, shipping etc., in such a way as not to alert the Germans to the exact Invasion areas...
Out of all of RAF Fighter Command Squadrons, the Typhoons suffered substantial losses in comparison, but their contribution was huge, the Invasion would have been indefinately delayed, but for their part carried-out on schedule...
This is an aspect of WWII that not many folk realise, as it's one thing to bomb from height defended targets, but to dive from 5,000 ft to ground-level with the flak barrage these chaps faced, to aim and fire RP'S and cannon, took real balls....especially when you're flying a 7 ton beast that really was a handful to fly....
They were also a Fighter, and Britain was in a spot when the Fw-190's first appeared, and the 'Tiffy's', then the world's fastest fighter, tackled them whilst the Spitfire Mk.IX was coming-on stream to relieve the Mk.V's, this at a time when the Typhoon was sorting-out it's own teething-troubles....
I can understand choices like F7F's, A-26's, B-25's and Il-2's.... they were good scraps, but for historical fact, the 2nd TAF Wings of Typhoons performed a great feat clearing the Channel of the vast German defensive belt, in preparation for D-Day, and keeping the Invasion Forces moving forward after their initial landings with their ''cab-rank'' call-up and destroy tactics, and the only comparable situation to that of the Typhoons, may have been the B-25 and A-20 attacks, through the fierce flak defences of Rabaul and the other well-defended Pacific Islands...
I have a vested interest in the Typhoons, as one of my ancestors was killed shooting-up a giant German Radar site around Cap de La Hague / Joburg [just like the one in ''Saving Private Ryan''], a month before D-Day, and they were very well defended with multiple 20mm's, 37mm's and 40mm AA batteries, let alone the bigger guns.......
John Golley was a famous pilot who with RAF 245 Sqn., another 2nd TAF Typhoon Sqn. who wrote a book called ''Day of the Typhoon'' [Patrick Stephens, 1986], that outlined Typhoon pilot's work, and 'the day' as book title refers to, is the day in mid August 1944, when they caught the 6th SS Panzer Division occupying six miles of road in daylight, and attacked facing 88mm guns and more than a hundred 20mm's....by late afternoon they had decimated the Division....but this is one book that gives some idea of their fight sacrifice.......
For my money [and family blood], the Typhoon was the fastest, deadliest ground-attack fighter, in the right place and at the right time of WWII.....
Out of all of RAF Fighter Command Squadrons, the Typhoons suffered substantial losses in comparison, but their contribution was huge, the Invasion would have been indefinately delayed, but for their part carried-out on schedule...
This is an aspect of WWII that not many folk realise, as it's one thing to bomb from height defended targets, but to dive from 5,000 ft to ground-level with the flak barrage these chaps faced, to aim and fire RP'S and cannon, took real balls....especially when you're flying a 7 ton beast that really was a handful to fly....
They were also a Fighter, and Britain was in a spot when the Fw-190's first appeared, and the 'Tiffy's', then the world's fastest fighter, tackled them whilst the Spitfire Mk.IX was coming-on stream to relieve the Mk.V's, this at a time when the Typhoon was sorting-out it's own teething-troubles....
I can understand choices like F7F's, A-26's, B-25's and Il-2's.... they were good scraps, but for historical fact, the 2nd TAF Wings of Typhoons performed a great feat clearing the Channel of the vast German defensive belt, in preparation for D-Day, and keeping the Invasion Forces moving forward after their initial landings with their ''cab-rank'' call-up and destroy tactics, and the only comparable situation to that of the Typhoons, may have been the B-25 and A-20 attacks, through the fierce flak defences of Rabaul and the other well-defended Pacific Islands...
I have a vested interest in the Typhoons, as one of my ancestors was killed shooting-up a giant German Radar site around Cap de La Hague / Joburg [just like the one in ''Saving Private Ryan''], a month before D-Day, and they were very well defended with multiple 20mm's, 37mm's and 40mm AA batteries, let alone the bigger guns.......
