Anti-Tank aircraft (split from 'Tank killing ratios')

the difference between the killing field of the west and the east is that in the east the majority of tank killings was made by tank or by at gun , in the west, the p-47, tempest and typhoons were resposinbles for the majority of tanks killings

 

That is no difference. In the east the Russian IL2 ground attack aircraft roamed the skies by the thousands, and the German Luftwaffe was also more active in the east, with Ju87D and He129B-3 AT aircraft. These planed were the major killers on the eastern front, just like the Typhoons and P47s in the west.

 

Planes vs Tanks

Let me start a controversy here. It is hghly debateable as to how effective planes were against tanks in WW2, so let's see if we can get a debate going.
It would appear that direct tank kills by aircraft were highly inflated, just as air-to-air kills were overestimated. Attacking a ground target from low level at 250+ knots doesn't give you much time to hit a target smaller than 20 square meters or see the results. Factor in noise, smoke and the guys on the ground trying to kill you and get in and get out fast looks like a real good option. It's hard to find data on this, but everything I recall seeing says the planes wiped out ground transport with ease, but were much less effective against the armor. The planes cost the panzers their fuel, ammo, spare parts and food and spotted ambushes.
Does anyone have any numbers on planes vs tanks?

 

I think for the first half of the war the best was Stuka, for the next one Sturmovik.

 

the germans replace the Ju 87 with the Fw 190 in the ground atack, even Hans Ulrich Rudel use it

 

I agree.

 

The Germans nicknamed this IL2 "The Black Death", it was that effective.

 

Uhm, yeah, so how could you agree with me262 on this? :-?

 

to the ruskis was named Ilyusha, the flying tank and by the jerrys Schwarz Tod :cry:

 

What and suspend the suspense? Never!
:lol:

 

I don't think that Ilyusha means flying tank, for one thing because tank in Russian is just 'Tank', and for another because the company that designed the IL2 was actually Ilyushin. The similarities with Ilyusha are obvious.

I got that russian off a model box, you never know what they're good for

 

Well since the luftwaffe were running out of pilots and fuel to fly their planes, what else do you expect the American and British pilots to shoot at??
The Sturmovik has my vote, it has just as much firepower as any other ground attack aircraft, and it carries the most armor protection, sure it slows it down a bit.

 

You´re probably right. The Soviets called the Sherman tank "Emcha", which is a contraction of M-Chetire which means M4. Simple as that.

 

Wow, really?! It's the first time I haer about it...

 

Hans-Ulrich Rudel did exchange his Ju 87G for a Fw 190D-9 at the very end of the war and flew a few missions in this aircraft. Rudel had nine aerial victories among his impressive tally of successes againts ground targets btw, making him a fighter ace as well.

 

Thanks for a new and interesting information!

 

I have once read an account of a German strafe/bombing attack on a fighter-bomber base near Bayeux, Normandy. This attack was carried out by Fw190s, and the Typhoon pilots on the ground commented that they could do much better in an attack like this, had they been the attacking party in their own aircraft. The German cannon and MGs were no match for four 20mm Hispano guns and eight 2.53" rockets.

 

And Typhoons? were they really so good against the tanks as some say?

 

I have read both yes and no. I do not have access to the actual stats to verify either side of that debate.

 

I think their massive HE rockets would do fine against even the thickest armour, provided that the Typhoon strikes from above.

Brings me to another question. Which was the better aircraft, the Typhoon Mk.II or the Tempest Mk.V?