Wasn't the STUKA the best dive bomber to see service in WWII

Discussion in 'Aviation' started by Jank, Apr 11, 2005.

  1. Jank

    Jank Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2005
    Messages:
    679
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Know it was ptrobably the one that had the greatest impact on the war but was it the best? This question is for all theatres of conflict combined. The entire war. Which was the best?
     
  2. DAVIDICUS

    DAVIDICUS Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2005
    Messages:
    915
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Douglas SBD Dauntless
    [​IMG]
     
  3. trackend

    trackend Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2003
    Messages:
    4,039
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    Retired tech support railway engineer
    Location:
    Ipswich, Suffolk
    I agree with Dave, I’m going to pick the Douglas SBD Dauntless.

    The JU 87 Stuka (from the German for diver bomber Sturzkampfflugzeug) was strong, accurate effective, but slow, did not maneuver well , was poorly armed, and vulnerable to fighters. In the Battle of Britain, the Stuka suffered heavy losses and it was eventually withdrawn from campaigns in Western Europe for the rest of the war. The Dauntless SBD although slower than its Japanese opposite number, the Aichi D3A2 "Val" was far more resistant to battle damage, and its flying qualities suited its role.
    The SBD's replacment the SB2C Hell-diver failed to meet expectations. Commander Herbert D. Riley, who served with Naval Operations said about the Hell-diver "the SB2C was so tricky to fly, compared to the SBD, and so hard to maintain that the skippers of the new carriers preferred to have the old SBD's"
    Captain Eric Brown, the test pilot who evaluated the Hell-diver for the Royal Navy, flew nearly every type of dive bomber, including a captured Ju-87 Stuka. After piloting the SBD-5 Dauntless, the Vultee Vengeance and the Hell-diver, Brown rated the Curtiss product a distant third. "One could only sympathize with the U.S. Navy pilots flying this unpleasant aircraft from carriers in the Pacific," he later wrote.
    In my opinion the Blackburn Skua was never really successful in its diver bomber role and the Aichi D3A2’s lack of robustness was not up to the job when put alongside the SBD.
     
  4. cheddar cheese

    cheddar cheese Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    20,349
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    Student
    Location:
    WSM, England
    Actually I think the Stuka was fairly manouverable for such a relatively large aircraft.
     
  5. trackend

    trackend Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2003
    Messages:
    4,039
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    Retired tech support railway engineer
    Location:
    Ipswich, Suffolk
    I may be wrong CC but I thought the wing shape of the Stuka was not condusive to good handling due to very narrow wing proportions at the point of maximum lift
     
  6. Gemhorse

    Gemhorse Member

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2004
    Messages:
    587
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Aw, I dunno about that, worked real well on the Corsair....if the Stuka had a more powerful engine and retractable undercarriage, that may have improved it....
    I'm a big fan of the Dauntless, I just love it's lines and it's excellent service, even though it wasn't that fast.......I'd say it probably sunk more shipping than the Stuka......

    Gemhorse
     
  7. cheddar cheese

    cheddar cheese Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    20,349
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    Student
    Location:
    WSM, England
    They tried a Stuka improvment, the Ju-187/287

    [​IMG]

    www.luft46.com
     
  8. BombTaxi

    BombTaxi Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2004
    Messages:
    1,907
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Location:
    Barnsley, S. Yorks, UK
    Im going to agree with the general opinion in favour of the SBD. While the Stuka made a massive contribution to the Blitzkreig in the West, it was obsolete by 1941 at the latest. Only the poor shape of the VVS during the opening stages of Barabarossa allowed it to stay on as a useful weapon, and this seemed to decieve the LW into thinking they could carry on using Stukas.
    It is possible to argue that the SBD was obsolete by the end of 1942, but by then the damage had been done and the Japanese Navy was no longer a threat. In fact, I really dont think thats it's going to far to say that the destruction cxaused by SBDs, TBDs and TBFs in the early stages of the Pacific War was a amjor factor in the US winning the war in that theatre. After all, the loss of most of the IJNs carriers and experienced aircrew by early 1943 represented a catastrophic blow to Japans ability to wage war in the theatre.
     
  9. mosquitoman

    mosquitoman Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2005
    Messages:
    2,990
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Occupation:
    student
    Location:
    Saffron Walden/Sheffield
    Home Page:
    I'm going to say the Skua, as it was sufficiently manouverable, was robust enough and carried a big enough bomboad.
    It had to be manouverable as there was a fighter version- The Roc!
     
  10. cheddar cheese

    cheddar cheese Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    20,349
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    Student
    Location:
    WSM, England
    But the less said about the Roc the better ;)
     
  11. mosquitoman

    mosquitoman Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2005
    Messages:
    2,990
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Occupation:
    student
    Location:
    Saffron Walden/Sheffield
    Home Page:
  12. Erich

    Erich the old Sage
    Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    May 20, 2004
    Messages:
    13,090
    Likes Received:
    15
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Platonic Sphere
    Will go with the Ju 87D variant on this. I'm pretty lame on my knowledge of US or RAF Pacific craft.....
     
