Military Review

Aviation against tanks (part of 11)

126



By the beginning of World War II, there were no serial attack aircraft in the UK and the USA capable of effectively fighting the German tanks. The experience of military operations in France and North Africa has shown the low efficiency of fighters and bombers in service when used against armored vehicles. So, during the battles in North Africa, the squadron of British Blenheim Mk I bombers, provided that each aircraft was loaded with four 113 kg high-explosive bombs, could destroy or seriously damage 1-2 enemy tanks. At the same time, because of the danger of destruction by fragments of their own bombs, bombing was carried out from horizontal flight from a height of at least 300 meters. The best results were predictably achieved when striking at places of accumulation of tanks and columns of armored vehicles. Tanks deployed in battle formations were not vulnerable to bombers. Allied fighters with machine gun and cannon weapons of 12,7-20 mm caliber also proved to be practically powerless against German medium tanks and self-propelled guns.

By the end of 1941, it became clear that the British Hurricanes in Africa were not able to fight the German Messerschmitt Bf 109F and the Italian Macchi C.202 Folgore on equal terms, and were reclassified as fighter-bombers. Although in some cases, pilots fighter Hurricane Mk IIС with four aviation Hispano Mk II cannons managed to disable Italian wedges and armored cars, the effectiveness of such attacks was low. As practice has shown, even when breaking through relatively thin armor, the armor effect of 20-mm shells was weak and, as a rule, they did not cause serious damage. In this regard, on the basis of the "tropical" modification of the Hurricane IIB Trop, a strike version of the Hurricane IID was created, armed with two 40-mm Vickers S guns with an ammunition of 15 shells per barrel. Before firing cannons, two 7,7 mm Browning .303 Mk IIs with tracer bullets could be used for shooting. The combat use of aircraft with 40 mm guns as part of the 6th RAF squadron began in mid-1942.

Aviation against tanks (part of 11)

Hurricane IID


Since the "artillery" fighter had to operate mainly on the ground, to protect against anti-aircraft fire, the cockpit and a number of the most vulnerable points of the aircraft were partially covered with armor. Additional load in the form of body armor and guns weighing 134 kg worsened the already not too high flight data of the Hurricane.


40-mm aircraft gun Vickers S


Following Hurricane IID, Hurricane IIE appeared. On this plane, the 40-mm guns were housed in removable gondolas. Instead of them, eight RP-60 3-pounders could be suspended, in addition to which there were two built-in 7,7 mm Browning .303 Mk II machine guns. Instead of guns and missiles, the aircraft could carry two outboard fuel tanks or two 250 pound (113 kg) bombs. It was impossible to use cannons and rockets under different wings, because of the recoil when firing, the rockets fell from the guides. In order to reduce the vulnerability to the shelling from the ground, the Hurricane IIE reservation was further strengthened. Now not only the cabin and the radiator were exposed to protection, armor also appeared on the sides of the engine. To compensate for the drop in flight data due to the increased take-off weight of the aircraft, the Merlin 27 engine, 1620 hp, was installed on the aircraft. This model received the designation Hurricane Mk IV.


Hurricane Mk IV


The aircraft with a maximum take-off weight of 3840 kg had a practical range of 640 km. When installing two outboard fuel tanks with a total capacity of 400 L, the flight distance increased to 1400 km. The maximum speed was 508 km / h, cruising - 465 km / h.

Despite its low characteristics, the serial production of the Hurricane percussion continued until the beginning of 1944. For lack of better, they were actively used against ground targets in the African campaign. At the request of the British, during the five-day battle at El Alamein, which began in the evening 23 October 1942 years, six squadrons of "Hurricane" fighter-bombers during 842 sorties destroyed 39 tanks, more than 200 APCs and trucks, 26 tank trucks with fuel and 42 artillery guns. Own losses in the technology were not disclosed, but it is known that during the execution of the assault airstrikes, 11 British pilots were killed.

Pilots who flew in Hurricanes with 40-mm cannons in North Africa announced the destruction of 47 tanks and roughly 200 units of other vehicles. Since June 1943, the "artillery" attack aircraft began to operate in Europe. If in Africa the main targets were armored vehicles, in Europe they were mainly hunting for locomotives. At the start of the 1944, attack aircraft were used against the Japanese in Burma. Since there were relatively few tanks in the Japanese army, fighter-bombers, using mostly fragmentation 40-mm shells, operated on transport communications and sank small vessels in the coastal zone. In combat missions from 700 "Hurricanes" with 40-mm guns, about a third of attack aircraft were lost, even taking into account local reservations, the plane was very vulnerable to anti-aircraft fire.



Although the British claimed that the effectiveness of firing at tanks was 25%, in reality even very experienced pilots managed to get into the 1-2 tank with shells at best. The British aircraft had the same flaw as on the IL-2 with the 37-mm guns - due to strong recoil, aimed shooting was possible only with a shot length of 2-3. Sighting shooting at a single tank was recommended to open from a distance 500-400 m. In addition, the reliability of the gun Vickers S left much to be desired. Delays and failures in shooting occurred in every 3-4 combat departure. As in the case of the Soviet NA-37, aimed fire from one large-caliber gun in the event of failure of the other was impossible - the plane turned and only one projectile was flying towards the target.

An 40-mm armor-piercing projectile with a mass of 1113 g left the gun barrel with a length of 1,7 m at a speed of 570 m / s, and at a distance of 300 m normal pierced through an 50 mm armor plate. Theoretically, such an indicator of armor penetration allowed us to confidently fight medium German tanks when firing at the side or from the stern. However, in practice, it was impossible to get into the armor of a tank at a right angle from a hollow diving plane. Under these conditions, shells often ricocheted, but even in the case of armor penetration, the destructive effect was usually small. In this regard, "Hurricane" with "big guns" did not become an effective anti-tank tool.


Mustang with 40-mm Vickers S cannons


By the beginning of 1944, the Allies realized the futility of creating specialized anti-tank attack aircraft with cannon armament. Although it is known that the Americans also tested the assault version of the Mustang with 40-mm cannons Vickers S. The crushing return of large-caliber aircraft cannons did not allow acceptable accuracy of firing more than 2-3 with projectiles in the queue, the ammunition for such guns was very limited, and large Mass and significant frontal resistance of large-caliber guns worsened flight performance. On the basis of Vickers S, it was planned to create an 57-mm aircraft gun with armor penetration to 100 mm, but calculations showed that such a weapon would have excessive mass and unacceptably strong recoil for use on single-engine fighter-bombers, and work in this direction was curtailed.

The basic one weapons American fighters during the Second World War were 12,7-mm machine guns, ineffective even against light armored vehicles. 20-mm guns were installed quite rarely and by their characteristics of armor penetration they differed little from heavy machine guns. However, in the prewar period, American designers experimented with larger-caliber aircraft guns, and a number of combat aircraft with 37-75-mm guns were created in the United States, but their main purpose was not to fight armored vehicles.

So, the 37-mm M4 cannon with 30 ammunition of shells was armed with the P-39D Airacobra fighter. The 97 kg cannon had a 150 shot rate / rpm. The fighter’s ammunition, as a rule, included fragmentation shells. An 750 g armor-piercing projectile left the barrel at an initial speed of 610 m / s and could penetrate 25 mm armor at a distance of 400 m. But the AeroCab pilots used guns mainly in air battles, and only occasionally for shelling ground targets.

75-mm gun M5 with manual loading, weight 408 kg was installed on the B-25G Mitchell bombers. An armor-piercing projectile weighing 6,3 kg with an initial speed of 619 m / s at a distance of 300 m along the normal pierced through 80 mm homogeneous armor. A gun with such armor penetration could surely hit medium tanks PzKpfw IV.


Bomber B-25G Mitchell


But given the fact that during the attack, in view of the extremely low rate of fire, one tank could be fired at a real distance of a battle, the strength of two shots was very low from the strength of two shots. They tried to improve accuracy by shooting tracer bullets from 12,7-mm machine guns, but the effectiveness of firing at small targets remained small. In this connection, the Mitchells, armed with 75-mm guns, were used mainly in the Pacific against Japanese ships of small and medium displacement. When attacking large sea convoys, the B-25G effectively suppressed anti-aircraft fire. When firing from the 1500 distance m, the crew of the assault Mitchell managed to make an 3-4 sighting shot at the destroyer class ship.

At the beginning of 1942, the designers of the American company North American began to create a diving bomber based on the P-51 Mustang fighter. The first "Mustangs" in February 1942, the British used in battle. The fighter, known as the Mustang I, proved to be a very easy-to-operate and highly maneuverable aircraft. However, the Allison V-1710-39 engine, installed on the first Mustangs, had a significant disadvantage - after rapidly gaining more than 4000 meters, it rapidly lost power. This significantly reduced the combat value of the aircraft, while the British needed fighters capable of confronting the Luftwaffe at medium and high altitudes. Therefore, the entire batch of American-made fighter aircraft was transferred to tactical aviation units, which were subordinate to the Tactical Command for interaction with army units, but there was no need for a high altitude. British pilots who flew on the Mustang I, mainly engaged in low-altitude photography, free hunting on railways and highways and attacked point ground targets along the coast. Later, the number of their tasks was introduced by the interception of single German aircraft trying at low altitude, out of sight of British radar, to break through and strike targets in the UK. Given the success of the low-altitude Mustang I fighters, in April 1942, North American was given an order to create a pure strike aircraft that could drop bombs from a dive. Total supposed to build 500 aircraft. The shock version of the "Mustang" received the designation A-36A and proper name Apache.


A-36A


On the A-36, an Allison 1710-87 engine with an 1325 hp power was installed, which allowed it to reach speed in horizontal flight 587 km / h. The aircraft with a maximum take-off weight of 4535 kg had a range of 885 km. Built-in weapons consisted of six 12,7-mm machine guns. The combat load initially consisted of two 227 kg (500-pounder) bombs, and in the future, incendiary tanks began to be suspended from napalm.

Since the "Mustang" from the very beginning had excellent aerodynamics, the aircraft developed a high speed during a dive, which was not necessary for a diving bomber. To reduce the maximum speed of a dive on the plane, they installed perforated brake flaps, reducing speed to 627 km / h.

The first A-36A in June 1942 of the year entered service with the 27-th light bomber group and the 86-th group of diving bomber operating in Italy. In July, the bomber groups began to perform the first combat missions, launching attacks against targets in Sicily. After a month of combat use, the pilots of the two groups made more than 1000 sorties. In August 1943, both groups were renamed Fighter-Bomber. American dive bombers had a significant impact on the course of hostilities in Italy. Due to the not very suitable bomb armament against tanks deployed in battle formations, the Apaches were ineffective, but on the other hand they were very successful at armored vehicles and transport convoys. The main role of A-36A in the fight against tanks was to destroy bridges and destroy mountain roads, which made the terrain impassable for armored vehicles and made it difficult for German tank units to bring fuel and ammunition. In the middle of September 1943, the A-36A and P-38 fighter-bombers provided almost decisive assistance to the units of the US 5 Army in the Apennines, which were in a very difficult situation. Thanks to a series of successful strikes against the concentration points of the enemy forces, bridges and communications, the offensive outburst of the German forces was stopped.



Initially, the main combat technique "Apache" was dive-bombing. Usually, the sorties were made as part of the 4-6 group of airplanes, which alternately swooped on the target from a height of 1200-1500 m, while the accuracy of the bombing was quite high. After dropping bombs, the target was often fired with machine guns, thus making 2-3 combat approaches. It was believed that the guarantee of the Apache invulnerability was their high speed, but with such tactics the anti-aircraft gunners had time to react and target, and the losses of the dive bombers were very significant. In addition, when diving at high speeds, the aircraft very often became unstable, which was due to the abnormal operation of the aerodynamic brakes.

To reduce losses, it was decided to drop all the bombs in one go, and to increase stability, bombing was carried out from a flatter dive angle and from a greater height. This made it possible to reduce losses, but the accuracy of the bombing dropped significantly. The combat effectiveness of A-36A against tanks could be significantly higher when using incendiary tanks with napalm. But incendiary tanks with A-36A were used mainly against the Japanese, in the jungles of Burma.

In total, the Apaches in the Mediterranean and Far Eastern theaters of military operations made 23373 sorties, during which more than 8000 tons of bombs were dropped. In A-36A air battles, the enemy's 84 aircraft were destroyed. Own losses were 177 units. Most of the downed shock "Mustangs" fell on the 20-37-mm caliber anti-aircraft guns during re-entry missions. The A-36A combat career actually ended in the first half of 1944, when more advanced American fighters P-51D Mustang, P-47 Thunderbolt, as well as the British Typhoon and Tempest began to enroll in combat squadrons.

The main anti-tank weapons of British and American fighter-bomber steel missiles. The first British unguided RP-3 aircraft missiles were based on 76,2-mm anti-aircraft missiles. The British three-inch anti-aircraft missile was a simple tubular structure with stabilizers, the engine used 5 kg cord cord brand SCRK. The first aircraft missiles were tested on the Hurricane and Beautifier.


