freebird, when did the RAF gain enough air superiority in the ETO for the Vengeance to operate like the Ju87 did in 1939 and early 1940 in the ETO?
The rhubarbs, rodeos, circuses, ramrods, roadsteads into France and the Low Counties cost the RAF dearly in 1941 > 1943 and early 1944. I don't think the Vengeance would have been successful.
I believe Al is exactly right. I think air superiority is the crux issue for any a/c that is slow or less capable than the enemy fighters one is liable to engage.
P-47s (and A-36/51s and Spits, etc) were more vulnerable on the deck, particularly in ETO where cloud cover likely to exist in some form or another...and caught unawares by bad tempered guys sneaking up on them with altitude and speed advantage. So, where would a Vengence 'fit'?
Many to most of the 8th AF losses 'greater than 5 lost' in one Group in air to air combat were during Normandy campaign when 4th (twice) and 353rd and 78th Groups, for example, had their eyes and noses on the deck in low level area support.
On June 6, SG103 had to know they were looking at a risky venture trying to get to the beach head with 20+ Ju-87s - and they got hammered near Janville in a 'Stuka shoot'. IIRC none of them got back and the only survivors were the ones that broke for the deck, crash landed, and ran for the trees.
I think another major issue for something like the Vengence and the A-24/SBD is that the Germans had a LOT more 20mm flak as core TO&E. They were bad enough on 47s and 51s and Tempests zipping along at 350 mph on full deflection shots. How much fun do they have on an a/c that has less deflection and keeps getting closer?
From a personal POV, the LW would have been far better off if they had abandoned all future design specs around dive bombing after the Ju-87 and replaced the Ju 87 with Fw 190s and Hs 129s as fast as possible