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

[buffnut453]

Finding any hard facts on the FAA isn't easy. The first allied fighter ace of WW2 was a naval man William Lucy flying Skuas in the Norway campaign. I can't even find where he was born or where his grave is.

I can help with some of that:

William Lucy from Sutton Valence, Kent, was born in Bideford, North Devon, on 12 July 1910. He joined the Royal Navy and learned to fly, obtaining his pilot's licence in May 1937. A serving FAA Lieutenant at the start of the war, he was commanding officer of 803 Sqn from 8 Feb 1940. On 10 Apr he led 11 Skuas from his own unit and five from 800 Sqn from Hatston in the Orkneys to the Norwegian port of Bergen where they sank the German cruiser Konigsberg by dive bombing - the first major warship to be sunk by aircraft in time of war. Later in the month his unit served aboard HMS Glorious off the coast of Norway, and then on Ark Royal. On 14 May his aircraft was hit by crossfire from He111s which he was attacking, and blew up. His body was later picked up by HMS Whirlpool but no sign was found of his Observer, Lieutenant MCE Hanson, DSC. Lucy was awarded the DSO for taking part in the shooting down of 6 aircraft and the strike on Konigsberg.


Source of the above is "Aces High" (2nd Edition) by Chris Shores and Clive Williams.

Given that his body was recovered by a destroyer, he was likely buried at sea. This theory is reinforced by his record in the Commonwealth War Graves Commission where he's listed on the Lee-on-Solent Memorial (Casualty Details | CWGC). Lucy's Observer, Hanson, is also listed on the Lee-on-Solent Memorial. The CWGC website lists his parents as Francis William and Violet Lucy, of Sutton Valence, Kent. It also lists his full name as William Paulet Lucy.

Hope this is of use/interest. "Aces High" also lists his claims, at least four of which were in Skua L2925 '8F'.

 

[RCAFson]

One interesting difference is that whilst the Ju-87 came to drop 1,000 kg bombs and the SBD dropped 1,000 bombs, the D3A never carried anything heavier than 250 kg. I am not sure why. It may simply have been the IJN's focus on out ranging the enemy. Possibly, the extra weight might have made a controlled dive more difficult but the power and lift was available especially for the D3A2. The IJN may have thought that 250 kg was enough for a cruiser and that 500 kg would not sink a battleship (but they may have been wrong Attacks on Kure and the Inland Sea (July 1945) - Wikipedia). However, a 500 kg bomb would have been useful in attacks on the Yorktown Class Carriers. I cannot claim that it would necessarily have made a difference but the Ju-87 could penetrate Illustrious's hangar through 75 mm of armour and a Yorktown had 45 lb for the deck (just over an inch) and 60 lb for the 4th Deck (1.5 in.). I doubt if hit 2 on Enterprise Santa Cruz - Battle Damage would have been disastrous had it been a 500 kg bomb as the forward aviation tank is further aft https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipe...town-class_carrier_technical_drawing_1953.jpg but it would have taken longer to repair.

Yorktown class carriers had a very light (~8-10lb (.2in) flight deck and a 45lb hangar deck (and the 60lb 4th deck) according to Friedman.

I suspect that the lack of catapults on IJN carriers had some bearing on D3A bomb load capacity but it is interesting that they stuck with a 250kg bomb for the D3A-2.

 

[GrauGeist]

The Val's 550 pound bomb was enough to inflict serious damage as seen by the Allied tonnage sunk during the war.

 

[Warbirdnutball]

In the beginning of the war, both the Japanese and German crews were extremely well trained. They researched their targets and went after them well disciplined. There are even reports of formations holding even after several planes were shot down from the formation in the Pacific. American pilots, though we'll trained, didn't have the same sort of discipline and needed much more practice to catch up. That's not to say they were not eager, but many were shocked when Pearl Harbor was attacked. The Japanese had years of practice in China and the Germans had the same starting in Spain all through Poland and France. The Ju 87 went through considerable change, to from the wheel spats to the engine and fuselage streamlining in the D version. (I'll never understand why they never had retracting wheels in either the Ju 87 or the D3A.). The SBD was the only one with the retracting wheels. However none effected the planes ability to bomb. Some choices for the best are probably ascetic. If so mine are;

1-Ju 87A
2-SBD
3-D3A

If one wishes to put all of these usage, statistics and effectiveness together, that changes things. No matter what, all three planes were vital to their respective nations and earned their place in history.

