Which was the more successful single engine dive bomber, the SBD, the JU-87 or D3A?

[SaparotRob]

This is another one of those threads that compare planes designed for different roles, the Stuka was a land based dive/ground attack aircraft, the SBD a dive/recon aircraft, the Val a dive bomber, trying to find out which was the best is not going to work because the roles aren't interchangeable.

I actually agree with your post. I came up with this to get the thoughts of the forum members on these planes. The SBD is one of my favorites. I've read about it in many books (though not as many as you guys). I wondered how it compared to its closest "competitors". As stated in other threads, pilots say their plane is best so perhaps pilot comments are biased. (Maybe not the SB2C or F2A3.)
You brought up a very valid point about differing mission profiles. But it does come down to putting ordnance on target. The D3A had the toughest opposition IMHO. It attacked mobile targets that probably had more point AAA than any other opponent. Then add all the floating flak wagons protecting that target.
How does the SBD stand up? Can't compare it to twin engine DB's or can I? I wouldn't have known to ask that before finding this forum. It's more about talking airplanes with people who actually know what they're talking about. Bring on thread drift.

 

[Shortround6]

How is the Val or SBD going to fair over Russia with a couple of 3.7cm cannons under their wings?

Doesn't matter since we are no longer talking about dive bombing once you stick the cannon underneath the Ju 87.

The Ju 87 was not designed to use the cannon, that came a number of years after initial design

 

[PAT303]

Found this diagram

View attachment 596366​

The armored RN carriers cop a lot of negative flak because the design limited the aircraft they could carry, but one thing that cannot be disputed is the punishment those ladies could absorb.

 

[PAT303]

Doesn't matter since we are no longer talking about dive bombing once you stick the cannon underneath the Ju 87.

The Ju 87 was not designed to use the cannon, that came a number of years after initial design

It's designed role was infantry support, bombs cannons rockets were all used in that scenario.

 

[SaparotRob]

Details of the hits are quite lengthy. If anyone wants them, I'll enlarge the photo and add abbreviated details there

You post it I'll read it.

 

[fubar57]

SaparotRob this is abbreviated. I'll PM you the pages

 

[GrauGeist]

Japan aside, their originating countries saw at least potential interchangeability.

The USN's SBD became the USAAF's A-24 Banshee.
The Luftwaffe's Stuka became the RLM's Ju 87C.

And the Stuka in its Luftwaffe role was often playing a maritime strike role, same as the SBD and Val, or the FAA's land based Skuas that sank the cruiser Konigsberg. Both the SBD and Val operated from land bases in addition to carriers.

The RLM is Luftwaffe high-command, by the way.
Also, any German aircraft that operated in a maritime role (like the Ar196, Fw200 or BV222), were operated by the Luftwaffe.
This includes the aircraft that were to be operated from the DKM Graf Zeppelins: Bf109T, Ju87T and the Fi167.

Also, the A-24 was simply a de-navalized SBD.

 

[fastmongrel]

Found this diagram

View attachment 596366​

Pretty good shooting, three in the rear lift. You can see why they were worried the stern might drop off. While she was in Valetta being made fit to run back to Alexandria she was hit again and there were another iirc five near misses.

 

[Admiral Beez]

The armored RN carriers cop a lot of negative flak because the design limited the aircraft they could carry, but one thing that cannot be disputed is the punishment those ladies could absorb.

It's true. Hit by dive bomber, torpedo and kamikaze strikes, plus collision and grounding damage; the armoured carriers came back from it all. Until the Essex class began entering service in 1943, the Illustrious/Implacables were the only class of fleet carrier not to lose a ship.

Was the side armour ever tested? I expect that's the reason the CAG was so small. Keep the AFD, drop the side armour.

 

[muskeg13]

Even by the standards of their users, Ju-87s were obsolete and ineffective as dive bombers after 1942, at the same time the star of the SBD was rising. JU-87 ground attack units were mostly replaced with FW-190s.

"Outmoded in performance, slow in level flight and also in dives, inadequately armed both from the front and rear, the Ju.87 soon had to quit the Battle of Britain and the anti-shipping war. When German air superiority in Africa was lost the Ju.87 could not be employed without heavy losses even in the presence of fighter cover."
Generalleutnant, Galland, Adolf. The Luftwaffe Fighter Force: The View from the Cockpit (p. 14). Skyhorse. Kindle Edition.
The Luftwaffe Fighter Force: The View from the Cockpit (p. 75). Skyhorse. Kindle Edition.

 

[PAT303]

Even by the standards of their users, Ju-87s were obsolete and ineffective as dive bombers after 1942, at the same time the star of the SBD was rising.

SBD and worst still Vals would have met the same fate as Ju 87's if used over England in 1940, doing the same in any of the three in '42 it would be paramount to suicide.

 

[Admiral Beez]

SaparotRob this is abbreviated. I'll PM you the pages

View attachment 596372​

Clearly a ship in need of a better and larger CAP.

 

[fastmongrel]

Clearly a ship in need of a better and larger CAP.

Part of the problem was the lack of aircraft in the Mediterranean. Illustrious only had 4 Fulmars and 11 Swordfish on board at the time. It could have been the USS Ronald Reagan but if she had only 4 fighters she would struggle.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Part of the problem was the lack of aircraft in the Mediterranean. Illustrious only had 4 Fulmars and 11 Swordfish on board at the time. It could have been the USS Ronald Reagan but if she had only 4 fighters she would struggle.

How long can a CIWS run before it's out of ammunition or overheats?