Hurricane IIE fighter-bomber with missiles


Initially, the 87,3 mm (3,44 inch) steel-launched rockets were designed to combat the German submarines that surfaced and were periscope depths. On tests, it turned out that a monolithic steel warhead weighing 11,35 kg at a distance of 700 meters can penetrate an 3-inch steel plate. It was more than enough to break through the solid hull of a submarine and allowed to confidently fight with medium tanks. The target launch range was limited to 1000 meters, the maximum flight speed of the rocket was 440 m / s. There is also evidence of the creation of an 87,3-mm rocket, the warhead of which contained a hard-alloy core. But whether they were used in hostilities, information could not be found.

In June, 1942, armor-piercing missiles began to be actively used by British fighter-bombers in North Africa. According to reports of British pilots, with a salvo launch of missiles on a single tank, it was possible to achieve hits in 5% of cases. The result, of course, was not high, but in any case, the effectiveness of the missiles was higher than during the shelling of 20-mm guns. Due to low accuracy, when it was possible, NAR launches tried to carry out armored vehicles in places of congestion and columns.



For use against "non-solid" targets, a high-explosive 114-mm (4,5 inch) warhead was created, a warhead weighing 21,31 kg, containing 1,36 kg of TNT-hexogen alloy. It is worth saying that for the family of British aircraft missiles used a single "chassis" with stabilizers and a cruise engine equipped with a cordit. The rockets and the spinning warheads themselves were delivered to the airfields of the fighter-bombers separately, and could be completed depending on the specific combat mission.


114-high-explosive high-explosive fragmentation bomber under the wing of the Typhoon fighter-bomber


Missiles with high-explosive fragmentation warhead proved to be effective not only against trains, transport convoys, anti-aircraft batteries and other areal targets. In some cases, with their help, it was possible to successfully fight with German armored vehicles. The 1,36 kg of powerful explosives, enclosed in a robust case 4 mm thick, in the case of a direct hit turned out to be enough to break through the 30-35 mm armor. In this case, not only armored personnel carriers were vulnerable, but also medium German tanks. The armor of heavy tanks with these missiles did not penetrate, but the NAR hit, as a rule, did not pass without a trace. Even if the armor was able to withstand, observation devices and sights often suffered, the attachments were swept away, the turret was jammed, the gun and the undercarriage were damaged. In most cases, tanks hit by high-explosive high-explosive artillery missiles lost their combat capability.

There was also a rocket with a 114-mm warhead equipped with white phosphorus. Attempts to use incendiary missiles against armored vehicles turned out to be ineffective in most cases - when they hit armor, white phosphorus burnt out, without causing any special harm to combat vehicles. Incendiary shells were a threat to trucks or open-top armored personnel carriers, towing vehicles, tanks with open hatches during loading of ammunition or refueling. In March, 1945, the missiles with improved accuracy and cumulative combat units, but the British did not have time to use them in battle.

In the second half of 1942, it became known that heavy tanks appeared in Germany, after which the question arose of building missiles capable of penetrating their armor. In 1943, a new version of the missile with an 152-mm armor-piercing high-explosive warhead (semi-armored in British terminology - Eng. Semi Armor Piercing) was put into service. Warheads weighing 27,3 kg with a strong armor-piercing tip contained 5,45 kg of explosives were able to penetrate 200 mm armor and had a good fragmentation effect. At a distance of 3 meter heavy fragments punched 12 mm armor plate. Due to the fact that the rocket engine remained the same, and the mass and frontal resistance increased significantly, the maximum velocity of the missile dropped to 350 m / s. In this regard, there was a slight drop in the launch range and the shooting accuracy deteriorated, which was partially offset by an increased destructive effect.


152-mm 60lb SAP Projectile SAP No2 Mk.I


According to British data, 152-mm missiles confidently hit heavy tanks Pz.Kpfw.VI Ausf.H1. However, the British pilots tried to attack the Tigers and Panthers on board or from the stern, which indirectly indicates that the frontal armor of German heavy tanks, due to the likelihood of a rebound, could not always be broken through. If, as a result of a direct hit, penetration did not occur, the tank, as a rule, still received heavy damage, the crew and internal units were often hit by internal chipping of armor.


152-mm missiles under the wing of a British attack aircraft


Thanks to a powerful warhead, the undercarriage was destroyed at close break, optics and armament were knocked out. It is believed that the cause of death of Michael Wittman - one of the most famous German tank aces, was hit in the rear part of his "Tiger" missiles from the British fighter-bomber "Typhoon". Heavy 152-mm missiles were also successfully used against German ships, trains, military columns and artillery positions. There are cases when small bridges were destroyed by a missile salvo, which hampered the advancement of German tanks.



By the end of 1942, aircraft missiles were being released in large quantities. The British NARs were very primitive and did not differ in high accuracy, but their advantages were high reliability and low cost of production.

After the Typhoon fighters were attracted to strikes on ground targets, the missiles took a firm place in their arsenal. The standard option was to install eight guides, four under each wing. The Typhoon fighters-bombers of the Hauker Company made their first combat sorties against ground targets in November 1942 of the year. Although the Typhoon was not equipped with powerful armor, it turned out to be quite tenacious. Its success in the role of a fighter-bomber contributed to good low-altitude handling and powerful weapons: four 20-mm cannons, eight NAR or two 1000-pound (454 kg) aerial bombs. The practical range of the flight with rockets was 740 km. Maximum speed without external hangers on the ground - 663 km / h.

By the end of 1943, the Typhoon aviation units capable of carrying missiles from 18 formed the Second Tactical Command of the RAF, whose main task was the direct air support of ground forces, the fight against fortifications and enemy armored vehicles.


Typhoon fighter-bomber with missiles suspended


After the Allies landed in Normandy, the Typhoons conducted a free hunt in the nearby German rears or patrolled near the front line at an altitude of about 3000. After receiving an aircraft engineer command on the radio, they attacked armored vehicles, gun emplacements or mortar positions on the battlefield. At the same time, the target was “tagged” with smoke shells or signal rockets, if possible.



With the opening of the "Second Front" one of the main tasks of the British fighter-bomber began to act on the communications of the enemy. Fighting columns of German tanks moving along the narrow roads of France was much easier than to destroy them one by one on the battlefield. Often when striking large forces, the British attack aircraft operated a mixed composition. Part of the aircraft carrying missiles, and the other part of the bomb. The first in this case attacked fighter-bombers with missiles. They stopped the column, striking its head and suppressed anti-aircraft resistance.

In the 1944, in the RAF shock tactical squadrons, the Typhoons began to be replaced with more advanced Tempests. But the combat use of "Typhoon" continued until the end of hostilities. In turn, Hawker Tempest was a further development of Typhoon. The maximum speed of the aircraft increased to 702 km / h. High-altitude characteristics increased markedly, and the practical range reached 1190 km. Armament remains the same as on the Typhoon, but the ammunition for four 20-mm guns increased to 800 shells (on the Typhoon 140 shells per gun).

Given the experience of using the Hurricane IID anti-tank attack aircraft, Tempest Mk.V attempted to install X-NUMX-mm Class P guns manufactured by Vickers. The gun had a tape feed, its weight with 47 rounds of ammunition shells was 30 kg. Rate of fire - 280 rds / min.


Tempest with 47-mm guns


According to project data, an armor-piercing projectile weighing 2,07 kg, released at a speed of 808 m / s, was supposed to penetrate 75 mm armor. When using a tungsten core in the projectile, the armor penetration value was supposed to be increased to 100 mm. However, at the final stage of the war there was no special need for aircraft with such guns. It is known about the construction of one Tempest with 47-mm guns.

Due to the fact that the flight data of Tempest made it possible to perform the whole range of tasks and successfully conduct air combat with any German serial piston fighter, the use of this machine was more multifaceted compared to the Typhoon. Nevertheless, Tempests were widely used to combat armored vehicles and direct air support. By the beginning of 1945, combat squadrons already had about Tempest 700. About a third of them participated in strikes against ground targets.



It is quite difficult to evaluate the effectiveness of the actions of British fighter-bombers against tanks. 152-mm heavy missiles are guaranteed to destroy or incapacitate in the event of hitting any German tank or SPG. But the effectiveness of the use of missiles is directly dependent on the qualifications and experience of the pilot. Usually during the attack, the British attack aircraft swooped at the target at an angle of up to 45 degrees. The steeper the dive angle was, the greater the accuracy of the launch of heavy NAR. After the target hit the reticle, just before launching, it was necessary to slightly raise the nose of the aircraft in order to take into account the downfall of the missiles. For inexperienced pilots, a recommendation was issued before launching missiles to carry out tracer shells. It was very common for British pilots to significantly overestimate their achievements in the fight against German armored vehicles. So, 7 August 1944, the Typhoon fighter-bombers during the day attacked the German tank units advancing to Normandy. According to the pilots reports, they destroyed 84 and damaged 56 tanks. However, later the British command found out that only 12 tanks and SPG were damaged and destroyed by missiles. However, in addition to the missiles, attack aircraft also dropped 113 and 227 kg bombs and fired at targets from cannons. Also among the burned and wrecked tanks there were a lot of armored personnel carriers and tracked tractor, which in the heat of battle could be mistaken for tanks or self-propelled guns.



But in any case, the success of the Typhoon pilots was overestimated several times. Practice has shown that in reality, the high declared results of fighter-bomber should be treated with great care. Pilots were very peculiar not only to overstate their own success, but also the number of German tanks on the battlefield. According to the results of several detailed investigations carried out in order to ascertain the real combat effectiveness of the "Typhoons" and "Tempests", it was found that real achievements did not exceed, at best, 10% of the declared number of enemy tanks.

In contrast to the Royal Air Force, the US Air Force did not have squadrons specializing mainly in hunting for German armored vehicles. The American Mustangs and Thunderbolts, attracted for strikes at ground targets, acted upon requests from land-based aircraft navigators or engaged in “free hunting” in the near German rear or on communications. However, the missiles on the American warplanes were suspended even more often than in the British Air Force. The most common American NARs were shells of the M8 family - they were produced in millions of copies and were widely used in all theaters of operations. To launch NAR М8, tubular launchers with a length of about 3 m, made of plastic (36 kg weight), magnesium alloy (39 kg) or steel (86 kg) were used. In addition to the mass, the launch tubes differed in resource. The lightest, cheapest and most common plastic PU M10 had the lowest resource. Launch tubes were grouped into a bundle of three pieces under each wing of the fighter.


American fighter Р-51D with PU NAR М8


The design of the NAR M8 for its time was quite advanced, compared with the British RP-3 family of missiles - it is a much more advanced missile, characterized by reduced frontal resistance of launchers, good weight perfection and better shooting accuracy. This was achieved through a successful layout and the use of spring-loaded stabilizers, which were revealed when the missile exited the PU.


Uncontrolled aircraft rocket M8 in the hands of an American soldier in front of equipment in a tubular launcher

The 114-mm (4,5 in.) Missile M8 had a mass of 17,6 kg and a length of 911 mm. The engine containing 2,16 kg of solid fuel accelerated the rocket to 260 m / s. In practice, the speed of flight of the carrier was added to the rocket’s own speed. The high-explosive warhead contained 1,9 kg of TNT. In the case of a direct hit with a high-explosive warhead, she breached 25 mm armor. There was also an armor-piercing modification with a steel bar, which, with a direct hit, could penetrate 45 mm armor, but such missiles were rarely used. The combat use of the M8 missiles began in the spring of 1943. Initially, the P-8 Tomahawk fighter was the carrier of the M40 missiles, but later these NARs became very widespread and were used on single-engine and twin-engine American combat aircraft.


P-47D with PU rockets M8


At the end of 1943, an improved model М8А2, and then А3 went into the series. On missiles of new versions in order to improve the stability of the trajectory, the area of ​​folding stabilizers was increased, and the mass of explosives in the warhead increased to 2,1 kg. Thanks to the use of a new formulation of gunpowder, the thrust of the cruise missile engine was increased, which in turn had a beneficial effect on the accuracy and range of fire. Just before the start of the 1945, more than 2,5 million M8 missiles were produced. The scale of the combat use of NAR M8 in the US Air Force is evidenced by the fact that the Thunderbolt fighters of the 47 Air Army during the fighting in Italy spent up to 12 missiles daily.

Late modifications M8 had a good accuracy of fire, surpassing this indicator British missiles by about 2 times. But with actions on heavy armored vehicles and pillboxes, the destructive force of their warhead was not always enough. In this connection, 1944-mm NAR 127HVAR (High Velocity Aircraft Rocket - a high-speed aircraft rocket), created on the basis of 5 FFAR and 3,5 FFAR missiles used in naval aviation, entered production in 5. In aviation units, she received the informal name "Holy Moses" ("Holy Moses").