 

[azador1606]

Well a difficult comparison as the Ju-87 was a short-range land-based bomber and the other two are carrier-based.
However the question was: which was the most successful? Not which was best. Nor did it ask for the most successful by role, a fine distinction to be sure, however the Ju-87 was successful in ground-attack and the SBD contributed a lot in the scout role. So, I'll answer most successful overall by an aircraft designed as a single-engine dive bomber.

Ultimately, the Ju-87 could not operate with as much freedom once effective fighters were about, and especially over ground targets. That it operated for as long as it did in as many roles as it did - even anti-shipping may mean it is the most effective - but was it the most successful?

So, that leaves the two carrier-based dive-bombers. The D3A was successful while the A6Ms could clear the skies. The SBDs were successful when the A6Ms could not - or did not. From a quality point of view, the D3As had great pilots - at least in the early years and the bang per plane would (in my opinion) shade the SBD slightly. The SBDs really contributed in the scout role. As the A-24 the SBD was ... well, lacking is a kind way of putting it.

In the end while success is about achievement that achievement is relative.

The SBDs claim to success is the battle of Midway, the results speak for themselves. Yet by no stretch of the imagination can we say that the SBD did anything outstanding or even above average on that day. Superior intelligence, fleet tactics, enemy error, dumb luck, the sacrifice of earlier attack waves, a host of other factors NEEDED to be there to give them a chance at glory. Midway is the only event that keeps the SBD in the running, otherwise it's a just good enough aircraft, solid, reliable and able to built in numbers and with sufficient expendable pilots.
So for those reasons, I decided not to give full weight to their achievements at that battle. If they had scouted the enemy fleet, flown in, dodged or fought off fighter cover, braved the ship-board AA fire (such as it was) and achieved the same results, then for that single action alone it would be a slam dunk. Please note, I'm not saying it didn't take guts to attack when the previous waves had been nearly wiped out, it did.

The Ju-87 is my pick for #1.

Without the D3A the IJN still had the B5N and the G3M. The D3A helped but wasn't critical. With the arrival of D4Y and the sinking of most of the carriers in any case, it doesn't contribute much after 1942. Even so, I'd rank this aircraft #2.
The SBD may have delivered the final blow at Midway, but it didn't do the heavy lifting. Nor was it critical to the the success of the US fleet carriers and surface forces. Nonetheless, it contributed a lot - rank #3.

The blitzkeig would not have succeeded without the tactical effect of the Ju-87. Further, it's success in the Mediterranean and Russian theatres kept it as a viable an important tool throughout the war. 1939-1945

 

[SaparotRob]

Well a difficult comparison as the Ju-87 was a short-range land-based bomber and the other two are carrier-based.
However the question was: which was the most successful? Not which was best. Nor did it ask for the most successful by role, a fine distinction to be sure, however the Ju-87 was successful in ground-attack and the SBD contributed a lot in the scout role. So, I'll answer most successful overall by an aircraft designed as a single-engine dive bomber.

Ultimately, the Ju-87 could not operate with as much freedom once effective fighters were about, and especially over ground targets. That it operated for as long as it did in as many roles as it did - even anti-shipping may mean it is the most effective - but was it the most successful?

So, that leaves the two carrier-based dive-bombers. The D3A was successful while the A6Ms could clear the skies. The SBDs were successful when the A6Ms could not - or did not. From a quality point of view, the D3As had great pilots - at least in the early years and the bang per plane would (in my opinion) shade the SBD slightly. The SBDs really contributed in the scout role. As the A-24 the SBD was ... well, lacking is a kind way of putting it.

In the end while success is about achievement that achievement is relative.

The SBDs claim to success is the battle of Midway, the results speak for themselves. Yet by no stretch of the imagination can we say that the SBD did anything outstanding or even above average on that day. Superior intelligence, fleet tactics, enemy error, dumb luck, the sacrifice of earlier attack waves, a host of other factors NEEDED to be there to give them a chance at glory. Midway is the only event that keeps the SBD in the running, otherwise it's a just good enough aircraft, solid, reliable and able to built in numbers and with sufficient expendable pilots.
So for those reasons, I decided not to give full weight to their achievements at that battle. If they had scouted the enemy fleet, flown in, dodged or fought off fighter cover, braved the ship-board AA fire (such as it was) and achieved the same results, then for that single action alone it would be a slam dunk. Please note, I'm not saying it didn't take guts to attack when the previous waves had been nearly wiped out, it did.