John Golley was a famous pilot who with RAF 245 Sqn., another 2nd TAF Typhoon Sqn. who wrote a book called ''Day of the Typhoon'' [Patrick Stephens, 1986], that outlined Typhoon pilot's work, and 'the day' as book title refers to, is the day in mid August 1944, when they caught the 6th SS Panzer Division occupying six miles of road in daylight, and attacked facing 88mm guns and more than a hundred 20mm's....by late afternoon they had decimated the Division....but this is one book that gives some idea of their fight sacrifice.......
For my money [and family blood], the Typhoon was the fastest, deadliest ground-attack fighter, in the right place and at the right time of WWII.....
Attachments
A
Anonymous
Guest
DAVIDICUS said:
The pilots handbook shows configuration 7 as a single 2000 lbs bomb under the fuselage and a 1000 lbs bomb on each inner wing pylon. While no loading condition with 4 bombs and rockets is given, the weight addition is rather minimal. Maxium range cruise speed is very slow (180 mph), but this is at 60% NRP, so it could probably cruise faster at the expense of some range. R-2800's are R-2800's, so there is no reason it should not have been able to sustain at least 85% of NRP for extended periods.
DAVIDICUS said:
Actually, I have found that the F7F-3P did fly a few operational sorties (I assume these were photo recon) with the USMC in WWII. One was also used for combat trials by the 787 squadron, RAF, starting in Feb. 1945.
Also, F7F-3N's flew night interdiction missions and night target designation missions for B-29's in Korea.
=S=
Lunatic
Gemhorse:
6th SS Panzer Division in mid august 1944?
Where?
You are referring to France (Typhoons only in the west).
If i recall correctly no 6th SS Panzer Divison did exist at all in the German order of battle in Normandy and France; furthermore, if i continue to recall correctly the SS had no 6th panzer divison elsewhere ever.
There was a 6th SS Panzer Army, but it did not came to life until the Ardenes offensive of the winter of 1944; also it saw service near Budapest against the soviets in 1945.
Perhaps it was just a mistake in naming the panzer unit, still no German armored formation got decimated by any allied ground attack squadron.
It has been proved RAF and USAAF ground attack units overclaimed up to ten times the number of German tanks actually hit and destroyed by air attack.
Do not take me wrong, i do not put into doubt the service your relative gave to his country. That is not the point here.
I totally agree the Typhoon was a far more capable ground attack plane, along with the Fw190 F versions, since they could carry powerful armament to deliver to enemy ground positions, and once their cargo was delivered, they were very manouverable and fast to deal with enemy fighters as well.
The IL-2 after delivering its bombs or rockets had to take its nearly 1 ton of armor back to base, being a comfortable prey for enemy fighters or for flak batteries.
The IL-2 was an armored turkey capable of flying, the most overrated plane of the entire world war II. The catastrophic losses it took even during the victorious episodes of the soviet union in 1944 are clear testimony of the actual capabilties of that plane and of the pilots that flew it.
6th SS Panzer Division in mid august 1944?
Where?
You are referring to France (Typhoons only in the west).
If i recall correctly no 6th SS Panzer Divison did exist at all in the German order of battle in Normandy and France; furthermore, if i continue to recall correctly the SS had no 6th panzer divison elsewhere ever.
There was a 6th SS Panzer Army, but it did not came to life until the Ardenes offensive of the winter of 1944; also it saw service near Budapest against the soviets in 1945.
Perhaps it was just a mistake in naming the panzer unit, still no German armored formation got decimated by any allied ground attack squadron.
It has been proved RAF and USAAF ground attack units overclaimed up to ten times the number of German tanks actually hit and destroyed by air attack.
Do not take me wrong, i do not put into doubt the service your relative gave to his country. That is not the point here.
I totally agree the Typhoon was a far more capable ground attack plane, along with the Fw190 F versions, since they could carry powerful armament to deliver to enemy ground positions, and once their cargo was delivered, they were very manouverable and fast to deal with enemy fighters as well.