127-mm HAP 5HVAR


Due to the use of rocket fuel of complex composition with a high specific impulse consisting of: 51,5% nitrocellulose, 43% nitroglycerin, 3,25% diethyl phthalate, 1,25% potassium sulfate, 1% soot, the maximum speed of the rocket’s flight was reached up to XNXMHMXXMHMXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXxxxxxx without taking into account the speed of the aircraft carrier. The target launch range for point targets was 0,2 m, for area targets - up to 420 m. The 1000 rocket carried a 2000 kg warhead, which was loaded with 61 kg of Comp B-explosives - a mixture of TNT and hexogen. On tests 20,6-inch missiles managed to break through 3,4 mm naval cemented armor. Armor 5-57 mm thick could be punctured in the immediate vicinity of the explosion point by fragments. For 12-mm NAR also created a solid armor-piercing warhead with a carbide tip, despite the fact that such a missile was able to penetrate the frontal part of the "Tiger", she was not popular with her crew.



In terms of its operational and combat performance, the 127-mm 5HVAR has become the most advanced type of unguided aircraft missiles used by the Americans during the Second World War. Despite the fact that the cruciform cruciform stabilizers were used on this rocket, in accuracy of launch it was not inferior to the M8. The striking effect of 127-mm rockets was ample. With a direct hit in heavy and medium tanks, they were usually incapacitated. Uncontrolled aircraft 5HVAR missiles in the postwar period were widely used, in some countries remained in service until the beginning of the 90-s and used in many local conflicts.

In the part devoted to the anti-tank capabilities of the Allied aviation, it is not by chance that so much attention is paid to aviation unguided missiles, since they were the main means of fighting German armored vehicles. However, against the tanks, including on the battlefield, bombs were used quite often. Since the Americans and the British did not have anything like the Soviet PTAB, they were forced to use 113, 227 and even 454 kg bombs against single tanks. At the same time, in order to exclude the destruction of own bombs by shrapnel, it was necessary to severely limit the minimum discharge height or to use detonators with deceleration, which naturally had a negative effect on the accuracy of bombing. Also, from the middle of 1944 in Europe, single-engine strike aircraft began to suspend 625 liter napalm tanks, but they were used relatively infrequently.

In the comments to the second part of the cycle devoted to the combat effectiveness of Soviet attack aircraft, a number of visitors to the site rests on the "uselessness" of the IL-2. It has been argued that an airplane, in its characteristics close to the P-47, would have been a more effective attack aircraft on the Eastern Front than the armored Elahs. At the same time, discussion participants forget about the circumstances in which Soviet and American aviation had to fight. It is absolutely not correct to compare the conditions and aviation equipment of the Western and Eastern fronts. At least until the middle of 1943, our combat aircraft had no dominance in the air, and the attack aircraft constantly encountered the most severe anti-aircraft resistance from the Germans. By the time the Allies landed in Normandy, the main German flight crews were ground up on the Eastern Front or defended the sky of Germany from the destructive raids of heavy bombers. Even with fighters in the Luftwaffe, they were often unable to take to the air due to the chronic shortage of aviation gasoline. And the German anti-aircraft artillery on the Western Front in 1944 was not at all the same as, say, in 1942 in the East. There is nothing surprising that in these conditions the unarmored "Typhoons", "Tempests", "Thunderbolts" and "Mustangs" dominated the battlefield and pirated in the rear of the enemy. Here it came at an opportune time that the Thunderbolt had a large combat load (P-47D - 1134 kg) and a huge fighter-range flight range - 1400 km without PTB.


P-47N with 127-mm NAR and kg kg aerial bombs


It was possible to bring the powerplant to mind, “lick” the structure and eliminate the “childhood sores” of the P-47 only a few months before the opening of the “Second Front”. After that, “Flying Jugs” became the main striking force of aviation support for the ground forces of the US Army on the battlefield. This was facilitated not only by a large combat radius of action and a commanding combat load, but also by a tenacious air-cooled engine covering the pilot in front. However, more maneuverable and high-speed "Mustangs" also often worked on the leading edge and acted on communications.

A typical tactic of American fighter-bombers was a sudden attack from a gentle dive. At the same time, during actions on columns, railway junctions, artillery positions and other targets behind the line of German defense, repeated combat visits in order to avoid losses from anti-aircraft fire, as a rule, were not carried out. American pilots, providing direct air support to their units, also tried to deliver "lightning strikes", after which they carried out care at low altitude. Thus, they did not “iron” the target, making several attacks, like IL-2, and, accordingly, the losses of the American attack aircraft from small-caliber anti-aircraft artillery were minimal. But even with such tactics, taking into account the total superiority of the Allies in the air and the number of fighter-bombers that depart daily for combat missions, it was impossible for the Germans to navigate the roads in the frontline in the daytime during the flying weather. Continuous air strikes also exposed any detected armored vehicles.

This is extremely demoralizing effect on the morale of German soldiers. The fear of raids by Anglo-American aviation even appeared among veterans who fought in North Africa and on the Eastern Front. As the Germans themselves said, on the Western Front they developed a “German look” - all German soldiers, without exception, who had spent several days on the Western Front, even away from the front line, constantly looked at the sky with anxiety. A survey of German prisoners of war confirmed the enormous psychological effect of air attacks, especially missile ones, even tank crews consisting of veterans were exposed to it. Often, tankers left their combat vehicles, only noticing the approaching attack aircraft.

Here is what the commander of the 3 tank battalion of the 67 tank regiment, Colonel Wilson Collins, wrote about this in his report:
Direct air support seriously helped our offensive. I saw the work of fighter pilots. Acting from low altitudes, with rockets and bombs, they cleared the way for us at the breakthrough from Saint-Lo. Aviators tore down the German tank attack on the barman we had recently taken, on the west bank of the Röhr. This section of the front was fully controlled by Thunderbolt fighter-bombers. Rarely, when German units could fight with us without being hit by them. Once I saw how the crew of the Panther threw his car after the fighter fired at their tank with machine guns. Obviously, the Germans decided that the next time they entered, they would drop bombs or launch rockets.


In general, the effectiveness of air attacks during actions against tanks among the pilots of the Mustangs and Thunderbolts was about the same as in British aviation. Thus, in ideal conditions of the landfill, in the motionless captured tank PzKpfw V, with the launch of the 64, the NAR M8 managed to achieve five direct hits. No better deal with the accuracy of the missiles were on the battlefield. So, during the inspection of the destroyed and destroyed German armored vehicles at the battle site in the Ardennes, all 6 tanks and SPGs were hit with missiles, although the pilots claimed that they were able to make hits on the 66 armored vehicles. When attacking a tank column of about fifty tanks, on the highway in the vicinity of La Baleyn in France, it was announced the destruction of 17 units. During the survey, the site of the air strike on the spot found only 9 tanks, and only two of them could not be restored.

Thus, it can be stated that the Allied fighter-bombers didn’t exceed the Soviet armored IL-2 attack aircraft in their effectiveness. However, literally all the Allied combat aircraft that flew during the daytime acted against armored vehicles. Many cases are known when dozens of B-17 and B-24 heavy bombers were involved in the bombing of German tank units. Given that the Americans in 1944 had superiority in the air and a huge number of bombers at their disposal, they could not afford to use strategic bomber aircraft to accomplish tactical tasks. Of course, four-engine bombers dropping 227, 454 and 908 kg bombs as an adequate anti-tank weapon can be considered a stretch, but the probability theory and the “magic of big numbers” come into play. If hundreds of heavy bombs fall from a height of several kilometers onto a limited area, they inevitably cover someone. After such air raids, even the surviving crews in serviceable tanks, due to the strongest moral shock, often lost their combat capability.



In France, the Netherlands and Belgium, the Allies avoided mass bombing of populated areas, but after the fighting spread to the territory of Germany, the tanks could no longer hide among the residential areas.



Despite the fact that in the arsenal of aviation weapons of the Americans and the British there was not enough effective anti-tank weapons, they were able to successfully hold down the actions of the German tank units, depriving them of the supply of fuel and ammunition. After the Allies landed in Normandy, the enemy’s railway network was completely destroyed and the German armored vehicles that accompanied its trucks with shells and supplies, fuel trucks, infantry and artillery were forced to make long marches on the roads, while being subjected to continuous air traffic. After the liberation of France, many commanders of the Allied units complained that the narrow roads leading to Normandy were cluttered with broken and broken German vehicles in 1944, and it was very difficult to travel around them. As a result, a significant part of German tanks simply did not reach the front line, and those who got there were left without fuel and ammunition. According to the memoirs of the surviving German tankers who fought in the West, they were often forced to abandon, not being able to timely repair, not only equipment that received minor military damage or had minor damage, but also absolutely serviceable tanks with dry fuel tanks.

Продолжение следует ...

Based on:
http://www.quarryhs.co.uk/Pgun.htm
http://www.airpages.ru/us/b25h.shtml
http://www.airwar.ru/enc/aww2/a36.html
http://ftr.wot-news.com/2014/04/04/ground-attack-aircraft-myth-of-the-tank-busters/
http://www.designation-systems.net/
Jaap Teeuwen. British Aircraft of World War II
Author:
Articles from this series:
Aviation against tanks (part of 1)
Aviation against tanks (part of 2)
Aviation against tanks (part of 3)
Aviation against tanks (part of 4)
Aviation against tanks (part of 5)
Aviation against tanks (part of 6)
Aviation against tanks (part of 7)
Aviation against tanks (part of 8)
Aviation against tanks (part of 9)
Aviation against tanks (part of 10)
126 comments
Ad

Our projects are looking for authors in the news and analytical departments. Requirements for applicants: literacy, responsibility, efficiency, inexhaustible creative energy, experience in copywriting or journalism, the ability to quickly analyze text and check facts, write concisely and interestingly on political and economic topics. The work is paid. Contact: [email protected]

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Oden280
    Oden280 14 November 2017 15: 24 New
    +3
    "A warhead weighing 27,3 kg with a strong armor-piercing tip contained 5,45 kg of explosives, was capable of penetrating 200 mm of armor and had a good fragmentation effect."
    Wild storytellers
    1. hohol95
      hohol95 14 November 2017 15: 47 New
      +1
      Sounded 200 mm are indicated on the Internet ... Googling - maybe you will come across real characteristics of a 152 mm 60lb SAP projectile No2 Mk.I.
      1. Kibb
        Kibb 14 November 2017 17: 55 New
        0
        They indicate it on the Internet, but how? 350 m / s maximum speed
        1. hohol95
          hohol95 14 November 2017 22: 13 New
          +1
          These data look more plausible -
          Four main types of shells were produced:
          "25lb AP Mk-I" (with armor-piercing head),
          "60lb SAP No2 Mk-I" (semi-armor-piercing),
          “60lb NOT No1 Mk-I” and “18lb HE Mk-I” (with HE).
          In total, 1 thousand rockets were fired. TTX shell: caliber –041 mm; length - 76,2 m; warhead length - 1.4 - 315 mm; projectile diameter - 558-87 mm; projectile weight - 152 - 19,7 kg; warhead mass - 36,8 - 8,2 kg; charge mass - 27,2 kg; initial speed - 350 - 480 m / s; armor penetration - at a distance of 1000 m - 78 mm; firing range - 1,6 km.
      2. Razvedka_Boem
        Razvedka_Boem 14 November 2017 19: 22 New
        0
        Googling - maybe you will come across the real characteristics of a 152 mm 60lb SAP projectile No2 Mk.I.

        Better video, at least replicas with the documented composition of the fuel part, explosives and tip.
        But the video will not be, only Google .. At the same time, often debaters, this very Google, are often ignored.
        Remains common sense, physics, chemistry and formulas.
        1. hohol95
          hohol95 14 November 2017 22: 39 New
          +1
          In August 1941, information was received about the successful use of missiles in the USSR against German tanks. Certain efforts were made to obtain a sample of Russian MS. Probably diplomatic steps yielded results, although it is not known for certain how and with whom negotiations were conducted in Moscow. One way or another, by September 1941, schematic drawings of Soviet 82-mm rockets were received. As far as they helped in the development of the British missiles, history is silent, but in the same September two own projects were already developed in England.
          The first version of the 60-pound rocket, despite the designation, weighed slightly less - 47 pounds or 21.3 kg. The elongated streamlined warhead contained 3 pounds of explosive (1.36 kg), equipped with either pure TNT, or a mixture of RDX and TNT in a ratio of 6/4. The total length of the rocket was 558 mm.
          At the end of 1943, an improved version of the rocket was developed, which became the most popular and widespread in the British aviation. Its length has become a little less than the original version - 553 mm. Its warhead was significantly "swollen" and now contained 12 pounds (5.45 kg) of explosive. Initially pure TNT, later either amatol, or a mixture of amatol and TNT in a ratio of 6/4. The 6-inch (152 mm) warhead weighing exactly 60 pounds (27.3 kg) had an armor-piercing tip made of hardened steel and was able to penetrate armor up to 200 mm thick at a distance of up to 1 km. True, due to the fact that the marching engine remained the same, and the mass of the warhead increased, the flight speed of the rocket still decreased - to 350 m / s, which predetermined its lower accuracy.
          1. venik
            venik 15 November 2017 09: 23 New
            +5
            Quote: hohol95
            In August 1941, information was received about the successful use of missiles in the USSR against German tanks. Certain efforts were made to obtain a sample of Russian MS. Probably diplomatic steps yielded results, although it is not known for certain how and with whom negotiations were conducted in Moscow.