The Ju-87 is my pick for #1.

Without the D3A the IJN still had the B5N and the G3M. The D3A helped but wasn't critical. With the arrival of D4Y and the sinking of most of the carriers in any case, it doesn't contribute much after 1942. Even so, I'd rank this aircraft #2.
The SBD may have delivered the final blow at Midway, but it didn't do the heavy lifting. Nor was it critical to the the success of the US fleet carriers and surface forces. Nonetheless, it contributed a lot - rank #3.

The blitzkeig would not have succeeded without the tactical effect of the Ju-87. Further, it's success in the Mediterranean and Russian theatres kept it as a viable an important tool throughout the war. 1939-1945

I may not be happy with with your choice but that's a sound argument and one I couldn't argue against. Makes sense to me.

 

[SaparotRob]

I just like the SBD.

 

[Shortround6]

It is a good argument but it also points out the trials of trying to use planes in many theaters.

The A-24 had two strikes against it when used by the Army in New Guinea. One was trying to carry a good bomb load over the Owen Stanley mountains. Something the Val rarely did and the JU 87 never had to contend with such a mountain range between base and targets.
The other was range. The SBD/A-24 could carry a decent bomb load or it could carry fuel. It really couldn't do both. The Japanese didn't even try with with Val and the Ju-87 may have had a few problems, at least until the Ju 87D with the more powerful engine.
The A-24 couldn't carry a heavy enough bomb load far enough to justify the space and ground crew it took up on the land bases. Again not sure the JU 87 would have done much better, single 550lb over long range?

 

[GrauGeist]

The SBD may have delivered the final blow at Midway, but it didn't do the heavy lifting. Nor was it critical to the the success of the US fleet carriers and surface forces.

The SBD did far more than that. At the battle of Coral Sea, the SBDs fought their way through to sink the Shoho and severely damaged the Shokaku (which would have been with Kido Butai at Midway, otherwise) AND acted as interim CAP defending the Lexington and Yorktown.

They also defended Guadacanal both with fleet elements and with the Cactus Airforce, sinking the Ryujo and damaged several other carriers as well as sinking a cruiser. They also sank supply ships and nine fully loaded troop transports, causing a critical shortage in manpower and supplies for the Japanese.

Yes, scouting was part of their mission, but they were a Scouting Bomber, meaning as designed, they were to scout ahead of the fleet in a sweep and were armed to attack anything they encountered.

So in the end, even if "dumb luck" is factored in, the Dauntless deprived the Imperial Japanese Navy five of her fleet carriers - that in itself was a catastrophic setback that the IJN could not recover from. Add to that, the countless troops and tons of supplies sent to the bottom that were desperately needed to maintain their strength during the Guadacanal/Solomon Island campaigns and we can see the SBD contributed immensely to the decline of Japan's fortunes.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

If they had scouted the enemy fleet

When McClusky could not find the Japanese carriers where he expected them, and with his air group's fuel running dangerously low, he began a box search and on the second leg spotted the Japanese destroyer Arashi steaming north at flank speed. The Arashi had stayed behind to attack the submarine USS Nautilus, which had been harassing the Japanese fleet. Surmising that the Arashi must be following the main fleet, McClusky ordered a change in course in the same direction as Arashi. This led him directly to the enemy carriers."

If this isn't "scouting" I don't know what else is!

 

[GrauGeist]

He did what they were trained to do and that training paid off!

 

[Acheron]

Regarding the Ju-87 I read that it could engage in a MUCH steeper dive than most other dive bombers. IIRC, the Ju-87 could dive almost vertically, while most aircraft of the class could only manage a much shallower dive. Is that true? Could other dive bombers go almost vertical? And what were the advantages of a steeper dive?

 

[azador1606]

When McClusky could not find the Japanese carriers where he expected them, and with his air group's fuel running dangerously low, he began a box search and on the second leg spotted the Japanese destroyer Arashi steaming north at flank speed. The Arashi had stayed behind to attack the submarine USS Nautilus, which had been harassing the Japanese fleet. Surmising that the Arashi must be following the main fleet, McClusky ordered a change in course in the same direction as Arashi. This led him directly to the enemy carriers."

