What is the best of these four Dive Bombers?

Discussion in 'Polls' started by SamPZLP.7, Feb 26, 2012.

?

What is the best of these Dive Bombers

  1. Blackburn Skua

    2 vote(s)
    6.3%
  2. Junkers Ju 87 Stuka

    11 vote(s)
    34.4%
  3. Aichi D3A Val

    2 vote(s)
    6.3%
  4. Douglas SBD D auntless

    17 vote(s)
    53.1%
  1. SamPZLP.7

    SamPZLP.7 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2012
    Messages:
    71
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    volunteer t the Fargo Air Museum; student pilot
    Location:
    Fargo,ND,USA
    There is the Stuka, Skua, Val, or the Dauntless
     
  2. syscom3

    syscom3 Pacific Historian

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2005
    Messages:
    12,631
    Likes Received:
    309
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Orange County, CA
    The Dauntless of course!
     
  3. oldcrowcv63

    oldcrowcv63 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2012
    Messages:
    1,923
    Likes Received:
    96
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Occupation:
    Tired and Retired
    Location:
    Northeast North Carolina
    #3 oldcrowcv63, Feb 26, 2012
    Last edited: Feb 26, 2012
    Dauntless, 4 Sure! 4 its basic performance, historical importance, effectiveness throughout the war, even in the presence of strong fighter opposition. It was upgradable to enhance its capability (through 6 marks, although the last -6 came too late) . An eminently tough aircraft to deflect from its unholy purpose. :twisted:
     
  4. davebender

    davebender Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2009
    Messages:
    6,418
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    - Best bombing accuracy.
    - Automatic pull out system. This may have contributed to accuracy. Pilots knew the aircraft would recover from a dive even if they blacked out or were injured by ground fire. So they could chance diving right to the limit of aircraft capability.
    - No dangerous flight characteristics. Operates well from primative airfields.
    - Very reliable
    - Largest bomb load.
    - Best armor protection.
    - Tied with SBD for greatest max speed.
    - Equally capable at ground attack by placing gun pods on underwing hardpoints.
    - Probably the least expensive of the bunch. 131,175 RM / $52,470.

    The Ju-87 looked ugly and obsolescent but it wasn't. Neither is the modern day A-10. When ground troops are in need of air support these are the aircraft they prefer.
     
  5. T Bolt

    T Bolt Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2010
    Messages:
    9,728
    Likes Received:
    194
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Bridge & Highway Construction Inspector
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    The North American A-36 Apache should be on the list. From everything I've read it was a very effective dive bomber and could defend it's self because it was in effect a Mustang. The only reason it didn't do more, or was not as well known was that very few of them were Built (500) due to North American switching production of the P-51 from the Allison to the Merlin.
     

    Attached Files:

  6. oldcrowcv63

    oldcrowcv63 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2012
    Messages:
    1,923
    Likes Received:
    96
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Occupation:
    Tired and Retired
    Location:
    Northeast North Carolina
    Hard to argue with a dive bomber that can defend itself, carry about 80% of the payload of an SBD with a similar combat radius. But can it land on a postage stamp floating in the middle of the great watery desert:?: :D

    I recall seeing a photo of a P-51 rigged for carrier landings so perhaps it would have been possible. I expect there would have been some penalty to such a capabiity retrofit. :eek:
     
  7. T Bolt

    T Bolt Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2010
    Messages:
    9,728
    Likes Received:
    194
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Bridge & Highway Construction Inspector
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    Carrier trials on CV-38 Shangri-La on Nov 15, 1944. All went well, but the maximum arrester cable speed (90mph) and the stall speed of the Mustang (82mph) were too close for safety.
     

    Attached Files:

  8. davebender

    davebender Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2009
    Messages:
    6,418
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    An A-36 carrying a 2,000 lb bomb cannot defend itself any better then a Ju-87D carrying a 1,000 kg bomb. All bombers carrying a payload require fighter escort.
     
  9. renrich

    renrich Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2007
    Messages:
    4,542
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    real estate
    Location:
    Montrose, Colorado
    If you are going to open up the field and include the A36, then why not the Corsair. It could dive more steeply than the SBD and was almost as accurate and it would run rings around the others.
     
  10. davebender

    davebender Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2009
    Messages:
    6,418
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    The 4 aircraft in the poll were all in service before the end of 1941. So I assume 1941 to be the cut off date.
     
  11. oldcrowcv63

    oldcrowcv63 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2012
    Messages:
    1,923
    Likes Received:
    96
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Occupation:
    Tired and Retired
    Location:
    Northeast North Carolina
    #11 oldcrowcv63, Mar 1, 2012
    Last edited: Mar 1, 2012
    Dive bombers tend to be most vulnerable after dropping their bombs during their retirement from the target. I would expect the JU-87, the Val or Skua to be more vulnerable than either an SBD or an A-36 during all phases of an attack. Definitely less vulnerable than any of the fighter bombers that came to the fore in the war's latter stages.

    From what I've seen looking, at published specs, the A-36 couldn't carry a 2,000 pound bomb. Whatever it was carrying, I wouldn't expect any dive bomber to defend itself very well before it dropped its payload. A relatively high target approach speed would make the A-36 (Or F4U or F6F) a bit less vulnerable, while the aft-facing flex-guns are the SBD's (or JU-87's) insurance during both phases of an attack. The speed, manueverability, and forward facing armament of the A-36 would seem to be helpful for defense during the retirement phase of an attack.
     