            ==========
            Definitely !!! During the war, there was an agreement (not too advertised now) between the USSR, the USA and Great Britain, according to which, the parties provided each other with samples of equipment and weapons (not all of course) for “familiarization”!
            In addition, due to the fact that the USSR’s only rocket propellant production plant in Minsk (according to other sources, in the Dnipropetrovsk region) was not completely evacuated (some of the equipment, especially bulky equipment, could not be taken out and had to be destroyed), a serious problem arose. production of rockets. They turned to the Americans - they agreed, albeit for a considerable fee, and they were given the technology of rocket fuel production. From this moment, in fact, the Amer and British development of aircraft missiles began.
            1. hohol95
              hohol95 15 November 2017 15: 19 New
              +2
              “A personal and strictly secret message from Mr. Churchill
              Marshal Stalin:
              1. The Admiralty asked me to turn to you for help on a small but important matter. The Soviet Navy informed the Admiralty that two German T-5 acoustic torpedoes were found in a submarine captured in Tallinn. This is the only known type of torpedo guided by the principles of acoustics. It is very effective not only against merchant ships, but also against escort ships. Although this torpedo has not yet been widely used, 24 British escort ships were sunk and damaged with the help of it. Including 5 vessels from convoys heading to Northern Russia.
              2. Our experts have invented a special device. It provides some protection against this torpedo and is mounted on the British destroyers currently used by the Soviet Navy. However, the study of a sample of the T-5 torpedo would be extremely valuable for finding additional countermeasures. Admiral Archer asked the Soviet naval authorities that one of the two torpedoes be immediately available for study and practical testing in the United Kingdom. I am informed that the Soviet naval authorities do not exclude this possibility, but that the issue is still under consideration.
              3. I am sure that you acknowledge the great help that the Soviet Navy can render to the Royal Navy by immediately sending one torpedo to the United Kingdom. You acknowledge that if I remind you that over the past few months the enemy has been preparing to start a large submarine war with the help of new boats that have tremendous speed under water. This would lead to an increase in all kinds of difficulties in the transfer of troops of the United States and supplies across the ocean to both theaters of war. We consider receiving one T-5 torpedo so urgent that we would be ready to send a British plane to the torpedo to any place convenient for you.
              4. Therefore, I ask you to draw your attention to this matter. It becomes even more important because the Germans may have handed over the blueprints of the torpedo to the Japanese Navy. The Admiralty will gladly provide the Soviet Navy with all the results of its research and experiments with a torpedo. And also - any new protective equipment designed subsequently.
              November 30, 1944. "
              To this letter, Stalin replied:
              “I received your message about the German T-5 torpedo. Soviet sailors really captured two German acoustic torpedoes, which are now being studied by our experts. Unfortunately, we are deprived of the opportunity to send to England one of these torpedoes, since both have damage from an explosion. To study and test torpedoes, it is necessary to replace damaged parts of one with parts of another. In this regard, two options are possible:
              or drawings and descriptions obtained as a result of the study will be immediately transferred to the British Military Mission and, upon completion of the study and testing, the torpedo will be placed at the disposal of the British Admiralty. Or British specialists should immediately leave for the Soviet Union and study the torpedo in detail on the spot, removing the blueprints from it. We are ready to provide you with any of these opportunities.
              December 14, 1944. "
              The British could not wait to get either a torpedo or its blueprints as quickly as possible. Churchill again sends a message to Stalin:
              “Responding to your message about the German torpedo, I inform you that I fully understand the impossibility of immediately transferring one of these torpedoes to England. I prefer the second of the two options you proposed: that British experts go to the Soviet Union to study torpedoes on the spot. I am informed that the Soviet Navy expects to conduct tests in early January, and the Admiralty believes that it will be very convenient if the Admiralty officer leaves for the next convoy. Thus, he will arrive in time for testing. I am very grateful for your help in this matter and I ask the Admiralty to agree on details through the British mission.
              December 23, 1944. "
            2. hohol95
              hohol95 15 November 2017 15: 36 New
              +3
              Prior to the supply of gunpowder for PCs from the United States, do it yourself!
              But the quality ...

              Here the BM-13 based on the STZ-5 is firing - a strong smoke trail (domestic gunpowder)!
              American gunpowder gave at times less smoke.
              1. venik
                venik 16 November 2017 19: 41 New
                +1
                Quote: hohol95
                American gunpowder gave at times less smoke.

                =========
                American gunpowder was produced by SOVIET technology (at least the first!)
                1. hohol95
                  hohol95 17 November 2017 08: 02 New
                  0
                  Technology does not negate the quality of the feedstock.
                  1. venik
                    venik 17 November 2017 14: 21 New
                    0
                    Quote: hohol95
                    Technology does not negate the quality of the feedstock.

                    ==========
                    Yes, "not really like that" ..... Sometimes - just it and it doesn’t matter, though .. Sometimes - "YES"!!
                    In "this case" - it is precisely "technology" that played primary role"!
                    1. hohol95
                      hohol95 17 November 2017 14: 25 New
                      0
                      According to L. G. Spendiarov, who went through the entire war as the chief of the rear of the rifle regiment, several times more than the domestic cable got on the same coil of the American cable.

                      Here you have the raw materials and technology ...
    2. The comment was deleted.
  2. Amurets
    Amurets 14 November 2017 15: 37 New
    +4
    Thus, it can be stated that the Allied fighter-bombers did not in any way surpass the Soviet armored Il-2 attack aircraft. However, literally all the Allied combat aircraft flying in the daytime acted against armored vehicles.

    This is to be expected. Because there is nothing fundamentally new either in tactics or in anti-tank weapons. Sergey, thanks. Good review.
  3. polpot
    polpot 14 November 2017 19: 32 New
    +3
    Thanks for the article is very interesting
  4. long in stock.
    long in stock. 14 November 2017 20: 06 New
    +2
    about anti-aircraft artillery in the year 44. then Pierre Closterman fought precisely at the temperature. So reading his memoirs simply shows horror when he describes the attack. Almost no lossless attacks are always noted by terrible anti-aircraft fire.
    1. hohol95
      hohol95 14 November 2017 22: 29 New
      +5
      Klosterman describes horror and terrible anti-aircraft fire!
      But the Germans have horror and a “German look” at the sky!
      The truth, somewhere in the middle ...
      1. Amurets
        Amurets 14 November 2017 23: 28 New
        +4
        Quote: hohol95
        The truth, somewhere in the middle ...

        And the truth lies in the memoirs of our attack pilots: Hero of the Soviet Union Emelianenko. * In the harsh air of war *. Twice Hero of the Soviet Union Sivkov.G.F. * Readiness No. 1 *. If you search, you can find more. Hero of the Soviet Union Hoffmann G.G. better known as a writer, but I did not find his memoirs.
      2. long in stock.
        long in stock. 15 November 2017 02: 02 New
        +5
        everyone was scared ...
      3. verner1967
        verner1967 15 November 2017 21: 35 New
        +1
        Quote: hohol95
        Klosterman describes horror and terrible anti-aircraft fire!
        But the Germans have horror and a “German look” at the sky!
        The truth, somewhere in the middle ...

        It’s natural, everyone is afraid to die, and fear has big eyes.
    2. Alf
      Alf 14 November 2017 22: 58 New
      +5
      Quote: long in stock.
      about anti-aircraft artillery in the year 44. then Pierre Closterman fought precisely at the temperature. So reading his memoirs simply shows horror when he describes the attack. Almost no lossless attacks are always noted by terrible anti-aircraft fire.

      He would make at least a dozen sorties on the Eastern Front ...
      1. long in stock.
        long in stock. 15 November 2017 02: 03 New
        +3
        oh well, Basil .. I’m not afraid of the dude, I fought. not many of the francs can boast of this ..
        1. Alf
          Alf 16 November 2017 22: 35 New
          +1
          Quote: long in stock.
          oh well, Basil .. I’m not afraid of the dude, I fought. not many of the francs can boast of this ..

          I agree.
      2. verner1967
        verner1967 15 November 2017 21: 38 New
        0
        Quote: Alf
        He would make at least a dozen sorties on the Eastern Front ...

        do you think the air defense was stronger on the eastern front? Another thing is the living conditions of our pilots and the English. I read the memoirs of this Klosterman, interestingly written, the battles themselves, like those of our veterans, but their conditions of life in the war are undoubtedly better.
        1. Alf
          Alf 16 November 2017 22: 25 New
          0
          Quote: verner1967
          do you think the air defense was stronger on the eastern front?

          I think yes. He would have gone once to the cutting edge instead of IL-2 ....
          1. Cherry Nine
            Cherry Nine 16 November 2017 22: 55 New
            0
            Quote: Alf
            I think yes

            And in connection with what do you think so?
            1. Alf
              Alf 16 November 2017 23: 52 New
              0
              Quote: Cherry Nine
              Quote: Alf
              I think yes

              And in connection with what do you think so?

              In connection with the statistics of losses of the ARMORED attack aircraft. And in Tempest the armor was only armored.
              1. Cherry Nine
                Cherry Nine 17 November 2017 00: 09 New
                +1
                Quote: Alf
                In connection with the loss statistics of the RESERVED attack aircraft

                Do you consider this the basis for such conclusions? Differences in tactics (one approach - many approaches) and goals (stormed the columns on the march - stormed the railway bridges) could not influence?
        2. gladcu2
          gladcu2 17 November 2017 01: 35 New
          +1
          Soviet pilots had excellent conditions for rest, a medical examination and nutrition.

          I can argue that the Britons and Amers, even half of these conditions were not.

          It is a fallacy that the USSR did not care about people.
          1. verner1967
            verner1967 17 November 2017 18: 28 New
            0
            Quote: gladcu2
            It is a fallacy that the USSR did not care about people.

            good
  5. NIKNN
    NIKNN 14 November 2017 22: 02 New
    10
    Thank you, Sergey!
    It has been suggested that an aircraft with characteristics close to the R-47 would have been a more effective attack aircraft on the Eastern Front than the armored Ilyas.
    Opinion from the series just to say something. Well, firstly, one must proceed from the technical equipment of countries. We did not have engines of comparable power with foreign ones. It was not possible to produce such a complex aircraft as the P47 in sufficient quantities (even assuming the possibility of manufacturing it on existing equipment), a mass aircraft with a price of P47 is just a dream. In terms of efficiency, the aircraft and its weapons were significantly inferior to Il2. The use of small-caliber PTABs has already allowed plugging all the achievements of using foreign information security. In addition, at the end of the war, the Il10 attack aircraft appeared, which was practically an ideally possible anti-aircraft plane of that time. Well, for dessert, "analysts." For some reason, even after many years, taking into account the use of information security, we returned to the fact that the attack aircraft is not replaceable ... request hi
    1. venik
      venik 15 November 2017 10: 12 New
      +8
      Well, actually the R-47 Thunderbolt is NOT a stormtrooper at all, but long-range escort fighter ("Flying Fortress"). As an attack aircraft, his Americans adapted forcedly (!), since in view of some neglect of frontline aviation, after landing in Europe, they felt a clear lack of it. What turned out to be "not so bad" is due not only (or maybe not so much) to a successful design, but rather to the conditions prevailing on the Western Front in the second half of 1944. What Sergey, by the way very competently substantiated! No wonder, after all, a sad joke spread among the Germans during this period: "If the" silver "planes in the sky are Americans ... If the" camouflaged "are the British ... If the" green "are Russians ... If in there is no one in the sky - this is the Luftwaffe! "
      1. NIKNN
        NIKNN 15 November 2017 10: 24 New
        +7
        Quote: venik
        Well, actually the R-47 Thunderbolt is generally NOT a ground attack aircraft, but a long-range escort fighter (Flying Fortresses). As an attack aircraft, his Americans were forced to (!)
        Absolutely. Therefore, the thought of "strategists" at VO
        that the aircraft, with its characteristics close to the R-47, would be a more effective attack aircraft on the Eastern Front than the armored Ilya.
        absolutely not justified ... hi
      2. verner1967
        verner1967 15 November 2017 21: 41 New
        +3
        Quote: venik
        If there is no one in the sky, this is the Luftwaffe! "

        the rather twofold meaning of this phrase ...
        1. venik
          venik 16 November 2017 19: 53 New
          0
          Quote: verner1967
          If there is no one in the sky, this is the Luftwaffe! "
          the rather twofold meaning of this phrase ...

          ==========
          Well, it can be considered "double", if you do not take into account the fact that from the second half of 1944, the aircraft of the "allies" "hung" in the skies of Germany every day, "from morning to night" and at night too!
          1. verner1967
            verner1967 17 November 2017 18: 32 New
            0
            Quote: venik
            if you do not take into account the fact that from the second half of 1944, the aircraft of the "allies" "hung" in the skies of Germany daily

            so this is the case when
            Quote: venik
            "If the" silver "planes in the sky are Americans ... If the" camouflage "are the British"
  6. Curious
    Curious 14 November 2017 22: 13 New
    +6
    For some reason, the author does not consider several samples of aircraft, which, although they did not go into series, are of interest from a technical point of view.