The Japanese get criticized for not having adequate aircraft and flight crew replacement pipelines, but the British were just as bad or worse. Why build six fleet carriers but neglect the aircraft and pilots needed for each?

 

[Juha3]

Even by the standards of their users, Ju-87s were obsolete and ineffective as dive bombers after 1942, at the same time the star of the SBD was rising. JU-87 ground attack units were mostly replaced with FW-190s.

"Outmoded in performance, slow in level flight and also in dives, inadequately armed both from the front and rear, the Ju.87 soon had to quit the Battle of Britain and the anti-shipping war. When German air superiority in Africa was lost the Ju.87 could not be employed without heavy losses even in the presence of fighter cover."
Generalleutnant, Galland, Adolf. The Luftwaffe Fighter Force: The View from the Cockpit (p. 14). Skyhorse. Kindle Edition.
The Luftwaffe Fighter Force: The View from the Cockpit (p. 75). Skyhorse. Kindle Edition.

In fact Ju 87 was effective anti-shipping plane at least up to Sept-Oct 43 in the Eastern Med sinking several destroyers during the Dodecanese campaign, e.g. sinking a destroyer and crippling a AA cruiser on 9 Oct 43. And was still effective dive bomber on the Eastern Front at least up to summer 44.

 

[RCAFson]

How long can a CIWS run before its out of ammunition or overheats?

The Japanese get criticized for not having adequate aircraft and flight crew replacement pipelines, but the British were just as bad or worse. Why build six fleet carriers but neglect the aircraft and pilots needed for each?

Illustrious's CIWS (6 x octuple 40mm pom-poms) was water cooled and could fire continuously until each barrel ran out of ammo (~90 secs with ~150 rnds/barrel). According to her gunnery report each surviving mount fired nearly 6000 rnds with hardly any stoppages.

The FAA was fighting a very hot war from Sept 1939 when the IJNAF was able to expand under near peacetime conditions until Dec 1941.
The early loss of Courageous and Glorious was a severe blow to the FAA. However, the dislocation of the UK aeroindustry and air crew training by the battles of France and Britain caused a crisis in FAA aircrew and aircraft deliveries. It's hardly fair to mention the FAA and IJNAF in the same sentence given the very different circumstances that they were operating under. The FAA had to engage the Luftwaffe and RAI in protracted campaigns in ETO and MTO coastal waters, where the IJNAF operated well away from the Allied mainlands.

 

[RCAFson]

Part of the problem was the lack of aircraft in the Mediterranean. Illustrious only had 4 Fulmars and 11 Swordfish on board at the time. It could have been the USS Ronald Reagan but if she had only 4 fighters she would struggle.

She was actually carrying about 14 Fulmars and ~18-20 Swordfish. However some of these aircraft were u/s. IIRC, about eight Fulmars got airborne but some of these were out of ammo from previous engagements. The launching of the fighters was delayed because radar only picked up the raid at 28nm, which gave less than 9 minutes of warning.

 

[fastmongrel]

She was actually carrying about 14 Fulmars and ~18-20 Swordfish. However some of these aircraft were u/s. IIRC, about eight Fulmars got airborne but some of these were out of ammo from previous engagements. The launching of the fighters was delayed because radar only picked up the raid at 28nm, which gave less than 9 minutes of warning.

My bad I got my figures in a twist, she had 11 Swordfish and 4 Fulmars in the hangar when she was hit, these were burnt out by the bombs that penetrated the flight deck. 8 Fulmars were on the flight deck when the radar picked up the raid these were launched but there was no time to bring the 4 Fulmars up from the hangar before the bombs hit the aft lift destroying the 4 Fulmars which were in Hangar section C aft of the lift.

My point still stands Illustrious and the Mediteranean fleet was short of planes she wasnt even carrying the maximum of 36 in the hangar. From 1942 Illustrious usually carried 45 aircraft and by Jan 1945 carried 32 Corsairs and 22 Avengers. More planes were tried but 54 was the maximum the crew could handle efficently.

 

[RCAFson]

My bad I got my figures in a twist, she had 11 Swordfish and 4 Fulmars in the hangar when she was hit, these were burnt out by the bombs that penetrated the flight deck. 8 Fulmars were on the flight deck when the radar picked up the raid these were launched but there was no time to bring the 4 Fulmars up from the hangar before the bombs hit the aft lift destroying the 4 Fulmars which were in Hangar section C aft of the lift.

My point still stands Illustrious and the Mediteranean fleet was short of planes she wasnt even carrying the maximum of 36 in the hangar. From 1942 Illustrious usually carried 45 aircraft and by Jan 1945 carried 32 Corsairs and 22 Avengers. More planes were tried but 54 was the maximum the crew could handle efficently.

Its easy to do and I have a hard time trying to count her aircraft complement, even with the action reports online.

 

[DarrenW]

In a way the Yokosuka D4Y might have been the most efficient ship killer. A few of them launched successful SINGLE plane attacks against US aircraft carriers. U.S.S. Bunker Hill, U.S.S. Franklin (and I think U.S.S. Indianapolis) as well as a few of CVL's and CVE's. How they slipped through the CAP and search radar nets with inexperienced pilots is amazing.

From the accounts I've read the attacking aircraft used low lying cloud cover to conceal their presence and dived straight down on the ships, making early detection nearly impossible. By the way, the Bunker Hill was attacked by two bomb-carrying Kamikaze Zeros, not a D4Y. It is widely presumed a 'Judy' attacked the Franklin that day but accounts differ on this (some believe it could also have been a D3A). And although extensively damaged, both ships survived these attacks and were successfully rebuilt. Unlike other ships in their class however, neither were to see active service again.