Which was the best 1942-era dive bomber?

Hiromachi · Jul 15, 2016

D4Y1 wins hands down. It's faster than any other dive bomber, can carry 500 kg bomb, has great range and flight characteristics. It's only weakness is the engine requireing liquid cooling. It allowed to build aerodynamically clean machine but in combat over ocean and AA defense of allied ships even a small damage to cooling system could lead to loss of the machine.
Only problem is that D4Y1 wasn't really there in 1942, 2 were assigned to Soryu during Midway events, but only as recce. As it turned out due to some issues with diving and structural limits aircraft was only used for reconnaissance in 1942. A dive bombing version came out only at the end of 1942 or beginning of 1943 and did not reach frontlines until last few months of 1943. Before that Navy could rely only on D3A, though in 1942 there was D3A2 pushed to replace all D3A1s.

Anyway, contrary to what a BLine said, no dive bomber could defend itself. That certain pilots could do so, once in a while, doesnt change the pattern. Best defense of a bomber is its speed and escorts. Period.

GrauGeist · Jul 15, 2016

Hiromachi said:
Anyway, contrary to what a BLine said, no dive bomber could defend itself. That certain pilots could do so, once in a while, doesnt change the pattern. Best defense of a bomber is its speed and escorts. Period.

The SBD is the only dive bomber of the war that actually shot down more enemy aircraft than it was shot down. The SBD's ratio was 3.2 to one.

It was also used, early in the war, as a fighting "top cover" for the fleet while the fighters were on a mission or being fueled.

Not bad for a dive bomber that accounted for nearly 30% of the total tonnage lost by the Japanese.

Hiromachi · Jul 16, 2016

The SBD is the only dive bomber of the war that actually shot down more enemy aircraft than it was shot down. The SBD's ratio was 3.2 to one.

It was claimed, not verified. Also, I'd like to see that in numbers and split across the years of service. Interestingly, its Army "cousin" A-24 Banshee was found inadequate and suffered heavy losses already in first half of 1942 in New Guinea and Philippines.

GrauGeist said:
Not bad for a dive bomber that accounted for nearly 30% of the total tonnage lost by the Japanese.

Nothing weird there, considering it was used through the whole length of the war on the PTO.

GrauGeist · Jul 16, 2016

Hiromachi said:
It was claimed, not verified. Also, I'd like to see that in numbers and split across the years of service. Interestingly, its Army "cousin" A-24 Banshee was found inadequate and suffered heavy losses already in first half of 1942 in New Guinea and Philippines.

The A-24 was operated under different conditions with Army crews trained with different methods. Can't really make a direct comparison.

As far as the SBD's performance, it was a very capable platform to confront IJN and IJA fighters early in the war and could make a stand if pressed. One good example would be the Battle of Coral Sea, when the USS Lexington came under concentrated attack. Her SBDs were launched to supplement the Lexington's F4F fighter screen and in the final engagement, one SBD, piloted by Ensign Leppla along with his tail gunner, accounted for 7 downed Japanese fighters, making that the highest single day victory of any dive-bomber of any nation, in WWII.

To provide a comparison of aircraft downed in the PTO (this will not include CBI numbers), I'll give you a list of all U.S. operated types (all versions per type) and their tally:

P-26 - 2
P-35 - 1
P-36 - 3
P-38 - 1,700
P-39/P-400 - 288
P-40 - 660
P-43 - 3
P-47 - 696
P-51 - 297
P-61 - 63
P-70 - 2
SBD - 138
TBF/TBM - 98
F2A - 10
F4F - 986
FM-2 - 422
F4U - 2,140
F6F - 5,160

GrauGeist · Jul 16, 2016

great...the infamous double-post strikes again!

Hiromachi · Jul 16, 2016

The A-24 was operated under different conditions with Army crews trained with different methods. Can't really make a direct comparison.

Well, Navy operated D3A both by land based Air Groups and on board of aircraft carriers, basic training was similar but once assigned to specific units differences grew.
But its not about the best branch operating dive bombers in 1942 era but best dive bomber. So what matters is a machine.

As far as the SBD's performance, it was a very capable platform to confront IJN and IJA fighters early in the war and could make a stand if pressed. One good example would be the Battle of Coral Sea, when the USS Lexington came under concentrated attack. Her SBDs were launched to supplement the Lexington's F4F fighter screen and in the final engagement, one SBD, piloted by Ensign Leppla along with his tail gunner, accounted for 7 downed Japanese fighters, making that the highest single day victory of any dive-bomber of any nation, in WWII.