    XA-38 Grizzly by Beech Aircraft. It was the experience of using the IL-2 that served as the reason for the American military to order a Beechcraft two-seat attack bomber in 1943, which subsequently received the XA-38 experimental index and the unofficial name “Grizzly”.
    Armament: one 75-mm gun T9E1 (M10) with 20 rounds, six 12.7-mm machine guns (2 in front in front of the fuselage, 2 under the bottom and 2 in the movable turret in the back), bomb load - 907 kg. The maximum speed is 605 km / h.
    But in 1944, the US military priorities changed the program closed. None of the prototypes have survived.
    1. Curious
      Curious 14 November 2017 22: 15 New
      +6

      And this is the same 75-mm gun T9E1 (M10).
    2. hohol95
      hohol95 14 November 2017 22: 22 New
      +3
      It’s a pity they didn’t keep such a WONDERFUL pattern! Rudel would have been presented ...
      1. Curious
        Curious 14 November 2017 22: 29 New
        +5
        For a rudel, this is more suitable.

        Fi.103 Reichenberg - attack aircraft. Flies one way. For suicide pilots. Not only the Japanese suffered from this.
        1. hohol95
          hohol95 14 November 2017 22: 42 New
          +5

          An exploding CHERRY PETLE with a powder engine would suit him DEFINITELY!
        2. hohol95
          hohol95 14 November 2017 22: 51 New
          +4
          Only the Japanese had those who wanted to wash the shame from the Empire of the Sun with their blood, but in the Third Reich they did not find such people ...
          Fw 190A-6 / R7- increased protection for the pilot with additional armor plates on the sides of the cockpit and bulletproof windows mounted on the sides of the windshield. These aircraft were equipped primarily Sturmstaffel III (literally - "assault squadron"), formed at the end of 1943 and reporting directly to Reichsmarschall Hermann Goering.
          Only volunteers fought in this unit, and each pilot vowed to bring down the Allied bomber by any means, even going to ram if necessary! Naturally, no one has resorted to such extreme decisions, but the Sturmbock (literally - “assault ram”), as the pilots christened the plane, really needed additional armor protection when approaching the closest possible distance to “large vehicles” (as German pilots called four-engine bombers), grouped in the form of a “box” to inflict a mortal blow.
          1. Curious
            Curious 14 November 2017 23: 43 New
            +2
            You're wrong.
            Artefakte des fanatismus
            Technik und nationalsozialistische Ideologie in der Endphase des Dritten Reiches
            von Ulrich Albrecht. The bottom line is brief.
            Selbstopfer (Selbstopfer) or Leonid's squadron - a division of German pilots - kamikaze. The ideologist is Hannah Reich. The number is about 70 people.
            Oath.
            Here, I voluntarily agree to be enrolled in a suicide group as a pilot of a guided bomb. I am fully aware that my participation in such activities will lead to my death.
            Participation in the battle for Berlin and Soviet bridges over the Oder. Killed about 35 people.
            1. venik
              venik 15 November 2017 09: 58 New
              0
              Quote: Curious
              Leonid's squadron - a division of German pilots - kamikaze. The ideologist is Hannah Reich.

              ==========
              It's weird. In fact, there was information that the same "fanatical Hannah" (either at 43, or at 44) came up with the initiative to create missile aircraft (type V-1) and missiles (V-2) piloted by "suicide bombers". Then Hitler personally “killed” this idea - for the reason ...... "that it's inhuman"(!!!! ???).
              1. Curious
                Curious 15 November 2017 11: 04 New
                +1
                Open the Selbstopfer article on Wikipedia, Germany. There are also references to the literature. The Russian-language Wikipedia has an article by Selbstopfer. It is worse than German, but does not contradict the primary sources.
      2. long in stock.
        long in stock. 15 November 2017 02: 09 New
        +3
        But how did the rudder crumble tanks with 37mm? Well, the Angles didn’t do it with 40mm. But did the rudder work out? Or how, with the Hartmann, is everything proved by letters to the bride?
        1. hohol95
          hohol95 15 November 2017 08: 07 New
          +6
          He was just believed in the word after 17 sorties a day good
          And the cores of the shells were from depleted URYAN lol
          He managed to fly over the tanks during the detonation of ammunition and the collapse of the tower from the hull.
          And that’s what he writes about the battles on the Kursk Bulge.
          “In many cases, the tank exploded as soon as the fire reached the ammunition that was usually found in each tank. It was very dangerous for us when the planes flew at an altitude of 5 - 10 meters above the tanks. In the first few days, this happened to me twice. I flew through the flames suddenly soaring up and thinking: "This time you are finished."
          However, both times I flew out of the flame alive and unharmed - even when the green paint on the skin was charred, and holes from the fragments remained on the plane. ”

          But to give credit, he still did not fly away from the front and was shot down 30 times.
          1. Same lech
            Same lech 15 November 2017 08: 09 New
            +4
            and was shot down 30 times.


            30 times ... belay ... well then I am the Chinese emperor ... believe me.
            1. hohol95
              hohol95 15 November 2017 08: 14 New
              +4
              What if the blood of the founder of the Xia era, Great Yui, flows in your veins !!!
        2. venik
          venik 15 November 2017 09: 52 New
          +2
          Quote: long in stock.
          But how did the rudder crumble tanks with 37mm? Well, the Angles didn’t do it with 40mm. But did the rudder work out? Or how, with the Hartmann, is everything proved by letters to the bride?

          ===========
          Well, firstly, the Germans "believe in the word" - somehow not very ... It also turns out like in a joke about Chapaev: "... and then Vasil Ivanichu" hit the map like .... "!
          And secondly, the British, American and Soviet “34-k” had better weaker armor than the “Tigers” and “Panthers” .....
          1. long in stock.
            long in stock. 15 November 2017 15: 29 New
            +2
            it’s not a matter of armor ... everyone complains that getting into a tank with such a caliber is extremely difficult. Yes, and if damage is hit, it’s minimal .. and then there’s a sudden rudel ... and they believe ..
        3. verner1967
          verner1967 15 November 2017 21: 58 New
          0
          Quote: long in stock.
          But how did the rudder crumble tanks with 37mm? Well, the Angles didn’t do it with 40mm. But did the rudder work out? Or how, with the Hartmann, is everything proved by letters to the bride?

          Are you joking?
          Stalingrad 42nd year
          At night, five IL-2 flew into the gloomy sky. A tank column was discovered in the area south of Gromoslavka and Vasilyevka. Dogaev and other pilots attacked targets. Flames from wrecked tanks and vehicles lit up the entire convoy, and then Vladimir boldly on a low-level flight became point-blank to shoot tanks and infantry. In this departure destroyed 9 tanks, 7 vehicles, before the platoon of enemy infantry. The movement of enemy tanks was stopped, and our ground forces were able to gain a foothold in new positions.
          The fight against armored vehicles continued. On December 26, as part of four IL-2, Dogaev was given the task of destroying the enemy on the eastern outskirts of the village of Chilikovo. The targets were covered by defensive anti-aircraft fire, but the brave pilot managed to break through. He went in four times for attacks and managed to destroy two tanks, four cars. Upon returning to their airfield, the pilots discovered two columns of 20-30 tanks each south of the village of Gutovo. They informed the command and twenty minutes later, replenishing the ammunition, flew to attack these columns. Vladimir added to personal account three tanks and two cars. The beginning of the forty-third year for a brave pilot was successful. Here is just one of the episodes of harsh everyday life. January 25, he led a group of three IL-2s flew to attack the vehicles and infantry of the enemy in the area of ​​the Malo-Zapadenka.
          it turned out ours from 20-mm guns, PtABs then was not there. Or letters to the bride too. So too examples about our attack aircraft and write off all the letters?
          1. long in stock.
            long in stock. 15 November 2017 22: 37 New
            +2
            the tanks are different. Could the Czechs get caught or T3.Again, work on the convoy. Besides, it is not indicated that it was the 400-kg guns of the Il2 bombs and the Il 2 mm silt that only stood on vehicles of the first series. The main issue was 20 mm. gun-other possibilities. but the fact that cannon fire is extremely ineffective against tanks, everyone noted. and then a sudden rudel ..
            1. verner1967
              verner1967 16 November 2017 07: 01 New
              +1
              Quote: long in stock.
              tanks are different

              that's it, Rudel could also get caught not only by the T-34 and KV
              Quote: long in stock.
              Moreover, it is not indicated what exactly the guns

              Quote: verner1967
              Vladimir bravely on a low-level flight began to point-blank to shoot tanks and infantry. Destroyed 9 tanks in this departure

              Rudel also did not destroy all the tanks with guns, mainly bombs.
              Quote: long in stock.
              another weapon - other possibilities.

              I agree, the 37 mm in the Yu-87 is much more effective than the 23 in the IL-2
              Quote: long in stock.
              and then a sudden rudel.

              well, it’s kind of not quite sudden, not everything went smoothly right away, but the experience came, unfortunately, they didn’t hit him right away, lucky.
              1. hohol95
                hohol95 16 November 2017 08: 19 New
                +2
                And what did the leadership of the German fascist Air Force - the Luftwaffe (what Goebbels thought - understandably) think about their "anti-tank" attack aircraft?
                Thanks to the digitization of the 500th TsAMO fund, you can read about it first hand.

                So, the combat use of attack aircraft based on the experience of three years on the Eastern Front in the document “Interaction of aviation with ground forces on the battlefield”, d.324, op.12480, f.500. March 1944
                Operations Management Headquarters, Division 1a (combat training)
                “The Yu-87 attack aircraft achieve the greatest efficiency, operating in narrow areas, and a great moral impact. But enemy air defense reduces their widespread use during the day and in wide areas, so they are forced to operate in narrow areas.

                In addition to the destruction of tanks with bombs by conventional attack aircraft, special tank destroyers armed with guns are put into operation. Due to the strong air defense, tank destroyers usually cannot destroy the concentration of tanks.

                As an anti-tank attack aircraft, Henschel-129 and Junkers U-87G aircraft (with special equipment) are used. Both aircraft, due to their heavy weight and special weapons, have low speed and are not sufficiently maneuverable. They are very vulnerable to enemy fire, and their use is accordingly limited.

                Attack anti-tank aircraft

                Attack anti-tank aircraft are armed with Henschel-129 and Junkers U-87G aircraft. They are introduced into the battle against penetrating tanks and armored vehicles of the enemy. But experience has shown that they cannot be used against tanks in their original positions, because the latter have a very strong anti-aircraft defense. It is advisable to simultaneously launch attack aircraft of anti-tank aviation and attack aircraft FV-190 or Yu-87. They crush the enemy’s [anti-air] defenses and the infantry accompanying the tanks, while the attack aircraft of the anti-tank aircraft attack the tanks directly. A prerequisite for success is coherence in the actions of both compounds. Otherwise, puffs of smoke and dust may interfere with the successful operation of anti-tank aircraft or the latter will be damaged by bomb fragments.
                "Assault anti-tank aviation is introduced into battle by small units (2-3 aircraft)."
              2. long in stock.
                long in stock. 16 November 2017 11: 10 New
                0
                as they have already pointed out, they shot him down 30 times ... a lucky pike son. but I don’t believe in his exploits on the thing with guns ... it’s painfully slow-moving and not maneuverable ..
                1. hohol95
                  hohol95 16 November 2017 15: 16 New
                  0
                  Hans Ulrich Rudel
                  Pilot "Pieces." Memoirs of Asa Luftwaffe. 1939–1945
                  The Russians have already discovered that the Romanians have left their positions. We will attack the enemy with bombs and airborne weapons - but how much will it be useful if no one on the earth is resisting the Russians?
                  We are seized with rage, the thought is crowded in our heads: how can a catastrophe be prevented? I throw bombs at the enemy and pour yellow-green waves of troops moving forward with machine gun fire, who were thrown here from somewhere in the depths of Asia or from the Mongolian ancestral home. I don’t have a single cartridge left, I won’t even be able to protect myself if a fighter chases after me. You need to quickly refuel and insert new tapes. To these hordes our attacks are like a crumbling elephant - but I don’t want to think about it now.
                  Or here are the consequences of the fight with the "Aerial Cobra" -
                  My plane was in holes from the 20 mm guns and got eight holes from the 37 mm guns.
                  After such an adventure, anyone would feel fear and fatigue, but this fear would not help the cause. I board another car and take off again. Tips should be stopped. On this day, I destroy nine tanks. Tough day. During the last departure, I had to strain my eyesight to look out for some tank. Good sign. I think that the strike forces are crushed; infantry alone cannot advance far without tanks.
                  The next morning, ground reconnaissance confirmed my assumptions. No activity, almost dead silence. When I landed after the first departure this day, a young pilot jumped onto the wing of my plane, waving his arms wildly. He said that I was awarded diamonds to the Knight's Cross. I received a message on the long-distance telephone from the Fuhrer, but this message also contained a ban on flying.
                  1. long in stock.
                    long in stock. 16 November 2017 15: 20 New
                    +3
                    amusing ... it means 8 holes from 37mm .... and he is definitely not a relative of Munchausen? and hordes of orcs from the depths of the muzzle .. phew of Mongolia ...
                    1. verner1967
                      verner1967 16 November 2017 19: 27 New
                      +1
                      Quote: long in stock.
                      and hordes of orcs from the depths of the muzzle .. ugh mongolia ...