  12. davebender

    davebender Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2009
    Messages:
    6,418
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    It also makes weapons delivery less accurate. That's why really good CAS aircraft such as the Ju-87D and A-10 fly slowly and rely on heavy armor for protection against ground fire.
     
  13. oldcrowcv63

    oldcrowcv63 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2012
    Messages:
    1,923
    Likes Received:
    96
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Occupation:
    Tired and Retired
    Location:
    Northeast North Carolina
    Target approach speed as in the high altitude horizontal run toward the target not the dive down onto the target which of course involves deployment of the dive flaps to slow the airspeed.
     
  14. davebender

    davebender Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2009
    Messages:
    6,418
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    Most level bombers and dive bombers cruised at 160 to 180mph with a typical bomb load. What was the economical cruise speed of an A-36 when carrying at least 1,000 lbs of ordnance?
     
  15. oldcrowcv63

    oldcrowcv63 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2012
    Messages:
    1,923
    Likes Received:
    96
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Occupation:
    Tired and Retired
    Location:
    Northeast North Carolina
    #15 oldcrowcv63, Mar 2, 2012
    Last edited: Mar 2, 2012
    You know, Dave, that's a really good question! :?: :eek:

    I may have been projecting a bias based on experience here. :oops: In the modern era, an acceleration to a higher target approach speed above that of the economic cruise is normal. For example, a target approach speed (dirty) from the Initial Point, may be some 50-60 knots faster than that of the economic cruise phase and last for perhaps the last 25-50 miles (4-8 ) minutes of flight to the target. Quite honestly, I don't know what a typical attack speed profile was in WW 2. I just assumed whatever it was, that final approach to the target would be faster for an A-36 than any of the other (Non-fighter bomber type) aircraft listed. It's one thing to do this over land assuming the ground is visible and a pilot has ground reference points to always know the location of the target. It's quite another for a naval dive bomber (could be any of the 4 dedicated dive bomber's listed) which is searching for its target somewhere on the big blue (assuming no ASV-type RADAR for target detection). In that case, the target approach speed may not have increased at all until the push over point. :confused:

    You've asked the economical cruise for an A-36. All I can find is what's listed on the web: a cruising speed of 250 mph. America's 100,000 doesn't really provide much that I could find in a quick look on the A-36. I'd be surprised if it were quite that high but I suppose it could be. Would there be a final sprint to the target? I suppose over land there would be, but over water? Dunno! I am hoping somebody here has a better answer.
     
  16. davebender

    davebender Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2009
    Messages:
    6,418
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    The Mosquito was one of the fastest bombers of WWII. Two 500 lb bombs is a relatively light bomb load. Mission cruise speed varied (i.e. speeding up over most dangerous areas) but average cruise speed for the entire mission (including trip home without bombs) was 283 mph.

    I'd be surprised if an A-36 could achieve an average cruise speed anywhere near that fast while carrying two 500 lb bombs. And that's not even a heavy bomb load. Ju-87Ds routinely carried 1,000 kg.
     
  17. oldcrowcv63

    oldcrowcv63 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2012
    Messages:
    1,923
    Likes Received:
    96
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Occupation:
    Tired and Retired
    Location:
    Northeast North Carolina
    #17 oldcrowcv63, Mar 2, 2012
    Last edited: Mar 2, 2012
    I didn't remember correctly my own (35 years past) experience. It wasn't 50-60 knots it was an acceleration to over 100 knots faster than cruise! :oops: The lower speed was in training flights... Not a good example of train how you fight and fight how you train. But my poor memory is probably because I never bombed an actual target, only did training missions.
     
  18. tomo pauk

    tomo pauk Creator of Interesting Threads

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2008
    Messages:
    8,003
    Likes Received:
    440
    Trophy Points:
    83
    #18 tomo pauk, Mar 2, 2012
    Last edited: Mar 2, 2012
    A-36 was able to reach 225 miles with 2 x 500 lbs bombs. The max speed with 2 x 500 lbs bombs was 298 mph @ 5000 ft , WEP setting. The P-51* with 2 x 500 lbs bombs was to cruise at 220 mph. (data from 'Mustang' by Jeffrey Ethell)
    So the A-36 was not cruising any better than that; if it uses military or WEP, it's obviously not cruising.

    *clarification: P-51B/C/D
     
  19. oldcrowcv63

    oldcrowcv63 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2012
    Messages:
    1,923
    Likes Received:
    96
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Occupation:
    Tired and Retired
    Location:
    Northeast North Carolina
    #19 oldcrowcv63, Mar 2, 2012
    Last edited: Mar 2, 2012
    That's interesting. I always think its helpful to refer to actual operational examples whenever possible, even if it's not necessarily directly related.

    Thanks Tomo, I was hoping somebody would come back with an answer. :D
     
  20. DBII

    DBII Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2007
    Messages:
    2,191
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    unemployed again, health insurance
    Location:
    The Woodlands, Texas
    So no one will defend the little VAL? Sorry, I do not have any sources with me. I read that it was a terror early in the war and it destoried more tonnage than any other plane. Ok fo ahead and start throwing rocks at me :)

    DBII
     
Loading...

Share This Page