He was credited. What was actual score should be cross checked with Japanese records. But to add, D3As also managed to score victories over Wildcats and few other types. Il-2s (even though its not actually a dive bomber, but I guess not much could be done in this regard to represent USSR) scored victories over 109s. And Ju-87s managed to score victories over both Allied and Soviet aircraft.
In such case though one has to add that SBD was operating without external ordnance which gives opportunity to fly at full performance and close to the edge.

Point remains, and Midways proves, that dive bombers without escort were sustaining heavy losses when CAP engaged.

To provide a comparison of aircraft downed in the PTO (this will not include CBI numbers), I'll give you a list of all U.S. operated types (all versions per type) and their tally:

That's not exactly what I was looking for. What I meant was the data on victories in regard to type of the aircraft shot down and date of the event. How many of the SBD victories were fighters, how many were recconaissance floatplanes, etc.

ww2restorer · Jul 17, 2016

what is a Sturmovik? Its Shturmovik IL-2 or Штурмовик Ил-2 in Russian. It is also a ground attack aircraft, not a Dive bomber.

DerAdlerIstGelandet · Jul 17, 2016

ww2restorer said:
what is a Sturmovik? Its Shturmovik IL-2 or Штурмовик Ил-2 in Russian. It is also a ground attack aircraft, not a Dive bomber.

Try again.

In English it is spelled Sturmovik.

In Russian Cyrillic it is spelled Илью́шин Ил-2 or Штурмови́к Šturmovík

Илью́шин Ил-2 = " Illyusion Il-2"

Штурмови́к Šturmovík = "Ground Attack Aircraft"

Or something like that. I won't pretend to actually know Russian, but every online source spells it and translates it as such.

pbehn · Jul 17, 2016

Thanks Adler, I thought we were discussing a breed of dairy cow or possibly northern cloud formations.

ww2restorer · Jul 17, 2016

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:
Try again.

In English it is spelled Sturmovik.

In Russian Cyrillic it is spelled Илью́шин Ил-2 or Штурмови́к Šturmovík

Илью́шин Ил-2 = " Illyusion Il-2"

Штурмови́к Šturmovík = "Ground Attack Aircraft"

Or something like that. I won't pretend to actually know Russian, but every online source spells it and translates it as such.

I will tell my Russian wife she cannot read and write her language.

ww2restorer · Jul 17, 2016

Штурмови́к actually translates to Shturmovik (attack aircraft). Šturmovík whatever language that is, translates to sturmovik, commonly used for a cheap computer game.
From official Ilyusion documents it was a called the самолеты Ил-2, however I guess they are incorrect.

GrauGeist · Jul 17, 2016

ww2restorer said:
I will tell my Russian wife she cannot read and write her language.

My Bulgarian Fiancee doesn't mind it when I don't adhere strictly to Cyrillic pronunciations and I don't give her trouble when she has difficulty with American English.

In the West, the generally accepted pronunciation and spelling for the Il-2 is "Sturmovik" and if you look at the game written by a Russian: Oleg Maddox, it's released as "IL-2: Sturmovik".

ww2restorer · Jul 17, 2016

Best wishes to your Fiancée. My wife is from Moscow and has PhD in languages, teaches Russian at the local university. She concurs that Bulgarian is similar to Russian with the Cyrillic text, however is very different from many forms of Russian. In fact my wife tells me that in Russia alone, being so huge that there is over 3000 different dialect's. I know nothing of Mr Maddox and why he dropped the 'H' All documents from Ilyusion have the H or its equivalent.in Cyrillic.

GrauGeist · Jul 17, 2016

ww2restorer said:
Best wishes to your Fiancée. My wife is from Moscow and has PhD in languages, teaches Russian at the local university. She concurs that Bulgarian is similar to Russian with the Cyrillic text, however is very different from many forms of Russian. In fact my wife tells me that in Russia alone, being so huge that there is over 3000 different dialect's. I know nothing of Mr Maddox and why he dropped the 'H' All documents from Ilyusion have the H or its equivalent.in Cyrillic.