                      Well, it’s a merit of Dr. Goebbels, in the 41st he broadcast that the Bolsheviks had run out of power and the Mongols were holding the front exclusively. In addition, Kyrgyz people with Kazakhs and other Asians were often captured.
                      Quote: long in stock.
                      8 holes from 37mm .... and he is definitely not a relative of Munchausen?

                      if there were armor-piercing shells, then it is possible, although this is a rare case, after all, they loaded the mixed BZ and HE
                      1. hohol95
                        hohol95 17 November 2017 08: 05 New
                        +1
                        And the 20 mm shells were just armor-piercing?
                        My plane was in holes from the 20 mm guns and got eight holes from the 37 mm guns.
                  2. Bongo
                    17 November 2017 15: 28 New
                    +1
                    Quote: hohol95
                    My plane was in holes from the 20 mm guns and got eight holes from the 37 mm guns.

                    In the Red Army's military air defense, there were practically no 20-mm anti-aircraft mounts, and exclusively fragmentation shells were used for firing at aircraft in the ammunition of the 37-mm anti-aircraft guns 61-K. I doubt very much that the Ju-87 could withstand such damage. Apparently 20-mm shells were bullets of a rifle caliber, and 37-mm - 12.7-mm DShK.
                    1. hohol95
                      hohol95 17 November 2017 15: 36 New
                      +1
                      This is Rudel’s description of the aftermath of the battle with the Russian "AEROKOBRA" ...
                      1. Bongo
                        17 November 2017 15: 59 New
                        +1
                        Quote: hohol95
                        This is Rudel’s description of the aftermath of the battle with the Russian "AEROKOBRA" ...

                        Yes, I'm sorry I missed this moment. request But everything is hard to believe early! no
                      2. long in stock.
                        long in stock. 17 November 2017 17: 54 New
                        0
                        and cobras 20 equipped? kind of 12.7 and 37. if the memory does not change ..
                      3. verner1967
                        verner1967 17 November 2017 18: 38 New
                        +1
                        Quote: hohol95
                        consequences of the battle with the Russian "AEROKOBRA" ...

                        Well, the Cobra was armed with either a 20 mm or 37 mm gun and 12,7 mm machine guns, so Bongo not far from the truth
          2. long in stock.
            long in stock. 15 November 2017 22: 59 New
            +3
            and I don’t mock .. for a long time everyone knows that at least half of Hartmann’s victories by British scientists have been proved precisely by letters to the bride .. there are no other papers ...
            1. verner1967
              verner1967 16 November 2017 07: 02 New
              0
              Quote: long in stock.
              for a long time, everyone knows that at least half of Hartmann’s victories by British scientists are proved by letters to his bride ..

              oh these notorious british scientists laughing but the Fuhrer then awarded him not by letters
              1. long in stock.
                long in stock. 16 November 2017 07: 41 New
                +1
                there is such a propaganda word .. and how the Germans needed heroes then ... only now when the hartmann was transferred to the western front he didn’t flash something ... apparently there is a difference in shooting down our planes that fell behind the front line and strategic bombers falling on the territory of the Reich ... here you can’t write what kind of flight I shot down a dozen, and they could be counted ..
                1. verner1967
                  verner1967 17 November 2017 18: 55 New
                  0
                  Quote: long in stock.
                  when Hartmann was transferred to the Western Front, something he didn’t flash ..

                  Mukhin was read. I also read once, writes interestingly. But here one moment is missed. Hartmann had his own tactics of battle, although it’s not new, “hit, left,” while he hunted for the backward pilots, usually these are newcomers or wounded (tactics are vile, of course, but in war all methods are good) All this paid off , hence the big score. This trick didn’t work with amers: firstly, the battles are already high-altitude, you can’t climb even higher, and secondly, the enemy’s equipment and skills are different, you won’t get sick here, but Hartmann managed to shoot down four planes per battle. By the way, if we take the ratio of the number of sorties and the number of shots, then Kozhedub or Pokryshkin has a better ratio, so there is nothing special for Hartmann with a score of victories.
    3. Bongo
      15 November 2017 07: 45 New
      +4
      Quote: Curious
      For some reason, the author does not consider several samples of aircraft

      The author only considers serial samples. Since otherwise a very broad topic will become immense. hi
      1. Curious
        Curious 15 November 2017 08: 21 New
        +4
        "... and so a very broad topic will become generally immense."
        A normal topic, a normal presentation, given the lack of quality materials on the site, why not expand it. Some won about the artillery in the WWI for months write three paragraphs - and everything is fine.
        1. Bongo
          15 November 2017 08: 40 New
          +6
          Quote: Curious
          A normal topic, a normal presentation, given the lack of quality materials on the site, why not expand it. Some won about the artillery in the WWI for months write three paragraphs - and everything is fine.

          Thanks for the kind words! drinks
          But when to do this? I am not a professional writer, there is sorely enough time for everything, there is a main job. This morning I returned from night duty, tomorrow morning I interrupt again. But you still need to take time for children and wife, do household chores. If only I could deal with this!
        2. zyablik.olga
          zyablik.olga 15 November 2017 09: 07 New
          +3
          Quote: Curious
          Normal topic, normal presentation, given the lack of quality materials on the site

          But not everyone likes ... request One "helicopter" fool clung to the "navigator-operator" on the Mi-24. Indicating that there was no such post, he managed to make half of the branch. It is clear that the author cannot know everything, but since the armament operator performs the duties of a navigator, is it worth raising a hi because of this? no In the past, Seryozha criticized one of the publications of the “professor” (Oleg Sokolov), for which he suggested that he write his own article, and as a result, Seryozha wrote it. Criticism should be constructive and responsible!
          I urge everyone to be tolerant of each other and respect the work of the authors, especially since the truly interesting and deeply developed articles on the site unfortunately are not as much as we would like. If someone categorically disagrees with the point of view of the author, then I want it to be not just a shaking of air or the more insult, but reasoned comments containing irrefutable facts. In addition, every registered visitor to the Military Review site has the opportunity to post their own denial article.
          1. Curious
            Curious 15 November 2017 09: 43 New
            +3
            There is a trend. Professional writers write like amateurs, amateurs try to write like professionals. If a person, despite the lack of knowledge, experience, tries, his hand does not rise to write an incorrect comment. Rather, a desire arises to complement, suggest.
            But if the material is an obvious hack from a professional, besides serial, it can be difficult to stay within the framework.
  7. Cherry Nine
    Cherry Nine 14 November 2017 23: 44 New
    +3
    Hello Sergey!
    Still, touching on the WWII topic, it’s hard to resist flaming statements. This is not for you to write about polygons))))
    Thus, it can be stated that the Allied fighter-bombers did not in any way surpass the Soviet armored Il-2 attack aircraft

    Exceeded, of course. And how. ThunderD / IL-2. Combat load, kg, 1135/600. Range, km, 2 898 (with PTB) / 685. Ceiling, m. 12 192/6 000, Max speed, km / h, 690/411. Max climb rate, m / min 847/417
    Another thing is that if you consider the effectiveness of "whether they could knock out a tank" - perhaps they did not exceed it. But you have written (quite rightly) that before the appearance of ATGMs, the main anti-tank benefits of aviation are the deprivation of tank maneuver forces through disruption of supply, repair, and destruction of infrastructure. And in this part, the Allied aviation, of course, performed very strongly. Your references to the fact that since the 42nd year the German army air defense has lost weight look at least strange.

    Here, it seems to me, another aspect is important. The allies generally went up to the front-line aviation through their sleeves. If the USSR (and slightly less than the Germans) attack aircraft were in the spotlight, then very little is heard about Boston and the Invaders. More specifically about fighter-bombers, which, nevertheless, were not made for that. Strong naval support aircraft appeared only after the war (Skyrider, Corsair AU-1). Army generally connected only in Vietnam.
    1. Bongo
      15 November 2017 09: 36 New
      +6
      Quote: Cherry Nine
      Hello Sergey!

      hi
      Quote: Cherry Nine
      Still, touching on the WWII topic, it’s hard to resist flaming statements. This is not for you to write about polygons))))

      Nobody previously dug about the test sites in Runet, and therefore the possible jambs remained unnoticed by readers. lol
      Quote: Cherry Nine
      Exceeded, of course.

      In anti-tank capabilities did not exceed. no
      Quote: Cherry Nine
      Your references to the fact that since the 42 of the year the German army air defense has lost weight look at least strange.

      This is about military air defense, and she compared to the one that was in the East in 1942, on the Western Front in 1944 was certainly weaker.
      Quote: Cherry Nine
      The allies generally went up to the front-line aviation through their sleeves. If the USSR (and slightly less than the Germans) attack aircraft were in the spotlight, then very little is heard about Boston and the Invaders.

      A-20 in Europe in 1944 was really not enough. They were replaced by much more advanced B-25, B-26 and A-26. But do not underestimate the role of these machines. Otherwise, I still have to do a cycle about American tactical bombers. recourse
      1. NIKNN
        NIKNN 15 November 2017 10: 40 New
        +5
        Quote: Bongo
        In anti-tank capabilities did not exceed.

        Hello Sergey! hi And not only in anti-tank capabilities, I already wrote here that if our designers could rely on the capabilities of the Americans, I think the IL-2 could be even better and more efficient, which later became embodied in the IL-10. Here, according to the criterion of price / effectiveness, Il was not equal ... hi
        1. Bongo
          15 November 2017 12: 15 New
          +5
          Quote: NIKNN
          Hello Sergey!

          Good evening, Nikolai!
          Quote: NIKNN
          And not only in anti-tank capabilities, I already wrote here that if our designers could rely on the capabilities of the Americans, I think the IL-2 could be even better and more efficient, which later became embodied in the IL-10. Here, according to the criterion of price / effectiveness, Il was not equal ...

          Unfortunately, many do not understand the conditions under which our aircraft industry worked during the war years. The best is the enemy of the good, not wanting to sacrifice production volumes, our management refused to develop many promising projects. For example, such as Su-6 and Su-8.
        2. Cherry Nine
          Cherry Nine 15 November 2017 13: 12 New
          +1
          Quote: NIKNN
          could rely on the capabilities of the Americans, I think the IL-2 could be even better and more efficient, which later became embodied in the IL-10

          The American single-engine strike aircraft of the end of the war - Douglas Skyrider and Martin Mowler. IL-10 is far from such.
          Quote: NIKNN
          Here, according to the criterion of price / effectiveness, Il was not equal ...

          There are some doubts about this. They were given in the discussion of the second part.
          1. Bongo
            15 November 2017 13: 48 New
            +2
            Quote: Cherry Nine
            There are some doubts about this. They were given in the discussion of the second part.

            It is probably worth considering the features of the Soviet-German front. A-1 "Skyrader" did not have time for World War II, but IL-10, although not very successfully, participated.
            1. NIKNN
              NIKNN 15 November 2017 14: 30 New
              +4
              Quote: Bongo
              IL-10, although not very successful, but participated.

              And after the war he stood in service for a long time, and not only in the USSR.
            2. Cherry Nine
              Cherry Nine 15 November 2017 15: 48 New
              0
              Quote: Bongo
              It is probably worth considering the features of the Soviet-German front. A-1 "Skyrader" did not have time for World War II

              Sergey, the problem with IL - 2 is not that he is not a sky rider.
      2. Cherry Nine
        Cherry Nine 15 November 2017 14: 40 New
        +1
        Quote: Bongo
        In anti-tank capabilities did not exceed

        Sergey, maybe I find fault, but, in my opinion, you incorrectly put emphasis. Means of destruction of those years did not allow aviation to fight armored vehicles. From this point of view, the capabilities of Mowler with 5 tons of these weapons did not exceed the IL-10 with 400 kg. But there is a nuance.
        Quote: Bongo
        more advanced B-25, B-26 and A-26. But do not underestimate the role of these machines. Otherwise, I still have to do a cycle about American tactical bombers

        Well, if you write about PT actions, then the mitchells, looters and invaders, it seems, were not particularly distinguished by the results. For the same reason.
        1. Bongo
          15 November 2017 15: 02 New
          +6
          Quote: Cherry Nine
          Means of destruction of those years did not allow aviation to fight armored vehicles. .
          It was quite possible, on the battlefield, the effectiveness of course left much to be desired, but in columns on the march or in places of concentration, refueling and replenishment of the ammunition, tanks were successfully destroyed by aviation. Moreover, in the USSR by the middle of the 1943 of the year it was possible to adopt fully effective PTABs. The Germans also had interesting developments, but this will be discussed later.
          Quote: Cherry Nine
          Well, if you write about PT actions, then the mitchells, looters and invaders, it seems, were not particularly distinguished by the results. For the same reason.