If this isn't "scouting" I don't know what else is!

As I remember it, it was a Catalina from a land base (Midway) that spotted the carriers. Following several waves of attacks by land-based planes, and then Devastator torpedo bombers, the Dauntless arrived.

?Not where he expected them, was he lost? Nobody else had a problem. 'Surmising' - a fancy word for guessing, especially since the Arashi might or might not have been attached to the main fleet, and might or might not have been going 'to' a mission rather than returning 'from' a mission - wouldn't 'lucky guess' be a better term? However, given the circumstances it was a better choice than just blindly flying around.

So, no, fully armed and formed up for an attack - I don't think they were 'scouting'. I think they were desperate.

Look, don't get so defensive. No disrespect to McClusky, he made the right call, it was a guess but not a wild one, and it paid off. The pressure must have been intense. Sometimes you need a little luck. (If he'd been flying a "Val" he would have had another 200km of fuel left - food for thought)

 

[GrauGeist]

Something to take into consideration when comparing range between the various types.

The D3A1 and D3A2 are both listed as having a range of 840 miles and 915 miles respectively. That certainly sounds impressive, but that is not their combat radius.

The SBD-3's max. range was 1,400 miles.
It's scouting radius was 325 miles with a 550 pound bomb, it's combat radius with a 1,000 bomb was 250 miles. The two listed radius figures are not absolutes, as they allow a "reserve" for additional mileage in the event that recovery is not immediate.

Another point to consider, is how many aircraft the SBD cost the Japanese. It is credited with 148 aerial victories which can be debated as with any type (fighter or otherwise) but what is often overlooked, is how many fighters, torpedo bombers and dive bombers the SBD destroyed.

During the course of the war, the Dauntless sank 6 carriers and severely damaged almost as many, which meant that either those carrier's compliments were lost during the sinking or had to ditch for lack of a destination. That is a substantial number of aircraft (and aircrew) when totaled up.

In the case of the off-course SBD elements at Midway, they were able to find Kido Butai by using their scouting training (just like the Enterprise's scouts found and surprised Zuiho during the Battle of Guadacanal) however, several elements of Wildcats at Midway (who also were also off course) had to turn back, leaving only 6 F4Fs to defend the torpedo bombers.

No one's being defensive, just putting facts on the table.

The Ju87 and D3A both were valuable assets and performed above and beyond the expectations of their original design, but the SBD through it's accomplishments is almost in a league of it's own.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

As I remember it, it was a Catalina from a land base (Midway) that spotted the carriers. Following several waves of attacks by land-based planes, and then Devastator torpedo bombers, the Dauntless arrived.

A Midway Catalina did spot the Japanese carriers (Specifically one flown by Ens. Jewell Reid) but did not give an accurate location. Later a pair of Catalinas (Flight 58) found a portion of the Japanese fleet but was forced to evade and again their radio transmission (Which was heard by Admiral Fletcher) was lacking in specific information. Later they transmitted the location of 2 carriers in which Fletcher ordered Admiral Spruance to pursue. This led up to the launching of aircraft from US Carriers on "scouting missions."

?Not where he expected them, was he lost? Nobody else had a problem. 'Surmising' - a fancy word for guessing, especially since the Arashi might or might not have been attached to the main fleet, and might or might not have been going 'to' a mission rather than returning 'from' a mission - wouldn't 'lucky guess' be a better term? However, given the circumstances it was a better choice than just blindly flying around.

Refer back to my first response

So, no, fully armed and formed up for an attack - I don't think they were 'scouting'. I think they were desperate.

Your opinion - McClusky was sent out to do a mission. He did not have good information on where his target should be so he used his own initiative and was successful.

Look, don't get so defensive. No disrespect to McClusky, he made the right call, it was a guess but not a wild one, and it paid off. The pressure must have been intense. Sometimes you need a little luck. (If he'd been flying a "Val" he would have had another 200km of fuel left - food for thought)

Who's getting defensive???? You made a statement and by definition was wrong. The Midway victory involved a lot of luck and timing. Please curtail the semantics.

 

[SaparotRob]

Something to take into consideration when comparing range between the various types.