  13. the lancaster kicks ass

    the lancaster kicks ass Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2003
    Messages:
    19,980
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    38
    well don't worry we didn't have any dive bombers :lol:
     
  14. BombTaxi

    BombTaxi Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2004
    Messages:
    1,907
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Location:
    Barnsley, S. Yorks, UK
    The Skua was pitiful even by early war standards. Heres some data:

    Engine: Bristol Perseus XII nine cylinder, sleeve valve, air cooled radial engine rated at 815 hp (could give a higher power rating of over 900 hp for 5 mins on emergency boost).

    Max Speed: 225 mph at 6,700 ft, 204 mph at sea level.

    Service ceiling 20,500 ft (reached in 43 mins), the Skua had a very poor rate of climb.

    Total fuel: 163 imperial gallons, giving a maximum range of some 760 miles (an endurance of over 4 hours).

    Armament: Four Browning .303 machine guns in wings with 300 rounds per gun. One Lewis gun in rear cockpit. One 500 lb semi-armour-piercing bomb(SAP) or one 250 lb general purpose (GP) bomb recessed under fuselage and held in a bomb crutch to swing it clear of the propeller in dive bombing attacks. A "light series carrier" bomb rack could be fitted under each wing. Each carrier could hold 4 x 20 lb Cooper bombs or incendiaries or 2 x 40 lb bombs or incendiaries. Some reference books mistakenly give the impression the light series bomb racks were only ever used for "practice" bombs. The same carriers were used on Lysanders, Battles and Blenheims and were very much a weapon of war. The 500lb SAP bomb was only used against armoured warships, for attacks on merchant ships and ground targets the normal bombload was a 250 lb bomb in the fuselage recess and either 20lb or 40lb bombs on the light series carriers. The 250 lb bomb had only a little less explosive content than the 500lb SAP bomb (the extra weight of the latter was down to the casing, needed to punch through armour). If used against ground targets the SAP bomb would often bury itself deep before exploding, reducing its blast effect. The small and largely ineffective 100 lb anti-submarine (AS) bomb could also be carried in the fuselage recess.

    The first prototype Skua had problems with stability and it and the second prototype (both known as Skua MK Is) had to be modified with a longer nose and upturned wingtips, features carried over to the production aircraft (known as Skua Mk IIs). The Skua prototypes used the well tried Bristol Mercury engine but use of these engines in the huge Blenheim bomber progamme meant that production Skuas had to use the new Bristol sleeve valve Perseus engine. There is no evidence that the Perseus engine as used on the Skua was particularly unreliable in itself, (later Bristol sleeve valve engines went through a stage of very bad reliability when first mass-produced by unskilled labour, faults cured in the supremely reliable later model Hercules and Centaurus) but the new sleeve valve technology must have made maintenance more difficult and the Perseus's small production run must have made spares hard to find as the war years rolled by. The spin characteristics of the Skua were bad enough to prompt the fitting of an anti-spin parachute in the tail to aid recovery.

    Sourced from http://freespace.virgin.net/john.dell/blackburn_skua.htm

    The poor performance of the Skua, along with poor handling, a complicated engine and its awful armament (it was supposed to be a secondary fleet defense fighter as well!) all contribute to it's place as probably the worst dive bomber of the war.
     
  15. cheddar cheese

    cheddar cheese Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    20,349
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    Student
    Location:
    WSM, England
    Oooo that IS nasty :lol:
     
  16. BombTaxi

    BombTaxi Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2004
    Messages:
    1,907
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Location:
    Barnsley, S. Yorks, UK
    475ft/min, not good at all.Once the failings of the Roc became all too apparent, the Skua was also tasked as a fleet defence fighter. The Germans cant have known this, they'd have gone after the North Sea carriers they hadnt already sunk...
     
  17. The Jug Rules!

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2004
    Messages:
    195
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Hattiesburg,Ms
    Dauntless ,Hands down...I've heard stories of Dauntlesses flying as fighters, and actually doing well against Japanese fighters.
     
  18. The Jug Rules!

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2004
    Messages:
    195
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Hattiesburg,Ms
     
  19. cheddar cheese

    cheddar cheese Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    20,349
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    Student
    Location:
    WSM, England
    Naw sod that, the WRIGHT FLYER with a really fat man piloting it could do better :lol:
     
  20. BombTaxi

    BombTaxi Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2004
    Messages:
    1,907
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Location:
    Barnsley, S. Yorks, UK
    The Flyer would probably outurn a Skua too, and the bloke maight well do more damage than a 250lb GP... but I digress :lol:

    I think the Skua's out of the running on this thread, and Im still sticking with the SBD :)
     
Loading...

Share This Page