          The role of the bombers was in the destruction of transport hubs, ammunition depots and bridges. All that without which the tanks could not operate successfully. Yes, and the bombers themselves often intensively bombed tanks.
          1. Cherry Nine
            Cherry Nine 15 November 2017 16: 02 New
            0
            Quote: Bongo
            It was quite possible, on the battlefield, the effectiveness certainly left much to be desired, but in columns on the march or in places of concentration, refueling and replenishment of the ammunition, tanks were successfully destroyed by aviation.

            From this point of view, the best solution to any problem is a lot of liberators. Or silverplate right away. It seems that the specificity of your topic implies precisely PT actions in the narrow sense.

            Quote: Bongo
            The role of the bombers was in the destruction of transport hubs, ammunition depots and bridges.

            Sergey, I wrote about this, it seems to me. The idea was that the discussion about the effectiveness of WWII aviation in anti-aircraft applications seems more correct to reduce to goal setting, and not to the advantages / disadvantages of individual aircraft. If attack aircraft send for targets that they have nothing to hit, one damn 400 kg or 4 tons are hung on them.
  8. iouris
    iouris 15 November 2017 00: 02 New
    +2
    Historical examples show that aviation against tanks is ineffective because the tank is a moving point target. That is why in the United States they did not begin to create an attack aircraft, they wanted to, but: lodged, they cried.
    1. venik
      venik 15 November 2017 09: 37 New
      +3
      Quote: iouris
      Historical examples show that aviation against tanks is ineffective because the tank is a moving point target. That is why in the United States they did not begin to create an attack aircraft, they wanted to, but: lodged, they cried.

      ==========
      Firstly! Americans still created attack aircraft! And not one model! This time!
      Secondly - why did you get that basic the attack mission is fight with tanks??? It's actually "multi-purpose" a machine aviation support troop on the battlefield!!!! (fighting tanks is only a “special case” (one of many tasks) of such support!
      Thirdly - what kind of "special" did you think you thought the fight between aviation and tanks "ineffective" ?? It would be so - no one would have to spend efforts to develop aircraft and aviation weapons for defeating heavy armored vehicles!
      And in the fourth, numerous conflicts (including in the Near and Middle East) confirmed one “indisputable truth”: aviation is one of the most serious threats to tanks (and remains so to this day!) !!
      PS So, think before you write comments!
      1. Bongo
        15 November 2017 09: 50 New
        +5
        Quote: venik
        So, think before you “write comments”!

        Vladimir, in my opinion it is worth avoiding harsh statements addressed to each other! Dear iouris certainly thought, and wrote his comment quite meaningfully. This is his point of view, which has a right to exist. Do not tell others what to do. no
        As for the effectiveness of combat aircraft against tanks, it seems to me that we can discuss its degree. Which is very dependent on many conditions. hi
        1. venik
          venik 15 November 2017 10: 41 New
          +1
          Quote: Bongo
          Vladimir, in my opinion it is worth avoiding harsh statements addressed to each other! This is his point of view, which has a right to exist. Do not tell others what to do.

          ==========
          Yeah, I got a little "excited", for which I ask "iouris" Grand Pardon! But still, such “loud statements” must be made very careful!
          Of course, during WWII, in the absence of "high-precision" weapons, the effectiveness of aviation operations was much lower than today, and the "targeted defeat" of "single" tanks and armored vehicles was mostly of a "probabilistic" nature - this is understandable, but to consider the actions of aviation "ineffective" ".... Sorry - this is an obvious" bust "! It is enough to recall only the counterattack near Yelnya in 41. Then the advancing units of the Red Army lost almost everyone(!!) tanks are not in battle, no! Namely, "on the march", which for absolutely incomprehensible reasons, tank columns were carried out in daytime!! Which, incidentally, did not allow the “success development" of the operation .....
          1. iouris
            iouris 17 November 2017 14: 46 New
            +1
            1) You must be able to discuss and be able to understand the subject of discussion. I allowed myself to speak out on a very specific issue.
            2)
            Quote: venik
            the "targeted defeat" of "single" tanks and armored vehicles was mainly of a "probabilistic" nature - this is understandable,

            This set of words indicates a very superficial understanding of the physics and technology of the process. The task of aerial shooting (bombing) is a classic example of a probabilistic process. However, the problem was and is that the target is a point. The tank is a point target, i.e. with a target whose size is an order of magnitude smaller than the standard deviation of the ammunition, therefore the probability of destroying such a target is an infinite small quantity and for the destruction of such a target the ammunition consumption is very large. The defeat of the columns is not related to the issue under discussion. On the other hand, military air defense works alongside the aircraft along with the attacker, so the conditions of combat use negatively affect the accuracy characteristics and contribute to significant combat losses of the attackers. Precision weapons do not yet solve this problem. The successes of German and NATO aviation were achieved largely in the conditions of very weak military air defense and with undivided air supremacy.
  9. maximghost
    maximghost 15 November 2017 02: 24 New
    +2
    The article is interesting, but it should have been the third in the cycle. To compare the effectiveness of the techniques of the opposing sides, it would be more convenient to locate the articles precisely in time of appearance (operation), and not on nationality.
    1. zyablik.olga
      zyablik.olga 15 November 2017 09: 16 New
      +3
      Quote: maximghost
      The article is interesting, but it should have been the third in the cycle. To compare the effectiveness of the techniques of the opposing sides, it would be more convenient to locate the articles precisely in time of appearance (operation), and not on nationality.

      Perhaps from a thematic point of view, you are right. yes But this does not devalue the cycle as a whole; on the Military Review this topic has never been dug so deep.
      1. Cherry Nine
        Cherry Nine 15 November 2017 13: 07 New
        +2
        Quote: zyablik.olga
        But it does not discount the cycle

        Olga, no one spoke of "depreciating." Just maximgost did not think that the author puts the parts in the same order as he writes, and it’s more convenient to go through the nations from sources. It is strange that from the Americans he went to the Germans, and not to the warthog.
        1. maximghost
          maximghost 15 November 2017 18: 07 New
          +1
          Exactly. But it’s not too late to structure all this according to the time frame and break it into helicopters / airplanes.
          At the end of the article, the author usually puts links to previous parts. This is a “table of contents” and can be redone so that you can easily navigate and quickly find what your opponents had at one time.
        2. Cherry Nine
          Cherry Nine 16 November 2017 00: 52 New
          0
          Quote: maximghost
          This is a "table of contents" and can be redone so that you can easily navigate and quickly find what your opponents had at one time.

          Here, it seems to me, it would be more rational to expand the names of the parts in the text of the footnote. Not (part 1) (part 2), etc., but (Soviet pre-war projects) (IL-2, IL-10), for example.
  10. venik
    venik 15 November 2017 09: 25 New
    +2
    Thank you Sergey! Great review! The only thing - of course, it would be better to "structure" it by time, or perhaps by type ... But this is already - so - "secondary" ...
    1. Bongo
      15 November 2017 09: 42 New
      +4
      Quote: venik
      Thank you Sergey! Great review! The only thing - of course, it would be better to "structure" it by time, or perhaps by type ... But this is already - so - "secondary" ...

      Please, Vladimir! Glad you liked it! drinks Regarding the "structuring", you are right. But that’s how it was written to me, I hope readers will forgive me for this.
      1. venik
        venik 15 November 2017 10: 48 New
        +2
        Quote: Bongo
        But that’s how it was written to me, I hope readers will forgive me for this.

        ============
        Yes, this is just understandable - it all depends on the "mood", "inspiration" and "the availability of material at hand"! We look forward to continuing! (By the way, do not "declassify what will happen in the next issue" ??)
        PS And the article was really very successful (in my opinion - one of the most successful in the whole "cycle" (the others are also read with pleasure), but this ideally "fits" into the name of the whole cycle!
        1. Bongo
          15 November 2017 12: 19 New
          +3
          Quote: venik
          By the way, do not "declassify what will happen in the next release" ??

          Germans
      2. Mikado
        Mikado 15 November 2017 11: 03 New
        +6
        Yes, this is just understandable - it all depends on the "mood", "inspiration" and "the availability of material at hand"!

        I will join Vladimir. And to your comment, Sergey, about the time. Creativity and time are an eternal question, and you need to look for a fine line. The cycle is detailed, interesting, intense. good Good luck in your work! hi
        1. Bongo
          15 November 2017 12: 20 New
          +3
          Quote: Mikado
          The cycle is detailed, interesting, intense. good Good luck in your work!

          I thank you and all who positively evaluate my modest work! Your support means a lot to me! hi
          1. Mikado
            Mikado 15 November 2017 12: 30 New
            +3
            Your support means a lot to me! hi

            And without this, it is impossible to write. good therefore again - good luck to you! Write to yourself and to our pleasure (to ourselves - from writing, to us - from reading and communication)!
  11. Dooplet11
    Dooplet11 16 November 2017 09: 27 New
    +2
    Sergei!
    I read it with pleasure. Thanks! Special respect for the analysis of the assumptions of the "alternative"!
  12. shuravi
    shuravi 16 November 2017 09: 40 New
    +1
    And how to understand this? From WWII to start and return to it? Did the pony go in a circle?
    1. Bongo
      16 November 2017 09: 41 New
      +3
      Quote: shuravi
      And how to understand this?

      This is beyond your comprehension. wink
      1. shuravi
        shuravi 16 November 2017 10: 07 New
        +1
        Well, of course, for such a presentation of material in the term paper on tactics, any teacher will immediately tear it up and force it to rewrite it. laughing
        1. Bongo
          16 November 2017 10: 38 New
          +3
          Quote: shuravi
          Well, of course, for such a presentation of material in the term paper on tactics, any teacher will immediately tear it up and force it to rewrite it.

          You have been repeatedly expected to write your own work. But this seems to be beyond your strength. For argumentless criticism of the mind is not much.
          1. shuravi
            shuravi 16 November 2017 12: 59 New
            +1
            Have you changed tactics? Decided to quietly delete the answers? Bravo. From now on I will make screenshots of pages. laughing
            1. Bongo
              16 November 2017 13: 14 New
              +2
              Quote: shuravi
              Have you changed tactics? Decided to quietly delete the answers? Bravo. From now on I will make screenshots of pages.

              Are you really cuckoo?
            2. zyablik.olga
              zyablik.olga 16 November 2017 14: 18 New
              +2
              Quote: shuravi
              Have you changed tactics? We decided to quietly delete the answers? Bravo. I will continue to make screenshots of pages

              Try deleting your comment in 5 minutes. If anyone removes the comments, it is the administration.
              Quote: shuravi
              Olenka, especially for you.

              If I'm for someone and Olenka, then obviously not for you. It is difficult to consider a man a man who waters others with mud. I am afraid that you spoiled your reputation on this site hopelessly.
              Quote: shuravi
              Omitting many other circumstances, the main thing is that such an analysis should take place ...
              I'm not sure that Seryozha owes you something. Want better - do it yourself.
    2. zyablik.olga
      zyablik.olga 16 November 2017 11: 07 New
      +2
      Quote: shuravi
      And how to understand this?

      But you don’t need it at all! Unfortunately, very often there are individuals who are incapable of anything other than indiscriminate decay. negative If you can’t say anything on the topic of discussion, what are you doing here at all? Or do you quarrel with anyone?
      1. shuravi
        shuravi 16 November 2017 12: 55 New
        +1
        Olenka, especially for you.
        https://topwar.ru/26304-o-koncepcii-boevogo-verto
        leta.html
        As you can see, this individual is capable of something, although it was all without my knowledge.
        Well:
        http://artofwar.ru/editors/l/lisowoj_w_i/
        As you can see, he is able to understand the essence of the issue.

        Well, about the work itself, for you I explain more clearly what is the essence of my claim.
        Omitting many other circumstances, the main thing is that such an analysis should be carried out sequentially in time frames, with reference to what is happening in these wars and conflicts, the characteristics of the theater of war, directly to the armored vehicles themselves (TTX and Tactics) and how the parties involved decided the fight with them through aviation.
        1. Mister X
          Mister X 16 November 2017 14: 29 New
          +2
          Quote: shuravi
          Well, about the work itself, for you I explain more clearly what is the essence of my claim.

          Sir,
          Usually claims are made to the manufacturer of the goods or service provider. About their poor quality. Did not like the sausage? Write a claim! Do you agree?
          Why so much sarcasm? Whatever the article or comment - a niggle or taunts. Is this worthy of men?
          Is it true that Mr. Lisova is an expert in military affairs? Only he flew the Mi-24?
          Don't like the article? Pass by. Do you think you write better? Write a response article and publish it on the BO. Let's look at the reaction of your readers.
          I ask you not to turn the discussion of articles into a market squabble.
          Thank you!
          1. shuravi
            shuravi 16 November 2017 14: 53 New
            +1
            You really don’t understand what it is about?
            1. Mister X
              Mister X 16 November 2017 15: 13 New
              +2
              Do not answer the question with a question. This is not Privoz or Deribasovskaya.
              Please note the above. Let's be mutually polite and tolerant of the opinions of others. Do you agree?
  13. shuravi
    shuravi 16 November 2017 14: 41 New
    +1
    Quote: zyablik.olga
    Quote: shuravi
    Have you changed tactics? We decided to quietly delete the answers? Bravo. I will continue to make screenshots of pages

    Try deleting your comment in 5 minutes. If anyone removes the comments, it is the administration.