The IL-2 after delivering its bombs or rockets had to take its nearly 1 ton of armor back to base, being a comfortable prey for enemy fighters or for flak batteries.
The IL-2 was an armored turkey capable of flying, the most overrated plane of the entire world war II. The catastrophic losses it took even during the victorious episodes of the soviet union in 1944 are clear testimony of the actual capabilties of that plane and of the pilots that flew it.
Captain Lunatic,
Mosquitoman already set me straight regarding Korea.
I see several references on the web (as I'm sure you have too) listing the cruise speed as 222mph. The A-26 used R-2800's as well and its cruise speed is universally listed at about 280mph. Can you shed some light on this?
As far as seeing combat in WWII:
"Actually, I have found that the F7F-3P did fly a few operational sorties (I assume these were photo recon) with the USMC in WWII. One was also used for combat trials by the 787 squadron, RAF, starting in Feb. 1945."
"Photo recon" and one used for "combat trials" by the RAF? Hell, F7F pilots flying water tanker duty to fight fires saw more combat than that.
Mosquitoman already set me straight regarding Korea.
I see several references on the web (as I'm sure you have too) listing the cruise speed as 222mph. The A-26 used R-2800's as well and its cruise speed is universally listed at about 280mph. Can you shed some light on this?
As far as seeing combat in WWII:
"Actually, I have found that the F7F-3P did fly a few operational sorties (I assume these were photo recon) with the USMC in WWII. One was also used for combat trials by the 787 squadron, RAF, starting in Feb. 1945."
"Photo recon" and one used for "combat trials" by the RAF? Hell, F7F pilots flying water tanker duty to fight fires saw more combat than that.
A
Anonymous
Guest
DAVIDICUS said:Captain Lunatic,
Mosquitoman already set me straight regarding Korea.
I see several references on the web (as I'm sure you have too) listing the cruise speed as 222mph. The A-26 used R-2800's as well and its cruise speed is universally listed at about 280mph. Can you shed some light on this?
Well, it is kinda hard because operational cruising speeds are usually somewhat mission dependant. If the plane is to be flying close escort, the cruising speed often listed is what was necessary to pace the bombers. If it's flying ground attack, the cruising speed listed often reflects a plane loaded up with external ordinance. In the pilots handbook for the F7F, cruising speed is listed as about 180 mph for all loading conditions - which really makes no sense. Surely a fighter configuration, clean except for a single 300 lbs drop tank should cruise a lot faster than the bomber configuration carrying 4,000 lbs of bombs slung under the belly and wings???
In general, R-2800 powered planes seem to have had a cruising speed of around 270-280 mph, so it is pretty reasonable to assume that this would be true of the F7F as well. In fact, given its rather clean lines and laminar flow wings, you'd really expect it to have a faster cruising speed than the P-47D. The P-47N cruising speed was about 330 mph.
DAVIDICUS said:As far as seeing combat in WWII:
"Actually, I have found that the F7F-3P did fly a few operational sorties (I assume these were photo recon) with the USMC in WWII. One was also used for combat trials by the 787 squadron, RAF, starting in Feb. 1945."
"Photo recon" and one used for "combat trials" by the RAF? Hell, F7F pilots flying water tanker duty to fight fires saw more combat than that.
I didn't say it was much action, or that combat was actually engaged with the enemy (in WWII), though it is most likely it did with the Brits who were known to take one new plane out in a squadron for combat service trials with solid protection from established types. The point is it did fly operational sorties, and it flew combat sorties in Korea.
=S=
Lunatic
Gemhorse
Senior Airman
Hi there Udet, the article I've quoted from is actually from a Feb. 2001 copy of 'Aeroplane' magazine, as an obituary to John Golley, who died 16 Nov. 2003, and was written by Bill Gunston....