Thanks and Cyrillic may seem complicated to some, but if a person takes the time to study it, it's actually a very simple language, quite unlike the English language!

My sweetheart, Rosi (Роси) points out that Bulgarian is the mother toungue and all other Cyrillic countries have their own evolved variations, much like English speaking nations have evolved from the English of Great Britian, like Australia, America, etc.

As far as Oleg and the Sturmovik naming, I think he understands that most of the Western nations are familiar with "Sturmovik" as it is, and didn't challenge the norm.

This can also be said with many German words when spoken by English speaking people, like "Junkers" for example. The proper way to pronounce it, is "Yunkers", just as Wehrmacht is pronounced "Vehrmakt". Rolling the "R" is optional (depending on one's skill)!

DerAdlerIstGelandet · Jul 18, 2016

ww2restorer said:
I will tell my Russian wife she cannot read and write her language.

That still does not change the fact that in English it is spelled Sturmovik. While you are at it, write to most English language sources and tell them it is wrong.

Thanks though...

Probably the same reason I don't correct people from English speaking countries when they call Köln Cologne or München Munich. It is just how it is spelled in their language...

ww2restorer · Jul 18, 2016

GrauGeist said:
Thanks and Cyrillic may seem complicated to some, but if a person takes the time to study it, it's actually a very simple language, quite unlike the English language!

My sweetheart, Rosi (Роси) points out that Bulgarian is the mother toungue and all other Cyrillic countries have their own evolved variations, much like English speaking nations have evolved from the English of Great Britian, like Australia, America, etc.

As far as Oleg and the Sturmovik naming, I think he understands that most of the Western nations are familiar with "Sturmovik" as it is, and didn't challenge the norm.

This can also be said with many German words when spoken by English speaking people, like "Junkers" for example. The proper way to pronounce it, is "Yunkers", just as Wehrmacht is pronounced "Vehrmakt". Rolling the "R" is optional (depending on one's skill)!

Quite correct on the Slovac origins. Personally I am getting too old to learn yet another language, let alone another alphabet. As for german being misspoken, you are 100% correct, I gringe every time I hear about people driving Voltswagon's. I don't know about the rest of the word, but in my circle of life and business I have always seen Shturmovik.

parsifal · Jul 18, 2016

Im married to a Russian as well, who happens to work as an interpreter (at one stage).

Russians can be very pedantic and difficult when it comes to issues of translation, but the truth is you often cant be as precise as one might want.

Tatyana (my wife) tells me that "Shturmovik" i s probably a more faithful anglicised translation because there should be a 'h" in ther somewhere, however there is no such thing as a correct translation. For us mere mortals, dropping the h makes the word easier to comprehend, is still wrong, but good enough.

try looking up the correct spelling for some Russian warships. There can be more versions and translations of the same word as to make your head spin

ww2restorer · Jul 18, 2016

parsifal said:
Im married to a Russian as well, who happens to work as an interpreter (at one stage).

Russians can be very pedantic and difficult when it comes to issues of translation, but the truth is you often cant be as precise as one might want.

Tatyana (my wife) tells me that "Shturmovik" i s probably a more faithful anglicised translation because there should be a 'h" in ther somewhere, however there is no such thing as a correct translation. For us mere mortals, dropping the h makes the word easier to comprehend, is still wrong, but good enough.

try looking up the correct spelling for some Russian warships. There can be more versions and translations of the same word as to make your head spin

Agree 110%

Blitzrockie · Jul 19, 2016

A dauntless is MUCH better for a surprise attack while still just have a siren that scares you. And besides stukas were easy prey for the British.

Blitzrockie · Jul 19, 2016

I meant the stukas have sirens. Just a typo.

Which was the best 1942-era dive bomber?

Which was the best 1942-era dive bomber?

Aichi D3A Val

Douglas SBD Dauntless

Junkers Ju 87 Stuka

Ilyushin IL-2 Sturmovik

Blackburn Skua

Airman 1st Class

Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung

Airman 1st Class

Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung

Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung

Airman 1st Class

Airman 1st Class

Private Chemtrail Disperser

Colonel

Airman 1st Class

Airman 1st Class

Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung

Airman 1st Class

Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung

Private Chemtrail Disperser

Airman 1st Class

Colonel

Airman 1st Class

Airman

Airman

Users who are viewing this thread

Similar threads