    Still a fact.


    If I'm for someone and Olenka, then obviously not for you. It is difficult to consider a man as a man who water others with slops.


    First of all, Olenka, you yourself have deigned to express in a boorish manner what to me and how to do. Secondly, stop slandering, if I allowed a negative review, it was only about the work of the author himself.

    I’m afraid that you have ruined your reputation on this site hopelessly.


    Are you serious? Excuse me, but I gained my reputation and knowledge and experience in completely different conditions in order to sacrifice them in order to please the community of admirers of the author of far from professional works.

    I'm not sure that Seryozha owes you something. Want better - do it yourself.


    Here you are just wrong. We are like not in ICQ and not even in LiveJournal. Read the site name. Therefore, for all the flaws of the author special demand.
    1. zyablik.olga
      zyablik.olga 16 November 2017 15: 36 New
      +2
      Quote: shuravi
      Still a fact.

      Only in your imagination. You seem to be special on unsubstantiated and irresponsible statements.
      Quote: shuravi
      First of all, Olenka, you yourself have deigned to express in a boorish manner what to me and how to do. Secondly, stop slandering, if I allowed a negative review, it was only about the work of the author himself.

      Your most boorish statements, and comments from other visitors where they quoted you were deleted by moderators. Perhaps they just deleted them? no
      Quote: shuravi
      Are you serious? Sorry, but I got my reputation and knowledge and experience in completely different conditions.

      For now, that is what is. Just appearing on the site, you immediately began to arrange squabbles. negative
      Quote: shuravi
      Here you are just wrong. We are like not in ICQ and not even in LiveJournal. Read the site name. Therefore, for all the flaws of the author special demand.

      Special flaws except you, the author has not noticed. Before that, the main complaints were reduced to the navigator-operator. But a cycle of a total of VO read about 200 000 people, because you are smarter than them all together, aren't you?
      1. Cherry Nine
        Cherry Nine 16 November 2017 22: 13 New
        +2
        Quote: zyablik.olga
        But you don’t need it at all! Unfortunately, very often there are individuals who are incapable of anything other than indiscriminate decay.

        Olga, I apologize, but still get in with aesthetic claims.
        Any normal kid knows that there is no worse catastrophe than his mother, who went down to the courtyard and tells the local slammers that they offend her boy. Unfortunately, your discussion with the troll provokes, I think, not just me, just such associations. Perhaps this is not the best investment of your time and energy, although of course it is up to you to decide.

        As for your opponent, the first time (2, 6, 7 part), he wrote meaningless things. I’m even ready to admit that a real pilot-operator could be offended that he was called a navigator - we don’t know what kind of relations the pilot pilots have with the navigators, maybe they fight wall to wall after football. Or, there, the navigator abused him in childhood)))
        Unfortunately, in the last parts of uv. Shuravi diminished the content, but added an absurd tone. On the Internet, this is all the time, alas.
      2. The comment was deleted.
  14. shuravi
    shuravi 16 November 2017 16: 38 New
    +1
    Quote: zyablik.olga

    No one noticed any special flaws except you.


    If, for example, I read an article on a medical topic, I would hardly notice any flaws there either. hi

    Prior to that, the main complaints came down to the navigator-operator.


    And if I poke your nose, what’s wrong?
    For example, from October 27 to 2017 11: 28:
    https://topwar.ru/127829-aviaciya-protiv-tankov-c
    hast-7.html



    But the cycle in total on VO was read by about 200 000 people, you are smarter than all of them combined, aren't you?


    Yes, even a million. It’s not the number here.
  15. hohol95
    hohol95 17 November 2017 16: 03 New
    0
    Bongo,
    So HIS a day had up to 17 sorties per day - 2530 sorties (the largest number among the pilots of World War II) for 1941-1945 !!!
    1. shuravi
      shuravi 17 November 2017 16: 15 New
      +1
      Here is the very case when a non-specialist cannot distinguish reality from propaganda. Hence the belief in fairy tales, about 17 sorties per day, about bombs of tanks thrown into hatches and so on.
      1. hohol95
        hohol95 17 November 2017 16: 21 New
        +3
        I may not be a specialist, but I have 24 hours in a day hi And not 72, like the "Goebbels chicks"!
        1. shuravi
          shuravi 18 November 2017 10: 04 New
          +1
          In general, Rudel in German propaganda served as a kind of Stakhanov. Hence his achievements, which contradict both the laws of physics and human physiology.
          1. hohol95
            hohol95 18 November 2017 20: 06 New
            +1
            In this, I personally do not doubt a bit! They simply made IMMORTAL NIBELUNG ...
      2. long in stock.
        long in stock. 17 November 2017 17: 56 New
        +2
        it was an irony ... calmer comrade ....
        1. hohol95
          hohol95 17 November 2017 22: 43 New
          +2
          In every JOK there is a share of JOKES ...
  16. DimerVladimer
    DimerVladimer April 27 2018 11: 15 New
    +1
    Klostreman describes the attack on the Tempest airfield:

    “Schwerin airfield. Sleeping Recco saw 11.40 messerschmitts land at 40. About 100 A / S based on 15 double Arados — a fuel replenishment point 500 yards southeast of the main hangar. Map 829 GA II - good luck! "

    I looked around my pilots. For a moment everyone was silent.
    - Well, it's time! - Wormsley sighed philosophically.

    “Quickly, Edge, jump into the jeep and get the list of German airfields,” I said.
    Ken Hyos has already found Schwerin on the wall map - 30 miles southeast of Lübeck - we have 150 miles to go.

    Edge quickly returned with Spay and handed me the data, having opened the necessary page. Schwerin is a good large airfield near the lake, west of the city of the same name. I made a quick sketch on the board: three runways form a triangle, the likely location of the airfield, based on the report of the 49th air link.

    Fritz landed at 11.40. Now it was 12.10. The Germans will take an hour to replenish their fuel and ammunition reserves. We just had time to grab them before they rise into the sky, where they disperse.

    I gave the last instructions while Spy called the Center to tell them what we were going to do and ask them to provide our “typhoons” with rockets.

    “We will attack from south to north, all 8 together, on the same line, with an aircraft spacing of 200 yards.” Speed ​​530 - 540 miles per hour. Each pilot will choose his goal when he will dive - at the last minute not to change direction. Open fire at a distance of a thousand yards and continue within the range of a direct shot. Stay as close to the ground as possible, count to 20, and then rise at full speed.

    Intelligence on the "typhoons" at 13.00, but I am afraid that they will not be able to come there earlier. The Typhoons will descend from 8000 to 3000 feet 30 seconds earlier than us and will defeat all anti-aircraft artillery posts that they can detect with their rocket shells, such is the fate of anti-aircraft artillery. [287]

    Remember that pasha is the best defense - speed and flight as low as possible above the ground. It makes no sense to maneuver and try to distract the guys from the anti-aircraft artillery - you lose a few precious miles per hour and run the risk of catching a wing on the runway.

    Last advice: if you get knocked down and have to throw yourself with a parachute, the best way, let me remind you, is this: control stick on yourself - throw the flashlight - curl up into a lump - wait a few seconds - sharply push the control stick straight forward. You will have nine out of ten chances to fly out of the cab without hindrance. Naturally, I hope this does not come to this!

    Any questions? Then ok, let's go!

    .....
    - Hello, Filmstar presenter, sorry, buddy, there’s a confusion about Tiffy. Do your best without them!

    Wow, nice little prospect! Without anti-aircraft "typhoons" it will not be easy for us. My voice was probably not very confident when I built my patrol to attack. A large blue lake, bordered by pine trees, divided in the middle of the peninsula, on which stood Schwerin, a picturesque small town adjacent to the rocks with Renaissance belfries and varnished tiles. In the west, there was a huge airfield, intact, complemented by buildings and camouflaged hangars - there were few of them, and they looked like those that remained in Germany.

    We were 14 feet high and held to the left, as if we had no intention of attacking. I carefully examined the airfield: small black crosses, located exactly where we expected them, loomed on the bright grass, as it happens in early spring. I noticed one ... two ... four ... seven anti-aircraft artillery towers, their shadows clearly protruding on the track around the perimeter thanks to the sun ...

    - Caution, Filmstar presenter, anti-aircraft artillery, 6 hours!

    At 200 yards behind us came five large black puffs of smoke from 88-millimeter shells. Ok! Five more seconds, and I will attack. The goal was before us, and we were from the sun. Anxiety grabbed my throat and stopped breathing. The air battle with fighters has never bothered me so much - after the first moments, but anti-aircraft artillery is completely different.

    “Filmstar, drop your tanks.”

    My stomach tightened and a wave of nausea rolled up - the advantage of a single-seat car is that you can lose consciousness from fright and no one will notice it.

    - Quickly, 180 ° to the port side, come on!

    This will turn us facing the airfield, and the sun will be behind.

    - Filmstar, dive - full power!

    My 7 “temps” were beautifully located on the ledges on my left, although we dived almost vertically.

    “The smell of flowers,” came the mocking voice of Bey Adams in the headphones. [289]

    Flak! God, what a density of fire! The entire airfield seemed to be lit up by flashes from 20- and 37-mm guns. There probably were at least forty of them. A carpet of white puffs of smoke lay beneath us, and black puffs of smoke came in even strands.

    Physical fear is the most terrible thing a person can experience - my heart sank, I sweat, sticky, sticky sweat. Clenched toes floated in boots.

    We frantically dived into the smoke ... explosions and tracer shells on the left, flying right through us and below us ... strong blows around our wings and ominous blinding flashes.

    We were a mile from the perimeter, 150 feet from the ground. People ran back and forth.
    - Below, for God's sake! I cried hysterically.

    The boundless expanse of grass covered with gray runways running towards me. Speed ​​is 450 miles per hour. The first hangar ... the tanker ... then the Messerschmitts, clumsily sitting on their narrow chassis, there are a dozen or three ... people who crouched under the wings. Unfortunately, too far to the left, outside my line of fire.

    A group of ten Arado loomed in my sight. I shot, shot frantically, my finger jumping on the button. My shells formed a band of explosions, paving their way between the Arado, rising up the fuselage, hitting the engine ... smoke ... one of the planes exploded just as I flew past, and my "tempest" was thrown by a burning explosion . "Tempest" touched the ground, and the fuselage ricocheted in a stream of fragments of the broken wings and tails of the aircraft.

    More hangars across from me. I released the second stage - shells exploded on a galvanized iron door and steel struts.

    - Beware, Red-2!

    My number 2 was flying right at me with terrible speed, losing control. His flashlight flew off. At 470 mph, 20 yards to my right. He walked directly to the anti-aircraft artillery tower, cutting it into two parts below the platform.

    Wooden frames flew into the air. A group of people holding on to a weapon fell into the water. The Tempest fell to the edge of the field with a roar, paving a group of small houses, with a terrible flash of light; the engine slid by inertia in a whirlwind of flame and fragments scattered across the sky.

    It's over, almost everything. One, two, three ... tracer bullets chased me ... I pulled my head in and bent over the armored back ... twelve ... thirteen ... fourteen. I wanted to trick bullets. The fire line of 37 millimeters was so close that I saw only a flash of explosions without smoke ... fragments showered hail my fuselage ... nineteen, twenty! I yanked the control knob on myself and immediately ascended into the sky. Anti-aircraft artillery continued to fire.

    I looked back at Schwerin, visible under the tail of my plane. A thousand feet below the zigzag, a "tempest" rose, tracer shells relentlessly chasing him. Fires near hangars, pillars of greasy smoke, fireworks of exploding magnesium bombs. The lonely “tempest” caught up with me, shook its wings and stood in one line.

    - Hello, airplane Filmstar, go south from the target, gain altitude 10.

    - Hello, Pierre, here is Red-3. You know, I think the rest is already there!

    Of course, Bay was wrong! I carefully studied the 360 ​​° horizon - right above in the silent sky above Schwerin hung a terrible pyramid of anti-aircraft artillery explosions. Nobody.

    13.04/13.03. We attacked on 35. The nightmare continued, perhaps 8 seconds from the start of our dive, and we lost six out of XNUMX planes ....

    The control center has just sent photos of the Schwerin show. They turned out very clear. The Canadian from the 49th air link made them three hours after shelling the airfield, when he was met by anti-aircraft artillery shells. He had to go down quite low to get his perspective aerial photograph, as a result of which he was seriously injured. Thanks to absolute endurance and willpower, he managed to deliver back his damaged Spitfire-XIV and photographs.

    We carefully and critically examined the photographs. The game was really not worth the candle. Two Messershmites were clearly disabled by a tanker explosion, and between the two sections of the Focke-Wulf assembly shop one could see a plane with a pulling propeller and the other damaged when towing. My group caused the only real destruction to the Germans, destroying five of their Arado. But this was insufficient compensation for the loss of six “tempest” and their pilots.