It does appear the incident referred to may have been to do with the Ardennes Offensive, but as I haven't as yet read the book he wrote, ''Day of the Typhoon', I can't at this point shed any further light on it...I'm not too up-to-speed on the Panzer Divisions, but took note of the article due to my ancestor's Typhoon involvement.....I do concur with you that the Fw-190 F's were also very competent at the low-flying attack role, a role that a lot of the powerful and manoevrable single-seat fighters were used for at some stage of their respective operational careers, Spits, Thunderbolts, Mustangs etc...but my feeling for the Typhoon is as stated, based on their service and losses in this role....The Fw-190 was a superlative aircraft in my opinion, and stands as the Luftwaffe equivalent to the Typhoon.......
Interesting discussion between Davidicus and RG on the F7F....I've got Capt. Eric Brown's assessment of this great aircraft on hand here, and although he doesn't comment on the ''cruise speed'', as RG commented in his last post, it's alot to do with the particular mission.....In the specs, Capt. Brown has 402 mph @ 15,000 ft. as ''combat speed'', where there is usually the cruise speed, and sights 439 mph @ 22,100 ft. as the max. speed...
What to me is surprising is this aircraft first test flew on 1st April 1940, was VERY fast for it's day, and had a rocket-like climb [4,460 ft/min in the specs], and after extensive tests and mods, by June 1941 the US Navy had two, dubbed XF7F-1 'Tigercat' by then, and underwent carrier trials, but the Navy decided they were 'too heavy and too hot' and the US Marines had a go....
The RN tested them at Farnborough, and the problem they had on carriers was the props could cut the arrester-wires when hard-braking on landing due to nose-wheel compression, and their single-engine handling.
Capt. Brown's summary was real interesting [for me] because he compared the F7F to the Sea Hornet, the then RN Carrier twin, and states the F7F was superior to the S.Hornet in deck landing mainly on the strength of good take-off characteristics, it's tricycle undercart arrangement, slightly better lateral control on approach and improved power-on stalling characteristics.....It was however inferior to the Hornet, in mainly because of it's critical CG restriction on effective elevator travel during the approach and it's dangerous baulked landing longitudinal trim change. Regretably, while the F7F's tri-undercart and power-boosted rudder were useful contributions to the general problem of landing on a carrier deck with a twin, on one engine it wasn't ! -Also, the F7F was only 4 knots slower than the Hornet....Hmmmmm......
The US Marine Corps first F7F Sqn., VMF[N]-533 was fated to reach Okinawa on 14 Aug. 1945, the day before the surrender, but carried out Occupation duties, but were active in Korea in ground-attack, nightfighting, combat air patrols, photo-recce and escort duties with B-29's, providing pre-strike anti-aircraft defence attacks......One F7F-3N flown by M/Sgt. Olsen T/Sgt. Frederick was credited with destroying an entire enemy convoy......
I really like the F7F and feel it was a real shame they never got it into WWII proper......
It does appear the incident referred to may have been to do with the Ardennes Offensive, but as I haven't as yet read the book he wrote, ''Day of the Typhoon', I can't at this point shed any further light on it...I'm not too up-to-speed on the Panzer Divisions, but took note of the article due to my ancestor's Typhoon involvement.....I do concur with you that the Fw-190 F's were also very competent at the low-flying attack role, a role that a lot of the powerful and manoevrable single-seat fighters were used for at some stage of their respective operational careers, Spits, Thunderbolts, Mustangs etc...but my feeling for the Typhoon is as stated, based on their service and losses in this role....The Fw-190 was a superlative aircraft in my opinion, and stands as the Luftwaffe equivalent to the Typhoon.......
Interesting discussion between Davidicus and RG on the F7F....I've got Capt. Eric Brown's assessment of this great aircraft on hand here, and although he doesn't comment on the ''cruise speed'', as RG commented in his last post, it's alot to do with the particular mission.....In the specs, Capt. Brown has 402 mph @ 15,000 ft. as ''combat speed'', where there is usually the cruise speed, and sights 439 mph @ 22,100 ft. as the max. speed...
