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

pgf_666 said:
Hs-129B. Almost a Warthog with props. Period. End of sentence. Happily, the other guys didn't have a whole lot of them.
Click to expand...


This has been gone over a few times, or more than a few.
Hs-129A

It used Argus inverted V-12 air cooled engines of 465hp for take-off, the French engines were a definite improvement.
The German engines only weighed 315kg. You were rather limited was to what engines would fit without redesigning the whole airplane.

See ;Argus As 410 - Wikipedia
BTW the engine was supercharged.

Only German engines that had a prayer of working were the BMW 132 or Bramo 323 9 cylinder radials. The were both heavier than the French engines (about 200lbs apiece) and of much greater diameter (over 54in compared to under 38 in for the French engines)

Vision to the side on the Hs 129B, already bad, would have gone to dismal with a cowl line 8in (200mm) higher than what it had.
 
The Hs129 doesn't fit with being the best low flying ground attack aircraft of WWII as it had too many faults including the poor speed and inability
to defend itself.

The armour was a good thing but also a hindrance no matter what engines were fitted (as has been shown larger engines would have meant a large
redesign anyway - not viable in the time frame at all and could have made it worse - the ME 210 comes to mind). Pilots found the 75mm windscreen
handy when being shot at but hard to actually see through.

When the 75mm gun was fitted the 129 was said to be virtually incapable of flight.

Also, the mathematics of numbers are against the 129 as there were less than 1000 built. Not really enough to justify it as a contender.

Some say it was the A10 Warthog of WWII but I think it was more like an aggressive Guinea Pig with a wooden leg. Yes it could bite you
but only if you stopped long enough to actually let it.
 
The Hs129 may not have been produced in great numbers, buy that doesn't detract from the fact that it was an effective tool.

The "Flying Infrantryman" has the notoriety of being the first aircraft to ever change the tide of a ground battle and the BK7.5 equipped version was not the mainstay, but rather the BK5 and 30mm versions that wreaked havoc on Soviet ground forces.

Yes, it was slow and yes, it could NOT defend itself - it was NOT an Fw190f/g, it was a purpose-built ground attack aircraft - like the A-10, which would ALSO need air superiority to operate un-challenged.

But the Hs129 filled it's mission profile to a "T" and it is a very fortunate thing that there were only a limited number ever built.
 
A good ground attack aircraft was a combination that was capable of defending itself.

The HS129 was used as the Luftwaffe had relied on the dive bomber as it's ground attack card. The quick evolution of the tank caused a problem
with that and 30mm+ cannons became more important. There wasn't a lot of choice for aircraft for this purpose and what they had became
vulnerable fairly quickly. The FW 190 was going to be the main aircraft for the task but the bomber offensive meant the allocation of the bulk of
these to bomber interception.

That is why the Thunderbolt and Typhoon were so much better as they had the fighter capability built in as well as good speed to target which
allowed more sorties on target in less time. The 190 would have been the best choice for the Luftwaffe for the same role for the same reasons
had enough been made available.
 
Petlyakov Pe-2 in its ground attack dive bomber version. It wasnt heavily gunned like the IL-2 nor did it carry a big bombload like some other light twin engine bombers but it was fast 360mph according to wiki. It had a rear upper turret, a ventral mounting plus 2 other M/Gs to guard its tail and it seems to have been very robust with much higher survival rates than most other Soviet planes.
 
Me likes Pe-2 very much, far more than I like Il-2. Unfortunately, English-language Wikipedia credits the Pe-2 for perhaps 30 mph more than what Soviets will say. Eg. data from Shavrov's bible puts Pe-2 (no-prototype bomber versions) at 320-335 mph at altitude, and under 290 mph at sea level - that's ~50 mph slower than early Typhoon, or ~70 mph slower than late models with better Sabres.
 

Your right it looks like only the Pe-2K with 1700hp M82 engines and the very late Pe-2L/M with 1650hp Klimov 107s could go faster than about 320mph. Still it seems to have been very robust and survivable much better than the IL-2 which was a sluggish bullet magnet.
 

I'm puzzled by this, Admiral, the BP P.92 wasn't designed as a ground attack aircraft, it was designed for a two-seat turret fighter spec, F.11/37 as a home defence fighter by day or night.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

A
Best WW2 Seafire vs. best A6M Zero
Replies
9
Views
1K
Shortround6
S
A
Was the Hispano-Suiza 12Y the worst ≥25L V-12 of WW2?
2 3
Replies
46
Views
3K
ThomasP
T
G
Ditching qualities of WW2 Aircraft
Replies
14
Views
2K
ThomasP
T
M
So The Germans Really Did Have Flying Saucers in WW2
Replies
15
Views
2K
GregP
Making the best use of Jumo 211 series?
2
Replies
21
Views
1K
peceed
P
Menu
Log in
Register