The D3A1 and D3A2 are both listed as having a range of 840 miles and 915 miles respectively. That certainly sounds impressive, but that is not their combat radius.

The SBD-3's max. range was 1,400 miles.
It's scouting radius was 325 miles with a 550 pound bomb, it's combat radius with a 1,000 bomb was 250 miles. The two listed radius figures are not absolutes, as they allow a "reserve" for additional mileage in the event that recovery is not immediate.

Another point to consider, is how many aircraft the SBD cost the Japanese. It is credited with 148 aerial victories which can be debated as with any type (fighter or otherwise) but what is often overlooked, is how many fighters, torpedo bombers and dive bombers the SBD destroyed.

During the course of the war, the Dauntless sank 6 carriers and severely damaged almost as many, which meant that either those carrier's compliments were lost during the sinking or had to ditch for lack of a destination. That is a substantial number of aircraft (and aircrew) when totaled up.

In the case of the off-course SBD elements at Midway, they were able to find Kido Butai by using their scouting training (just like the Enterprise's scouts found and surprised Zuiho during the Battle of Guadacanal) however, several elements of Wildcats at Midway (who also were also off course) had to turn back, leaving only 6 F4Fs to defend the torpedo bombers.

No one's being defensive, just putting facts on the table.

The Ju87 and D3A both were valuable assets and performed above and beyond the expectations of their original design, but the SBD through it's accomplishments is almost in a league of it's own.

I'm going with GrauGeist on this one!

 

[tomo pauk]

It is a good argument but it also points out the trials of trying to use planes in many theaters.

The A-24 had two strikes against it when used by the Army in New Guinea. One was trying to carry a good bomb load over the Owen Stanley mountains. Something the Val rarely did and the JU 87 never had to contend with such a mountain range between base and targets.
The other was range. The SBD/A-24 could carry a decent bomb load or it could carry fuel. It really couldn't do both. The Japanese didn't even try with with Val and the Ju-87 may have had a few problems, at least until the Ju 87D with the more powerful engine.
The A-24 couldn't carry a heavy enough bomb load far enough to justify the space and ground crew it took up on the land bases. Again not sure the JU 87 would have done much better, single 550lb over long range?

Ju 87R-1 (1000 HP engine), in 1939-early 1940: 1100 lb bomb + two drop tanks; in second half of 1940 and on: 2200 lb bomb + two drop tanks.

 

[RCAFson]

Regarding the Ju-87 I read that it could engage in a MUCH steeper dive than most other dive bombers. IIRC, the Ju-87 could dive almost vertically, while most aircraft of the class could only manage a much shallower dive. Is that true? Could other dive bombers go almost vertical? And what were the advantages of a steeper dive?

All DBs could dive vertically, but most, including the JU87 didn't because a vertical dive causes a lot of targeting issues if the target is moving, or there is any wind. A dive of 60-80 degrees was more common. Some DBs such as the SB2C were overweight and consequently their dive brakes were not sufficient to prevent excessive speed build up and so they would normally dive, level off and then commence their final dive.

 

[Acheron]

All DBs could dive vertically, but most, including the JU87 didn't because a vertical dive causes a lot of targeting issues if the target is moving, or there is any wind. A dive of 60-80 degrees was more common. Some DBs such as the SB2C were overweight and consequently their dive brakes were not sufficient to prevent excessive speed build up and so they would normally dive, level off and then commence their final dive.

The following from wikipedia:

Eric "Winkle" Brown RN, a British test pilot and Commanding Officer of No. 1426 Flight RAF (the captured enemy aircraft Flight), tested the Ju 87 at RAE Farnborough. He said of the Stuka, "I had flown a lot of dive-bombers and it's the only one that you can dive truly vertically. Sometimes with the dive-bombers ... maximum dive is usually in the order of 60 degrees ... When flying the Stuka, because it's all automatic, you are really flying vertically ... The Stuka was in a class of its own."

Is this false then?

 

[RCAFson]

Ju 87R-1 (1000 HP engine), in 1939-early 1940: 1100 lb bomb + two drop tanks; in second half of 1940 and on: 2200 lb bomb + two drop tanks.

The R-1 has a Jumo 211Da which provided 1200hp on TO. Land based DBs can take advantage of the longer TO run to carry heavier loads.