What to me is surprising is this aircraft first test flew on 1st April 1940, was VERY fast for it's day, and had a rocket-like climb [4,460 ft/min in the specs], and after extensive tests and mods, by June 1941 the US Navy had two, dubbed XF7F-1 'Tigercat' by then, and underwent carrier trials, but the Navy decided they were 'too heavy and too hot' and the US Marines had a go....
The RN tested them at Farnborough, and the problem they had on carriers was the props could cut the arrester-wires when hard-braking on landing due to nose-wheel compression, and their single-engine handling.
Capt. Brown's summary was real interesting [for me] because he compared the F7F to the Sea Hornet, the then RN Carrier twin, and states the F7F was superior to the S.Hornet in deck landing mainly on the strength of good take-off characteristics, it's tricycle undercart arrangement, slightly better lateral control on approach and improved power-on stalling characteristics.....It was however inferior to the Hornet, in mainly because of it's critical CG restriction on effective elevator travel during the approach and it's dangerous baulked landing longitudinal trim change. Regretably, while the F7F's tri-undercart and power-boosted rudder were useful contributions to the general problem of landing on a carrier deck with a twin, on one engine it wasn't ! -Also, the F7F was only 4 knots slower than the Hornet....Hmmmmm......
The US Marine Corps first F7F Sqn., VMF[N]-533 was fated to reach Okinawa on 14 Aug. 1945, the day before the surrender, but carried out Occupation duties, but were active in Korea in ground-attack, nightfighting, combat air patrols, photo-recce and escort duties with B-29's, providing pre-strike anti-aircraft defence attacks......One F7F-3N flown by M/Sgt. Olsen T/Sgt. Frederick was credited with destroying an entire enemy convoy......
I really like the F7F and feel it was a real shame they never got it into WWII proper......
Attachments
A
Anonymous
Guest
Me too. It was a nimble twin engine fighter with increadible climb and unbelievable firepower. Can you imagine the same fire power as a Tempest plus a P-51B in one plane?
=S=
Lunatic
=S=
Lunatic
Gemhorse
Senior Airman
Yeah, the more I read, the more I'm surprised at the number of really fine aircraft that were designed, built, but not deployed....
It's great that there's still some F7F's around though, I've read of their exploits at Reno, but they are still a firm favourite in Warbird events....y'never know, with all the rebuilds going on, some of them will inevitably be re-produced, it's starting to happen, like Flugwerk with the Fw-190's, and Yaks too...You guys have such great resources over there to do this, it's set to become an industry within an industry.......
Gemhorse
It's great that there's still some F7F's around though, I've read of their exploits at Reno, but they are still a firm favourite in Warbird events....y'never know, with all the rebuilds going on, some of them will inevitably be re-produced, it's starting to happen, like Flugwerk with the Fw-190's, and Yaks too...You guys have such great resources over there to do this, it's set to become an industry within an industry.......
Gemhorse
Vahe Demirjian
Banned
Judging from my experience reading about WW2 aircraft, the Ilyushin Il-2 was definitely the best-ever low-flying ground attack aircraft for a number of reasons:
1. It destroyed over 200 German tanks at the Battle of Kursk, helping to further turn the tide of war against the Germans on the Eastern Front.
2. Stalin called it as "vital to the Red Army as air and bread".
1. It destroyed over 200 German tanks at the Battle of Kursk, helping to further turn the tide of war against the Germans on the Eastern Front.
2. Stalin called it as "vital to the Red Army as air and bread".
fubar57
General
LMAO
fubar57
General
The Lancaster had long MG barrels up front though so that would make it a good dive-bomber and not an air superiority fighter
swampyankee
Chief Master Sergeant
- 4,022
- Jun 25, 2013
The Tigercat was used in the ground attack role in Korea. It just had very limited use in air combat.
The Corsair became an excellent, dedicated ground attack aircraft post-WWII, although not as good as the AD
The Corsair became an excellent, dedicated ground attack aircraft post-WWII, although not as good as the AD
